Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-16-17 CCMP
NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday, May 16, 2017 7:00 P.M. City of Lake Elmo | 3800 Laverne Avenue North Agenda A. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance B. Approval of Agenda C. Approval of Minutes 1. May 2, 2017 D. Public Comments/Inquiries E. Presentations F. Consent Agenda 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Accept April 2017 Assessor’s Report 4. Accept April 2017 Building Department Report 5. Accept April 2017 Fire Department Report 6. Accept April 2017 Public Works Department Report 7. 2017 Crack Seal Project – Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL). 8. 2017 Seal Coat Project – Approve West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement. 9. 2017 Seal Coat Project – Accept Bids and Award Contract – Resolution 2017-055 10. Approve Private Development Security Reductions: Village Preserve 2nd Addition Grading Security 11. Approve Resolution Supporting the Rowing Regatta on Lake Elmo - Resolution 2017-056 12. CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) – Approve Resolution Establishing a No On-street Parking Zone along West Side of CSAH 13, from 44th Street North to 50th Street North – Resolution 2017-054 G. Regular Agenda 13. VMX Rezoning (Zoning Map Amendment) – Ordinance 08-176 14. V-LDR/VMX Zoning Text Amendment – Ordinance 08-175; Resolution 2017-041 15. 2017A Bond Issuance Authorization – Resolution 2017-046 16. Library Services in Lake Elmo and Library Tax Levy - Resolution 2017-049 17. Wildflower PUD Amendment - Resolution 2017-048 18. Lions park 19. Old Village Ph3 Street & Utility Improvements – Accept Bids and Award Contract –Resolution 2017-051 20. 2017 Street Improvements – Accept Bids and Award Contract –Resolution 2017-052 21. CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) – Approve Concurrence to Award Contract and Approve -- Cooperative Agreement No. 10904 with Washington County for Design and Construction Costs – Resolution - 2017-053 22. Specifications for a New Rescue Engine H. Council Reports I. Staff Reports and Announcements J. Adjourn Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner While Preserving the City’s Open Space Character CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 2, 2017 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Justin Bloyer, Julie Fliflet, and Christine Nelson. ABSENT: Councilmember Lundgren Staff present: Administrator Handt, City Attorney Sonsalla, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Wensman, City Planner Becker and City Clerk Johnson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. Motion passed 4 - 0. ACCEPT MINUTES Minutes of the April 4, 2017 Regular Meeting, April 11, 2017 Special Meeting, and April 18, 2017 Regular Meeting were accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES Tedi Carlson, 8735 27th Street North, thanked the Council for supporting the Arbor Day tree giveaway for Lake Elmo residents. PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Approve 2018 Budget Schedule Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 4 - 0. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 4: CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) – Public Improvement and Final Assessment Hearing LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 2, 2017 Page 2 of 5 City Engineer Griffin presented an overview of the project for street, drainage and trail improvements, noting that it is a Washington County project with a City contribution of $425,000. Sanitary sewer improvements were also reviewed along with assessment amounts for each property. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. Motion passed 4 – 0. No members of the public spoke at the public hearing. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 4 – 0. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PUBLIC ASSESSMENT. Motion passed 4 – 0. No members of the public spoke at the public hearing. Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 4 – 0. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-042 ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR CSAH 13 (IDEAL AVENUE/OLSON LAKE TRAIL) IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 4 – 0. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-043 ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE CSAH 13 (IDEAL AVENUE/OLSON LAKE TRAIL) IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM #5: I-94 Lift Station and Sanitary Sewer Improvements – Accept Bids and Award Contract City Engineer Griffin reported on bids received and recommended awarding the contract to R.L. Larson Excavating. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2017-044 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO R.L. LARSON EXCAVATING, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $809,129.70 FOR THE I-94 LIFT STATION (NO. 1) AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM #6: Royal Golf Preliminary Plat Discussion City Planner Wensman reviewed elements of the proposed plat for the Royal Golf Club PUD and reviewed PUD flexibility requested to deviate from current city requirements. Wensman noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat with 37 conditions and explained that the Council is not asked for approval at this time but staff and the developer would appreciate Council input. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 2, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Discussion held concerning trails, entrance signs, lift stations and other potential conditions of approval. Rick Packer, Royal Golf, stated that his group is working through the 37 conditions proposed by the Planning Commission and hopes to have many addressed prior to the Council vote on the preliminary plat. Mike Boldenow, 2120 Legion Ln. N., stated that he and his neighbors are very disappointed about concessions granted to the builder. ITEM #7: Royal Golf Grading Permit Planning Director Wensman presented the request for grading permit approval, noting that the request is needed due to the size of the area to be graded. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO APPROVE RESOLTION 2017-045 APPROVING HC ROYAL GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT’S GRADING PERMIT TO GRADE THE PHASE 1 ROYAL GOLF CLUB AT LAKE ELMO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA WITH 7 CONDITIONS AND FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM #8: Noise Ordinance City Planner Becker reviewed proposed changes to the noise ordinance and provided explanations for the changes. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT ORDIANCE 08-174 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S NOISE ORDINANCE. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Fliflet – nay) Councilmember Fliflet stated that the changes would be more lenient to developers and preferred the ordinance not change. Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-039 AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-174. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM #9: Easton Village 2nd Addition Final Plat Planning Director Wensman presented the proposed final plat for Easton Village 2nd Addition and reviewed issues to be addressed. Discussion was held concerning revisions to Village Parkway and revision of the preliminary plat prior to recording of the final plat. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-040 APPROVING THE EASTON VILLAGE 2ND ADDITION FINAL PLAT WITH THE 10 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Fliflet – nay) LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 2, 2017 Page 4 of 5 ITEM #10: VMX Zoning Map Amendment City Planner Becker reviewed proposed zoning map amendments to address property owner concerns. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 08-176 APPROVING A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT REZONING SELECT PARCELS TO VMX-VILLAGE MIXED USE. Motion failed 2 –0 - 2. (Bloyer, Fliflet – present/not voting) Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO RECONSIDER THE CURRENT ITEM AT THE NEXT MEETING. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Fliflet – nay) ITEM #11: V-LDR/VMX Zoning Text Amendment Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO POSTPONE THE CURRENT ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING. Motion passed 3 – 0 – 1. (Fliflet – present/not voting) COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pearson: Attended Washington County incident handling, addressed library issues, visited Tartan Park ball fields and attended an HOA meeting. Councilmember Nelson: Addressed resident concerns. Councilmember Lundgren: Absent. Councilmember Bloyer: No Report. Councilmember Fliflet: Attended the Library Board special meeting. STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Administrator Handt: Reported she will be attending the MCMA conference for the balance of the week. City Clerk Johnson: Reminded residents of the annual clean-up day on May 20th, announced interns will be starting work in a couple of weeks, attended a budget meeting at Roseville IT and reported that the cable commission will be starting the bid process for upgrade of the Council Chambers audio and video equipment. City Attorney Sonsalla: Working on Library matters and drafting an easement. Planning Director Wensman: Working on development review, held the first Comp Plan Advisory Panel meeting, working on Savona Park. City Engineer Griffin: Accepting bids on various projects. Meeting adjourned 9:28 pm. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 2, 2017 Page 5 of 5 ATTEST: ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk STAFF REPORT -- page 1 -- DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM 3 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Dan Raboin, City Assessor AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Assessor Report REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly assessor report for April 2017 outlining work performed on behalf of the City of Lake Elmo. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended as part of the Consent Agenda. MONTHLY ACTIVITY: Property splits/plats – 0 Sales collected and viewed – 22 Taxpayer inquiries – 12 Miscellaneous inquiries - 2 Inspections – Residential – 10 Building permit reviews – 38 Pictures taken – 7 Other work performed included: • Received valuation related phone calls/inspecting properties. • Monthly meeting with County residential and commercial supervisors. • When not working in the field/inspections: o Computer work includes but not limited to; data entry for all properties inspected, o permit information, sales verification using MLS and other resources, and telephone inquiries. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council accept the April 2017 monthly assessor report. STAFF REPORT DATE: CONSENT ITEM #: 4 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Mike Bent, Building Official AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Building Department Report – April 2017 REVIEWED BY: SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly building department report. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. MONTHLY REPORT: Below is a snapshot of the monthly statistics for April 2017. Comparison data is also include from prior years for April for new home single family construction and total permitting activity for the month. Attached are the system summary reports breaking out this information further, including the statistics related to the inspection activity. 2017 2016 2015 New homes 18/12* 22 5/3* Total valuation $5,862,751/$3,284,000 $5,862,751 $1,869,018/$624,000 Average home value $325,708/$273,666 $355,041 $373,803/$208,000 Total Permit Valuation YTD $39,688,340** $35,128,916 $10,760,747 *Single Family Home/Townhouse ** Bremer Bank Regional Office Addition Permit Issued: Valuation $4,689,072 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, staff recommends the City Council accept the April 2017 monthly building permit report. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Valuation Report 2. Permits Issued & Fees Report 3. Inspection statistic report for April 2017 STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 5 TO: City Council FROM: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief AGENDA ITEM: Month End Fire Department Update for April 2017 REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Review month end activity update from fire department. Advise on any additional information requested. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: We had a total of 33 Calls for April. 3 Fire alarms 1 arcing, shorting electrical equip 1 Structure fire 1 Oven Fire 2 Dispatched and cancelled en route 17 Medicals 1 Gas leak 1 Grass fire 3 Car accidents with injuries 1 Search and rescue for a missing child 1 Smoke or odor removal 1 Special outside fire (port-a-potty) 33 Total A Command vehicle did not respond on 6 of the calls for the month for a response rate of 83%. Average response time for the month was just over 8 minutes. 8 calls had 3 or less responders minus the Duty Officer. Department drills for the month: #1 – CEU (Transitional Fire Attack) #2 – Drafting and pumping from portable water dump tanks #3 – ResQ Pump inservice training Points of interest: - The department purchased and was trained in the use of the ResQ Pump device for CPR. The ResQ Pump is a device that has shown great success in survivability for cardiac arrest victims. - 1 Fire fighter began a Leave of Absence for 4-6 months for out of state work. - Station 2 continues to have a staffing shortage making it difficult to fill Duty Crews there. - Personnel continue Fire Apparatus Operator training. - 1 Fire Fighter was out on Medical Leave for the entire month. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A OPTIONS: RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 5/16/2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 6 AGENDA ITEM: Public Works Director Report SUBMITTED BY: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: City Council is asked to review and accept, as part of Consent Agenda, a brief description of activities that have taken place in the Public Works Department in the month of April 2017. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: • Staff attended MDH Metro Water Training • Hazard Mitigation Mtg w/Washington County • Mtg w/FOCUS Eng. regarding Royal Golf Devlp. Lift Stations • Booster Station Start-up/Training • Installation of Chlorine at Well #1 • Wellhead Protection Plan Public Hearing and mtg. w/MDH • Bid opening for I-94 Lift Station • Mtg. with Planning Dept and Lennar about Savona Park grading • Lions Park Const. Mtg. • Grading of park parking lots and Manning Ave N near Well #2 • Pulling of Well #2 for maint/repairs • Safety Training • Street Sweeping was completed • Lift Station Cleaning • 2018-2022 CIP Review • Begin Park Mowing • 4 PW Staff members obtained Class SD Sewer License • 1 PW Staff member obtained Class C Water License • Pothole Patching o 27 tons ( Heritage Farms, Fields of St. Croix 2nd, Jane Rd) RECOMMENDATION: Base on the activities listed above, City Council is respectfully asked to accept the April 2017 Public Works Report. STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 7 AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Crack Seal Project – Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL) SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Krintina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept the improvements and approve Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL) for the 2017 Crack Seal Project? BACKGROUND AND PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The 2017 Crack Seal Project has been fully completed. The Project Engineer has prepared a Certificate of Completion and is recommending acceptance of the improvements and release of payment in full. The one year warranty period will begin on May 16, 2017, and will extend to May 16, 2018. Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc., has submitted Partial Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL) in the amount of $29,992.00. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Final payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council, as part of the Consent Agenda, accept the improvements and approve Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL) to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. in the amount of $29,992.00 for the 2017 Crack Seal Project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to accept the improvements and approve Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL) to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. in the amount of $29,992.00 for the 2017 Crack Seal Project”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Engineer’s Certificate of Completion dated May 16, 2017. 2. Gopher State Sealcoat Invoice dated May 4, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MN 2017 CRACK SEAL PROJECT PROJECT NO. 2017.119 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION DATE OF ISSUANCE: May 16, 2017 OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MN CONTRACTOR: GOPHER STATE SEALCOAT, INC. PROJECT NAME: 2017 CRACK SEAL PROJECT PROJECT NO.: 2017.119 This Certification of Completion applies to all work under the Contract Documents This Certification of Completion applies to the following specified parts of the Contract Documents I do hereby certify that the work to which this Certificate applies has been constructed in accordance with the Contract dated April 18, 2017. The above-mentioned improvement is hereby declared to be complete and acceptance of this work is recommended. DATE OF COMPLETION: May 5, 2017 Ryan Stempski Reg. No. 45395 FOCUS Engineering, Inc. THE WARRANTY PERIOD BEGINS May 16, 2017 AND ENDS May 16, 2018 Invoice Date 5/4/2017 Invoice # 16325 Bill To City of Lake Elmo Attn: Ryan Stempski 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Job Location various streets, per map 12519 Rhode Island Avenue Savage, MN 55378 P.O. No.Terms Net 10 Due Date 5/14/2017 Rep CAO We appreciate your business! Questions? Call (952) 931-9188. Phone #952-931-9188 Fax #952-931-0956 Total info@gopherstatesealcoat.com Description Amount Crack Sealing 29,992.00 $29,992.00 STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 8 AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Seal Coat Project – West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Krintina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Ryan Stempski, Project Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve the West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement for the 2017 Seal Coat Project? BACKGROUND: Since 2012, Lake Elmo and West Lakeland Township have successfully contracted jointly for the annual street seal coat projects to share and reduce overall project costs. Each jurisdiction pays its portion of the construction costs and shares in the engineering design, bidding and construction administration costs. The construction observation services are contracted directly by each jurisdiction. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Staff is recommending that the City continue to work jointly with West Lakeland Township to perform seal coating for routine maintenance of City and Township streets, therefore, staff has reviewed and updated the Joint Services Agreement with West Lakeland Township in preparation of the 2017 Seal Coat Project. The agreement identifies the terms and conditions upon which the City of Lake Elmo prepares and administers a contract for the 2017 Seal Coat Project to be completed on streets within both the City and Township. The City of Lake Elmo is defined as the lead entity and prepares the plans and specifications with input from the Township. The City bids the project and enters into a contract with the selected contractor for all the work. West Lakeland will pay a fee to the city in the amount of $3,000 to reimburse the City for the Township’s share of the design, bidding and construction administration services related to the project. The Township will reimburse the City within 30 days of receiving contractor invoices for the work performed on West Lakeland streets. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost savings of $3,000 in engineering and administration services. Staff believes that a unit price savings for the seal coat work is also likely due to the economy of scale at the time of bid/construction. Through a joint project effort, the City of Lake Elmo, West Lakeland Township and, at times, Baytown Township, have been realizing project cost savings through an economy of scale and sharing in project expenses for preparation of plans and specifications, bidding, and construction administration. In addition, staff believes that by combining the project work for multiple communities, we can continue to promote a more favorable bidding environment that may result in lower overall construction costs. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of the consent agenda, the West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement for the 2017 Seal Coat Project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as follows: “Move to approve the West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement for the 2017 Seal Coat Project.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement for the 2017 Seal Coat Project. JOINT SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE 2017 SEAL COAT PROJECT This Agreement is made this ___ day of ________2017, by and between the West Lakeland Township (hereinafter referred to as “West Lakeland”) and the City of Lake Elmo (hereinafter referred to as “Lake Elmo”). WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties, and it is the purpose of this Agreement, that certain road-related services be performed or contracted by Lake Elmo on behalf of West Lakeland for the purpose of seal coating certain street segments as designated by West Lakeland; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth below, the above parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Term: The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the date of execution and shall be for the duration of the one year warranty period for the 2017 Seal Coat Project. 2. Services. For the term of this Agreement, Lake Elmo shall provide West Lakeland with the following services in and on behalf of West Lakeland and at the direction of West Lakeland’s Engineer: a. Lake Elmo will provide professional engineering services to prepare Plans and Specifications and Contract documents for the 2017 Seal Coat Project. The project will include seal coating of street segments located in West Lakeland, in addition to the street segments located in Lake Elmo for which Lake Elmo is otherwise contracting. b. Prior to March 15, 2017, West Lakeland will provide Lake Elmo with a plan, designating and depicting the street segments to be seal coated in West Lakeland, said plan to be suitable for inclusion in the Plan documents, along with a tabulation of the estimated quantities (in square yards) showing the seal coating work to be performed in West Lakeland as a part of the project. c. Lake Elmo will advertise the 2017 Seal Coat Project for contractor bids and may award a contract for seal coating, or a portion of thereof, as deemed in the best interests of Lake Elmo. If Lake Elmo awards a contract for the 2017 Seal Coat Project and West Lakeland agrees, the award shall include that portion of streets within West Lakeland. d. Lake Elmo will provide professional engineering services for the construction administration of the contract. e. At its sole cost and expense, West Lakeland will provide a construction observer to inspect the seal coat work performed on West Lakeland streets. 3. Payments. West Lakeland shall make payments to Lake Elmo for services related to the project or directly for services as follows: 2 a. West Lakeland will pay Lake Elmo a fee in the amount of $3,000 for engineering and administration fees performed by Lake Elmo for the seal coat project. Lake Elmo will invoice this amount to West Lakeland once the Lake Elmo City Council accepts the bids and awards the construction contract. b. Lake Elmo will make Contractor payments for all work completed in accordance with the Contract. West Lakeland will reimburse Lake Elmo for the work completed and paid to the contractor in accordance with the contract for the actual quantities of work performed on West Lakeland streets. c. Lake Elmo will invoice West Lakeland for services to be reimbursed by West Lakeland as outlined above and West Lakeland will pay all invoices within 30 days after receipt of the invoice. Lake Elmo shall include with its invoices copies of the contractor’s claims showing the amount charged for the work performed and materials used in West Lakeland. 4. Insurance. Lake Elmo shall require its contractor(s) to provide insurance as specified below, and West Lakeland shall be named as an additional insured on such insurance: Comprehensive General Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate Auto Liability $1,200,000 per occurrence Workers compensation Statutory amount 5. Indemnification. Lake Elmo agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless West Lakeland, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys fees, arising out of or resulting from Lake Elmo's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is caused in whole or in part by an alleged negligent act, omission, or willful misconduct (including, but not limited to, a claimed breach of contract made by the contractor) of Lake Elmo. Lake Elmo agrees to require, as part of its contract with the contractor used to provide the seal coating, to include West Lakeland in the contractor’s indemnification obligation under the contract. West Lakeland agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Lake Elmo, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from West Lakeland’s performance of the duties required of it under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is caused in whole or in part by an alleged negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of West Lakeland. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities or limitations on liability to which they are entitled, under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466 or otherwise. Under no circumstances shall a party be required to pay on behalf of itself and other parties, any amounts in excess of the limits of liability established in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, applicable to any one party. The limits of liability for some or all of the parties may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for any party. 6. Service Contract. This is a service contract. The parties do not intend to create, and nothing herein shall be construed as creating, a joint powers agreement, joint venture, or joint enterprise. However, to the extent a court of competent jurisdiction may find such a relationship exists, Lake Elmo and West Lakeland shall be considered a single governmental entity as provided 3 in Minnesota Statutes, section 471.59, subdivision 1a for the purposes of determining total liability. The limits of liability for Lake Elmo and West Lakeland shall not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for either party or for any occurrence. 7. Contracting Procedure and Oversight. Lake Elmo shall be solely responsible for letting the contracts for the services to be provided hereunder in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. The bonds obtained from the contractor for the work shall include the work to be performed in West Lakeland. Lake Elmo shall, to the extent reasonably necessary, assist West Lakeland to draw upon the performance bond as needed to complete or correct any work the contractor fails to perform in West Lakeland in accordance with the contract. West Lakeland will be responsible for inspecting the work to be performed in West Lakeland, but Lake Elmo shall be responsible for generally overseeing the contractor’s performance of services in accordance with the contract. 8. Miscellaneous. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and no other person shall have any right, claim, or interest in it. 9. Legal Compliance. Both parties agree to comply with all applicable state, federal and local laws, rules and regulations in carrying out their respective obligations under this Agreement. 10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between Lake Elmo and West Lakeland and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. No amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth their hands on the day and year first written above. CITY OF LAKE ELMO TOWN OF WEST LAKELAND By: ___________________________ By: ___________________________ Its Mayor Its Town Chairperson ______________________________ ______________________________ Date Date By: ___________________________ By: ___________________________ Its City Administrator Its Town Clerk-Treasurer ______________________________ ______________________________ Date Date STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 9 AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Seal Coat Project – Accept Bids and Award Contract SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Ryan Stempski, Project Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept bids and award a contract for the 2017 Seal Coat Project? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Bids were received, publicly opened, and read aloud at City Hall on Thursday, May 4, 2017. FOCUS Engineering, Inc. has prepared and attached the Tabulation of Bids and a Letter of Recommendation for the award of the contract. The City received three (3) bids for this project, with Allied Blacktop Company providing both the lowest base bid and lowest alternate bid. Staff is recommending that Allied Blacktop Company be awarded the contract for the Alternate Bid in the amount of $173,305.00 which includes the amount of $122,265.00 for the City of Lake Elmo and the amount of $51,040 for West Lakeland Township. The Alternate Bid includes higher performing asphalt (CRS-2P) to provide a better product and to reduce resident complaints. Once again, the project will be completed jointly with West Lakeland Township with the Township reimbursing Lake Elmo their portion of the construction cost in the bid award amount of $51,040.00 (29%). West Lakeland Township will also pay Lake Elmo $3,000 for engineering and administration fees once the Lake Elmo City Council accepts the bids and awards the construction contract. Construction observation services will be contracted directly by each jurisdiction for the work performed on their streets. FISCAL IMPACT: $122,265.00. The post-bid construction estimate for Lake Elmo is $122,265.00 (71%). The total engineering design, bidding and construction services is estimated to be $8,500 less $3,000 to be reimbursed by West Lakeland Township. The Lake Elmo total post-bid project cost is therefore estimated to be $127,765.00 to be paid through the General Fund (Fund No. 101-430-3120-42250). RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the consent agenda, Resolution No. 2017-055 accepting the bids and awarding a Contract to Allied Blacktop Company. If removed from consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2017-055Accepting the Bids and Awarding a Contract to Allied Blacktop Company in the Alternate Bid amount of $173,305.00 for the 2017 Seal Coat Project; which includes $122,265.00 for the City of Lake Elmo and $51,040.00 for West Lakeland Township.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2017-055 Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract. 2. Engineer’s Letter of Award Recommendation and Tabulation of Bids. 3. Project Schedule. CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-055 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE 2017 SEAL COAT PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 2017 Seal Coat Project, 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 submittals 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, Allied Blacktop Company, for the Alternate Bid in the amount of $173,305.00. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY 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 MAY 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk May 5, 2016 Jack Griffin, P.E. City Engineer City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 2017 Seal Coat Project City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Project No. 2017.118 Dear Mr. Griffin, Attached is a complete tabulation of Bids for the 2017 Seal Coat Project. Bids were received at City Hall at 3:00 PM on Thursday, May 4, 2017. Contractor Base Bid Alternate Bid Allied Blacktop Company City of Lake Elmo $119,047.50 $122,265.00 West Lakeland Township $49,720.00 $51,040.00 TOTAL: $168,767.50 $173,305.00 Astech Corporation City of Lake Elmo $120,120.00 $126,555.00 West Lakeland Township $49,280.00 $51,920.00 TOTAL: $169,400.00 $178,475.00 Pearson Bros, Inc. City of Lake Elmo $124,410.00 $130,845.00 West Lakeland Township $52,360.00 $55,440.00 TOTAL: $176,770.00 $186,285.00 We recommend that you award the Contract to the lowest responsible bidder for the Alternate Bid to Allied Blacktop Company in the total amount of $173,305.00. This includes the amount of $122,265.00 for the City of Lake Elmo and the amount of $51,040.00 for West Lakeland Township. The Alternate Bid includes the higher grade CRS‐2P emulsified asphalt for a superior product. Please contact me with any questions you may have. Sincerely, Ryan W. Stempski, P.E. Project Engineer Enclosure FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283 TABULATION OF BIDS2017 SEAL COAT PROJECTCITY OF LAKE ELMO & WEST LAKELAND TWPPROJECT NO. 2017.118 BIDS OPENED: MAY 4, 2017, AT 3:00 PMBASE BID (CRS‐2 EMULSIFIED ASPHALT)ITEMUNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTALNO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNTCITY OF LAKE ELMO1 BITUMINOUS SEAL COAT WITH 1/8" DRESSER TRAP ROCK107,250 SY 1.23$ 131,917.50$ 1.11$ 119,047.50$ 1.12$ 120,120.00$ 1.16$ 124,410.00$ CITY OF WEST LAKELAND2 BITUMINOUS SEAL COAT WITH 1/8" DRESSER TRAP ROCK44,000 SY 1.23$ 54,120.00$ 1.13$ 49,720.00$ 1.12$ 49,280.00$ 1.19$ 52,360.00$ TOTAL186,037.50$ 168,767.50$ 169,400.00$ 176,770.00$ ALTERNATE BID NO. 1 (CRS‐2P EMULSIFIED ASPHALT)ITEMUNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTALNO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNTCITY OF LAKE ELMO1 BITUMINOUS SEAL COAT WITH 1/8" DRESSER TRAP ROCK107,250 SY 1.33$ 142,642.50$ 1.14$ 122,265.00$ 1.18$ 126,555.00$ 1.22$ 130,845.00$ CITY OF WEST LAKELAND2 BITUMINOUS SEAL COAT WITH 1/8" DRESSER TRAP ROCK44,000 SY 1.33$ 58,520.00$ 1.16$ 51,040.00$ 1.18$ 51,920.00$ 1.26$ 55,440.00$ TOTAL201,162.50$ 173,305.00$ 178,475.00$ 186,285.00$ ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Allied Blacktop Company Astech CorporationENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Allied Blacktop Company Astech Corporation Pearson Bros, Inc.Pearson Bros, Inc. PROJECT SCHEDULE CITY OF LAKE ELMO 2017 SEAL COAT PROJECT PROJECT NO. 2017.118 FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283 APRIL 6, 2017 Placement of Advertisement for Bids. –Oakdale‐Lake Elmo Review. Publication on April 12 – Quest CDN. Publication on April 12 MAY 4, 2017 Receive Contractor bids. MAY 16, 2017 Council accepts bids and awards Contract. JUNE 14, 2017 Conduct Pre‐construction meeting and Issue Notice to Proceed. JUNE 15, 2017 Contractor begins Work. JULY 14, 2017 Substantial Completion of Work; including sweeping of excess aggregate. AUGUST 31, 2017 Final Completion of Work; including punchlist and final documentation. STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 10 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Private Development Security Reductions: Village Preserve 2nd Addition Grading Security SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Chad Isakson, Assistance City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve the grading security reduction for the Village Preserve 2nd Addition? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Staff has received and processed a request to reduce the grading security for the Village Preserve 2nd Addition. This request has been reviewed and the following reduction is being recommended: Current Security Amount Proposed Security Amount 1. Village Preserve 2nd Addition: $482,681 $406,698 The grading work has been completed and verified through the submittal and review of grading record plans. Staff is therefore recommending the release of grading security in the amount of $75,983. FISCAL IMPACT: It is the City’s goal to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the City tax payers against the potential of developer default. With this reduction, the remaining security amount held by the City remains sufficient to complete the remaining improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, the grading security reduction for the Village Preserve 2nd Addition as detailed in this report and supporting documentation. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve the grading security reduction for the Village Preserve 2nd Addition as detailed in the attached Security Reduction Worksheet.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Security Reduction Worksheet – Village Preserve 2nd Addition. VILLAGE PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION Time of Performance: October 31, 2016DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMOUNTSCATEGORY CONSTRUCTION 125% REMARKS #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6Grading $60,786 $75,983 $75,983Sanitary Sewer $60,734 $75,918 $56,938Watermain $120,071 $150,089 $112,567Storm Sewer (w/pond structures) $41,671 $52,089 $26,044Streets $219,972 $274,965 $137,483Sidewalks/Trails $58,525 $73,156Surface Water Facilities NA NAStreet Lighting $36,000 $45,000Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs $2,540 $3,175Private Utilities (electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable)Landscaping $26,745 $33,431Tree Preservation and Restoration NA NAWetland Mitigation and Buffers NA NAMonuments $4,500 $5,625Erosion Control $18,525 $23,156Miscellaneous Facilities NA NARecord Drawings $2,500 $3,125TOTALS $652,569 $815,712RELEASED AMOUNTS:$333,032 $75,983 $0 $0 $0 $0CUMMULATIVE AMOUNTS:$333,032 $409,014SECURITY AMOUNT REMAINING:$482,681 $406,698DATE:2/21/2017 5/16/2017REDUCTIONS STAFF REPORT -- page 1 -- DATE: May 16, 2017 CONSENT ITEM 11 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Julie Johnson, City Clerk AGENDA ITEM: Approve Resolution Supporting the 114th NWIRA Championship Regatta on Lake Elmo REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: It is respectfully requested that the City Council, as part of the Consent Agenda, consider approving Resolution 2017-056, supporting the 110th Northwestern International Rowing Association Championship Regatta on Lake Elmo on August 11 and 12, 2017. During the event on August 11th & 12 and event set up on August 9th & 10th, residential boat traffic will be asked to follow the No Wake rule. BACKGROUND: A representative of the Minnesota Rowing Club has previously appeared before the City Council seeking the Council's support for the event as part of the application for water surface use from the Washington County Sheriff’s office. In order to conduct the proposed rowing event, the Minnesota Rowing Club will need to secure a water use permit from the County Sheriffs office and the Council's approval of the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving Resolution 2017-056, supporting the 114th Northwestern International Rowing Association Championship Regatta on Lake Elmo on August 11 and 12, 2017. As part of the Consent Agenda, no specific motion is required. ATTACHMENT(S): Resolution 2017-056 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2017-056 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A REQUEST BY THE MINNESOTA BOAT CLUB TO HOST THE 114th NORTH WESTERN INTERNATIONAL ROWING ASSOCIATION CHAMPIONSHIP REGATTA ON LAKE ELMO ON AUGUST 11 AND 12, 2017. WHEREAS, the Minnesota Boat Club is seeking support from the City of Lake Elmo to host the 114th Annual Northwestern International Rowing Association (NWIRA) Championship Regatta on Lake Elmo from August 11 through August 12, 2017; and WHEREAS, Lake Elmo's namesake lake has been chosen as the site for the two- day championship rowing competition; WHEREAS, Lake Elmo fully supports the efforts of the Minnesota Boat Club and welcomes the opportunity to be a host city to this international event for the third time in its history. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1. That the Minnesota Boat Club will need to obtain a Water Surface Use Permit from the Washington County Sheriff’s Office in order to conduct a Regatta on the waters of Lake Elmo. 2. That the application for water surface use will include the following components: a. The Minnesota Boat Club will receive the sanctioning of the US Rowing Association, the sport's national governing body to host the regatta, and will need to demonstrate adequate insurance to cover the standard liability issues as part of the permit request. 3. During the rowing competition on Lake Elmo, the Minnesota Boat Club has requested that residential boat traffic follow the No Wake rule. The dates and times are as follows: August 9 - 10 from 7 AM to 7 PM for event set up, and August 11 - 12 from 7 AM to 7 PM. 4. The City Council defers to the Washington County Sheriff for the placement of any and all buoys, floating starting platforms, and pontoon boats in the water as part of approval of the Water Surface Use Permit. 5. Upon event approval by the Washington County Sheriff, enforcement of Lake Elmo City Code Chapter 97, and all other laws and regulations, is assigned to the Washington County Sheriff’s Department pursuant to City Code § 97.24. 2 6. The Minnesota Boat Club will encourage all spectators, officials, rowers, coaches, and others to refrain from parking on residential streets in close proximity to Lake Elmo and on County Road 17. This plan will protect the property and privacy of the City's residents, and to prevent spectators from parking along city streets and entering the Park from the north end. 7. The Minnesota Boat Club will request that Washington County close the public access boat ramp in the Lake Elmo Park Preserve from normal motorized traffic during the event. This closure will allow the regatta to be conducted in a safe and manageable fashion. 8. The City of Lake Elmo does not require a special event permit to conduct a rowing event that takes place on a public water body within the City. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Lake Elmo supports the application by the Minnesota Boat Club to host the 114th North Western International Rowing Association Championship Regatta on Lake Elmo on August 11 and August 12, 2017. Passed and duly adopted this 16th day of May, 2017, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Mike Pearson, Mayor STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 12 AGENDA ITEM: CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) – Resolution Establishing a No On- Street Parking Zone along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street to 50th Street SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Assistance City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve a Resolution establishing a No On-Street Parking Zone along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street to 50th Street? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: In 2017, Washington County will be reconstructing CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) from 44th Street North to 50th Street North including street, drainage, trail, and sanitary sewer improvements. The approved 36-foot wide street section design for Olson Lake Trail meets County State Aid design standards with an 8-foot parking lane on the east side (Lake Elmo side) and with no parking on the west side (Oakdale side). State Aid rules require a council resolution establishing a No Parking Zone along the western side of the improved corridor. The resolution must be submitted together with the completed project plans in order obtain State Aid plan approval and before State Aid funds may be expended on the improvement. Parking will be prohibited along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13), from 44th Street to 50th Street. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2017-XXX establishing a No On-Street Parking Zone along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street to 50th Street. The recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2017-054 establishing a No On-Street Parking Zone along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street to 50th Street.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2017-054 Establishing a No On-Street Parking Zone along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street to 50th Street. CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-054 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NO ON-STREET PARKING ZONE ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF OLSON LAKE TRAIL (COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY (CSAH) 13) FROM 44TH STREET NORTH TO 50TH STREET NORTH FOR PROJECT NO. S.A.P. 082-613-033 WHEREAS, Washington County, in conjunction with the City of Lake Elmo and the City of Oakdale has planned improvements for Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street to 50th Street in the Cities of Lake Elmo and Oakdale; and WHEREAS, Olson Lake Trail has previously been designated as a County State Aid Highway; and WHEREAS, Washington County will be expending County State Aid Funds on the improvements on CSAH 13; and WHEREAS, these improvements do not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street; and approval of the proposed construction as a County State Aid Highway must therefore be conditioned upon certain restrictions; and WHEREAS, Washington County has determined that no on-street parking shall be allowed on the west side of Olson Lake Trail from 44th Street North to 50th Street North; and WHEREAS, The Lake Elmo City Engineer has reviewed the Plans and concurs that parking shall not be allowed as stated above; and WHEREAS, the City Council has authority to establish No Parking Zones; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council that no on-street parking be allowed along the west side of Olson Lake Trail (CSAH 13) from 44th Street North to 50th Street North at all times. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MAY, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mike Pearson (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE: 5/16/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 13 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Map Amendment Rezoning Select Parcels within Village to VMX – Village Mixed Use REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: At its last meeting, the Council considered a proposal recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission to rezone properties within the Old Village that are either currently zoned GB – General Business or which were incorrectly zoned on the Zoning Map. The Council tabled the issue due to concerns over density (as Staff understands it). Staff is asking that the Council reconsider the proposed Zoning Map Amendment. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council should review and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels guided for VMX – Village Mixed Use within the Old Village to VMX – Village Mixed Use. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Attached is the item from the Council packet from the last meeting at which this rezoning was discussed. It should be noted that the Comprehensive Plan guides density for an area, and the density designated for areas guided for VMX – Village Mixed Use is 6-10 units per acre. When a property develops, it is required to do so according to the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, a property that were to subdivide within the area guided for VMX would need to be rezoned to VMX and could do so at a density of 6-10 units per acre. As mentioned in the attached report, Staff and the Planning Commission had made this recommendation because a number of properties within the GB – General Business zoning district do not conform to the district’s standards. Many infrastructure improvements have been made to the Old Village including the availability of city sewer and additional storm water management, and the GB zoning district standards were set forth assuming a lack of such improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: Rezoning the recommended parcels to Village Mixed Use zoning will allow property owners to redevelop or make improvements to their property in accordance with VMX standards, thereby allowing greater flexibility. Not having to go through the process or pay the application fee for a Zoning Map Amendment City Council Meeting 5/16/2017 Page 2 may further incent property owners to make improvements that otherwise may not be allowed under current standards. OPTIONS: The Council may: • Adopt Ord. 08-176 as proposed. • Amend Ord. 08-176 and adopt as amended. • Deny adoption of Ord. 08-176. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the Council adopt Ord. 08-176, approving a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels to VMX - Village Mixed Use: “Move to adopt Ord. 08-176, approving a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels to VMX - Village Mixed Use.” ATTACHMENTS: • Item from May 2, 2017 meeting packet STAFF REPORT DATE: 5/2/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 10 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Map Amendment Rezoning Select Parcels within Village to VMX – Village Mixed Use REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: City Staff has received a number of request from property owners within areas currently zoned GB – General Business and guided for VMX – Village Mixed Use to further develop or make improvements to their properties. A number of these requests have or would require rezoning to VMX, as the proposals did not meet the requirements of the GB – General Business District but did meet the requirements of the VMX – Village Mixed Use District, a more flexible zoning district. Many infrastructure improvements have been made to the Old Village including availability of city sewer and additional stormwater management. Rezoning to VMX is also a priority on the 2017 Planning Commission Work Plan. For these reasons, Staff and the Planning Commission are requesting that the Council consider a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels within the Village to VMX – Village Mixed Use. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council should review and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels within the Old Village to VMX – Village Mixed Use. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Properties Proposed to be Rezoned. The attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 24, 2017 further details the properties being proposed to be rezoned. At this time, no properties guided for VMX and zoned Rural Single Family will be rezoned to VMX. Planning Commission and Public Hearing. The Planning Commission held two public hearings regarding the proposed rezoning. The initial public hearing was held on March 27, 2017 and proposed only properties currently zoned GB – General Business District that were guided for Village Mixed Use in the Comprehensive Plan. Upon receiving feedback from this public hearing notice, Staff learned that there were a number of Zoning Map errors which designated commercial properties as either right-of-way or Rural Single Family zoning, and thus these properties were not published in the original public hearing notice. Staff then published an additional public hearing notice and held an additional public hearing on April 24, 2017 to capture these missing properties. Comments from the public hearing included concern over the density designated for the Village Mixed Use land use category and the desire to preserve existing single- City Council Meeting 5/2/2017 Regular Agenda item #10 Page 2 family homes within the Village. The Planning Commission recommended adoption of Ord. 08-176 with an affirmative vote of 7-0. FISCAL IMPACT: Rezoning the recommended parcels to Village Mixed Use zoning will allow property owners to redevelop or make improvements to their property in accordance with VMX standards, thereby allowing greater flexibility. Not having to go through the process or pay the application fee for a Zoning Map Amendment may further incent property owners to make improvements that otherwise may not be allowed under current standards. OPTIONS: The Council may: • Adopt Ord. 08-176 as proposed. • Amend Ord. 08-176 and adopt as amended. • Deny adoption of Ord. 08-176. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the Council adopt Ord. 08-176, approving a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels to VMX - Village Mixed Use: “Move to adopt Ord. 08-176, approving a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning select parcels to VMX - Village Mixed Use.” ATTACHMENTS: • Ord. 08-176 • Planning Commission 4.24.2017 Meeting Packet – Item 4a. • Planning Commission 4.24.2017 Meeting Minutes pertaining to ZMA – VMX • Current and Proposed Zoning 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-176 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains the following properties to be rezoned from GB – General Business to VMX – Village Mixed Use: PIDs: 1302921230055 1302921320001 1302921320052 1302921210010 1302921120013 1302921230057 1302921230038 1302921320026 1302921320012 1302921120010 1302921230058 1302921230037 1302921230007 1302921240022 1302921120016 1302921320021 1302921320019 1302921320046 1302921220007 1302921120012 1302921230068 1302921210013 1302921230059 1302921220023 1302921120009 1302921320025 1302921210014 1302921310017 1302921220018 1302921120011 1302921230070 1302921210011 1302921210016 1302921220016 1302921120015 1302921320049 1302921210012 1302921310016 1302921220017 1302921120014 1302921320051 1302921210015 1302921230046 1302921220019 1302921220008 1302921320048 1302921320041 1302921230065 1302921220022 1302921220010 1302921320047 1302921320042 1302921230053 1302921220021 1302921240016 1302921240020 1302921320083 1302921240024 1302921220020 1302921220012 1302921310003 1302921230054 1302921240019 1302921240021 1302921230071 1302921230056 1302921210001 1302921240017 1302921210006 1302921210007 1302921320032 1302921320005 1302921230067 1302921220002 1302921220013 1302921320027 1302921230025 1302921240025 1302921220011 1302921220014 1302921230063 1302921230036 1302921210009 1302921230004 1302921210002 1302921320022 1302921230062 1302921230064 1302921320086 1302921320007 1302921320009 1302921320008 1302921320010 1302921320085 1302921320096 1302921320094 1302921230077 1302921230027 1302921230018 1302921230026 1302921230010 SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo also hereby ordains that the Zoning Administrator shall make the applicable changes to the official Zoning Map of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. 2 SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-176 was adopted on this 2nd day of May, 2017, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-176 was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2017. STAFF REPORT DATE: 03/27/2017 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM #: 4a TO: Planning Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planner AGENDA ITEM: Rezoning Old Village GB – General Business District to VMX – Village Mixed Use District REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: Creation of VMX District. In November of 2013, creation of the Village Mixed Use District was approved in support of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update for the Village Planning Area. The Village Mixed Use District was created to replace the existing intermingling of commercial, residential, and public zoning classifications within the central portion of the Village area. While the creation of the District was approved, the majority of the area for which it was meant has not yet been rezoned. Currently, the majority of the parcels that are planned for VMX - Village Mixed Use zoning are still zoned GB – General Business. Only three parcels within the City have been rezoned to VMX thus far. Former Planning Commission Review of Rezoning GB Parcels to VMX. The Planning Commission discussed rezoning all parcels zoned GB – General Business District within the Old Village to VMX – Village Mixed Use in June of 2016. The meeting minutes of this meeting are attached for reference. Summarily, the Commission was not in favor at that time of this mass rezoning for concern of the following: That the densities within this area are guided too high. That VMX district standards are less restrictive (higher maximum impervious surface, additional permitted uses, smaller minimum building setbacks, etc.) than the GB district standards. That Form Based Code should be created for the Village. Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 2 That updated population and development projections for the areas guided for VMX in the Old Village are needed. Reconsideration Requested. At its February 27, 2017 meeting, the Commission again discussed rezoning parcels within the Old Village from GB to VMX. This discussion was prompted by a number of requests from residents to further develop or make improvements on their properties located within the GB – General Business zoning district. Staff has found that a number of these requests required rezoning to VMX, as the proposals did not meet the minimum requirements of the GB – General Business District but did meet the requirements of the VMX – Village Mixed Use District. Many infrastructure improvements have been made to the Old Village including availability of city sewer and additional stormwater management. For these reasons, and because updating the Zoning Map to change Village parcels to VMX consistent with the Comprehensive Plan is an item on the 2017 Planning Department Work Plan, Staff would like the Planning Commission to re-review rezoning GB parcels within the Old Village to VMX. ISSUE BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission should consider rezoning the parcels currently zoned GB - General Business District to VMX - Village Mixed Use. It should also consider removal of 154.034: GB – General Business from the Zoning Code, along with all other references within the Code to the GB – General Business zoning district, as this district will no longer exist on the Zoning Map. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Reason for Requesting Zoning Map Amendment Now vs. at Time of Development Application. In order to ensure that the property is being developed according the Comprehensive Plan, rezoning will typically occur at the time of a development application if a parcel is not zoned in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. However, as previously mentioned, there are many non-conforming parcels within the GB – General Business zoning district which cannot further develop or, in some cases, make simple improvements, as a non- conformity may not be expanded. Rezoning these parcels will allow for owners to further develop and/or make improvements without having to submit application and go through a public hearing and approval process. Number of Parcels Currently in the GB – General Business District. According to data provided in the City’s Zoning Map, there are currently 83 parcels that are zoned GB – General Business District. It should be noted that only those properties currently zoned GB are proposed to be rezoned to VMX. There are some RS - Rural Single Family-zoned parcels that are guided for VMX, however, these are not proposed to be rezoned. Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 3 Comparison Tables of Two Ordinances. In general, the proposed rezoning will allow a higher degree of flexibility for site improvements and land development in the Village than is presently permitted under the current ordinance. The following outlines differences in lot dimensions, setback requirements, and permitted uses in the two districts. Staff has also provided a complete draft the GB and VMX District regulations for review. Permitted and Conditional Use Comparison. The following shows that there are a number of uses that the VMX district either permits or allows with a conditional use permit that the GB district does not. In some cases, the VMX is actually more restrictive, in that it requires a conditional use permit for some uses that the GB district permits. It should be noted that current properties that currently employ any of these land uses would not be required to obtain a conditional use permit for such uses unless an expansion of the use was proposed or if the use was discontinued for more than a year. The VMX district permits the following uses that the GB district does not allow: Single Family Detached Single Family Attached Two Family Live Work Unit Wayside Stand Temporary Sales as Accessory Use Parking Facility as Accessory Use Solar Equipment as Accessory Use The VMX districts allows the following conditional uses that the GB district does not allow: Multi Family Secondary Dwelling Congregate Housing Semi-Transient Accommodations Schools Funeral Home Lodging Trade Shop Farmer’s Market Gas Station Parking Facility Outdoor Recreation Facility Parks and Open Areas Indoor Athletic Facility Broadcasting or Communication Facility Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 4 The VMX district requires a Conditional Use Permit for the following uses that the GB district permits (does not require a Conditional Use Permit): Group Residential Facility/Nursing and Personal Care (the GB district permits a Boarding Care Facility with 15 residents max) Public Assembly Religious Institutions Medical Facility Membership Organization Repair and Maintenance Shop Veterinary Services Restaurant with Drive Thru Garden Center Shopping Center Automobile Maintenance Service Sales and Storage Lots Indoor Recreation (the GB district allows Family Entertainment Centers (no definition provided)) Bed and Breakfast as Accessory Use Group Family Day Care as Accessory Use Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements Comparison. The table below compares the minimum lot size requirements of the GB General Business District to those of the VMX District and provides analysis on the differences. Standard GB VMX Analysis Minimum Lot Area 1.5 acres Non-Residential Use: None Single Family Detached Dwelling: 5,000 sf Two-Family Dwelling (per unit): 3,000 sf Single-Family Attached (per unit): 2,500 sf Multi-Family Dwelling (per unit): 1,800 sf Live-Work Unit: 3,000 sf The minimum lot size requirement of 1.5 acre most likely assumed that properties within the GB district would not be sewered. The entire Village Area is now within the MUSA, and lots of this size are no longer necessary to provide wastewater treatment. It should also be noted that properties that further subdivide would be required to rezone to VMX and would need to adhere to the standards of the VMX district. Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 5 Other Structures: 3,500 sf There are 50 parcels within the GB district that do not meet its minimum lot size requirement. Maximum Lot Area None Residential Structures: None Other Structures: 5 acres This would also only be applicable when a property further subdivided, which would already necessitate a rezoning from GB to VMX. Minimum Lot Width 150 ft Single Family Detached Dwelling: 50 ft Two-Family Dwelling (per unit): 30 ft. Single-Family Attached (per unit): 25 ft. Multi-Family Dwelling (per building): 75 ft. Live-Work Unit: 25 ft. The VMX minimum lot width requirements are smaller than those of the GB district, as the minimum lot size requirements of the VMX district are much smaller. There are approximately 20 parcels within the GB district that do not meet the minimum lot width requirement. Setbacks Front: 0 ft. for Old Village Interior Side: 0 ft. for Old Village Side (Corner): 50 ft. Rear: 50 ft. Front: 0-20 ft. (25 ft for single family homes) Interior Side: 10 ft. (for properties abutting residential uses) Side (Corner): 0 ft. (or maintain front setback of adjacent property adjoining street) Rear: 10 ft. This item has been discussed at previous Planning Commission meetings. The VMX ordinance is undergoing revisions, and the Planning Commission has suggested that because of the street design of some areas within the Village, there should be certain defined areas of the VMX that have a build-to setback. Maximum Building Height 35 ft 35 ft/3 stories Standard does not change. Maximum Impervious Coverage Residential Structures: 75% • Other Structures: No Limit Up to 4 acres: 40% >4-8 acres: 35% >8 acres: 25% Many lots within the GB district do not meet the maximum impervious surface requirement. The Village has increased stormwater management efforts, and stormwater management plans will be evaluated upon the receipt of land use applications. Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 6 It is difficult to know without having exact impervious surface calculations, but one can see by looking from an aerial that a vast majority of parcels within the GB district do not meet the maximum impervious surface requirement. Lot Config- uration Maximum depth to width ratio no more than 3:1 None Septic Drainage Regulation 20,000 sf dedicated for septic None All GB parcels within the Village would be required to be sewered eventually, as they are in the MUSA. This standard is no longer applicable. Density. The Comprehensive Plan guides the Village Mixed Use area for a density of 5-10 residential equivalency units per acre. Maximum lot size and no minimum lot size requirement for the VMX district help to accomplish this higher density. Form Based Code. Staff is also cognizant of the fact that the Planning Commission is in support of implementing a Form Based Zoning for the VMX District, as is supported in the Comprehensive Plan. Creation of a draft of a form-based code for the VMX zoning district is currently on the 2017 Planning Department Workplan. The Commission should consider if it is necessary for Form Based Code to be adopted before rezoning Village parcels to VMX. It should be noted that the City can do nothing, short of enacting a moratoria, to prevent further development within the area guided for VMX until a Form Based Code is adopted. The goal of rezoning these parcels is to make non-conforming parcels conforming. General Business District References No Longer Required in the Zoning Code. Currently, the only parcels zoned GB – General Business are located in the Old Village. Rezoning these parcels to VMX – Village Mixed Use will leave the GB – General Business District non-existent on the Zoning Map. Therefore, Staff is recommending that Section 034, GB – General Business be removed along with all other references to this zoning district. Public Hearing Notices – Additional Consideration Requested. A public hearing notice was published in the official City newspaper, and public hearing notices were sent out to property owners within 350 feet of all properties zoned GB – General Business District. Staff received a number of inquiries about the rezonings, asking for clarification. One resident was not in support Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 7 the rezonings, citing concerns of increased density and the ability for homeowners not being able to keep a single family home. As previously mentioned in this report, GB-zoned parcels are still guided for VMX, which means that a rezoning would need to occur when the property develops, and any development may occur at the density which the Comprehensive Plan dictates. Additionally, existing single family detached homes are a permitted use in the VMX. Another comment that was received was that there are still a number of parcels that are guided for VMX that were not zoned GB – General Business District (currently either zoned RS – Rural Single Family, RT – Rural Development Transitional, or had no zoning classification on the City’s Zoning Map), even though the land use of some of these parcels is not a single family home. Staff has looked further in to this and have found that the following parcels are zoned RS but are guided for VMX, yet are not used as single family homes. Please note that this list does not include land that is guided for VMX yet is still used as single family homes. If the Commission wishes to recommend rezoning all parcels that are guided for VMX to VMX, a motion can be made to do so. PID# Address Description 1302921230010 None Small strip of land south of and owned by same owner as 3699 Laverne Avenue North (vacant) 1302921230026 None Small strip of land north of and owned by same owner as 3520 Laverne Avenue North (vacant) 1302921230027 3520 Laverne Ave N Industrial Use per Washington County Use Description 1302921230077 11127 Stillwater Blvd N Lake Elmo Oil 1302921320007 None Small strip of land near 33rd St N (vacant) 1302921320010 None Paved area for Lake Elmo Inn 1302921240003 11179 Stillwater Blvd N Lake Elmo Repair Shop Building 1302921230064 None Small strip of land west of 11799 Stillwater Blvd N 1302921230062 None Small strip of land east of and owned by same owner as 11179 Stillwater Blvd N 1302921320009 None Small strip of land north of 33rd St N 1302921320022 3504 Lake Elmo Ave N Owned by Lake Elmo Inn Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 8 1302921320008 None Small strip of land north of 33rd St N 1302921230020 None Small strip of land used for parking, owned by Christ Lutheran Church 1302921320096 11123 Upper 33rd St N Owned by Grain on Main LLC 1302921230063 None Parking area for 11179 Stillwater Blvd N 1302921230018 None Parcel south of parking area for 11179 Stillwater Blvd N 1302921240028 None Schiltgen Property (31.78 acre parcel) 1302921320086 None Small strip of land north of 33rd St N 1302921320085 None Small piece of land west of and owned by same owner as 11123 Upper 33rd St N 1302921320094 11320 Upper 33rd St N Storage building with parking (parking shared with Lake Elmo Inn) The Commission should consider if the above-mentioned parcels should also be rezoned to VMX. If the Commission recommends this, an additional public hearing notice would need to be published, and it is recommended this item be tabled until the next meeting after which an appropriate public hearing notice has been given for this Zoning Map Amendment to rezone these parcels. FISCAL IMPACT: Rezoning the subject area to Village Mixed Use zoning will allow property owners to redevelop or make improvements to their property in accordance with VMX standards, thereby allowing greater flexibility. Not having to go through the process or pay the application fee for a Zoning Map Amendment may further incent a property owner within the current GB district to make improvements that otherwise may not be allowed under the GB district standards. OPTIONS: The Planning Commission may recommend any of the following: 1) Rezone all of the parcels located in the GB – General Business District to VMX – Village Mixed Use and omit references to the GB district from the City Code. Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2017 Public Hearing Item #4a Page 9 2) Rezone some of the parcels located in the GB – General Business District to VMX – Village Mixed Use and not omit references to the GB district from the City Code. 3) Table discussion so that an additional public hearing notice may be published to include the above-mentioned parcels in the Zoning Map Amendment rezoning properties to VMX – Village Mixed Use. 4) Table discussion so that an additional public hearing notice may be published to include all properties guided for VMX – Village Mixed Use in the Zoning Map Amendment rezoning properties to VMX – Village Mixed Use. 5) Not rezone any parcels to VMX – Village Mixed Use at this time and leave references to the GB district from the City Code for the time being. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission table tonight’s discussion so that an additional public hearing notice may be published to include the above-mentioned parcels in the Zoning Map Amendment rezoning properties to VMX – Village Mixed Use. “Move to table this Zoning Map Amendment Discussion to rezone properties to VMX – Village Mixed Use until an appropriate public hearing notice may be published to include the above-mentioned properties in the Zoning Map Amendment.” ATTACHMENTS: GB District Regulations VMX District Regulations Ord. 08-___ rezoning GB parcels to VMX and omitting references to GB district from City Code. Current and Proposed Zoning Maps PC Meeting Minutes from 6.13.2016. III-3 the first drainfield is prohibited. Maximum Width of Primary Dwelling All dwelling units must be at least 20 feet wide through the main living area of the structure. Footings The primary structure must have continuous frost footings. Continuous frost footings are not required for porches, decks, and other appendages so long as proper post type footings per existing Building Codes are constructed. Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Maximum Width of Driveways See § 93.26 Signage See §§ 154.212 (1997 Code, § 300.07 Subd. 4.D) (Am. Ord. 97-192, passed 6-19-2007) § 154.034 GB – GENERAL BUSINESS. A. Permitted uses and structures. 1. The following service/office uses: General Business – Service/Office Accounting Advertising (Sign fabrication not permitted use) Alterations Apparel Cleaning Pick-up Stations Apparel Repair and Alterations Architectural Art Gallery Auditing Bakeries (With production of bakery goods limited to retail sales) Barber Services Beauty Shops Bookkeeping Business and Management Consultant Offices III-4 Business Associations Cafes and Restaurants - Drive-up window (Menu boards and intercom systems prohibited; Adequate vehicle stacking must be provided) Cafes and Restaurants (Limited to full table service operations) Charitable Chiropractic Civic, Social and Fraternal Association Offices and Halls Collection and Adjustment Services General Business – Service/Office Credit Reporting (Consumer and Mercantile) Dental Detective and Protective Agencies Duplication Educational Employment Agencies Engineering Finance Galleries Governmental Offices Insurance Investment Labor Unions Legal Libraries Mailing Medical Medical Services (The compounding, dispensing or retail sale of drugs, prescription items, patient or proprietary medicine, sick room supplies, prosthetic devices or items relating to any of the foregoing when conducted in the building occupied primarily by medical, dental, osteopathic, chiropractic or III-5 optometric offices) Optometric Osteopathic Photo Gallery Professional Membership Organizations Real Estate Religious Scientific Research (Excluding laboratory facilities) Shoe Repair General Business – Service/Office Stenographic Service Therapeutic Massage (See licensing requirements in § 114.01) Welfare Offices (Am. Ord. 97-170, passed 5-2-2006; Am. Ord. 2012-064, passed 12-4-2012) 2. The following retail uses: General Business - Retail Antiques and Secondhand Merchandise Apparel and Related Accessories Automobile Repair and Services Automobiles and Automobile Accessories Bicycles Books Building Supplies Cameras and Photographic Supplies Cigars and Cigarettes Drugs and Proprietary Items Electrical Supplies Flowers and Floral Accessories Food and Grocery Products Furniture III-6 Gifts, Novelties and Souvenirs Glass Heating Equipment Home Furnishings and Related Equipment Jewelry Liquors Marine Craft and Accessories Newspapers and Magazines Nursery and Garden Supplies General Business – Retail Optical Goods Paint Pets Plumbing Equipment Sporting Goods Stationery Wallpaper 3. The following repair/service uses: General Business – Repair/Service Clock Repair Electrical Repair and Supplies Equipment–Rental and Leasing Food Catering Furniture Repair Heating Household Appliances Jewelry Repair Landscaping Plumbing Radio III-7 Reupholstery Television Watch Repair 4. The following office uses (excluding equipment storage): General Business - Office Air Conditioning Contractor Building Construction Contractor Carpentry Contractor General Business - Office Decorating Contractor Heating Contractor Masonry Contractor Painting Contractor Plastering Contractor Plumbing Contractor Roofing Contractor Sheet Metal Contractor Stone Work Contractor Tile Setting Contractor Wallpaper Contractor Water Well Drilling Contractor Wood Flooring Contractor 5. Uses permitted by conditional use permit. General Business - Conditional Use Bed and Breakfast Facility 15 Beds Maximum Boarding Care Facility 15 Residents Maximum Day Care Centers 40 Children Maximum Family Entertainment Centers Fitness Studio Maximum floor area not to exceed 5,000 square feet III-8 Kennels Nursing Care Facility 15 Residents Maximum Open Sales Lots Manufacturing Any industrial manufacturing operation in existence within the city at the effective date of this chapter, including manufacture of wood products and plastic products, may continue the use as a conforming use without a conditional use permit. Nothing in this provision shall otherwise be construed to require the city to authorize any manufacturing use in the General Business Zone after the effective date of this chapter. General Business - Conditional Use Veterinary Clinics (Am. Ord. 97-20, passed 10-21-1997; Am. Ord. 97-86, passed 10-2-2001; Am. Ord. 97-88,passed 10-2-2001; Am. Ord. 97-138, passed 9-7-2004; Am. Ord. 2012-064, passed 12-4-2012) 6. General requirements. a. All storage, services, repair or processing shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed building or behind opaque fence or wall not less than 6 feet high, except the outdoor display of merchandise; b. Incineration of waste matter shall be conducted in approved equipment located within the building wherein the permitted use is conducted; c. Where a proposed GB development abuts on RR, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, or RE district other than at a public street line, buffer provision shall be established. There shall be provided a protective strip of not less than 35 feet in width. The protective strip shall not be used for parking, off- street loading or storage and shall be landscaped. The protective strip must be approved by the Council as being in harmony with the residential neighborhood and providing sufficient screening of the commercial area; d. All lots must have at least 1 acre of land suitable for septic drainfields and area sufficient for 2 separate and distinct drainfield sites. Placement of the second required drainfield between the trenches of the first drainfield is prohibited; and e. Must meet all requirements of §§ 51.002 through 51.008. B. Accessory uses. Uses which are clearly incidental and subordinate to the allowed uses. (Am. Ord. 97-38, passed 11-17-1998) C. Minimum district requirements. III-9 1. The Old Village District shall be defined as the Old Village Sign District described in § 151.117(S)(1)(a). General Business Lot Size 1-1/2 acres (except as required by Interstate Corridor Overlay District, §§ 150.230 - 150.238) Lot Width 150 Feet Minimum Building Setback from property lines: (Also see § 154.082) Front: 10 Feet Minimum No setback required for properties located in the Old Village District and south of Minnesota State Highway 5 Side (Interior): 20 Feet Minimum No setback required for properties located in the Old Village District and south of Minnesota State Highway 5 Side (Corner): 50 Feet Minimum Rear: 50 Feet Minimum Building Height (Also see § 154.083)35 Feet Maximum Maximum area to be covered by buildings, parking lots, driveways and other hard surfaces: Up to 4 acres 40% of lot size Larger than 4 acres to 8 acres 35% of lot size Larger than 8 acres 25% of lot size Lot Configuration Maximum lot depth to width dimension ratio shall be no more than 3:1 Lot Size Covered Area Lot Configuration Maximum Width of Driveways See § 93.26 Signage See §§ 154.212 Septic Drainage Regulation (Also see §§ 51.002 through 51.008) All newly subdivided lots shall have a minimum of 20,000 square feet of land dedicated for septic system use and suitable for that use. This land may comprise up to 2 separate areas, each of which III-10 is contiguous to the 1.25-acre building site or contained within it, and each of which contains at least 10,000 contiguous square feet. Placement of the second required drainfield between the trenches of the first drainfield is prohibited. (1997 Code, § 300.07 Subd. 4.H) (Am. Ord. 08-030, passed 10-5-2010) D. Performance standards. 1. Purpose and intent. a. It is the purpose and intent of the city, by the adoption of the performance standards of this division, to ensure commercial buildings constructed within the city are of a high quality of exterior appearance, consistent with the terms of Non-Residential Development Policy #5 of the 2000-2020 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. It is the finding of the city that a limited selection of primary exterior surfacing materials meets this standard of quality. b. It is the further finding of the city that several specific exterior surfacing materials are appropriate, and of sufficient quality, to be utilized only as accent materials in varying percentages. The variations of percentage of specific accent materials relates to a finding by the city as to the relative quality and rural character of those respective accent materials. 2. Architectural and site plan submittals. New building proposals shall include architectural and site plans prepared by registered architect and shall show the following as a minimum: a. Elevations of all sides of the buildings; b. Type and color of exterior building materials; c. Typical general floor plans; d. Dimensions of all structures; and e. Location of trash containers, heating, cooling and ventilation equipment and systems. 3. Applicability – structure additions and renovation. a. Additions to existing structures resulting in an increase of gross floor area of the structure of less than 100%; and/or installation of replacement exterior surfacing of any portion of an existing structure shall be exempt from the standards of this division where it is found that the new or replacement exterior surfacing proposed is identical to that of the existing structure. b. Where additions to an existing structure result in an increase in the gross floor area of the existing structure of 100% or greater, the entire structure (existing structure and structure addition) shall be subject to the standards of this division. III-11 4. Performance standards – primary exterior surfacing. a. The primary exterior surfacing of structures shall be limited to natural brick, stone, or glass. Artificial or thin veneer brick or stone less than nominal 4 inches thick shall not qualify as complying with this performance standard. b. Primary exterior surface shall be defined as not less than 70% of the sum of the area of all exterior walls of a structure nominally perpendicular to the ground. All parapet or mansard surfaces extending above the ceiling height of the structure shall be considered exterior surface for the purposes of this division. Windows and glass doors shall be considered a primary surface, but the sum area of this glass shall be deducted from the wall area for purposes of the 70% primary/30% accent formulas of this chapter. Doors of any type of material, except glass, shall not be considered a primary exterior surface. c. Each wall of the structure shall be calculated separately and, individuallycomply with the 70/30 formula. 5. Performance standard – exterior surfacing accents. Not more than 30% of the exterior wall surfacing, as defined by division (D)(4) above, may be of the following listed accent materials, but no single accent material, except natural wood, may comprise more than 20% of the total of all accent materials; and, no combustible materials shall be used: a. Cedar, redwood, wood siding; b. Cement fiber board; c. Standing seam metal; d. Architectural metal; e. Stucco; f. Poured in place concrete (excluding “tilt-up” panels); g. Architectural metal panels; and (Am. Ord. 97-175, passed 6-20-2006) h. Porcelain or ceramic tile. 6.Performance Standard – Accessory Structures. All accessory structures shall comply with the exterior surfacing requirements specified by this division (D). 7.Performance Standard – HVAC Units and Exterior Appurtenances.All exterior equipment, HVAC and trash/recycling and dock areas shall be screened from view of the public with the primary exterior materials used on the principal structure. 8.Performance Standard – Visible Roofing Materials.Any roofing materials that are visible from ground level shall be standing seam metal, fire-treated cedar shakes, ceramic tile, clay tile, concrete or slate. 9.Applicability – New Construction.The standards of this division shall be applicable to all structures and buildings constructed in the city, on and after the XIII-1 ARTICLE XIII. VILLAGE MIXED USE DISTRICT § 154.500 PURPOSE AND DISTRICT DESCRIPTION. The purpose of the VMX district is to provide an area for compact, mixed use development made mutually compatible through a combination of careful planning and urban design and coordinated public and private investment. This district is intended to continue the traditional mixed use development that has occurred in the Village area by allowing retail, service, office, civic and public uses as well as residential units. The mixture of land uses within the district is essential to establishing the level of the level of vitality and intensity needed to support retail and service uses. The placement of building edges and treatment of building, parking, landscaping, and pedestrian spaces is essential to creating the pedestrian friendly environment envisioned for the VMX district. The standards in this chapter are intended to implement and effectuate the principles and relationships established in the Village Master Plan, which will be carried out through specific standards related to site planning, signage, architecture, building materials, and landscaping. Renovation and infill of traditional storefront-type buildings is encouraged, and parking standards may be waived to recognize the availability of on-street and shared parking facilities. (Ord. 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.501 PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES. Table 11-1 lists all permitted and conditional uses allowed in the urban residential districts. “P” indicates a permitted use, “C” a conditional use. Uses not so indicated shall be considered prohibited. Cross-references listed in the table under “Standards” indicate the location within this Ordinance of specific development standards that apply to the listed use. A.Combinations of Uses. The following use types may be combined on a single parcel: 1. Principal and accessory uses may be combined on a single parcel. 2. A principal and secondary dwelling unit may be combined according to the standards of Section 154.454 (A) and 154.505 (D). 3. Single-family attached or multi-family complexes designed for rental or condominium occupancy, since these typically include multiple units and buildings on a single parcel. 4. Other permitted or conditional uses allowed within the district may be combined on a single parcel, provided that a unified and integrated site plan is approved. The entire development must be approved as a conditional use. 5. A mixed-use building that combines permitted or conditionally permitted residential, service, retail and civic uses may be developed meeting the form standards of this Article. Office or studio uses on upper stories are encouraged. XIII-2 Table 11-1: Permitted and Conditional Uses, VMX Districts VMX Standard Residential UsesHousehold Living Single-family detached dwelling P** See Restrictions in 155.504 (A) Two-family dwelling P * See Restrictions in 155.504 (A) Single-family attached dwelling C 154.505 (B) Multifamily dwelling C 154.505 (C) Secondary dwelling C 154.505 (D), 154.454 (C) Live-work unit P 154.505 (J) Group Living Group Home P 154.012 (B) (1) (b), 154.301 (A) Group Residential Facility C 154.012 (B) (1) (b), 154.301 (B) Congregate Housing C 154.012 (B) (1) (b), 154.301 (C) Semi-Transient Accommodations C 154.012 (B) (1) (b), 154.301 (D) Public and Civic UsesCommunity Services P 154.012 (B) (2) Day Care Center P 154.012 (B) (2) Public Assembly C 154.012 (B) (2) Religious Institutions C 154.012 (B) (2), 154.303 (N) Schools, Public and Private C 154.012 (B) (2), 154.303 (A) Services Business Services P 154.012 (B) (3) Business Center P 154.012 (B) (3) Offices P 154.012 (B) (3) Communications Services P 154.012 (B) (3) Education Services P 154.012 (B) (3), 154.303 (A) Financial Institution P 154.012 (B) (3) Funeral Home C 154.012 (B) (3) Lodging C 154.012 (B) (3), 154.302 (D) Medical Facility C 154.012 (B) (3), 154.303 (B) Membership Organization C 154.012 (B) (3) Nursing and Personal Care C 154.012 (B) (3), 154.303 (C) Personal Services P 154.012 (B) (3) Repair and Maintenance Shop C 154.012 (B) (3), 154.505 (E) Trade Shop C 154.012 (B) (3), 154.505 (F) Veterinary Services C 154.012 (B) (3), 154.505 (G)VMX Standard Food ServicesStandard Restaurant P 154.012 (B) (4), 154.505 (L) Restaurant with Drive-through C 154.012 (B) (4), 154.505 (L), 154.304 (A) Drinking and Entertainment P 154.012 (B) (4), 154.505 (L), 154.304 (B) Sales of Merchandise XIII-3 Note: Standards listed in Table 11-1 are listed by Article, Section and Subsection. 1. Retail Trade in the VMX District includes all uses and activities defined as Retail Trade in §154.012 (B) (5) with the exception of building supplies sales and warehouse club sales. (Ord. 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.502 LOT DIMENSIONS AND BUILDING BULK REQUIREMENTS. Lot area and setback requirements shall be as specified in Table 11-2, Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements. Retail Trade 1 P 154.012 (B) (5) Farmer’s Market C Garden Center C 154.012 (B) (5), 154.505 (H)Neighborhood Convenience Store P 154.012 (B) (5) Shopping Center C 154.012 (B) (5) Wayside Stand P Automotive/Vehicular Uses Automobile Maintenance Service C 154.505 (I) Automobile Parts/Supply P 154.505 (I) Gasoline Station C 154.305 (B) Parking Facility C 154.505 (K) Sales and Storage Lots C 154.305 (C) Outdoor RecreationOutdoor Recreation Facility C 154.306 (C) Parks and Open Areas P 154.012 (B) (7) Indoor Recreation/Entertainment Indoor Athletic Facility C 154.012 (B) (7), 154.307 (A) Indoor Recreation C 154.012 (B) (7), 154.307 (A) Transportation and Communications Broadcasting or Communications Facility C 154.012 (B) (11), 154.083 Accessory Uses Home Occupation P 154.012 (B) (12) Bed and Breakfast C 154.012 (B) (12) Domestic Pets P 154.012 (B) (12) Family Day Care P 154.012 (B) (12) Group Family Day Care C 154.012 (B) (12) Temporary Sales P 154.012 (B) (12) Parking Facility P 154.505 (K) Solar Equipment P 154.012 (B) (12), 154.310 (C) Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, Etc.P 154.012 (B) (12) Other Structures Typically Incidental and Clearly Subordinate to Permitted Uses P XIII-4 Table 11-2: Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements, VMX District VMX Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.)a Non-Residential Use None Single Family Detached Dwelling 5,000 Two-Family Dwelling (per unit) b 3,000 Single-Family Attached (per unit) c 2,500 Multi-Family Dwelling (per unit) 1,800 Secondary Dwelling See 154.454 (C) Live-Work Unit 3,000 Congregate Housing See 154.301 (C) Other Structures 3,500 Maximum Lot Area (acres) Residential Structures N/A Other Structures 5 Minimum Lot Width (feet) Single Family Detached Dwelling 50 Two-Family Dwelling (per unit)b 30 Single-Family Attached (per unit)c 25 Multi-Family Dwelling (per building) 75 Live-Work Unit 25 Maximum Height (feet/stories)35/3 d VMX Maximum Impervious Coverage Residential Structures 75% Other Structures No Limit Minimum Building Setbacks (feet) Front Yard e See 154.506 Interior Side Yard f 10 Corner Side Yard g 0 Rear Yard 10 Notes to VMX District Table a. No development may exceed the residential density range as specified in the Comprehensive Plan for the Village Mixed Use land use category XIII-5 b. Two-family units may be side-by-side with a party wall between them (“twin”) or located on separate floors in a building on a single lot (“duplex”). The per-unit measurements in this table apply to “twin” units, whether on a single lot or separate lots. The standards for single-family detached dwelling shall apply to a “duplex” containing two vertically-separated units on a single lot. c. In the case of single-family attached dwellings that are not situated on individual lots, minimum lot size shall be applied to each unit as a measure of density; i.e. 1 unit per 2,500 square feet. This standard is also used for multifamily dwellings. d. Buildings up to 45 feet in height may be permitted as part of a PUD. e. The front yard setback for single family homes shall be 25 feet. f. Side yard setbacks in the VMX District apply only along lot lines abutting residentially zoned parcels or those parcels with residential uses as the sole use. g. Corner properties: the side yard façade of a corner building adjoining a public street shall maintain the front setback of the adjacent property fronting upon the same public street, or the required front yard setback, whichever is less. If no structure exists on the adjacent property, the setback shall be shown in the table. (Ord. 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.503 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND PRESERVATION OF OPEN SPACE. A.Averaging of Lot Area. When lots are clustered within a development to provide common open space, the open space may be used to calculate an average density per lot to determine compliance with the individual lot are requirements. B.Lot Dimension Reductions. Other reductions in dimensional standards may be considered as part of a Planned Unit Development if these reductions provide for common open space within a development. (Ord. 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.504 GENERAL SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS – VMX DISTRICT. Development of land within the VMX District shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, and other considerations as specified in Article 7, 8 and 9. (Ord. 08-152, passed 10-01-2016) A.Circulation. New access points to State Highway 5 may be refused or restricted to right-in right-out movement if alternatives exist. Internal connections shall be provided between parking areas on adjacent properties wherever feasible. 1. The number and width of curb-cuts shall be minimized. To promote pedestrian circulation, existing continuous curb-cuts shall be reduced to widths necessary for vehicular traffic, and unnecessary or abandoned curb cuts shall be removed as parcels are developed. XIII-6 B.Fencing and Screening. Fencing and screening walls visible from the public right-of-way shall be constructed of materials compatible with the principle structure. C.Lighting Design. Lighting shall be integrated into the exterior design of new or renovated structures to create a greater sense of activity, security, and interest to the pedestrian, and shall comply with §150.035-150.038 Lighting, Glare Control, and Exterior Lighting Standards. D.Exterior Storage.Exterior materials storage must be screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties, by a wing of the principal structure or a screen wall constructed of the same materials as the principal structure. Height of the structure or screen wall must be sufficient to completely conceal the stored materials from view at eye level (measured at six feet above ground level) on the adjacent street or property. E.Screening of Existing Residential Structures. When a new development is proposed adjacent to an existing single family residential structure, screening shall be provided in accordance with §154.258.F. The City may require buffering or screening above and beyond this section in cases where the required screening will not provide an adequate separation between incompatible uses. (Ord. 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.505 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC USES. Development of land within the VMX district shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, parking, signs and other considerations as specified in Articles 7, 8and 9. The following standards apply to specific uses; other standards related to design and building type may be found at §154.506. (Ord. 08-152, passed 10-01-2016) A. Single-Family and Two-Family Dwellings 1. Single-Family Dwellings are limited to those existing at the time of adoption of this Ordinance. Existing single-family dwellings shall be considered permitted uses, rather than nonconforming uses. 2. Unless otherwise specified in this Article, Single and Two Family Dwellings in the VMX district shall adhere to the MDR district setbacks as specified in §154.452. B. Single-Family Attached Dwellings 1. A maximum of eight (8) units shall be permitted within a single building. 2. Townhouse dwellings shall be located on lots in such a way that each individual unit has a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet of public street frontage. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front façade and the street. 3. The primary entrance to each unit shall be located on the façade fronting a public street; an additional entrance may be provided on the rear or side façade. XIII-7 4. Common open space for use by all residents or private open space adjacent to each unit shall be provided. Such open space shall compromise a minimum of three hundred (300) square feet per unit. C.Multi-Family Dwelling Units. Dwelling units (both condominium and rental) are restricted to the upper floors or rear or side ground floors of a mixed use building. 1. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front façade and the street. D.Secondary Dwellings. Restricted to lots occupied by single-family dwellings, and must meet the standards for secondary dwellings in residential districts, §154.454 (C). E.Repair and Maintenance Shop. No outdoor storage is permitted unless fully screened from public view. F.Trade Shop. Exterior materials storage must be totally screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties by a wall of the principal structure or a screen wall constructed of the same materials as the principal structure. G.Veterinary Services. All activities must be conducted within an enclosed building. H. Garden Center. 1. The storage or display of any materials or products shall meet all setback requirements of a structure, and shall be maintained in an orderly manner. Screening along the boundaries of adjacent residential properties may be required, meeting the standards of Section 154.258 (F). 2. All loading and parking shall be provided off-street. 3. The storage of any soil, fertilizer or other loose, unpackaged materials shall be contained so as to prevent any effects on adjacent uses. I. Automobile Maintenance Service and Automobile Parts/Supply. 1. All vehicle repairs shall be conducted in a completely enclosed building 2. The storage or display of inoperable or unlicensed vehicles or other equipment shall meet all setback requirements of a structure, and shall be totally screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties. J.Live-Work Unit. The purpose of a live-work unit is to provide a transitional use type between a home occupation and a larger commercial enterprise, and to provide neighborhood-oriented commercial services, while maintaining a generally residential character in which the work space is subordinate to the residential use. 1. The work space component shall be located on the first floor or basement of the building. 2. The dwelling unit component shall maintain a separate entrance located on the front or side façade and accessible from the primary abutting public street. 3. The work space component of the unit shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of the total gross floor area of the unit. XIII-8 4. A total of two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be provided for a live-work unit, located to the rear of the unit, or underground/enclosed. 5. The size and nature of the work space shall be limited so that the building type may be governed by residential building codes. An increase in size or intensity beyond the specified limit on floor area would require the building to be classified as a mixed-use building. 6. The business component of the building may include offices, small service establishments, home crafts which are typically considered accessory to a dwelling unit, or limited retailing (by appointment only) associated with fine arts, crafts, or personal services. It may not include a wholesale business, a commercial food service requiring a license, a limousine business or auto service or repair for any vehicles other than those registered to residents of the property. 7. The business of the live-work unit must be conducted by a person who resides on the same lot. The business shall not employ more than two (2) workers on-site at any one time who live outside of the live-work unit. K.Parking Facility. Structured parking is permitted as a ground floor use within a mixed- use building, provided that it is located on side or rear facades, not facing the primary abutting street. The primary street-facing façade shall be designed for retail, office or residential use. The primary street façade may include an entrance into the parking facility. L.Outdoor Dining Accessory to Food Services. Outdoor dining is allowed as an accessory use in the commercial districts, provided that tables do not block the sidewalk. A minimum of five (5) feet of sidewalk must remain open. (Ord 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.506 VMX DISTRICT DESIGN AND DEMOLITION REVIEW. A.Review of Design. For certain development activity as specified in the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual, design review is required as part of the approval process for a permit or certificate under this Ordinance. All projects subject to design review shall be reviewed for conformance with the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual. A separate process for design review is not established. 1.Review Authority and Process. Design review shall be the responsibility of the individual or body authorizing the permit or certificate and shall be incorporated in the established review of the applicable permit or certificate. For those applications under this Ordinance that require review by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission shall consider the standards in the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual as part of its recommendation to the City Council. 2.Review by Professional. The authorizing body may request review by a design professional of the proposed design or demolition. The cost of review by such design professional shall be charged by the applicant, and shall not exceed $1,000 unless otherwise agreed to by the applicant. XIII-9 3.Development Activity Defined. Development Activity consists of new construction and redevelopment activities, including remodeling that expands the footprint of a structure, altering, or repairing a structure in a manner that will change the exterior appearance of said structure. Development activity also includes the construction of a new parking lots and installation of signage. a.Exempt Activities. The following activities shall be exempt from under review of this Section: i. Ordinary repairs and maintenance that will not change the exterior appearance of a structure; ii. Removal of existing signage without replacement unless said signs are an integral part of the building; iii. Emergency repairs ordered by the Director of Planning in order to protect public health and safety; iv. Exterior alteration, addition, or repair of a structure used as a single-family residence, duplex, or two-family residence. v. Temporary signage, installed in accordance with §154.212 of this Ordnance, or during which time an application for permanent signage is pending under this Ordinance; vi. Maintenance of existing signage advertising an on-site business; vii. Alterations only to the interior of a structure. (Ord 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.507 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES. Accessory uses are listed in the VMX District Use Table as permitted or conditional accessory uses. Accessory uses and structures in the VMX District shall comply with the following standards and all other applicable regulations of this ordinance: A.Phasing. No accessory use or structure shall be constructed or established on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal use to which it is accessory. B.Incidental to Principal Use. The accessory use or structure shall be incidental to and customarily associated with the principal use or structure served. C.Subordinate to Principal Use. The accessory use or structure shall be subordinate in the area, extent, and purpose to the principal use or structure served. D.Function. The accessory use or structure shall contribute to the comfort, convenience, or necessity of the occupants of the principal use or structure served. E.Location. The accessory use or structure shall be located on the same zoning lot as the principal use or structure. (Ord 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) XIII-10 §154.508 RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, VILLAGE MIXED-USE DISTRICT. A.Attached Structures, Village Mixed-Use District.An accessory structure shall be considered attached, and an integral part of, the principal structure when it is connected by an enclosed passageway. All attached accessory structures shall be subject to the following requirements: 1. The structure shall meet the required yard setbacks for a principal structure, as established for the zoning district in which it is located. 2. The structure shall not exceed the height of the principal building to which it is attached. B.Attached Garages, Mixed-Use District 1. Attached garages are encouraged to be side or rear loaded. If facing the primary street, garages shall be designed using one of the following techniques, unless specific physical conditions on the lot in question require a different approach: a. The front of the garage is recessed at least four (4) feet behind the plane of the primary façade; or b. The front of the garage is recessed at least four (4) feet behind a porch if the garage is even with the primary façade. 2. The width of the attached garage shall not exceed 40% of the width of the entire principal building façade (including garage) fronting the primary street. 3. Attached garages shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet in area at the ground floor level except by conditional use permit. 4. Garage doors or openings shall not exceed fourteen (14) feet in height. C.Detached Structures, Village Mixed-Use District.Detached accessory structures that are accessory to permitted residential structures in the VMX District shall adhere to the following requirements: 1. Detached accessory structures shall be located to the side or rear of the principal building, and are not permitted within the required front yard or within a side yard abutting a street. 2. Detached garages shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet at ground floor level and shall not exceed a height of twenty-two (22) feet or the height of the principal structure. The maximum size and height may be increased upon approval of a conditional use permit, provided that lot coverage requirements are satisfied. 3. Pole barns, as defined herein, shall be prohibited. 4. No more than thirty (30) percent of the rear yard area may be covered by accessory structures. 5. Garage doors or openings shall not exceed fourteen (14) feet in height. XIII-11 D.Exterior Design and Color, All Accessory Structures. The exterior building materials, design and color of all accessory building or structures shall be similar to or compatible with the principal building, with the exception of the following accessory building or structures: 1. Gazebos 2. Swimming pools 3. Tennis and sport courts 4. Other structures in which the required design is integral to the intended use, such as a greenhouse. (Ord. 08-104, passed 3-18-2014) Penalty, see § 154.999 § 154.509 ACCESSORY USES. A.Exterior Storage on Residential Parcels. All materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or be fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except for the following: 1. Laundry drying 2. Construction and landscaping materials and equipment currently being used on the premises. Materials kept on the premises for a period exceeding six (6) months shall be screened or stored out of view of the primary street on which the house fronts. 3. Agricultural equipment and materials, if these are used or intended for use on the premises. 4. Off-street parking and storage of vehicles and accessory equipment, as regulated in Sections 154.404 and 154.210. 5. Storage of firewood shall be kept at least ten (10) feet from any habitable structure and screened from view of adjacent properties. 6. Outdoor parking B.Temporary Sales. Temporary sales, also known as yard or garage sales, are permitted in all residential districts, limited to two (2) per calendar year per residence, not to exceed four (4) days in length for each event. (Ord 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) § 154.510 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES NOT LISTED. Standards for accessory uses and structures that are permitted in all districts, or in all residential buildings in any district, are listed in Article 9, Specific Development Standards. These include uses such as family and group family day care, bed and breakfast facilities, and home occupations, and structures such as swimming pools and solar equipment. (Ord 08-091, passed 11-13-2013) (Ord. 08-152, passed 10-01-2016) 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO AND AMENDING THE ZONING CODE BY OMITTING SECTION 034: GB – GENERAL BUSINESS SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains the following properties to be rezoned from GB – General Business to VMX – Village Mixed Use: PIDs: 1302921230055 1302921320001 1302921320052 1302921210010 1302921120013 1302921230057 1302921230038 1302921320026 1302921320012 1302921120010 1302921230058 1302921230037 1302921230007 1302921240022 1302921120016 1302921320021 1302921320019 1302921320046 1302921220007 1302921120012 1302921230068 1302921210013 1302921230059 1302921220023 1302921120009 1302921320025 1302921210014 1302921310017 1302921220018 1302921120011 1302921230070 1302921210011 1302921210016 1302921220016 1302921120015 1302921320049 1302921210012 1302921310016 1302921220017 1302921120014 1302921320051 1302921210015 1302921230046 1302921220019 1302921220008 1302921320048 1302921320041 1302921230065 1302921220022 1302921220010 1302921320047 1302921320042 1302921230053 1302921220021 1302921240016 1302921240020 1302921320083 1302921240024 1302921220020 1302921220012 1302921310003 1302921230054 1302921240019 1302921240021 1302921230071 1302921230056 1302921210001 1302921240017 1302921210006 1302921210007 1302921320032 1302921320005 1302921230067 1302921220002 1302921220013 1302921320027 1302921230025 1302921240025 1302921220011 1302921220014 1302921210009 1302921230004 1302921210002 SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo also hereby ordains that the Zoning Administrator shall make the applicable changes to the official Zoning Map of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby strikes Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; by repealing Section 154.034: GB – General Business in its entirety. SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby strikes reference to 154.034: GB – General Business District from the Table of Contents of Chapter 154: Zoning Code of Title XV: Land Usage. 2 SECTION 5. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 030: Classifications by eliminating the following: § 154.030 CLASSIFICATIONS. For the purpose of this chapter, all land in the city is divided into zoning districts. The zoning districts shall be identified by the following classifications, including those districts identified in § 154.350: (A) R-2 One- and Two-Family Residential (B) GB General Business (C) B OP Open Space Preservation District (D) C OZD Overlay Zoning Use District SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 212: Sign Regulations; Table 5-3 to read the following: Ground Signs Zoning Districts Aa, LDR, OP, RE, RS, RRa, RTa MDR, HDR BP, C, CC, GB, LC, VMX No. of Total Traffic Lanes Speed Limit (MPH) Max Height/ Area (Sq. Ft.) Max Height/ Area (Sq. Ft.) Max Height/ Area (Sq. Ft.) 1-3 0-34 - 6’/32 10’/32 35-44 - 6’/32 10’/50 45+ - 6’/32 10’/72 4-5 0-34 - 6’/32 10’/40 35-44 - 6’/32 10’/64 45+ - 6’/32 12’/80 SECTION 7. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 150.116: [Wireless Communications] Zoning Requirements to read the following: 3 § 150.116 ZONING REQUIREMENTS. (A) Wireless communications facilities that require a conditional use permit, including the installation of a new tower, shall be permitted in the following districts and subject to the following height restrictions provided they meet all other requirements of this subchapter. Zoning District Maximum Height (in feet) Minimum Parcel Area A- Agriculture 125 10 RR - Rural Residential Zoning 125 5 R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 Urban Residential 125 2.5 OP - Open Space 125 2.5 RE - Residential Estates 125 2.5 GB , LB, CB, HB - Business 125 5 BP - Business Park 125 5 PF - Public Facility 125 None SECTION 8. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 153.14: Park Land Dedication Requirements to read the following: Zoning Districts Minimum Required Land Dedication GB , LB, HB, BP, CB, Fee as set by Council resolution C, CC, LC, VMX, BP Fee as set by Council resolution RR and AG with OP Conditional Use Permit 7% RR and AG with OP-A Conditional Use Permit 10% SECTION 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 10. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-___ was adopted on this _____ day of ________, 2016, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL 4 ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-____ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2017. Current Zoning Proposed Zoning (Only includes parcels included in the Public Hearing Notice – see next page for parcels added in Staff report) Proposed Zoning (includes parcels that were included in tonight’s Staff report but were not advertised in public hearing) The aqua-outlined VMX-zoned parcels are those that were added in the Staff Report that were not zoned GB 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Public hearing opened at 8:34 pm No one spoke and there was no written comments received. Public hearing closed at 8:35 pm Dunn would like to see the option of sewer or private septic. She doesn’t think that they should be forced to connect to sewer. Wensman stated that the comprehensive Plan is not in compliance with the projects that we are doing. If we don’t do this amendment, the land use designation would need to be changed. M/S/P: Fields/Dodson, Move to recommend the City Council approve the comprehensive plan text amendment to amend the planned land use category in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to read as written, Vote: 5-1, motion carried. Dunn voted no because she feels it is important that people have an option regarding connection. Business Item – Zoning Text Amendment to discuss the VMX Zoning Text . Wensman began his presentation by showing the areas that are zoned as general business, but guided as VMX in the Comprehensive Plan. To bring the zoning into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, Wensman would like to see these properties rezoned. Wensman believes by rezoning, it would actually eliminate some non conformities. The area that would change the most, would be in the Northern area by 39th Street. Wensman stated that this was intended to bring the district more in conformance than it is now and should be done as a district vs. one at a time. If there are things about the district that the Commission does not like, then changes should be made to the district. Dunn feels that the premise is based on the Village Master Plan. Where is the master plan? Wensman stated that the plan was based on transfer of density and he is not sure what happened to that plan. Dunn did a rough calculation on what could be done if the maximum densities were used. With her calculation, there is potential for upwards of 3000 people. She feels it is quite intense and not appropriate for this target area. She would like to see more work done on the reductions for the comprehensive plan and possibly look at form based code. Dunn would like to see the Comprehensive Plan revisited as soon as possible for population reductions. She thinks we should take our time and do this right. Dunn pointed out some of the differences between GB and VMX. She feels one of the biggest differences is the impervious surface coverage maximum goes from 40% based on acreage in GB to 75% in VMX. 6 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Fields is confused because if the comprehensive plan is guided the way we want it, the rezoning should happen. If we are considering if the guiding is correct, then it should not be rezoned, but should be discussed what the guiding should be. Larson thinks that what brings the guiding for VMX into question is that the density of this area is in transition. Larson understands the feeling of discomfort as this zone is less restrictive. There are still a lot of questions that make it uncomfortable for people to buy into this zone. Williams thinks it would be good to ask the City Council if past projections of population in this area are still valid. Dodson is wondering how big a project form based code is. Wensman stated that it is something that takes some technical skill to do and it would need to be contracted out. Williams thinks it would help facilitate the vision, but would not be necessary to do the rezone. M/:Dunn/, Move to recommend not rezoning the parcels to VMX until the City Council can review the target numbers and there is a form based code, motion dies for lack of second. M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, Move to ask the City Council to give the Planning Commission guidance on updated population and development projections for the areas guided for VMX in the Old Village, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Fields would like to know what the driving force was for the VMX. If it was to bring more people to the downtown to make it more vibrant, or if it was to meet the Met Council mandates for housing population. Williams recollection was that it was for both of those reasons in addition to form based code to make it a more picturesque downtown and to incorporate business and residential in the same building, which general business does not do. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, Move to ask the City Council to approve funds for a consultant to work on a form based code for the downtown Old Village, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Fields would like any information that he could get on form based code. Williams believes that the City has a couple of videos on this topic. Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. June 27, 2016 b. July 11, 2016 7 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16 Commission Concerns Dunn asked about the AUAR. Wensman stated that the City is overdue for the update and it is in the City Engineers hands right now. Meeting adjourned at 9:28 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-24-17 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 24, 2017 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dorschner, Fields, Larson, Kreimer, Dodson, Emerson, Williams, Lundquist and Hartley COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman and City Planner Becker Approve Agenda: Accept the agenda as presented. Approve Minutes: April 10, 2017 M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to approve the April 10, 2017 minutes as presented, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Zoning Map Amendment – Rezone Properties to VMX Becker started her presentation by reviewing what was discussed at the March 27, 2017 meeting. After advertising the public hearing notice for that meeting, staff learned that there were a number of Zoning Map errors with incorrect zoning classifications resulting in properties that should have been included in the public notification for rezoning. There are 2 properties that are zoned GB, that are guided for RAD. Staff does not recommend rezoning these at this time. The guidance of the properties should first be reconsidered with the 2040 Comp Plan update process. As a result, GB standards will need to remain in the code. The Schiltgen parcel, which is a larger parcel, was added to the PH notice, however, staff is not recommending that it be rezoned at this time. It is typical for the developers to rezone during Preliminary Plat process. Dorschner asked why we would keep the general business standards. Wensman stated that 2 parcels are zoned GB, but are guided for RAD. Wensman stated that until the guidance is changed, if they continue to remain GB, there needs to be standards. Dorschner stated that he thought this whole exercise was to get everything in line now because of new development coming in. Wensman stated that if it is the desire of the Commission to get rid of the GB standards, those 2 properties could be rezoned to RAD. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-24-17 These properties are currently not used for business, even though that is how they are zoned. Becker stated that the reason they are rezoning a lot of these properties is because a lot of the properties do not meet the standards and are legal non-conforming. The rezone to VMX will give them better standards to work with for their properties and make them more conforming. The VMX standards give them greater flexibility. Williams asked if they had heard anything from the property owners of the 2 parcels. He is wondering if they might have thought they were going to be rezoned to VMX. Becker stated that it is possible, but after reviewing the map, it was determined that they are guided for RAD. Williams asked about the impervious surface allowance in the table. Becker stated that the numbers in table are reversed. Williams asked if the list of properties included any residential properties. Becker stated that if they were not already zoned as GB, they were not included. There were a couple of properties that were zoned as residential that are used for business. Those are being rezoned to VMX. Public Hearing opened at 7:14 pm Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd Street, she is concerned as she lives in a single family home in the Village. Dunn is wondering if all single family homes will be reguided to VMX. Becker stated that no, not all would be rezoned. Only those currently zoned GB or used for commercial purposes and had a zoning map error and guided for VMX will be rezoned. Becker estimated that approximately 78 acres would be rezoned. There are approximately 1300 acres in the Village, with approximately 164 acres guided for VMX. Dunn asked how many units per acre are in VMX. Becker stated that there are 6- 10 units per acre. Dunn is not in favor of that large of an area being VMX. There were no written comments Public Hearing closed at 7:18 pm Larson asked about the single family homes and how they would be handled. Becker stated that it depends how the ZTA for Village Urban Districts is decided. She stated that right now, it states that single family homes are permitted. Wensman stated that the single family homes are not being rezoned at this time. Wensman stated that the next step is to decide with the ZTA how to handle them. Should they be rezoned, reguided, or left that same. M/S/P: Williams/Lundquist, move to recommend a Zoning Map Amendment rezoning properties outlined in Ord. 08- to VMX – Village Mixed Use, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Grading Permit in Excess of 400 cubic yards of material Becker started her presentation 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-24-17 Public Hearing opened at : pm There were no written comments and no one spoke Public Hearing closed at : pm M/S/P: /, move to recommend , Vote: -, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – Solar Energy Becker started her presentation Public Hearing opened at : pm No one spoke and there were no written comments Public Hearing closed at : pm M/S/P: /, move to , Vote: -, motion carried unanimously. Business Item – Easton Village 2 Final Plat Becker started her presentation M/S/P: /, move to recommend approval : Vote: -, motion carried unanimously. Business Item – Zoning Text Amendment – Village Urban Districts Becker started her presentation M/S/P: /, move to , Vote: -, motion carried unanimously. City Council Updates – April 18, 2017 Meeting i) Engineering & Landscape Design & Construction Standards – Passed ii) Bremer Bank Service Center Easement Vacations – Passed Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. May 8, 2017 b. May 22, 2017 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-24-17 2. MAC CEP Report Commission Concerns Meeting adjourned at : pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant Current Zoning Proposed Zoning STAFF REPORT DATE: 5/16/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 14 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: V-LDR/VMX Zoning Text Amendment REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: At its last meeting, the Council tabled consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment which proposed creation of a V-LDR – Village Low Density Residential zoning district and minor amendments to the VMX – Village Mixed Use zoning district ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council is being asked to review a proposed Zoning Text Amendment creating standards for the V-LDR zoning district and making minor amendments to the VMX zoning district standards. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Please see attached item from last meeting’s packet. FISCAL IMPACT: None. OPTIONS: The Council may: • Adopt Ord. 08-175 as proposed. • Amend Ord. 08-175 and adopt as amended. • Deny adoption of Ord. 08-175. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the Council adopt Ord. 08-175, approving an amendment to Article XIII: Village Mixed Use Districts, creating a Village Low Density Residential Zoning District and amending standards for the Village Mixed Use zoning district: “Move to adopt Ord. 08-175, approving an amendment to Article XIII: Village Mixed Use Districts, creating a Village Low Density Residential Zoning District and amending standards for the Village Mixed Use zoning district.” City Council Meeting 5/16/2017 Page 2 If Council adopts the above ordinance amendment, Staff also recommends that the Council adopt Resolution 2017-041 approving summary publication of Ord. 08-175. “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-041 approving summary publication of Ord. 08-175.” ATTACHMENTS: • Item from May 2, 2017 meeting packet STAFF REPORT DATE: 5/2/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 11 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: V-LDR/VMX Zoning Text Amendment REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: During the Planning Commission meeting on November 14, 2016, there was discussion regarding the need for a Village Urban Low Density (V-LDR) zoning district for areas guided for Village Urban Low Density on the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Map, as no zoning districts currently allow the density designated for this Land Use (1.5-2.49 units per acre). Staff drafted an ordinance which created the V-LDR zoning district, setting forth standards. The zoning district was drafted to be included in Article XIII – Village Mixed Use District of the Zoning Code. Staff and the Planning Commission also took the opportunity to make amendments to standards of the Village Mixed Use (VMX) zoning district. The Planning Commission reviewed the draft ordinance at its January 23, February 13, February 27, March 27, April 10 (public hearing), 2017 meetings, and made recommendation on the proposed ordinance amendment at its April 24, 2017 meeting. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council should review and consider adoption of an ordinance amendment to Article XIII – Village Mixed Use of the Zoning Code, creating a V-LDR zoning district and making amendments to the VMX zoning district. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The following describes a summary of the V-LDR zoning district as well as amendments to the VMX zoning district standards. Because the ordinance amendment was discussed over a number of meetings, only the latest Planning Commission Staff Report, attachments, and meeting minutes are included in the attachments to this report. V-LDR Zoning District. • Purpose and District Description is added, defining density as 1.5-2.49 units per acre. • Lot Dimensions and Setback Requirements. o The minimum lot size of the V-LDR zoning district is proposed as 9,000 square feet in size, as this is slightly increased from the minimum lot size of the Urban Low Density Residential zoning district (8,000 square feet) due to a slightly lower density. This is also City Council Meeting 5/2/2017 Regular Agenda item #11 Page 2 the minimum lot size in the Golf Course Community zoning district. The minimum lot width (70 feet) is also slightly longer than and maximum impervious surface (35%) is slightly less than the Urban Low Density zoning district (60 feet and 40%, respectively) due to larger lots. Accessory structure setbacks from the Urban Residential zoning districts were added, as well as the provision that garages may not exceed more than 60% of the entire principal façade. • Setbacks from County Roads. 30 foot setbacks are proposed for residential homes within the V- LDR for reasons outlined in the April 24, 2017 Planning Commission Staff Report. • Village Open Space Overlay District. A provision was added to protect lots from encroaching the buffer areas within the Village Open Space Overlay District but also allowing an alternative to this requirement if berming or screening is provided and protected by landscape easement. • Sidewalks and/or Trails to Connect Cul-de-Sac Bulbs to roads or trails. • Lake Elmo Theming Study Elements to be incorporated where applicable. • Minimum House Size is added. This is a requirement that is within all residential zoning districts of the Zoning Code. VMX Zoning District. • Density. Defines that development shall occur at a density of 6-10 units per acre and adds language from the Comprehensive Plan which allows density to increase to 16 units per acre for senior congregate care facilities with a conditional use permit. • Single-family detached and two-family dwellings are conditional uses. o Previous language indicated that existing single-family detached and two-family dwellings are permitted within the VMX. Upon rezoning, either a use needs to be permitted, conditional or interim, or it becomes legal non-conforming (and therefore subject to the City’s Non-Conforming Uses and Structures Ordinance). Therefore, better language was needed to both recognize existing single-family detached and two-family homes within the VMX district as well as allow for additional single-family homes provided the use is compatible with the existing neighborhood. o Staff and the Planning Commission believe the best way to accomplish this is to make them a conditional use within the VMX. A conditional use permit would require that the Planning Commission and City Council make the required findings for a conditional use permit that the proposed single-family detached or two-family dwelling meet the provisions outlined in Section 154.106: Conditional Use Permits, attached to the attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 24, 2017. o This would result in existing single-family detached and two-family dwellings not needing a conditional use permit unless they were to expand. New single-family detached and two-family dwellings would require a conditional use permit. • Other Residential Uses are changed from permitted to conditional uses. o The Commission recommended that all other residential uses, including live-work units and group homes be conditional, rather than permitted uses. The City Attorney was consulted regarding amending group homes to be conditional uses and has stated that group homes as defined by Minn. Statute are required to be permitted in cities. • Automobile Parts/Supply are changed from permitted to conditional uses. o The Planning Commission recommended this, as all other Automotive/Vehicular Uses are conditional uses. • Setbacks. Setbacks standards are proposed to meet the prevailing front yard setback of a block or maximum setback of 20 feet, whichever is less. This is to reflect the Lake Elmo Design Standards and Guidelines Manual. • Veterinary Services Standards. The Commission requested that standards be added to veterinary services in order to help prevent large animals from being treated in the Village area. City Council Meeting 5/2/2017 Regular Agenda item #11 Page 3 Planning Commission and Public Hearing. The proposed ordinance includes changes recommended by the Planning Commission. Comments from the public hearing included concern over the density associated with the VMX zoning district. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact in regards to the proposed ordinance: 1. That certain areas of the Old Village are guided for Urban Low Density Residential in the Land Use Plan of the Comprehensive Plan, which designates a density of 1.5-2.49 units per acre. 2. That there currently does not exist a Village Low Density Residential zoning district which has a density of 1.5-2.49 units per acre within the Zoning Code. 3. That the Village Low Density Residential zoning district is being proposed due to the imminence of the Gonyea West Development, which is expected to be proposed to be located within the Old Village in an area guided for Village Low Density Residential. 4. That the Planning Commission would be interested in exploring increased densities within the Old Village as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission recommended adoption of Ord. 08-175 with an affirmative vote of 7-0. FISCAL IMPACT: None. OPTIONS: The Council may: • Adopt Ord. 08-175 as proposed. • Amend Ord. 08-175 and adopt as amended. • Deny adoption of Ord. 08-175. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the Council adopt Ord. 08-175, approving an amendment to Article XIII: Village Mixed Use Districts, creating a Village Low Density Residential Zoning District and amending standards for the Village Mixed Use zoning district: “Move to adopt Ord. 08-175, approving an amendment to Article XIII: Village Mixed Use Districts, creating a Village Low Density Residential Zoning District and amending standards for the Village Mixed Use zoning district.” If Council adopts the above ordinance amendment, Staff also recommends that the Council adopt Resolution 2017-041 approving summary publication of Ord. 08-175. “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-041 approving summary publication of Ord. 08-175.” ATTACHMENTS: • Ord. 08-175 • Summary Publication Resolution 2017-041 • V-LDR/VMX Item from Planning Commission Meeting Packet dated 4/24/2017 • Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 4/24/2017 pertaining to V-LDR/VMX 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-176 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains the following properties to be rezoned from GB – General Business to VMX – Village Mixed Use: PIDs: 1302921230055 1302921320001 1302921320052 1302921210010 1302921120013 1302921230057 1302921230038 1302921320026 1302921320012 1302921120010 1302921230058 1302921230037 1302921230007 1302921240022 1302921120016 1302921320021 1302921320019 1302921320046 1302921220007 1302921120012 1302921230068 1302921210013 1302921230059 1302921220023 1302921120009 1302921320025 1302921210014 1302921310017 1302921220018 1302921120011 1302921230070 1302921210011 1302921210016 1302921220016 1302921120015 1302921320049 1302921210012 1302921310016 1302921220017 1302921120014 1302921320051 1302921210015 1302921230046 1302921220019 1302921220008 1302921320048 1302921320041 1302921230065 1302921220022 1302921220010 1302921320047 1302921320042 1302921230053 1302921220021 1302921240016 1302921240020 1302921320083 1302921240024 1302921220020 1302921220012 1302921310003 1302921230054 1302921240019 1302921240021 1302921230071 1302921230056 1302921210001 1302921240017 1302921210006 1302921210007 1302921320032 1302921320005 1302921230067 1302921220002 1302921220013 1302921320027 1302921230025 1302921240025 1302921220011 1302921220014 1302921230063 1302921230036 1302921210009 1302921230004 1302921210002 1302921320022 1302921230062 1302921230064 1302921320086 1302921320007 1302921320009 1302921320008 1302921320010 1302921320085 1302921320096 1302921320094 1302921230077 1302921230027 1302921230018 1302921230026 1302921230010 SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo also hereby ordains that the Zoning Administrator shall make the applicable changes to the official Zoning Map of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. 2 SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-176 was adopted on this 2nd day of May, 2017, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-176 was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO RESOLUTION NO. 2017-041 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 08-175 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-175, an ordinance amending Article XIII: Village Mixed Use Districts, creating a Village Low Density Residential Zoning District and amending standards of the Village Mixed Use Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, that the City Administrator shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-175 to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-175, which: •Creates a Village Low Density Residential (V-LDR) Zoning District, which allows a density of 1.5-2.49 units per acre for areas guided for Village Low Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. •Sets forth lot dimension and setback requirements for the V-LDR zoning district. •Allows single-family detached and two-family dwellings within the Village Mixed Use district as conditional uses (previously permitted only if existing). •Designates live-work units and automotive/vehicular uses as conditional, rather thanpermitted, uses. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the City Administrator keep a copy of the ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a full copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City. Dated: May 2, 2017. ___________________________________ Mayor Mike Pearson ATTEST: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk (SEAL) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _____________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against same: ______________________ Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. BUSINESS ITEM 5b STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 24, 2017 AGENDA ITEM: 5B – BUSINESS ITEM CASE #2016-59 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planner SUBMITTED BY: Zoning Text Amendment – Village Urban Districts REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission has reviewed a proposed draft Village Urban Low Density (V-LDR) zoning district as well as minor amendments to the Village Mixed Use (VMX) District at its January 23, 2017, February 13, February 27, 2017, and March 27, 2017 meetings. A public hearing was held at the April 10, 2017 meeting. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: Staff respectfully requests that the Planning Commission make recommendation on the proposed draft ordinance of the Village Low Density Residential and minor amendments to the Village Mixed Use (VMX) District. PLANNING/ZONING ANALYSIS: Summary of Discussed Changes since the last Planning Commission meeting to Proposed Ordinance. Staff has made minor amendments to the draft ordinance that the Planning Commission recommended. Major issues discussed are summarized below: Single Family Homes in VMX. Currently, standards for the VMX district indicate that an existing single family home shall be considered a permitted, rather than non-conforming use, in the VMX zoning district. This language was derived from the Comprehensive Plan. While the Comprehensive Plan does not specifically outline new single-family homes as an allowed use in the VMX zoning district, it does state that existing single family residential homes shall be permitted. As previously discussed, an existing use that is no longer allowed in a zoning district cannot be considered “permitted” upon rezoning; it is then considered legal non-conforming (and consequentially cannot expand). o Again Proposed as a Conditional Use. Staff has again proposed that single-family detached dwellings be designated as conditional uses. Conditional use means a land use or development as defined by ordinance that would not be appropriate generally but may be allowed with appropriate restrictions as provided by official controls only upon required findings. These required findings include (among others): That the use or development is compatible with the existing neighborhood; and That the use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of the area. The City Attorney has been consulted regarding this provision and believes that designating single-family detached homes as a conditional use may be appropriate within the VMX district in order to limit the number and expansion 2 BUSINESS ITEM 5b – ACTION ITEM of such homes in this district. She stated that the City would have to place appropriate standards and conditions on such uses in order to properly regulate them. Mixed Use Definition. The City Attorney was asked about a mixed use definition and did not have a definitions because it’s a mix of two principal uses already defined in the Zoning Code. Village Open Space Overlay District. Staff had previously proposed that lots may not encroach on the Village Open Space Overlay/Greenbelt portions as designated by the Comprehensive Plan. o Reasoning. The reasoning for this was to maintain the open space buffer as designated by the Comprehensive Plan without having to reference different setbacks for lots encroaching on the open space buffer, which could complicate the building permit review process. o Reconsideration. Staff further considered this provision after discussion with a developer. This may not be practical, as a buffer may be sufficiently provided through landscaping, berms, or other option. Additionally, a small strip of open space may be difficult for an association to maintain. The developer suggested additional way to conserve this buffer may be to record a landscape easement over the buffer portions of residential lots that would prevent structures from being erected and allow the Homeowners’ Association to maintain if necessary. o Amended Language. In response to this, Staff has drafted language that allows berming or screening as an alternative to lots not encroaching on the buffer with Council approval. Limiting Housing Types. Staff removed the following language from the ordinance: “For redevelopment projects, new housing types should be introduced in limited quantities to increase diversity and housing choice, not to replace whole blocks of existing housing. Therefore, no more than 1/4 of the lineal frontage of a developed block (measured around the entire block perimeter) may be converted to townhouse units, and no further townhouse, two- family or higher-density development is permitted once this threshold is reached.” o The City Attorney believes that this language causes equal protection issues. Setbacks from County Roads in the V-LDR District. The County had requested the City to increase setbacks along certain portions of county roads to 30 feet. This includes residential areas on Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) north of Stillwater Blvd and Stillwater Blvd (CSAH 14). They requested this for the following reasons: o Portions of these roads are considered minor highways and right-of-way widening may be necessary in the future. o There’s a higher volume of traffic. o Lake Elmo Avenue provides direct access to Highway 36. o Trails may be desired on both sides of four lanes, and additional setbacks could accommodate construction of eventual trails. o Additional setbacks leave room for berming and landscaping. This provision was added to the draft ordinance and only applicable to the V-LDR zoning district. Findings. The Planning Commission drafted the following findings at its February 13, 2017 meeting: 1. That certain areas of the Old Village are guided for Urban Low Density Residential in the Land Use Plan of the Comprehensive Plan, which designates a density of 1.5-2.49 units per acre. 2. That there currently does not exist a Village Low Density Residential zoning district which has a density of 1.5-2.49 units per acre within the Zoning Code. 3 BUSINESS ITEM 5b – ACTION ITEM 3. That the Village Low Density Residential zoning district is being proposed due to the imminence of the Gonyea West Development, which is expected to be proposed to be located within the Old Village in an area guided for Village Low Density Residential. 4. That the Planning Commission would be interested in exploring increased densities within the Old Village as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and provide feedback on or recommend approval of amendments to Article XIII: Village Mixed Use Districts, which add standards for the V-LDR Village Low Density Residential District and proposes minor changes to the VMX – Village Mixed Use District. If the Commission wishes to make recommendation at this time, the Commission may do so with the following motion: “Move to recommend adoption of Ord 08- , creating a Village Low Density Residential District and making minor amendments standards of the Village Mixed Use District.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-__ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE XIII: VILLAGE MIXED USE DISTRICT AND CREATING STANDARDS FOR A VILLAGE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends the Lake Elmo City Code Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter154: Zoning Code; Article XIII: Village Mixed Use District; to read the following: ARTICLE XIII: VILLAGE MIXED USE DISTRICTS § 154.500 PURPOSE AND DISTRICT DESCRIPTION (A) V-LDR Village Low Density Residential. The purpose of the V-LDR zoning district is to provide opportunity for lower density residential development within the Old Village and create a transition and connectivity between the heart of the Old Village and surrounding rural areas. Residential development within areas zoned V-LDR will occur at a density of 1.5-2.49 units per acre. (B) VMX – Village Mixed Use District. The purpose of the VMX district is to provide an area for compact, mixed use development made mutually compatible through a combination of careful planning and urban design and coordinated public and private investment. This district is intended to continue the traditional mixed use development that has occurred in the Village area by allowing retail, service, office, civic and public uses as well as residential units. The mixture of land uses within the district is essential to establishing the level of vitality and intensity needed to support retail and service uses. Development within areas zoned VMX will occur at a density of 6-10 units per acre. Senior congregate care facilities may exceed this density maximum with a range not to exceed a total of 16 units per acre, provided the facility can satisfy all zoning and applicable conditional use permit review criteria. The placement of building edges and treatment of building, parking, landscaping, and pedestrian spaces is essential to creating the pedestrian friendly environment envisioned for the VMX district. The standards in this chapter are intended to implement and effectuate the principles and relationships established in the Village Master Plan, which will be carried out through specific standards related to site planning, signage, architecture, building materials, and landscaping. Renovation and infill of traditional storefront-type buildings is encouraged, and parking standards may be waived to recognize the availability of on-street and shared parking facilities. § 154.501 PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 2 Table 11-1 lists all permitted and conditional uses allowed in the urban residential districts. “P” indicates a permitted use, “C” a conditional use. Uses not so indicated shall be considered prohibited. Cross-references listed in the table under “Standards” indicate the location within this Ordinance of specific development standards that apply to the listed use. A. Combinations of uses, Village Districts. The following use types may be combined on a single parcel: 1. Principal and accessory uses may be combined on a single parcel. 2. A principal and secondary dwelling unit may be combined according to the standards of Section 155.137 154.454 (C). B. Combination of uses, VMX District. 1. Single-family attached or multi-family complexes designed for rental or condominium occupancy, since these typically include multiple units and buildings on a single parcel. 2. Other permitted or conditional uses allowed within the district may be combined on a single parcel, provided that a unified and integrated site plan is approved. The entire development must be approved as a conditional use. 3. A mixed-use building that combines permitted or conditionally permitted residential, service, retail and civic uses may be developed meeting the form standards of this Article. Office or studio uses on upper stories are encouraged. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 3 Table 11-1: Permitted and Conditional Uses, VMX Village Districts V-LDR VMX Standard Residential Uses Residential Uses Household Living Single-family detached dwelling P P* C* 155.504.A 154.505 (A) (1), (2), *(4) Two-family dwelling - P* 155.504.A 154.505 (A) (1), (4) Single-family attached dwelling - C 154.505 (A) (1), (5) Multifamily dwelling - C 154.505 (A) (1), (6) Secondary dwelling C C 154.505.D 154.454 (C) & 154.505 (A) (1), (3)_ Live-work unit - P 155.505.J 154.505 (B) (6) Group Living Group Home P P 155.102.C 154.301 (A) Group Residential Facility - C 155.102.D 154.301 (B) Congregate Housing - C 155.102.E 154.301 (C) Semi-Transient Accommodations - C 155.102.F 154.301 (C) Public and Civic Uses Community Services - P 155.103.C Day Care Center - P 155.103.D Public Assembly - C 155.505.M Religious Institutions - C 155.505.N 154.303 (N) Schools, Public and Private - C 155.505.O 154.303 (A) Services Business Services - P Business Center - P Offices - P Communications Services - P Education Services - P 154.303 (A) Financial Institution - P 155.505.P Funeral Home - C Lodging - C 155.505.Q 154.302 (D) Medical Facility - C 155.505.R 154.303 (B) Membership Organization - C 155.505.N Nursing and Personal Care - C 155.104.C 154.303 (C) Personal Services - P Repair and Maintenance Shop - C 155.505.E 154.505 (B) (1) Trade Shop - C 155.505.F 154.505 (B) (2) Veterinary Services - C 154.505.G 154.505 (B) (3) Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 4 Food Services Standard Restaurant - P Restaurant with Drive-through - C 154.304 (A) Drinking and Entertainment - P 155.505.S 154.304 (B) Sales of Merchandise Retail Trade 1 - P 155.505.T Farmer’s Market - C 155.505.AA Garden Center - C 155.505.U 154.505 (B) (4) Neighborhood Convenience Store - P 155.505.V Shopping Center - C 155.505.W Wayside Stand P P 154.454 (D) Automotive/Vehicular Uses Automobile Maintenance Service - C 155.505.X 154.505 (B) (5) Automobile Parts/Supply - P 155.505.X154.505 (B) (5) Gasoline Station - C 155.505.X 154.305 (B) Parking Facility - C 155.505.X 154.505 (B) (7) Sales and Storage Lots - C 155.505.X 154.305 (C) Outdoor Recreation Outdoor Recreation Facility - C 155.505.Y 154.306 (C) Parks and Open Areas P P Indoor Recreation/Entertainment Indoor Athletic Facility - C 155.505.Z 154.307 Indoor Recreation - C 155.505.Z 154.307 Transportation and Communications Broadcasting or Communications Facility - C 155.110.B Mixed Uses Combination of Principal Uses on a single parcel - C/P 154.501 (B) Combination of Principal and Accessory Uses on a single parcel P P 154.501 (A) Accessory Uses Home Occupation P P 155.111.A,B 154.012 (12) (e) Bed and Breakfast - C 155.111.C 154.310 (A) Family Day Care P P 155.111.G 154.012 (12) (d) Group Family Day Care - C 155.111.G Temporary Sales P P 155.107.B 154.509 (G) Parking Facility - P 154.505 (H) (7) Solar Equipment P P 155.111.I154.310 (C) Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, Etc. P P 155.111.J Other Structures Typically Incidental and Clearly Subordinate to Permitted Uses P P Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 5 Note: Standards listed in Table 11-1 are listed by Article, Section and Subsection. 1Retail Trade in the VMX District includes all uses and activities defined as Retail Trade in §155.507.B.5 154.012 (5) (c) with the exception of building supplies sales and warehouse club sales. § 154.502 LOT DIMENSIONS AND BUILDING BULK REQUIREMENTS Lot area and setback requirements shall be as specified in Table 11-2, Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements. Table 11-2: Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements, VMX Villages Districts V-LDR VMX Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) a Non-Residential Use - None Single Family Detached Dwelling 9,000 5,000 9000 Two-Family Dwelling (per unit) b - 3,000 Single-Family Attached (per unit) c - 2,500 Multi-Family Dwelling (per unit) - 1,800 Secondary Dwelling - See 154.454 (C) Live-Work Unit - 3,000 Congregate Housing - 155.102.E 154.301 (C) Other Structures - 3,500 Maximum Lot Area (acres) Residential Structures N/A N/A Other Structures N/A 5 Minimum Lot Width (feet) Single Family Detached Dwelling 70 50 70 Two-Family Dwelling (per unit) b - 30 Single-Family Attached (per unit)c - 25 Multi-Family Dwelling (per building) - 75 Live-Work Unit - 25 Maximum Height (feet/stories) 35 35/3 d Maximum Impervious Coverage Residential Structures 35% 75% Other Structures - No Limit Minimum Building Setbacks (feet) g Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 6 Front Yard 25 Single-Family Detached, Two- Family, and Single- Family Attached: See LDR standards of 154.452 Multi-Family Dwellings: 154.505 (A) (6) (b) All Other Residential Uses: 154.505 (A) (7) Non-Residential Uses: 154.505 (B) (1) Interior Side Yard 10 10 e Corner Side Yard 15 0 f Rear Yard 20 10 g Garages 25 25 Notes to VMX Village Districts Table a. No development may exceed the residential density range as specified in the Comprehensive Plan for the Village Mixed Use corresponding land use category. b. Two-family units may be side-by-side with a party wall between them (“twin”) or located on separate floors in a building on a single lot (“duplex”). The per-unit measurements in this table apply to “twin” units, whether on a single lot or separate lots. The standards for single-family detached dwelling shall apply to a “duplex” containing two vertically-separated units on a single lot. c. In the case of single-family attached dwellings that are not situated on individual lots, minimum lot size shall be applied to each unit as a measure of density; i.e. 1 unit per 2,500 square feet. This standard is also used for multifamily dwellings. d. Buildings up to 45 feet in height may be permitted as part of a PUD in the VMX District. e. The front yard setback for single family homes shall be 25 feet. e. Side yard setbacks in the VMX District apply only along lot lines abutting residentially zoned parcels or those parcels with residential uses as the sole use. f. Corner properties: the side yard façade of a corner building adjoining a public street shall maintain the front setback of the adjacent property fronting upon the same public street, or the required front Commented [EB1]: This is already indicated in 154.505 (A) (3) (b) Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 7 yard setback, whichever is less. If no structure exists on the adjacent property, and provided required setbacks are not otherwise stated herein, the setback shall be shown in the table. f.g. Properties zoned V-LDR abutting Stillwater Boulevard (CSAH 14) and Lake Elmo Avenue 17) north of Stillwater Blvd (CSAH 14) shall have a minimum structure setback of 30 feet. Properties abutting CSAH 17 and CSAH 14 shall have a minimum setback standard of 30 feet. § 154.503 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND PRESERVATION OF OPEN SPACE A. Averaging of Lot Area. When lots are clustered within a development to provide common open space, the open space may be used to calculate an average density per lot to determine compliance with the individual lot area requirements. B. Lot Dimension Reductions. Other reductions in dimensional standards may be considered as part of a Planned Unit Development if these reductions provide for common open space within a development. C. Village Open Space Overlay District. Development of areas within the Village Open Space Overlay District, as designated by the Comprehensive Plan, is not allowed. Residential lots shall not encroach on the areas designated as open space per this overlay district, unless buffering or screening is provided as an alternative approved by Council. § 154.504 GENERAL SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS – LMX VILLAGE DISTRICTS Development of land within the VMX Village Districts shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, and other considerations as specified in Article 5, 6 and 7. A. Circulation. New access points to State Highway 5 County State Aid Highway 14 may be refused or restricted to right-in right-out movement if alternatives exist. Internal connections shall be provided between parking areas on adjacent properties wherever feasible. 1. The number and width of curb-cuts shall be minimized. To promote pedestrian circulation, existing continuous curb-cuts shall be reduced to widths necessary for vehicular traffic, and unnecessary or abandoned curb cuts shall be removed as parcels are developed. B. Fencing and Screening. Fencing and screening walls visible from the public right-of-way shall be constructed of materials compatible with the principle structure. C. Lighting design. Lighting shall be integrated into the exterior design of new or renovated structures to create a greater sense of activity, security, and interest to the pedestrian, and shall comply with §150.035-150.038 Lighting, Glare Control, and Exterior Lighting Standards. Commented [EB2]: Need to verify with the County why this is needed. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 8 D. Exterior Storage. Exterior materials storage must be screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties, by a wing of the principal structure or a screen wall constructed of the same materials as the principal structure. Height of the structure or screen wall must be sufficient to completely conceal the stored materials from view at eye level (measured at six feet above ground level) on the adjacent street or property. E. Screening of Existing Residential Structures. When a new development is proposed adjacent to an existing single family residential structure, screening shall be provided in accordance with §154.258.F. The City may require buffering or screening above and beyond this section in cases where the required screening will not provide an adequate separation between incompatible uses. F. Sidewalks and/or Trails. Where cul-de-sacs are permitted by the City, sidewalks or trails are required to connect the bulb of the cul-de-sac with the nearest through-road or trail. G. Lake Elmo Theming Study. Elements of the Lake Elmo Theming Study not herein described must be incorporated in to development within Village Districts where applicable. § 154.505 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC USES Development of land within the VMX Village d Districts shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, parking, signs and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6 and 7. The following standards apply to specific uses; other standards related to design and building type may be found at §154.506. A. Residential Units, Village Districts. 1. All Residential Units, Village Districts. a. Residential housing units shall be designed to reflect the general scale and character of the Village, including front yard depth, height and roof pitch, primary materials, facade detailing and size and placement of window and door openings. 2. Single-Family Detached Dwellings, Village Districts. a. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front façade and the street except on a permitted driveway. b. Primary entrances are required to be along the front façade. c. Dwelling units shall be at least twenty-four (24) feet in width, at least nine hundred sixty (960) square feet in area, and be placed on a permanent foundation. 3. Secondary Dwellings, Village District. Restricted to lots occupied by single-family dwellings, and must meet the standards for secondary dwellings in residential districts, §154.13454 (C) and be located within the primary structure. 4. Single-Family Detached and Two-Family Dwellings, VMX District. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 9 a. Single-Family Detached Dwellings are limited to those existing at the time of adoption of this Ordinance. Expansion of existing and new single-family detached dwellings shall be allowed through the conditional use process. considered permitted uses, rather than nonconforming uses. b. Unless otherwise specified in this Article, Single and Two-Family Dwellings in the VMX district shall adhere to the MDR LDR district setbacks as specified in §154.452. 5. Single-Family Attached, VMX District. a. A maximum of eight (8) units shall be permitted within a single building. a. The primary entrance to each unit shall be located on the façade fronting a public street; an additional entrance may be provided on the rear or side façade. b. For redevelopment projects, new housing types should be introduced in limited quantities to increase diversity and housing choice, not to replace whole blocks of existing housing. Therefore, no more than 1/4 of the lineal frontage of a developed block (measured around the entire block perimeter) may be converted to townhouse units, and no further townhouse, two- family or higher-density development is permitted once this threshold is reached. d.b. Common open space for use by all residents or private open space adjacent to each unit shall be provided. Such open space shall compromise a minimum of three hundred (300) square feet per unit. e.c. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front façade and the street except on a permitted driveway. f.d. Unless otherwise specified in this Article, Single-Family Attached dwellings in the VMX district shall adhere to the MDR district setbacks as specified in §154.452. 6. Multi-Family Dwelling Units, VMX District. a. Dwelling units (both condominium and rental) within a mixed use development are restricted to the upper floors or rear or side ground floors of a mixed use building. b. Setback standards for multi-family dwellings not within a mixed use development shall be determined through the conditional use process. 7. All Other Residential Uses, VMX District. Setbacks for all other residential uses within the Village districts not specifically outlined in this Section shall be determined by either 154.506 or through the conditional use process. B. Non-Residential Uses, VMX District. Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Formatted: Font color: Red Commented [EB3]: Verifying with the City Attorney if this is legal. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 10 1. Setbacks, Generally. The front yard setback of a new non-residential building within the VMX district shall maintain the prevailing front yard setback of that block, or a maximum setback of 20 feet, whichever is less. 2. Repair and Maintenance Shop. No outdoor storage is permitted unless fully screened from public view. 3. Trade Shop. Exterior materials storage must be totally screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties by a wall of the principal structure or a screen wall constructed of the same materials as the principal structure. 4. Veterinary Services. a. All activities must be conducted within an enclosed building. b. Specific veterinary practices shall be limited to veterinary medicine, surgery, dentistry, and related service for small domestic household pets. 5. Garden Center. a. The storage or display of any materials or products shall meet all setback requirements of a structure, and shall be maintained in an orderly manner. Screening along the boundaries of adjacent residential properties may be required, meeting the standards of Article 6, Section 155.89.F. b. All loading and parking shall be provided off-street. c. The storage of any soil, fertilizer or other loose, unpackaged materials shall be contained so as to prevent any effects on adjacent uses. 6. Automobile Maintenance Service and Automobile Parts/Supply a. All vehicle repairs shall be conducted in a completely enclosed building b. The storage or display of inoperable or unlicensed vehicles or other equipment shall meet all setback requirements of a structure, and shall be totally screened from view from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential properties. 7. Live-Work Unit. The purpose of a live-work unit is to provide a transitional use type between a home occupation and a larger commercial enterprise, and to provide neighborhood-oriented commercial services, while maintaining a generally residential character in which the work space is subordinate to the residential use. a. The work space component shall be located on the first floor or basement of the building. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 11 b. The dwelling unit component shall maintain a separate entrance located on the front or side façade and accessible from the primary abutting public street. c. The work space component of the unit shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of the total gross floor area of the unit. d. A total of two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be provided for a live-work unit, located to the rear of the unit, or underground/enclosed. e. The size and nature of the work space shall be limited so that the building type may be governed by residential building codes. An increase in size or intensity beyond the specified limit on floor area would require the building to be classified as a mixed-use building. f. The business component of the building may include offices, small service establishments, home crafts which are typically considered accessory to a dwelling unit, or limited retailing (by appointment only) associated with fine arts, crafts, or personal services. It may not include a wholesale business, a commercial food service requiring a license, a limousine business or auto service or repair for any vehicles other than those registered to residents of the property. g. The business of the live-work unit must be conducted by a person who resides on the same lot. The business shall not employ more than two (2) workers on-site at any one time who live outside of the live-work unit. 8. Parking Facility. Structured parking is permitted as a ground floor use within a mixed-use building, provided that it the entrance is located on side or rear facades, not facing the primary abutting street. The primary street-facing façade shall be designed for retail, office or residential use. The primary street façade may include an entrance into the parking facility. 9. Outdoor Dining Accessory to Food Services. Outdoor dining is allowed as an accessory use in the commercial districts, provided that tables do not block the sidewalk. A minimum of five (5) feet of sidewalk must remain open. § 154.506 VMX DISTRICT DESIGN AND DEMOLITION REVIEW A. Review of Design. For certain development activity as specified in the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual, design review is required as part of the approval process for a building permit, conditional use permit, or certificate of zoning compliance under this Ordinance. All projects subject to design review shall be reviewed for conformance with the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual. A separate process for design review is not established. 1. Review Authority and Process. Design review shall be the responsibility of the individual or body authorizing the permit or certificate and shall be incorporated in the established review of the applicable building permit, conditional use permit, or certificate of zoning compliance. For those applications under this Ordinance that require review by the Planning Commission (i.e. conditional use permits), the Planning Commission shall consider the standards in the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual as part of its recommendation to the City Council. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 12 2. Review by Professional. The authorizing body may request review by a design professional of the proposed design or demolition. The cost of review by such design professional shall be charged by the applicant, and shall not exceed $1,000 unless otherwise agreed to by the applicant. 3. Development Activity Defined. Development Activity consists of new construction and redevelopment activities, including remodeling that expands the footprint of a structure, altering, or repairing a structure in a manner that will change the exterior appearance of said structure. Development activity also includes the construction of a new parking lots and installation of signage. a. Exempt Activities. The following activities shall be exempt from under review of this Section: i. Ordinary repairs and maintenance that will not change the exterior appearance of a structure; ii. Removal of existing signage without replacement unless said signs are an integral part of the building; iii. Emergency repairs ordered by the Director of Planning in order to protect public health and safety; iv. Exterior alteration, addition, or repair of a structure used as a single-family residence, duplex, or two-family residence. v. Temporary signage, installed in accordance with §154.212 of this Ordnance, or during which time an application for permanent signage is pending under this Ordinance; vi. Maintenance of existing signage advertising an on-site business; vii. Alterations only to the interior of a structure. § 154.507 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES Accessory uses are listed in the VMX District Use Table 11-1 as permitted or conditional accessory uses. Accessory uses and structures in the VMX Village Districts shall comply with the following standards and all other applicable regulations of this ordinance: A. Phasing. No accessory use or structure shall be constructed or established on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal use to which it is accessory. B. Incidental to Principal Use. The accessory use or structure shall be incidental to and customarily associated with the principal use or structure served. C. Subordinate to Principal Use. The accessory use or structure shall be subordinate in the area, extent, and purpose to the principal use or structure served. D. Function. The accessory use or structure shall contribute to the comfort, convenience, or necessity of the occupants of the principal use or structure served. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 13 E. Location. The accessory use or structure shall be located on the same zoning lot as the principal use or structure. F. Residential Accessory Structures § 154.5087 RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES A. 1. Design Compatibility. On parcels used for residential structures within the VMX Village Districts, the design and construction of any garage, carport, or storage building shall be similar to or compatible with the design and construction of the main building. The exterior building materials, roof style, and colors shall be similar to or compatible with the main building or shall be commonly associated with residential construction. B. 2. Attached structures. An accessory structure shall be considered attached, and an integral part of, the principal structure when it is connected by an enclosed passageway. All attached accessory structures shall be subject to the following requirements: a. The structure shall meet the required yard setbacks for a principal structure, as established for the zoning district in which it is located. b. The structure shall not exceed the height of the principal building to which it is attached. B. 3. Attached Garages. 3. a. Attached garages are encouraged to be side or rear loaded. If facing the primary street, garages shall be designed using one of the following techniques, unless specific physical conditions on the lot in question require a different approach: i. The front of the garage is recessed at least four (4) feet behind the plane of the primary façade; or ii. The front of the garage is recessed at least four (4) feet behind a porch if the garage is even with the primary façade; or i. The front façade of the garage shall be offset by the principal structure by a minimum of two (2) feet from the plane of the public right-of-way. ii. The width of the attached garage shall not exceed 40% of the width of the entire principal building façade (including garage) fronting the primary street. 4. b. Attached garages shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet in area at the ground floor level except by conditional use permit. 5. c. Garage doors or openings shall not exceed fourteen (14) feet in height. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 14 C. 4. Detached structures. Detached accessory structures for permitted residential structures in the VMX Village Districts must be in accordance with the following requirements: a. Detached accessory structures shall be located to the side or rear of the principal building, and are not permitted within the required front yard or within a side yard abutting a street. b. Detached garages shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet at ground floor level and shall not exceed a height of twenty-two (22) feet or the height of the principal structure, whichever is higher. The maximum size and height may be increased upon approval of a conditional use permit, provided that lot coverage requirements are satisfied. c. Pole barns, as defined herein, shall be prohibited. d. No more than thirty (30) percent of the rear yard area may be covered by accessory structures. e. Garage doors or openings shall not exceed fourteen (14) feet in height. § 154.509 ACCESSORY USES A. G. Exterior Storage on Residential Parcels. All materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or be fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except for the following: a. Laundry drying, b. Construction and landscaping materials and equipment currently being used on the premises. Materials kept on the premises for a period exceeding six (6) months shall be screened or stored out of view of the primary street on which the house fronts. c. Agricultural equipment and materials, if these are used or intended for use on the premises. d. Off-street parking and storage of vehicles and accessory equipment, as regulated in Article 5, Section 155.67 154.210. e. Storage of firewood shall be kept at least ten (10) feet from any habitable structure and screened from view of adjacent properties. f. Outdoor parking. B. H. Temporary Sales. Temporary sales, also known as yard or garage sales, are permitted in all residential districts, limited to two (2) per calendar year per residence, not to exceed four (4) days in length for each event. C. I. Accessory Uses and Structures Not Listed § 154.510 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES NOT LISTED Standards for accessory uses and structures that are permitted in all districts, or in all residential buildings in any district, are listed in Article 7, Specific Development Standards. These include uses such as family and group family day care, bed and breakfast facilities, and home occupations, and structures such as swimming pools and solar equipment. Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 15 SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends the Lake Elmo City Code Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter154: Zoning Code; Article X: Division Into Districts; Section 154.350 to read the following: Zoning District R Reference R-2 One and Two Family Residential 154.033 GB General Business 154.034 A Agriculture Article XI RR Rural Residential Article XI RT Rural Development Transitional Article XI RS Rural Single Family Article XI RE Residential Estate Article XI LDR Urban Low Density Residential Article XII MDR Urban Medium Density Residential Article XII HDR Urban High Density Residential Article XII V-LDR Village Low Density Residential Article XIII VMX Village Center - Mixed Use Article XIII C Commercial Article XIV CC Convenience Commercial Article XIV LC Neighborhood Office/Limited Commercial Article XIV BP Business Park/Light Manufacturing Article XIV PF Public Facilities Article XV SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends the Lake Elmo City Code Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter154: Zoning Code; Article VII: General Regulations; Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; Table 5-3 to read the following: Table 5-3 Ground Signs Zoning District Aa, LDR, OP, RE, RS, RRa, RTa MDR, HDR, V-LDR BP, C, CC, GB, LC, VMX No. of Speed Max Height/ Max Height/ Area Max Height/ Area Total Traffic Limit Lanes (MPH) Area (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.) Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 16 1-3 0-34 - 6’/32 10’/32 35-44 - 6’/32 10’/50 45+ - 6’/32 10’/72 4-5 0-34 - 6’/32 10’/40 35-44 - 6’/32 10’/64 45+ - 6’/32 12’/80 SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends the Lake Elmo City Code Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations; Section 153.14: Park Land Dedication Requirements; Subd. A to read the following: Zoning Districts Minimum Required Land Dedication R1, R2, R3, andR4 10% RS, V-LDR, LDR, MDR, HDR 10% RE 7% RR and AG 4% SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 6. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-___ was adopted on this _____ day of ________, 2017, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Planning Commission Draft 4/1024/2017 17 __________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-__ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2017. V-8 3. Approximate location of all curb cuts, driveways, access roads, parking areas, off- street loading areas, and sidewalks. 4. Conceptual landscape plan indicating general planting areas for trees, shrubs, and lawns. 5. Conceptual grading, erosion control, and storm water management plan. 6. Conceptual sewer and water utility plan for the development. 7. Narrative indicating the types of uses or businesses that are contemplated for the development, number of employees, parking and traffic impacts, and other pertinent information about the proposed development. 8. The Director of Planning may require the applicant to supply proof of ownership of the property for which the amendment is requested that illustrates legal or equitable interest in the property. E.Hearing Requirements. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on each complete application for a Zoning Amendment as provided in §154.102 of this Article. After the close of such hearing, the Planning Commission shall consider findings and shall submit the same together with its recommendation to the City Council. F.Effect of Denial of Application. No application of a property owner for an amendment to the text of this chapter or the zoning map shall be considered by the Planning Commission within the one year period following a denial of such request, except the Planning Commission may permit a new application, if in the opinion of the Planning Commission, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. G.Relationship to Comprehensive Plan. Any rezoning shall be consistent with the current City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Land Use Plan. If the rezoning is not consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan must be requested and approved prior to or concurrent with the rezoning request. H.Coordination with Adjoining Communities. Any zoning district change on land adjacent to or across a public right-of-way from an adjoining community shall be referred to the Planning Commission and the adjacent community or county for review and comment prior to action by the City Council granting or denying the zoning district classification change. A period of at least ten (10) days shall be provided for receipt of comments. Such comments shall be considered as advisory only. (Ord. 08-085, passed 7-2-2013) § 154.106 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. A.Required Findings. Conditional use means a land use or development as defined byordinance that would not be appropriate generally but may be allowed with appropriate restrictions as provided by official controls only upon a finding that all of the following provisions are met: 1. The proposed use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. V-9 2. The use or development conforms to the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. 3. The use or development is compatible with the existing neighborhood. 4. The proposed use meets all specific development standards for such use listed in Article 9 of this Chapter. (Ord. 08-152) 5. If the proposed use is in a flood plain management or shoreland area, the proposed use meets all the specific standards for such use listed in Chapter 150, §150.250 through 150.257 (Shoreland Regulations) and Chapter 152 (Flood Plain Management). 6. The proposed use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. 7. The proposed use will not be hazardous or create a nuisance as defined under this Chapter to existing or future neighboring structures. 8. The proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. 9. The proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 10. The proposed use will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 11. Vehicular approaches to the property, where present, will not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. 12. The proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. B.Application Requirements. Conditional Use Permit applications shall be submitted to the Director of Planning on such form and accompanied by such information as required by §154.101.A of this Article and with the submission materials listed in §154.101.B of this Article. C.Public Hearing Required. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on each complete application for a conditional use permit as provided in §154.102 of this Article. After the close of the hearing on a proposed conditional use permit, the City Planning Commission shall consider findings and shall submit the same together with its recommendation to the City Council. D.Final Decision by City Council. The City Council shall make the final decision on a conditional use permit after a public hearing by the Planning Commission. The City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. V-10 E.Conditions. In reviewing applications for conditional use permits, the Planning Commission and Council may attach whatever reasonable conditions they deem necessary to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with these uses, to protect the value of property within the district and to achieve the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. In determining such conditions, special consideration shall be given to protecting immediately adjacent properties from objectionable views, noise, traffic and other negative characteristics associated with such uses. 1. The conditions shall include all specific development standards for such use listed in Article 9 of this Chapter. (Ord. 08-152) 2. If the proposed use is in a flood plain management or shoreland area, the conditions shall include specific standards for such use listed in Chapter 151 (Floodplain Management) and Chapter 152 (Shoreland Management). 3. In addition, conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Controlling the number, area, bulk, height and location of such uses; b. Regulating ingress and egress to the property and the proposed structures thereon with particular references to vehicle and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow, and control and access in case of fire or other catastrophe; c. Regulating off-street parking and loading areas where required; d. Controlling the location, availability and compatibility of utilities; e. Requiring berming, fencing, screening, landscaping or other means to protect nearby property; and f. Requiring other conditions to create compatibility of appearance with surrounding uses. F.Findings for Denial. If the Planning Commission recommends denial of a conditional use permit or the Council orders such denial, it shall include in its recommendation or determination findings as to the specific ways in which the proposed use does not comply with one or more specific findings required by this chapter. G.Permittee. A conditional use permit shall be issued for a particular use and not for a particular person, except in the case of a permit granted for the uses of land reclamation, mining or soil or mineral processing. In such cases, a permit shall be issued to the particular person making application for such permit and such permit shall not be transferred or assigned for use by another without the written consent of the City. However, such consent by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld. H.Periodic Review. A periodic review of the use may be attached as a condition of approval of a conditional use permit. I.Term of Permit. Unless otherwise stipulated, the term shall be the life of the use. J.Revocation. Failure to comply with any condition set forth in a conditional use permit, or any other violation of this chapter, shall be a misdemeanor and shall also constitute V-11 sufficient cause for the termination of the conditional use permit by the City Council following a public hearing conducted in accordance with §155.102 of this Article. K.Expiration. If substantial construction has not taken place within 12 months of the date on which the conditional use permit was granted, the permit is void except that, on application, the Council, after receiving recommendation from the Planning Commission, may extend the permit for such additional period as it deems appropriate. If the conditional use is discontinued for six months, the conditional use permit shall become void. This provision shall apply to conditional use permits issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, but the six-month period shall not be deemed to commence until the effective date of this chapter. (Ord. 08-085, passed 7-2-2013) § 154.107 INTERIM USE PERMITS. A.Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of allowing interim uses are: 1. To allow a use for a limited period of time that reasonably utilizes the property where such use is not consistent with the future land map in the Comprehensive Plan; and 2. To allow a use that is presently acceptable, but that with anticipated development or redevelopment or other significant change, will not be acceptable in the future or will be replaced by a permitted or conditional use allowed within the respective district. B.Required Findings. An interim use permit may be granted only if the City Council finds as follows: 1. The use is allowed as an interim use in the respective zoning district and conforms to standard zoning regulations. 2. The use will not adversely impact nearby properties through nuisance, noise, traffic, dust, or unsightliness and will not otherwise adversely impact the health, safety, and welfare of the community. 3. The use will not adversely impact implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The user agrees to all conditions that the City Council deems appropriate to establish the interim use. This may include the requirement of appropriate financial surety such as a letter of credit or other security acceptable to the City to cover the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures not currently existing on the site, upon the expiration of the interim use permit. 5. There are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments, interest, or city utility fees due upon the subject parcel. 6. The date or event terminating the interim use shall be set by the City Council at the time of approval. C.Application Requirements. Interim Use Permit applications shall be submitted to the Director of Planning on such form and accompanied by such information as required by STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 15 AGENDA ITEM: 2017A Bonding SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: The City Council has included a number projects in the 2017-2021 CIP for this year with funding proposed to come from bonding. Projects include the 2017 street projects, Ideal Ave/CSAH 13 street and sewer project, Old Village Phase 3 Improvement Project, Dump Truck with Plow, Pick Up Truck, Hudson Blvd Lift Station and the fourth and final payment to the Washington County for Old Village Phase 2 Improvement Project. At the April 18th meeting, Council approved the sale of the bonds. Staff participated in a bond rating call with Moody’s on April 26th. The City’s bond rating has been upgraded to Aa1. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council authorize the issuance, awarding of sale and details of $9,355,000 general obligation bonds? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The total bond amount has been reduced from $9,880,000 as proposed in April to $9,355,000 because the bids on the projects came in lower than projected. The finance plan has been revised and is included in your packet. The sale is scheduled to happen the morning of May 16th. Tammy Omdahl from Northland will be at the meeting to provide the results, which will be used to update the resolution in your packet. FISCAL IMPACT: Beginning on page 3 of the finance plan, the portion of the bond proceeds are broken down. The improvement portion of the bonds of approximately $4.46 million covers the street costs. The equipment portion of the bonds of approximately $275,000 covers the dump truck and pickup truck. These two items will be paid back through the general fund debt. Annual payment will be around $542,000 before reducing for special assessment revenue. Special assessment revenue should account for about a third of the payment. The sewer portion of the bonds of approximately $2.78 million covers the Old Village Phase 2 and 3 projects, CSAH 13 project and the Hudson Blvd lift station. Annual payments will be around $234,000 before reducing for special assessments. Special assessments will cover all projects except for the Hudson Blvd lift station, which will be paid from sewer fund revenues. The water portion covers the Old Village Phase 2 and 3 projects. Of the $1.7 million, being borrowed nearly all of it will be paid from water revenue funds. The only exception being about $40,000 if water is brought to the Westbrook building as part of Phase 3. Annual payments would be about $140,000. The storm water portion of the bonds of approximately $155,000 is for Old Village Phase 2. The annual payment of around $14,000 will be paid from storm water revenues. OPTIONS: 1) Approve Resolution No. 2017-046 2) Amend and then Approve Resolution No 2017-046 3) Do not authorize the issuance and sale of bonds RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Resolution No. 2017-046: A Resolution Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing for the Payment of $9,355,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A ATTACHMENTS: • Finance Plan • Resolution No 2017-046 CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $9,355,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A Issuer: City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on May 16, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. 2017-046 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $9,355,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this _____ day of May, 2017. City Clerk It was reported that [_______] ([__]) proposals for the purchase of $9,355,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A were received prior to 10:30 A.M., Central Time, pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds by Northland Securities, Inc., municipal advisor to the City. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: See Attached Councilmember ____________________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember ____________________: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $9,355,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.01. Authorization. This City Council, by resolution duly adopted on April 18, 2017, authorized the issuance and sale of its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A (the “Bonds”), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 412.301, 429, 444 and 475, for the purpose of (a) financing various improvement projects in the City (the “Improvements Project”), (b) financing various street, water, stormwater, and sewer improvements in the City (the “Utility Project”), (c) financing various items of capital equipment (the “Equipment”) and (d) funding costs of issuance of the Bonds (collectively, the “Project”). 1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Notice of Sale and the Preliminary Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Northland Securities, Inc., municipal advisor to the City, sealed or electronic proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of [___________________], in [___________, ___________] (the “Purchaser”), to purchase the Bonds in the principal amount of $[_______], at a price of $[__________] plus accrued interest, if any, on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. The principal amount of the portion of the Bonds allocable to the Improvements Project ($[________]) shall be designated as the “Improvement Bonds,” the principal amount of the portion of the Bonds allocable to the Utility Project ($[______]) shall be designated as the “Utility Bonds.” The principal amount of the portion of the Bonds allocable to the Equipment ($[_______]) shall be designated as “Equipment Bonds” and does not exceed 0.25 percent of the market value of taxable property in the City ($3,444,612). 1.03. Award. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser, and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the City to execute a contract for the sale of the Bonds with the Purchaser in accordance with the Preliminary Official Statement. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. 2 SECTION 2. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 2.01. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Bonds having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 2.02. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of June 8, 2017, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on January 15 in the years and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption, at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Maturity Improvement Bonds Utility Bonds Equipment Bonds Total Rate 2019 % 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein, provided that so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery of the Bonds pursuant to Section 2.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on January 15 and July 15 in each year, commencing January 15, 2018, each such date being referred to herein as an Interest Payment Date, to the 3 persons in whose names the Bonds are registered on the Bond Register, as hereinafter defined, at the Registrar’s close of business on the first day of the calendar month in which such Interest Payment Date occurs, whether or not such day is a business day. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. 2.04. Redemption. Bonds maturing on January 15, 2026 and in later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in integral multiples of $5,000, on January 15, 2025, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City Administrator shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published if and as required by law, and at least thirty (30) and not more than sixty (60) days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the Registrar and registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the Bond Register described in Section 2.06 hereof, provided that notice shall be given to any securities depository in accordance with its operational arrangements. No defect in or failure to give such notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing on January 15, 20__ and 20__ (the “Term Bonds”) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 2.03 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on January 15 in each of the following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $_______________ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on January 15, 20__. 4 Year Principal Amount The remaining $_______________ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on January 15, 20__.] 2.05. Appointment of Registrar. The City hereby appoints Northland Trust Services, Inc., in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as the initial Bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company organized under the laws of the United States or one of the states of the United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty days’ written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the Bond Register to the successor Registrar. 2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the “Bond Register”) in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term Holder or Bondholder as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the Holder thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the Holder thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the Holder in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the first day of the month in which the interest payment date occurs and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. At the option of the Holder of any Bond in a denomination greater than $5,000, such Bond may be exchanged for other Bonds of authorized denominations, of the same maturity and a like aggregate principal amount, upon surrender of the Bond to be exchanged at the office of the Registrar. Whenever any Bond is so surrendered for exchange the City shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver the Bonds which the Bondholder making the exchange is entitled to receive. 5 (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the Bond Register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to or upon the order of such Holder shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating agent for the Bonds, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1, as amended. (j) Valid Obligations. All Bonds issued upon any transfer or exchange of Bonds shall be the valid obligations of the City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 6 2.07. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Administrator and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on any Bond shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of such Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until the date of delivery of such Bond. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond, substantially in the form provided in Section 2.09, has been executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on any Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been duly authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Administrator shall deliver them to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale theretofore executed, and the Purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.08. Securities Depository. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: “Beneficial Owner” shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person’s subrogee. “Cede & Co.” shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee of DTC with respect to the Bonds. “DTC” shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York. “Participant” shall mean any broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution for which DTC holds bonds as securities depository. “Representation Letter” shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the City agrees to comply with DTC’s Operational Arrangements. (b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the Bond Register in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant, any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any 7 Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the Bond Register as being a registered owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds. So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC’s Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City’s obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond for each separate stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the City to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable to such new nominee in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (c) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of physical certificates, the City may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability through DTC of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and the Registrar and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC, if not previously filed with DTC, by the Mayor or City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed. (e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the printing of such Bonds in the form of physical certificates and the method of payment of principal of and interest on such Bonds in the form of physical certificates. 2.09. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the form found at EXHIBIT A attached hereto. Section 3. USE OF PROCEEDS; PROJECT FUND. 3.01. Project Fund 8 There is hereby created a special bookkeeping fund to be designated as the “General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A Project Fund” (the “Project Fund”), to be held and administered by the City Administrator separate and apart from all other funds of the City. Within the Project Fund are established the following accounts: (a) Improvements Project Account. The Improvements Account shall be credited with (i) $[_________] from the proceeds from the Improvement Bonds and (ii) all special assessments collected with respect to the improvements until all costs of such improvements have been fully paid. The City Administrator shall maintain the Improvements Account until payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the construction of the Improvements Project have been paid. (b) Utility Project Account. The Utility Project Account shall be credited with $[__________] from the proceeds of the Utility Bonds. The City Administrator shall maintain the Utility Project Account until all costs and expenses incurred by the City in connection with the construction of the Utility Project have been paid. (c) Equipment Account. The Equipment Account shall be credited with $[___________] from the proceeds of the Equipment Bonds. The City Administrator shall maintain the Equipment Account until all costs and expenses incurred by the City in connection with the Equipment have been paid. From the Project Fund there shall be paid all costs and expenses related to the construction and acquisition of the Project. After payment of all such costs and expenses, the Project Fund shall be terminated. All funds on hand in the Project Fund when terminated shall be credited to the Bond Fund described in Section 4 hereof, unless and except as such proceeds may be transferred to some other fund or account as to which the City has received from bond counsel an opinion that such other transfer is permitted by applicable laws and does not impair the exemption of interest on the Bonds from federal income taxes. In no event shall funds remain in the Project Fund later than June 1, 2022. SECTION 4. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A BOND FUND. The Bonds shall be payable from a separate General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A Bond Fund (the “Bond Fund”) of the City, which shall be created and maintained on the books of the City as a separate debt redemption fund until the Bonds, and all interest thereon, are fully paid. Into the Bond Fund shall be paid (a) any funds received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds in excess of the amounts specified in Section 3 above; (b) special assessments levied and collected in accordance with this Resolution except as otherwise provided in Section 3.01, clause (a) hereof; (c) net revenues of the municipal water, stormwater, and sewer systems, such revenues to be distributed ratably with respect to the Utility Bonds payable therefrom and any other obligations of the City payable from the same source; (d) any taxes collected pursuant to Section 7 hereof; and (e) any other funds appropriated by this Council for the payment of the Bonds. The principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund, and the money on hand in the Bond Fund from time to time shall be used only to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds. On or before each principal and interest payment date for the Bonds, the City Administrator is directed to remit to the Registrar from funds on deposit in the Bond Fund the amount needed to 9 pay principal and interest on the Bonds on the next succeeding principal and interest payment date. There are hereby established two accounts in the Bond Fund, designated as the “Debt Service Account” and the “Surplus Account.” There shall initially be deposited into the Debt Service Account upon the issuance of the Bonds the amount set forth in clause (a) above. Thereafter, during each bond year (each twelve month period commencing on January 16 and ending on the following January 15, a “Bond Year”), as monies are received into the Bond Fund, the City Administrator shall first deposit such monies into the Debt Service Account until an amount has been appropriated thereto sufficient to pay all principal and interest due on the Bonds through the end of the Bond Year. All subsequent monies received in the Bond Fund during the Bond Year shall be appropriated to the Surplus Account. If at any time the amount on hand in the Debt Service Account is insufficient for the payment of principal and interest then due, the City Administrator shall transfer to the Debt Service Account amounts on hand in the Surplus Account to the extent necessary to cure such deficiency. Investment earnings (and losses) on amounts from time to time held in the Debt Service Account and Surplus Account shall be credited or charged to said accounts. If the balance in the Bond Fund is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal then due on all Bonds payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund of the City which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from the Surplus Account when the balance therein is sufficient, and the City covenants and agrees that it will each year levy a sufficient amount of ad valorem taxes to take care of any accumulated or anticipated deficiency, which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory limitation. SECTION 5. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. The City hereby covenants and agrees that, for the payment of the costs of the Improvements Project, the City has done or will do and perform all acts and things necessary for the final and valid levy of special assessments in the principal amount of $1,733,247, which is not less than 20% of the cost of the Improvements Project. The principal of and interest on such special assessments are estimated to be levied and collected in the years and amounts shown on EXHIBIT B attached hereto. The principal of the assessments shall be made payable in annual installments, with interest as established by this Council in accordance with law on unpaid installments thereof from time to time remaining unpaid. In the event any special assessment shall at any time be held invalid with respect to any lot or tract of land, due to any error, defect or irregularity in any action or proceeding taken or to be taken by the City or by this Council or by any of the officers or employees of the City, either in the making of such special assessment or in the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the City hereby covenants and agrees that it will forthwith do all such further things and take all such further proceedings as shall be required by law to make such special assessment a valid and binding lien upon said property. SECTION 6. PLEDGE OF NET REVENUES. It is hereby found, determined and declared that the City owns and operates its municipal water, stormwater, and sewer systems as revenue-producing utilities and as a convenience, and that the net operating revenues of the systems, after deducting from the gross receipts derived from charges for the service, use and availability of the systems the normal, current and reasonable expenses of operation and maintenance thereof, will 10 be sufficient, together with any other pledged funds, for the payment when due of the principal of and interest on the Utility Bonds and on any other bonds to which such revenues are pledged. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075, the City hereby covenants and agrees with the registered owners from time to time of the Bonds that until the Bonds and the interest thereon are discharged as provided in Section 8 or paid in full, the City will impose and collect reasonable charges in accordance with said Section 444.075 for the service, use and availability of its municipal water, stormwater, and sewer systems according to schedules sufficient to produce net revenues sufficient, with other funds pledged to payment of the Utility Bonds, to pay the Utility Bonds and any other bonds to which said net revenues have been pledged; and the net revenues, to the extent necessary, are hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon when due. Nothing herein shall preclude the City from hereafter making further pledges and appropriations of the net revenues of its municipal water, stormwater, and sewer systems for payment of additional obligations of the City hereafter authorized if the Council determines before the authorization of such additional obligations that the estimated net revenues of the systems will be sufficient, together with any other sources pledged to the payment of the outstanding and additional obligations, for payment of the outstanding bonds and such additional obligations. Such further pledges and appropriations of net revenues may be made superior or subordinate to or on a parity with, the pledge and appropriation herein made. SECTION 7. PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts which, together with the collections of other amounts as set forth in Section 4, will produce amounts not less than 5% in excess of the amounts needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds, ad valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the City, the taxes to be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: Levy Years Collection Years Amount See attached schedules The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right and power to reduce the tax levies from other legally available funds, in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 8. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this Section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the Holders of the Bonds shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The City may also discharge its obligations with respect to any prepayable Bonds called for redemption on any date when they 11 are prepayable according to their terms by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date an amount equal to the principal, redemption premium, if any, and interest then due, provided that notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided herein. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with the Registrar or with a bank or trust company qualified by law to act as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited for such purpose, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder’s option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity or, if notice of redemption as herein required has been irrevocably provided for, to an earlier designated redemption date. If such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or specified redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the City must have received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely affect the exemption of interest on any Bonds from federal income taxation and a written report of an accountant or investment banking firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all of the principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 9. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 9.01. General Tax Covenant. The City agrees with the registered owners from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any action that would cause interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) and applicable Treasury Regulations (the “Regulations”), and agrees to take any and all actions within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Code and the Regulations. All proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Project Fund will be expended solely for the payment of the costs of the Project. The Project is and will be owned and maintained by the City and available for use by members of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The City shall not enter into any lease, management contract, use agreement, capacity agreement or other agreement with any non-governmental person relating to the use of the Project, or any portion thereof, or security for the payment of the Bonds which might cause the Bonds to be considered “private activity bonds” or “private loan bonds” pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 9.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and City Administrator being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this Resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with Section 148 of the Code, and applicable Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner that would cause the Bonds to be “arbitrage bonds” within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 9.03. Arbitrage Rebate. The City acknowledges that the Bonds are subject to the rebate requirements of Section 148(f) of the Code. The City covenants and agrees to retain such records, make such determinations, file such reports and documents and pay such amounts at 12 such times as are required under said Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations unless the Bonds qualify for an exception from the rebate requirement pursuant to one of the spending exceptions set forth in Section 1.148-7 of the Regulations and no “gross proceeds” of the Bonds (other than amounts constituting a “bona fide debt service fund”) arise during or after the expenditure of the original proceeds thereof. 9.04. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The City Council hereby designates the Bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code relating to the disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions, and hereby finds that the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code) which will be issued by the City and all subordinate entities during calendar year 2017 does not exceed $10,000,000. 9.05. Reimbursement. The City certifies that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used by the City to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the Project which the City paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance of the Bonds unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the City shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations, provided that this certification shall not apply (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with respect to the Project meeting the requirements of Section 1.150-2(f)(1) of the Regulations, or (ii) with respect to “preliminary expenditures” for the Project as defined in Section 1.150-2(f)(2) of the Regulations, including engineering or architectural expenses and similar preparatory expenses, which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% of the “issue price” of the Bonds. 9.06. Continuing Disclosure. (a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. § 240.15c2-12), relating to continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the Rule), which will enhance the marketability of the Bonds, the City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the outstanding Bonds. The City is the only obligated person in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. If the City fails to comply with any provisions of this section, any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this section, including an action for a writ of mandamus or specific performance. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this section constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other provision of this resolution. As used in this section, Owner or Bondowner means, in respect of a Bond, the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such Beneficial Owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, Beneficial Owner means, in respect of a Bond, any person or entity which (a) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with 13 respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following information at the following times: (1) on or before twelve (12) months after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016, the following financial information and operating data in respect of the City (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year, prepared in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer of the City; and (B) to the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period most recently available of the type contained in the Official Statement under the headings: “Economic and Financial Information—Valuations,” “—Tax Capacity Rates” and “--Tax Levies and Collections” and “Summary of Debt and Debt Statistics,” which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the City shall provide on or before such date unaudited financial statements and, within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the City shall provide the audited financial statements. Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by reference, if it is updated as required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have been submitted to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the MSRB) through its Electronic Municipal Market Access System (EMMA) or the SEC. The City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure Information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure Information shall include such 14 additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data provided. (2) In a timely manner, not in excess of 10 business days after the occurrence of the event, to the MSRB through EMMA, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events (each a “Material Fact,” as hereinafter defined): (A) principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) non-payment related defaults, if material; (C) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (D) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) adverse tax opinions, the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notices of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701-TEB), or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax status of the Bonds or other material events affecting the tax status of the Bonds; (G) modifications to rights of Bond holders, if material; (H) Bond calls, if material and tender offers; (I) defeasances; (J) release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds if material; (K) rating changes; (L) bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership, or similar event of the obligated person; (M) the consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving an obligated person or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the obligated person, other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant to its terms, if material; and (N) appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee, if material. As used herein, for those events that must be reported if material, an event is material if a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, an event is also material if it would be deemed material for purposes of the purchase, 15 holding or sale of a Bond within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event. For the purposes of the event identified in (L) hereinabove, the event is considered to occur when any of the following occur: the appointment of a receiver, fiscal agent or similar officer for an obligated person in a proceeding under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code or in any other proceeding under state or federal law in which a court or governmental authority has assumed jurisdiction over substantially all of the assets or business of the obligated person, or if such jurisdiction has been assumed by leaving the existing governing body and officials or officers in possession but subject to the supervision and orders of a court or governmental authority, or the entry of an order confirming a plan of reorganization, arrangement or liquidation by a court or governmental authority having supervision or jurisdiction over substantially all of the assets or business of the obligated person. (3) In a timely manner, to the MSRB through EMMA, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure of the City to provide the Disclosure Information required under paragraph (b)(1) at the time specified thereunder; (B) the amendment or supplementing of this section pursuant to subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this section pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the City. (c) Manner of Disclosure. (1) The City agrees to make available to the MSRB through EMMA, in an electronic format as prescribed by the MSRB, the information described in subsection (b). (2) All documents provided to the MSRB pursuant to this subsection (c) shall be accompanied by identifying information as prescribed by the MSRB from time to time. (d) Term; Amendments; Interpretation. (1) The covenants of the City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the 16 requirements of this section will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. (2) This section (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution of this Council filed in the office of the recording officer of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to customary qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the City or the type of operations conducted by the City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule; (ii) this section as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests of the Bondowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. (3) This section is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule. SECTION 10. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 10.01. Registration of Bonds. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Washington County, together with such additional information as is required, and to obtain a certificate that the Bonds and the taxes levied pursuant hereto have been duly entered upon the County Auditor’s Bond register. 10.02. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the City and the County Auditor are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits 17 and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 10.03. Official Statement. The Preliminary Official Statement relating to the Bonds, prepared and distributed by Northland Securities, Inc., is hereby approved. Northland Securities, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a Final Official Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other information relating to the Bonds required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule l5c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. 10.04. Authorization of Payment of Certain Costs of Issuance of the Bonds. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to the Registrar on the closing date for further distribution as directed by Northland Securities, Inc. 10.05. Effective Date. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. 18 Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. EXHIBIT A UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WASHINGTON CITY OF LAKE ELMO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A R-___ $_________ Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. __% January 15, 20__ June 8, 2017 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, State of Minnesota (the “City”) acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the registered owner specified above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above and promises to pay interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above or from the most recent Interest Payment Date (as hereinafter defined) to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, at the annual interest rate specified above, payable on January 15 and July 15 in each year, commencing January 15, 2018 (each such date, an “Interest Payment Date”), all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. The interest so payable on any Interest Payment Date shall be paid to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the first day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month in which such Interest Payment Date occurs. Interest hereon shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof at the principal office of the agent of the Registrar described below, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft drawn on Northland Trust Services, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota, as Bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent, or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein (the “Registrar”) or other agreed-upon means of payment by the Registrar or its designated successor. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively come due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Bond is one of an issue (the “Bonds”) in the aggregate principal amount of $9,355,000 issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on May 16, 2017 (the “Resolution”), to finance various street, water, stormwater, and sewer improvements in the City, and various items of capital equipment and to fund the costs of issuance of the Bonds. This Bond issued by authority of and in strict accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 412.301, 429, 444 and 475. For the full and prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same become due, the full faith, credit and taxing power of the City have 2 been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The Bonds are issuable only in fully registered form, in the denomination of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds maturing on January 15, 2026 and later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the Bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of $5,000, on January 15, 2025, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published if and to the extent required by law, and at least thirty (30) and not more than sixty (60) days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail (or, if applicable, provided in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository), to the registered holders of any Bonds, at the holders’ addresses as they appear on the Bond register maintained by the Bond Registrar, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing in the year 20____ and 20____ shall be subject to mandatory redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium, on January 15 in each of the years shown below, in an amount equal to the following principal amounts: Term Bonds Maturing in 20__ Term Bonds Maturing in 20__ Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount (final maturity) (final maturity) The County will cause notice of the mandatory redemption of the Term Bonds to be published if and as required by law and, and at least thirty and not more than sixty days prior to the designated redemption date, will cause notice of the call thereof to be mailed by first class mail to the registered owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the owner’s address as it appears on the bond register maintained by the Registrar, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified, and from and after such date (unless the County shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds shall cease to bear interest.] As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner 3 hereof in person or by the owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney, and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the designated transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date; subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to any such transfer or exchange. The Bonds have been designated by the City as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment as herein provided and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Bond, so long as this Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, or in the name of any other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on this Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to this Bond, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the City. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that, prior to the issuance hereof, the City Council has by the Resolution covenanted and agreed to collect and apply to payment of the bonds ad valorem taxes levied on all taxable property in the City, certain net revenues of its municipal water, stormwater, and sewer systems and special assessments upon property specially benefited by the local improvements financed with the Bonds, which taxes, revenues and assessments are estimated to be collectible in years and amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than 5% in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, and has appropriated such assessments, revenues and taxes to its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017 Bond Fund for the payment of such principal and interest; that if necessary for the payment of such principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; that all proceedings relative to the projects financed by this Bond have been or will be taken according to law and that the issuance of this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the City outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and City Administrator and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 4 (facsimile signature – City Administrator) (facsimile signature – Mayor) __________ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. Date of Authentication: __________________ NORTHLAND TRUST SERVICES, INC., as Registrar By Authorized Representative 5 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM --as tenants in common UTMA …………. as Custodian for ………….. (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT --as tenants by the entireties under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act ....…….. (State) JT TEN --as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used. __________ ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto ______________________________________________________________________ the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint ______________________________________________________________________ attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: NOTICE: The assignor’s signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. Signature Guaranteed: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an “eligible guarantor institution” meeting the requirements of the Registrar, which requirements include membership or participation in STAMP or such other “signature guaranty program” as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to or in substitution for STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: EXHIBIT B Special Assessments and Tax Levies WASHINGTON COUNTY AUDITOR’S CERTIFICATE AS TO REGISTRATION AND TAX LEVY The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting County Auditor of Washington County, Minnesota, hereby certifies that there has been filed in my office a certified copy of a resolution duly adopted on May 16, 2017, by the City Council of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, setting forth the form and details of an issue of $9,355,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A dated the date of issuance thereof. I further certify that the issue has been entered on my bond register and the taxes required by law have been levied as required by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.61 to 475.63. WITNESS my hand and official seal on the _____ day of ____________, 2017. Washington County Auditor (SEAL) City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $9,355,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Table of Contents Report ISSUE SUMMARY Total Issue SourcesA n d Uses 1 DebtServ ice Schedule 2 IMPROVEMENT PORTION DebtServ ice Schedule 3 1 0 5% Lev y 4 EQUIPMENT PORTION DebtServ ice Schedule 5 1 0 5% Lev y 6 SEWER PORTION DebtServ ice Schedule 7 WATER PORTION DebtServ ice Schedule 8 STORM WATER PORTION DebtServ ice Schedule 9 GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Issue Sum m ary | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $9,355,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 06/08/2017 | Delivered 06/08/2017 Improvement Portion Equipment Portion Sewer Portion Water Portion Storm Water Portion Issue Summary Sources Of Funds ParA m oun tofBon ds $4,455,0 0 0 .0 0 $275,0 0 0 .0 0 $2,775,0 0 0 .0 0 $1 ,695,0 0 0 .0 0 $1 55,0 0 0 .0 0 $9,355,0 0 0 .0 0 Plan n ed IssuerEquitycon tribution 65,868.54 3,921 .0 7 ---69,789.61 Total Sources $4,520,868.54 $278,921.07 $2,775,000.00 $1,695,000.00 $155,000.00 $9,424,789.61 Uses Of Funds Total Un derw riter'sDiscoun t (1 .0 0 0 % )44,550 .0 0 2,750 .0 0 27,750 .0 0 1 6,950 .0 0 1 ,550 .0 0 93,550 .0 0 CostsofIssuan ce 29,644.45 1 ,829.90 1 8,465.39 1 1 ,278.87 1 ,0 31 .39 62,250 .0 0 DeposittoProjectCon struction Fun d 4,376,790 .0 0 272,50 0 .0 0 2,726,859.0 0 1 ,667,727.0 0 1 54,0 33.0 0 9,1 97,90 9.0 0 DeposittoDebtServ ice 65,868.54 3,921 .0 7 ---69,789.61 Roun din g A m oun t 4,0 1 5.55 (2,0 79.90 )1 ,925.61 (955.87)(1 ,61 4.39)1 ,291 .0 0 Total Uses $4,520,868.54 $278,921.07 $2,775,000.00 $1,695,000.00 $155,000.00 $9,424,789.61 GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Issue Sum m ary | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 1 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $9,355,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 0 6/0 8/20 1 7 ----- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 --1 47,721 .24 1 47,721 .24 1 47,721 .24 0 7/1 5/20 1 8 --1 22,533.75 1 22,533.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 695,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .70 0 %1 22,533.75 81 7,533.75 940 ,0 67.50 0 7/1 5/20 1 9 --1 1 6,626.25 1 1 6,626.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 20 70 5,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .90 0 %1 1 6,626.25 821 ,626.25 938,252.50 0 7/1 5/20 20 --1 0 9,928.75 1 0 9,928.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 21 720 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.1 0 0 %1 0 9,928.75 829,928.75 939,857.50 0 7/1 5/20 21 --1 0 2,368.75 1 0 2,368.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 22 730 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.250 %1 0 2,368.75 832,368.75 934,737.50 0 7/1 5/20 22 --94,1 56.25 94,1 56.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 23 750 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.40 0 %94,1 56.25 844,1 56.25 938,31 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 23 --85,1 56.25 85,1 56.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 24 765,0 0 0 .0 0 2.550 %85,1 56.25 850 ,1 56.25 935,31 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 24 --75,40 2.50 75,40 2.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 25 785,0 0 0 .0 0 2.650 %75,40 2.50 860 ,40 2.50 935,80 5.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 25 --65,0 0 1 .25 65,0 0 1 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 26 80 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.750 %65,0 0 1 .25 865,0 0 1 .25 930 ,0 0 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 26 --54,0 0 1 .25 54,0 0 1 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 27 830 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.90 0 %54,0 0 1 .25 884,0 0 1 .25 938,0 0 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 27 --41 ,966.25 41 ,966.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 28 81 5,0 0 0 .0 0 3.0 50 %41 ,966.25 856,966.25 898,932.50 0 7/1 5/20 28 --29,537.50 29,537.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 29 330 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.1 50 %29,537.50 359,537.50 389,0 75.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 29 --24,340 .0 0 24,340 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 30 340 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.250 %24,340 .0 0 364,340 .0 0 388,680 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 30 --1 8,81 5.0 0 1 8,81 5.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 31 350 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.350 %1 8,81 5.0 0 368,81 5.0 0 387,630 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 31 --1 2,952.50 1 2,952.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 32 365,0 0 0 .0 0 3.450 %1 2,952.50 377,952.50 390 ,90 5.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 32 --6,656.25 6,656.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 33 375,0 0 0 .0 0 3.550 %6,656.25 381 ,656.25 388,31 2.50 Total $9,355,000.00 -$2,066,606.24 $11,421,606.24 - Date And Term Structure Dated 6/0 8/20 1 7 Deliv eryDate 6/0 8/20 1 7 Firstav ailable call date 1 /1 5/20 25 Call Price 1 0 0 .0 0 0 % Yield Statistics Bon d YearDollars $71 ,673.99 A v erage L ife 7.662 Years A v erage Coupon 2.8833421 % NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.0 1 38637% True In terestCost(TIC)3.0 1 0 41 32% A ll In clusiv e Cost(A IC)3.1 1 1 40 1 2% IRS Form 8038 NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.0 1 38637% W eighted A v erage Maturity 7.662 Years Bon d Yield forA rbitrage Purposes 2.860 421 6% GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Issue Sum m ary | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 2 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $4,455,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Im prov em en tPortion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 0 6/0 8/20 1 7 ----- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 --65,868.54 65,868.54 65,868.54 0 7/1 5/20 1 8 --54,637.50 54,637.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 40 5,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .70 0 %54,637.50 459,637.50 51 4,275.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 1 9 --51 ,1 95.0 0 51 ,1 95.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 20 41 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .90 0 %51 ,1 95.0 0 461 ,1 95.0 0 51 2,390 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 20 --47,30 0 .0 0 47,30 0 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 21 420 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.1 0 0 %47,30 0 .0 0 467,30 0 .0 0 51 4,60 0 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 21 --42,890 .0 0 42,890 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 22 425,0 0 0 .0 0 2.250 %42,890 .0 0 467,890 .0 0 51 0 ,780 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 22 --38,1 0 8.75 38,1 0 8.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 23 435,0 0 0 .0 0 2.40 0 %38,1 0 8.75 473,1 0 8.75 51 1 ,21 7.50 0 7/1 5/20 23 --32,888.75 32,888.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 24 445,0 0 0 .0 0 2.550 %32,888.75 477,888.75 51 0 ,777.50 0 7/1 5/20 24 --27,21 5.0 0 27,21 5.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 25 460 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.650 %27,21 5.0 0 487,21 5.0 0 51 4,430 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 25 --21 ,1 20 .0 0 21 ,1 20 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 26 470 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.750 %21 ,1 20 .0 0 491 ,1 20 .0 0 51 2,240 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 26 --1 4,657.50 1 4,657.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 27 485,0 0 0 .0 0 2.90 0 %1 4,657.50 499,657.50 51 4,31 5.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 27 --7,625.0 0 7,625.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 28 50 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.0 50 %7,625.0 0 50 7,625.0 0 51 5,250 .0 0 Total $4,455,000.00 -$741,143.54 $5,196,143.54 - Date And Term Structure Dated 6/0 8/20 1 7 Deliv eryDate 6/0 8/20 1 7 Firstav ailable call date 1 /1 5/20 25 Call Price 1 0 0 .0 0 0 % Yield Statistics Bon d YearDollars $28,0 60 .38 A v erage Life 6.299 Years A v erage Coupon 2.641 2460 % NetIn terestCost(NIC)2.80 0 0 1 0 8% True In terestCost(TIC)2.80 650 62% A ll In clusiv e Cost(A IC)2.9253283% IRS Form 8038 NetIn terestCost(NIC)2.80 0 0 1 0 8% W eighted A v erage Maturity 6.299 Years Bon d Yield forA rbitrage Purposes 2.860 421 6% GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Im prov em en tPortion | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 3 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $4,455,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Im prov em en tPortion 105% Levy Date Total P+I Less: Issuer Contribution 105% Levy Revenue*Net Levy Levy Year Collection Year 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 65,868.54 65,868.54 --- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 51 4,275.0 0 -539,988.75 21 0 ,31 5.33 329,673.42 20 1 7 20 1 8 0 1 /1 5/20 20 51 2,390 .0 0 -538,0 0 9.50 21 0 ,31 5.33 327,694.1 7 20 1 8 20 1 9 0 1 /1 5/20 21 51 4,60 0 .0 0 -540 ,330 .0 0 21 0 ,31 5.33 330 ,0 1 4.67 20 1 9 20 20 0 1 /1 5/20 22 51 0 ,780 .0 0 -536,31 9.0 0 21 0 ,31 5.33 326,0 0 3.67 20 20 20 21 0 1 /1 5/20 23 51 1 ,21 7.50 -536,778.38 21 0 ,31 5.32 326,463.0 6 20 21 20 22 0 1 /1 5/20 24 51 0 ,777.50 -536,31 6.38 21 0 ,31 5.33 326,0 0 1 .0 5 20 22 20 23 0 1 /1 5/20 25 51 4,430 .0 0 -540 ,1 51 .50 21 0 ,31 5.34 329,836.1 6 20 23 20 24 0 1 /1 5/20 26 51 2,240 .0 0 -537,852.0 0 21 0 ,31 5.33 327,536.67 20 24 20 25 0 1 /1 5/20 27 51 4,31 5.0 0 -540 ,0 30 .75 21 0 ,31 5.33 329,71 5.42 20 25 20 26 0 1 /1 5/20 28 51 5,250 .0 0 -541 ,0 1 2.50 21 0 ,31 5.32 330 ,697.1 8 20 26 20 27 Total $5,196,143.54 $65,868.54 $5,386,788.75 $2,103,153.29 $3,283,635.46 GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Im prov em en t Portion | 5/ 8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 4 *Special assessment revenue is based on assessments totaling $1,733,247, assessed at a rate of 3.65% (1% over the average coupon), with equal annual payments. City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $275,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Equipm en tPortion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 0 6/0 8/20 1 7 ----- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 --3,921 .0 7 3,921 .0 7 3,921 .0 7 0 7/1 5/20 1 8 --3,252.50 3,252.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .70 0 %3,252.50 33,252.50 36,50 5.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 1 9 --2,997.50 2,997.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 20 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .90 0 %2,997.50 32,997.50 35,995.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 20 --2,71 2.50 2,71 2.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 21 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.1 0 0 %2,71 2.50 32,71 2.50 35,425.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 21 --2,397.50 2,397.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 22 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.250 %2,397.50 32,397.50 34,795.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 22 --2,0 60 .0 0 2,0 60 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 23 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.40 0 %2,0 60 .0 0 32,0 60 .0 0 34,1 20 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 23 --1 ,70 0 .0 0 1 ,70 0 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 24 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.550 %1 ,70 0 .0 0 31 ,70 0 .0 0 33,40 0 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 24 --1 ,31 7.50 1 ,31 7.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 25 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.650 %1 ,31 7.50 31 ,31 7.50 32,635.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 25 --920 .0 0 920 .0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 26 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.750 %920 .0 0 30 ,920 .0 0 31 ,840 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 26 --50 7.50 50 7.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 27 35,0 0 0 .0 0 2.90 0 %50 7.50 35,50 7.50 36,0 1 5.0 0 Total $275,000.00 -$39,651.07 $314,651.07 - Date And Term Structure Dated 6/0 8/20 1 7 Deliv eryDate 6/0 8/20 1 7 Firstav ailable call date 1 /1 5/20 25 Call Price 1 0 0 .0 0 0 % Yield Statistics Bon d YearDollars $1 ,560 .76 A v erage Life 5.676 Years A v erage Coupon 2.540 491 2% NetIn terestCost(NIC)2.71 66870 % True In terestCost(TIC)2.7246631 % A ll In clusiv e Cost(A IC)2.854951 1 % IRS Form 8038 NetIn terestCost(NIC)2.71 66870 % W eighted A v erage Maturity 5.676 Years Bon d Yield forA rbitrage Purposes 2.860 421 6% GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Equipm en tPortion | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 5 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $275,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Equipm en tPortion 105% Levy Date Total P+I Less: Issuer Contribution Net Levy Levy Year Collection Year 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 3,921 .0 7 3,921 .0 7 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 36,50 5.0 0 -38,330 .25 20 1 7 20 1 8 0 1 /1 5/20 20 35,995.0 0 -37,794.75 20 1 8 20 1 9 0 1 /1 5/20 21 35,425.0 0 -37,1 96.25 20 1 9 20 20 0 1 /1 5/20 22 34,795.0 0 -36,534.75 20 20 20 21 0 1 /1 5/20 23 34,1 20 .0 0 -35,826.0 0 20 21 20 22 0 1 /1 5/20 24 33,40 0 .0 0 -35,0 70 .0 0 20 22 20 23 0 1 /1 5/20 25 32,635.0 0 -34,266.75 20 23 20 24 0 1 /1 5/20 26 31 ,840 .0 0 -33,432.0 0 20 24 20 25 0 1 /1 5/20 27 36,0 1 5.0 0 -37,81 5.75 20 25 20 26 Total $314,651.07 $3,921.07 $326,266.50 GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Equipm en tPortion | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 6 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $2,775,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Sew erPortion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 0 6/0 8/20 1 7 ----- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 --46,783.0 9 46,783.0 9 46,783.0 9 0 7/1 5/20 1 8 --38,80 6.25 38,80 6.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 1 55,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .70 0 %38,80 6.25 1 93,80 6.25 232,61 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 1 9 --37,488.75 37,488.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 20 1 60 ,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .90 0 %37,488.75 1 97,488.75 234,977.50 0 7/1 5/20 20 --35,968.75 35,968.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 21 1 60 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.1 0 0 %35,968.75 1 95,968.75 231 ,937.50 0 7/1 5/20 21 --34,288.75 34,288.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 22 1 65,0 0 0 .0 0 2.250 %34,288.75 1 99,288.75 233,577.50 0 7/1 5/20 22 --32,432.50 32,432.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 23 1 70 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.40 0 %32,432.50 20 2,432.50 234,865.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 23 --30 ,392.50 30 ,392.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 24 1 75,0 0 0 .0 0 2.550 %30 ,392.50 20 5,392.50 235,785.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 24 --28,1 61 .25 28,1 61 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 25 1 75,0 0 0 .0 0 2.650 %28,1 61 .25 20 3,1 61 .25 231 ,322.50 0 7/1 5/20 25 --25,842.50 25,842.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 26 1 80 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.750 %25,842.50 20 5,842.50 231 ,685.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 26 --23,367.50 23,367.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 27 1 85,0 0 0 .0 0 2.90 0 %23,367.50 20 8,367.50 231 ,735.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 27 --20 ,685.0 0 20 ,685.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 28 1 90 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.0 50 %20 ,685.0 0 21 0 ,685.0 0 231 ,370 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 28 --1 7,787.50 1 7,787.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 29 20 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.1 50 %1 7,787.50 21 7,787.50 235,575.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 29 --1 4,637.50 1 4,637.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 30 20 5,0 0 0 .0 0 3.250 %1 4,637.50 21 9,637.50 234,275.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 30 --1 1 ,30 6.25 1 1 ,30 6.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 31 21 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.350 %1 1 ,30 6.25 221 ,30 6.25 232,61 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 31 --7,788.75 7,788.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 32 220 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.450 %7,788.75 227,788.75 235,577.50 0 7/1 5/20 32 --3,993.75 3,993.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 33 225,0 0 0 .0 0 3.550 %3,993.75 228,993.75 232,987.50 Total $2,775,000.00 -$772,678.09 $3,547,678.09 - Date And Term Structure Dated 6/0 8/20 1 7 Deliv eryDate 6/0 8/20 1 7 Firstav ailable call date 1 /1 5/20 25 Call Price 1 0 0 .0 0 0 % Yield Statistics Bon d YearDollars $25,262.71 A v erage L ife 9.1 0 4 Years A v erage Coupon 3.0 58571 9% NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.1 6841 76% True In terestCost(TIC)3.1 650 1 1 1 % A ll In clusiv e Cost(A IC)3.2525252% IRS Form 8038 NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.1 6841 76% W eighted A v erage Maturity 9.1 0 4 Years Bon d Yield forA rbitrage Purposes 2.860 421 6% GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Sew erPortion | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 7 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $1 ,695,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) W aterPortion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 0 6/0 8/20 1 7 ----- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 --28,570 .1 6 28,570 .1 6 28,570 .1 6 0 7/1 5/20 1 8 --23,698.75 23,698.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 95,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .70 0 %23,698.75 1 1 8,698.75 1 42,397.50 0 7/1 5/20 1 9 --22,891 .25 22,891 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 20 95,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .90 0 %22,891 .25 1 1 7,891 .25 1 40 ,782.50 0 7/1 5/20 20 --21 ,988.75 21 ,988.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 21 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.1 0 0 %21 ,988.75 1 21 ,988.75 1 43,977.50 0 7/1 5/20 21 --20 ,938.75 20 ,938.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 22 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.250 %20 ,938.75 1 20 ,938.75 1 41 ,877.50 0 7/1 5/20 22 --1 9,81 3.75 1 9,81 3.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 23 1 0 5,0 0 0 .0 0 2.40 0 %1 9,81 3.75 1 24,81 3.75 1 44,627.50 0 7/1 5/20 23 --1 8,553.75 1 8,553.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 24 1 0 5,0 0 0 .0 0 2.550 %1 8,553.75 1 23,553.75 1 42,1 0 7.50 0 7/1 5/20 24 --1 7,21 5.0 0 1 7,21 5.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 25 1 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.650 %1 7,21 5.0 0 1 27,21 5.0 0 1 44,430 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 25 --1 5,757.50 1 5,757.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 26 1 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.750 %1 5,757.50 1 25,757.50 1 41 ,51 5.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 26 --1 4,245.0 0 1 4,245.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 27 1 1 5,0 0 0 .0 0 2.90 0 %1 4,245.0 0 1 29,245.0 0 1 43,490 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 27 --1 2,577.50 1 2,577.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 28 1 1 5,0 0 0 .0 0 3.0 50 %1 2,577.50 1 27,577.50 1 40 ,1 55.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 28 --1 0 ,823.75 1 0 ,823.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 29 1 20 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.1 50 %1 0 ,823.75 1 30 ,823.75 1 41 ,647.50 0 7/1 5/20 29 --8,933.75 8,933.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 30 1 25,0 0 0 .0 0 3.250 %8,933.75 1 33,933.75 1 42,867.50 0 7/1 5/20 30 --6,90 2.50 6,90 2.50 - 0 1 /1 5/20 31 1 30 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.350 %6,90 2.50 1 36,90 2.50 1 43,80 5.0 0 0 7/1 5/20 31 --4,725.0 0 4,725.0 0 - 0 1 /1 5/20 32 1 35,0 0 0 .0 0 3.450 %4,725.0 0 1 39,725.0 0 1 44,450 .0 0 0 7/1 5/20 32 --2,396.25 2,396.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 33 1 35,0 0 0 .0 0 3.550 %2,396.25 1 37,396.25 1 39,792.50 Total $1,695,000.00 -$471,492.66 $2,166,492.66 - Date And Term Structure Dated 6/0 8/20 1 7 Deliv eryDate 6/0 8/20 1 7 Firstav ailable call date 1 /1 5/20 25 Call Price 1 0 0 .0 0 0 % Yield Statistics Bon d YearDollars $1 5,421 .71 A v erage L ife 9.0 98 Years A v erage Coupon 3.0 57330 9% NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.1 67240 9% True In terestCost(TIC)3.1 63860 5% A ll In clusiv e Cost(A IC)3.251 40 75% IRS Form 8038 NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.1 67240 9% W eighted A v erage Maturity 9.0 98 Years Bon d Yield forA rbitrage Purposes 2.860 421 6% GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | W aterPortion | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 8 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $1 55,0 0 0 .0 0 Gen eral Obligation Bon ds,Series20 1 7A BQ A a2 Ratesasof3/1 4/1 7 plus0 .50 % (CityBon d Ratin g Upgraded toA a1 on May4,20 1 7) Storm W aterPortion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 0 6/0 8/20 1 7 ----- 0 1 /1 5/20 1 8 --2,578.38 2,578.38 2,578.38 0 7/1 5/20 1 8 --2,1 38.75 2,1 38.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 1 9 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .70 0 %2,1 38.75 1 2,1 38.75 1 4,277.50 0 7/1 5/20 1 9 --2,0 53.75 2,0 53.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 20 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 1 .90 0 %2,0 53.75 1 2,0 53.75 1 4,1 0 7.50 0 7/1 5/20 20 --1 ,958.75 1 ,958.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 21 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.1 0 0 %1 ,958.75 1 1 ,958.75 1 3,91 7.50 0 7/1 5/20 21 --1 ,853.75 1 ,853.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 22 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.250 %1 ,853.75 1 1 ,853.75 1 3,70 7.50 0 7/1 5/20 22 --1 ,741 .25 1 ,741 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 23 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.40 0 %1 ,741 .25 1 1 ,741 .25 1 3,482.50 0 7/1 5/20 23 --1 ,621 .25 1 ,621 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 24 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.550 %1 ,621 .25 1 1 ,621 .25 1 3,242.50 0 7/1 5/20 24 --1 ,493.75 1 ,493.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 25 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.650 %1 ,493.75 1 1 ,493.75 1 2,987.50 0 7/1 5/20 25 --1 ,361 .25 1 ,361 .25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 26 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.750 %1 ,361 .25 1 1 ,361 .25 1 2,722.50 0 7/1 5/20 26 --1 ,223.75 1 ,223.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 27 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 2.90 0 %1 ,223.75 1 1 ,223.75 1 2,447.50 0 7/1 5/20 27 --1 ,0 78.75 1 ,0 78.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 28 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.0 50 %1 ,0 78.75 1 1 ,0 78.75 1 2,1 57.50 0 7/1 5/20 28 --926.25 926.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 29 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.1 50 %926.25 1 0 ,926.25 1 1 ,852.50 0 7/1 5/20 29 --768.75 768.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 30 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.250 %768.75 1 0 ,768.75 1 1 ,537.50 0 7/1 5/20 30 --60 6.25 60 6.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 31 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.350 %60 6.25 1 0 ,60 6.25 1 1 ,21 2.50 0 7/1 5/20 31 --438.75 438.75 - 0 1 /1 5/20 32 1 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 3.450 %438.75 1 0 ,438.75 1 0 ,877.50 0 7/1 5/20 32 --266.25 266.25 - 0 1 /1 5/20 33 1 5,0 0 0 .0 0 3.550 %266.25 1 5,266.25 1 5,532.50 Total $155,000.00 -$41,640.88 $196,640.88 - Date And Term Structure Dated 6/0 8/20 1 7 Deliv eryDate 6/0 8/20 1 7 Firstav ailable call date 1 /1 5/20 25 Call Price 1 0 0 .0 0 0 % Yield Statistics Bon d YearDollars $1 ,368.43 A v erage L ife 8.829 Years A v erage Coupon 3.0 429663% NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.1 562347% True In terestCost(TIC)3.1 51 0 826% A ll In clusiv e Cost(A IC)3.241 0 524% IRS Form 8038 NetIn terestCost(NIC)3.1 562347% W eighted A v erage Maturity 8.829 Years Bon d Yield forA rbitrage Purposes 2.860 421 6% GOBon ds20 1 7A BQ | Storm W aterPortion | 5/8/20 1 7 | 9:51 A M Northland Securities, Inc. Public Fin an ce Page 9 STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 16 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: RESOLUTION REGARDING LIBRARY SERVICES IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO BACKGROUND: On January 3, 2017, the City Council approved a motion 5-0 to direct the city administrator to resume negotiations with County staff regard returning to the County library system. Since that time, I have met with County staff multiple times and have attended three library board meetings. A resolution that had been worked out by staff was presented to the Library Board in April. The library board had some questions and asked for some changes. A revised resolution was then presented at a special library board meeting on May 3rd. The library board made four amendments to that resolution: M. dollar amount was changed from $200,000 to $100,000 J. Sentence added that reads “Volunteers will be given meaningful volunteer involvement in the Lake Elmo branch library” G. Add a sentence that reads “If the county closes the Lake Elmo branch library, the City will receive the land, building, and contents back by quit claim deed” C. Sentence changed to read …a minimum of 40 hours per week including some weeknight and weekend hours for a four year period… (bolded words were added) Following the meeting, I shared the amended resolution with the County staff. County staff responded that they could not support the changes. The county offered the following comments and suggested changes: Instead of adding language stating "including some weeknight and weekend hours" I think we should note that operational decisions will remain with the county and we will treat Lake Elmo’s hours in a fashion similar to the Oakdale, Mahtomedi and Valley branches. The language, "if the county closes the Lake Elmo Branch Library, the city receives the building, land and contents by quit claim deed", is not something that staff could recommend. We are excited by the possibility of incorporating the Lake Elmo Library in Washington County Library, however we cannot agree to the proposed language. While it is challenging to consider the potential operationalization of this concept years down the line, it seems more appropriate to state that the contents of the library, (identified as those items in existence at the time Lake Elmo Library rejoins Washington County Library), would be returned to Lake Elmo should Washington County Library decide no longer operate the Lake Elmo Library. I cannot recommend language that would turn over future County investments in the Lake Elmo Library. This practice would not be consistent with the practices in place when other city libraries have joined Washington County Library. The language, "volunteers will be given meaningful volunteer involvement in the library" is open to interpretation. Instead of debating the definition of "meaningful", I would suggest that volunteers at the Lake Elmo Library will engage in activities similar to those occurring at other Washington County Libraries. Instead of trying to list all opportunities, I would direct you back to our volunteer handbook and note that volunteers cannot be used to displace employee work and volunteers will not have access to private patron data. Volunteers will have many opportunities to engage in work that supports our mission and our strategic plan. As a note, on Sunday, April 30 over 150 Washington County Library volunteers were invited to a recognition luncheon at the Oakdale Library. This event celebrated the work of the many volunteers at all Washington County Libraries. As we discussed on the phone yesterday, I am concerned with the change in the amount of funds that will flow to Washington County to support the transition and implementation. The targeted number moved from $200,000 to $150,000 and now it is at $100,000. With a number of items necessary to make the transition and begin to address facility concerns, the reduction in funds will impact our ability to provide the best possible transition. Additionally, while I recognize that the Lake Elmo Library Board has the authority to expend funds until the official date of transition, I am concerned that some of the potential plans to expend existing funds may not align with and support the transition. In addition, a separate agreement addressing insurance and liability issues would be needed with respect to the use of the community room. This information was shared with the library board ahead of their May 3rd meeting and discussed by the Board later that night. The Board decided to stay with their previously amended resolution and further passed a motion that if I go back to the Washington Co representatives that Tom DeGree should be involved. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: How should the Council proceed with respect to rejoining the County library system? PROPOSAL DETAILS: Included in your packet is a copy of the resolution passed by the Library Board at their May 3rd meeting. If the Council would like to advance that position, they could approve the library agreement drafted consistent with this proposal. County staff has told us they will not support some of the items in this agreement (see notes above). At each meeting of the library board I attended, I told them we would get Council approval in May and then send the agreement to Washington County so they could have ample time to get through their legislative process well before the July 1 deadline for deciding about the library levy. Initially I wanted to allow the Council two meetings to discuss but agreed to wait until the Council’s second meeting so the library could have time to conduct their survey. Since the library board was not willing to agree to the terms presented to them on May 11th, the other option the council may pursue to get Lake Elmo back into the County library system is to direct staff to provide notice of the city’s intention to return the levy for taxes payable 2018. Furthermore, it is my recommendation to cease offering city library services in Lake Elmo immediately. Lake Elmo residents will be able to continue to use their Washington County library cards to access services. Resolution No 2017-049 reflects this. The Library Board will be holding a special meeting on Monday, May 15th. An update on that meeting will be provided at the Council meeting. OPTIONS: 1) Approve the Library Agreement consistent with the May 3rd Library Board Resolution 2017-01 2) Approve Resolution 2017-049 3) Direct staff to continue negotiations 4) Take no action to make any changes 5) Another action consistent with action taken at the May 15th Special Library Board meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Resolution 2017-049 • Motion may change depending on Special LIBRARY Board meeting May 15th ATTACHMENTS: • Library Board Resolution No 2017-01: RESOLUTION REGARDING LIBRARY SERVICES IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO • Library Agreement (per May 3 Library Board resolution) • Resolution No 2017-049 497202v3 SJS LA515-5 LAKE ELMO LIBRARY BOARD WASHINGTON COUNTY MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 01 A RESOLUTION REGARDING LIBRARY SERVICES IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO WHEREAS, on January 1, 2012, the Lake Elmo City Council established public library service for the City’s residents, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07; and WHEREAS, upon this establishment, the Library Board was appointed by the City Council which established the Lake Elmo Public Library; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07, the City levies an annual tax on its taxable property for public library service for the library fund that funds the Lake Elmo Public Library; and WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City that public library service in the City will be expanded if the Lake Elmo Public Library becomes a branch of the Washington County Library System (the “County”); and WHEREAS, the County’s library system is a member of a “regional public library system” as defined by Minnesota Statutes Section 134.001, subdivision 4; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.20, subdivision 3, a city which is excluded from the county tax supporting the county’s regional public library system under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 134.20, subdivision 3, may, upon recommendation of its library board and upon action by its city council, be included in the county tax and become an integral part of the county’s regional public library system; and WHEREAS, the Library Board is recommending that the City be included in the County tax and become an integral part of the County’s library system; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Library Board of the City of Lake Elmo as follows: 1. The Library Board hereby recommends to the City Council that the City be included in the County tax and become an integral part of the County’s library system, provided that the City and the County agree to the following terms: a. That effective January 1, 2018, the City will be included in the County library tax and the City will no longer collect the library levy from City property owners. The County will then be responsible for setting and collecting the library levy for City property owners. LIBRARY AGREEMENT This Library Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into this ______ day of ________________, 2017 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”) and the County of Washington, a Minnesota political subdivision (the “County”). RECITALS WHEREAS, on January 1, 2012, the Lake Elmo City Council established public library service for the City’s residents, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07; and WHEREAS, upon this establishment, the Library Board was appointed by the City Council which established the Lake Elmo Public Library; and WHEREAS, the City levies an annual tax on its taxable property for public library service for the library fund that funds the Lake Elmo Public Library; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07, it has been determined by the City that public library service in the City will be expanded if the Lake Elmo Public Library becomes a branch of the Washington County Library System; and WHEREAS, the County’s library system is a member of a “regional public library system” as defined by Minnesota Statutes Section 134.001, subdivision 4; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.20, subdivision 3, a city which is excluded from the county tax supporting the county’s regional public library system under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 134.20, subdivision 3, may, upon recommendation of its library board and upon action by its city council, be included in the county tax and become an integral part of the county’s regional public library system; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on May 3, 2017, the City’s Library Board made a recommendation that the City not tax for library services and allow the County to tax City residents for library services and for the City become an integral part of the County’s library system; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on ___________, 2017, the City Council took such action whereby City residents would be subject to the County library tax and the City would rejoin the County’s library system, provided that the City and the County enter into this Agreement regarding the City’s library property and the library services that will be provided to the City by the County; and NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties as follows: Article 1 – Library Services A. Effective January 1, 2018, the City shall be included in the County tax and become an integral part of the County’s library system. B. On January 1, 2018, the County will begin operation in the City with the Lake Elmo Public Library located at: 3537 Lake Elmo Avenue North, Suite 130, Lake Elmo reverting to a County branch library. C. The City agrees that it will not initiate or complete a withdrawal from the County library system prior to January 1, 2022. D. The County must ensure that its Lake Elmo library branch is open to the public a minimum of 40 hours per week for a four year period starting on January 1, 2018. The County agrees that there will be some weeknight and weekend hours during this time period. After the four year period has ended, the County may at its sole discretion, determine the hours of operation of this branch. Furthermore, if the hours at either the Wildwood or Oakdale County branch libraries are reduced by the County due to an economic downturn or loss of state aid during the four year period, the County may reduce the Lake Elmo library branch hours proportionally. E. The County shall install a self-check-out system in the Lake Elmo branch library. F. The County agrees that upon the City becoming part of the County’s library system, the County will hire all current Lake Elmo Public Library staff. Once hired, the staff will become County employees and subject to the County’s rules and regulations and collective bargaining agreement for County library employees. G. That the County will welcome volunteers in accordance with the Washington County Library Volunteer Handbook. The County agrees that it will involve the Lake Elmo Public Library volunteers by providing them with meaningful volunteer opportunities at the Lake Elmo library branch. H. The County agrees that the Lake Elmo Public Library will not be required to pay for County library cards effective July 1, 2017. I. The County will seek access to MELSA resources for Lake Elmo residents no later than August 1, 2017. Article 2 – Library Funds A. Effective on January 1, 2018, the City will no longer levy for library services pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07. City residents will instead be assessed the County library levy. B. During the period of January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2021, the City agrees that it shall not impose a library tax pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07. The County may enforce this provision through injunctive relief. C. The City will convey $100,000 of its library funds to the County on January 1, 2018. The County must use the funds conveyed by the City exclusively for the Lake Elmo branch library. Any City library funds in excess of $100,000 will be retained by the City and used in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 134.20, subdivision 3, to increase or improve public library services within the City. Article 3 – Library Building, Property, and Personal Property A. On January 1, 2018, the City shall convey in fee simple absolute by quit claim deed the property in which the Lake Elmo Public Library is located, known as 3537 Lake Elmo Avenue, Lake Elmo, Minnesota and the property in which the parking lot for the Lake Elmo Public Library is located to the County at no cost to the County by quit claim deed (the “Library Property”). The Library Property is legally described on the attached Exhibit A. 1. The City’s conveyance shall include the library building and all fixtures and personal property that are located on the Library Property, including, but not limited to, furniture, books and other library materials. 2. The County shall be responsible for the cost of any title searches or title insurance for the Library Property; the payment of the state deed tax and the cost of the recording fees for the quit claim deed and the recording of this Agreement. The County shall be responsible for recording the quit claim deed and this Agreement. 3. The County agrees to accept the Library Property “AS IS.” The conveyance of the Library Property is being made without representation of any warranties, express, or implied, either oral or written, made by the City or any official, employee, or agent of the City with respect to the physical condition of the Library Property, including, but not limited to, the existence or absence of petroleum, hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants in, on, or under, or affecting the Library Property. B. The City hereby agrees to waive any building permit fees, plumbing and electrical inspection fees, and any other fees or charges normally imposed by the City with respect to any improvements made by the County to the Library Property throughout the term of this Agreement. C. The City hereby agrees to pave the Library Property’s parking lot at its cost, which will be completed no later than December 31, 2017. The City hereby agrees to provide at no cost to the County, snowplowing of the Library Property’s parking lot during the term of this Agreement. The County will be responsible for any other maintenance required with respect to the Library Property, including, but not limited to, the building and the parking lot. The County shall allow the City to use the parking lot for public parking purposes during the term of this Agreement. The parties shall enter into a separate agreement regarding the City’s snowplowing obligations and the City’s use of the parking lot. D. Throughout the term of this Agreement, the County shall allow the City to use the community room space in the library building on the Library Property for use by community groups free of charge so long as it does not interfere with the County’s library programs and is consistent with the Washington County Library Board policies on use of meeting rooms. The County and the City shall enter into a separate agreement governing the City’s use of the community room space. E. The City agrees that it will consider the Library Property as part of its municipal facilities space needs study. Article 4 – Termination of the Operation of the Public Library A. Throughout the term of this Agreement, the Library Property must be used by the County for the operation of a public library. “Operation of a public library” shall include the use of the Library Property by the County for County library administrative offices, storage of County library supplies and vehicles, and any other use by the County that relates to the providing of library services to the public. B. In the event the County desires to use all or a portion of the Library Property for County governmental purposes other than operating a public library as described above, it is understood and agreed that the County shall be required to apply for and receive the express approval of the Lake Elmo City Council for such alternate proposed County governmental use. In the event the City Council refuses to grant approval to the County for the use of the Library Property for purposes other than operating a public library the County shall reconvey the Library Property including the library building, the parking lot, and all fixtures and personal property that are located on the Library Property, including, but not limited to, furniture, books and other library materials to the City. Article 5 – City Withdrawal from County Library System A. In the eventthat the City determines that it wishes to withdraw from the County library system, the County agrees to reconvey the Library Property including the building and parking lot to the City by quit claim deed. The reconveyance shall not include fixtures and personal property that are located on the Library Property, including, but not limited to, furniture, books, and other library materials. In addition, if the withdrawal occurs prior to January 1, 2028, the City agrees to pay the County an amount equal to the capital improvements made by the County to the building on the Library Property from January 1, 2018 to the date of the reconveyance. Article 6 – General Provisions A. This Agreement shall terminate upon the County’s reconveyance of the Library Property to the City pursuant to either Article or Article 5 of this Agreement. B. The County shall not assign its rights under this Agreement without the written consent of the City. C. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the City and the County and there are no other agreements, either oral or written, between the parties. No subsequent alteration, amendment, change, or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the City or the County unless reduced to writing and executed in the same form and manner in which this Agreement is executed. D. Data exchanged between the parties under this Agreement shall be administered in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 and all data on individuals shall be maintained in accordance with statutory guidelines. E. The provisions of this Agreement are expressly severable, and the unenforceability of any provision or provisions hereof shall not affect or impair the enforceability of any other provision or provisions. F. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. G. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. H. The covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement shall bind the parties’ successors and assigns and shall run with the Library Property. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Library Property in the property records of Washington County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on or as of the date first above written. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: ____________________________________ Mike Pearson Its: Mayor By: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson Its: City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ________________, 2017 by Mike Pearson and Julie Johnson, the Mayor and the City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the City. ____________________________________ Notary Public WASHINGTON COUNTY By: ______________________________ Its: ______________________________ By: ______________________________ Its: _______________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of ___________________, 2017, by ________________ and ___________________, the _____________ and _____________________, respectively of the County of Washington, a Minnesota political subdivision, on behalf of the County. ____________________________________ Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (SJS) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 337-9300 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Library Property Lots 10, 11, 12 and 13, Block 3, Cloverdale, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota AND All that part of Lot 31 of County Auditor’s Plat No. 8 on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota. 497202v3 SJS LA515-5 b. That effective January 1, 2018, the County will operate the City’s library located at 3537 Lake Elmo Avenue North, Suite 130, Lake Elmo, Minnesota as a County branch library. c. That the Lake Elmo Public Library will be open to the public a minimum of 40 hours per week including some weeknight and weekend hours for a four year period starting on January 1, 2018. The City agrees that it will not initiate or complete a withdrawal from the County library system prior to January 1, 2021. d. If the hours at either the Wildwood or Oakdale branch library are reduced by the County due to an economic downturn or loss of state aid, the County may reduce the Lake Elmo branch library hours proportionally. e. That the County will install a self-check out system in the Lake Elmo Public Library. f. That the County will hire all current Lake Elmo Public Library staff. g. That the City will convey the property in which the Lake Elmo Public library is located and the property in which the parking lot for the Lake Elmo Public Library is located to the County at no cost along with all associated personal property. The library property must be used by the County for the operation of a public library. Lake Elmo City Council approval would be required for a change in the use of the property by the County. If the county closes the Lake Elmo branch library, the City will receive the land, building, and contents back by quitclaim deed. h. In the event the City withdraws from the County Library System, the County agrees to convey the building and property, which the parking lot for the library is located to the city at no cost by quitclaim deed. The conveyance will not include fixtures and personal property. In addition, if the withdrawal occurs prior to January 1, 2028, the city agrees to pay the county an amount equal to the capital improvements made by the county to the building from January 1, 2018 to the date of conveyance. Capital improvements funded from the funds conveyed in m. below will not be reimbursed by the City. i. That the County will allow the City to use the community room space in the Lake Elmo Public Library building for use by community groups free of charge so long as it does not interfere with the County’s library programs and is consistent with the Washington County Library Board policies on use of meeting rooms. j. That the County will welcome volunteers in accordance with the Washington County Library Volunteer Handbook. Volunteers will be given meaningful volunteer involvement in the Lake Elmo branch library 497202v3 SJS LA515-5 k. That County library staff will engage with the Friends of Lake Elmo Library by periodically attending their meetings and coordinating on activities where appropriate. l. The City will pay for the paving of the parking lot. The parking lot must remain a public parking area to be used by the community. The City will be responsible for snow plowing the parking lot. All other maintenance obligations with respect to the parking lot and library property will be the responsibility of the County. m. That the City will convey $100,000 of its library funds to the County on January 1, 2018. The County must use the funds conveyed by the City exclusively for the Lake Elmo Public Library. Any City library funds in excess of $100,000 will be retained by the City and used in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 134.20, subdivision 3 to increase or improve public library services within the City. n. That the Lake Elmo Library will no longer have to pay for Washington County library cards effective July 1, 2017. o. That the County will seek access to MELSA resources for Lake Elmo residents by August 1, 2017. p. That the City will consider library space as part of its municipal facilities space needs study. Passed and duly adopted this _______ day of ________, 2017, by the Library Board of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Secretary 499591v2 SJS LA515-5 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 049 A RESOLUTION DISCONTINUING LIBRARY SERVICES IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO WHEREAS, on January 1, 2012, the Lake Elmo City Council (the “City Council”) established public library service for the City’s residents, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo (the “City”) is a statutory city; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07 provides that in any statutory city, the governing body may levy an annual tax on all taxable property in the City for public library service; and WHEREAS, the City currently levies an annual tax on its taxable property for public library service for the library fund that funds the Lake Elmo Public Library; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.221, a statutory city council is authorized to provide for the general welfare of the public and has the power to provide for the government and good order of the city; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is no longer in the best interest of the public for the City to provide public library services to the City’s residents because Washington County can better provide these services to the public; and WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority to discontinue public library services; and WHEREAS, the City Council also has the authority under Minnesota Statutes Section 134.07 to determine whether to levy an annual tax to fund library services in the City; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo as follows: 1. Effective, _____, public library services in the City of Lake Elmo are hereby discontinued and the City shall cease providing those services on that date. 2. The City Council will no longer levy an annual tax on all taxable property in the City for public library services. 3. The City Administrator is hereby authorized to take any measures as are necessary to effectuate the discontinuance of library services in the City of Lake Elmo. 499591v2 SJS LA515-5 Passed and duly adopted this _____ day of _____, 2017, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE: 5/16/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 17 TO: City Council FROM: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Rezoning/PUD Amendment – Wildflower at Lake Elmo REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Emily Becker, City Planner Mike Bent, Building Official Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney BACKGROUND: Robert Engstrom Companies is requesting approval of an amendment to the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement and Plans. When Wildflower at Lake Elmo was approved, the PUD Plans and an associated PUD Agreement were approved that set forth specific site design elements and established specific setbacks, impervious coverages and other zoning specifics associated with the development. Once approved, the plans and agreement determine how the site will develop. Since approval, Engstrom Companies has been seeking additional PUD flexibilities as builders and residential buyers have made proposals that do not meet the strict enforcement of the PUD plan and Agreement that were not foreseen when the PUD plans and PUD Agreement were approved. PUD Amendments are processed as zoning amendments according to Lake Elmo Code Section 154.757 requiring a public hearing. The PUD and Agreement was originally codified in Resolution 2015-24, approved by the City Council on April 14, 2015. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The issue before Council is whether to approve or deny the multiple PUD Amendments requested by Engstrom Companies for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Robert Engstrom Companies made application for a number of amendments to the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Plans and Agreement. At the Planning Commission, the developer decided to withdraw a number of his requests to those that he feels are essential. The original request included: 1. Reduce the rear yard setbacks on some corner courtyard lots from 20 ft. to 10 ft. 2. Reduce the side yard setbacks on some corner lots from 20 ft. to 10 ft. 3. Allow front doors to face the corner sideyard. City Council Meeting May 16, 2017 5/8/17 Page 2 4. To allow the reorientation of certain courtyard lots to allow driveway access locations to be more flexible 5. To reduce the side yard setbacks for Conservancy and Ridge Lots from 15 ft./10 ft. to 10 ft./5 ft. 6. Increase the courtyard lots allowed impervious surface coverage from 50% to 56%. At the Planning Commission a number of items were withdrawn and the request was reduced to the following: 1. Reduce the rear yard setback on Lot 18, Block 3 Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition from 20 ft. to 10 ft. 2. Reduce the side yard corner setbacks on Lots 1 and 8 Block 13 of the Preliminary Plat from 15ft. to 10 ft. 3. To allow the reorientation Lots 12 and 13, Block 3 Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition to allow driveway access from Sunflower Lane rather than the courtyard. 4. Increase the courtyard lots allowed impervious surface coverage from 50% to 56%. 1. Reduce Rear Yard Setback on Lot 18, Block 3 Wildflower at Lake Elmo. The rear yard setbacks for the courtyard lots were codified in the PUD Agreement. It was established that the rear yard setbacks would be 20’ for all courtyard lots. The developer is seeking to reduce the rear yard setback for 18, Block 3 from 20 feet down to 10 feet to accommodate a specific client and home plan. The Lots 17 and 18 are 5 ft. shorter than similar lots in the development. By doing so, the developer will be essentially eliminating the small rear yard area on this lot, bringing the garage up to the 10 foot drainage and utility easement. The change will also lessen the distance between the garages on 18 and the home being constructed on Lot 16. The distance between the two structures will be reduced from 28’-7” to 18’-7” if the setback is reduced. Approved PUD Plan City Council Meeting May 16, 2017 5/8/17 Page 3 [Grab your reader’s attention with a great quote from the document or use this space to emphasize a key point. To place this text box anywhere on the page, just drag it.] 2. Reduce Corner Side Yard Setbacks for Preliminary Plat Lots 1 and 8 Block 13. The developer is requesting that the corner side yard setbacks be reduced from 15 ft. to 10 ft. to provide more flexibility in home design and layout. Preliminary Plat Area in RED represents Side Yard Setback 3. To allow the reorientation Lots 12 and 13, Block 3 Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition to allow driveway access from Sunflower Lane rather than the courtyard. The developer is requesting flexibility to allow re-orientation Lots 12 and 13, Block 3 Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition to take driveway access from Sunflower Lane rather than from the courtyard as originally planned. The proposal is a deviation from the concept plan of having garage doors and driveways accessed from the rear and front entrances and sidewalks facing the perimeter streets. Another issue to consider is the curbing in the Sunflower Lane cul-de-sac is a B6-12 curb type, City Council Meeting May 16, 2017 5/8/17 Page 4 and is not surmountable. The existing curbing in the cul-de-sac would need to be replaced with a surmountable curb to accommodate a driveway and would need to be replaced prior to the installation of the final lift of asphalt. There may also be public utility or joint trench conflicts associated with this change that would need to be evaluated if allowed. If the Council approves this change, Staff recommends that a condition be added that prior to approval such that the individual building permits for each lot will need to be reviewed by the City Engineer for potential conflicts before the driveway will be allowed by the City. Approved PUD Plans 4. Maximum Impervious Coverage. The developer is seeking a change to the allowed maximum impervious coverage for the courtyard lots. The PUD Agreement did not address the allowed maximum impervious coverage per lot, so therefore the base zoning district standards apply (MDR). The MDR Zoning District allows a maximum impervious coverage of 50% per lot. The developer is seeking an increase to 56% to allow for some of the changes previously discussed. Any such change would need to be subject to Valley Branch Watershed District approval. The original stormwater management stormwater model was based on impervious surface assumptions. These will need to be reviewed by the VBWD against the changes being proposed. PUD Flexibility. The PUD process is a give and take process where the City grants flexibility in exchange for higher quality development meeting the objectives identified in City Code Section 154.751. In the case of Wildflower at Lake Elmo, the City allowed smaller streets, lesser setbacks, and tighter arrangement of homes surrounding the courtyards in exchange for a larger preserved open space, trail networks, architecture standards, public art and a variety of lot sizes among other things to justify the PUD flexibility. These features and amenities were codified with the approval of the PUD Plans and PUD Agreement. Now the developer is seeking to amend the PUD, and seeking additional deviations from City zoning, particularly the MDR setbacks and maximum impervious surface coverages with no obvious additional benefit to the City. Generally, a PUD allows greater “flexibility” in return for concessions or enhancements from the developer. In this case, it is staff’s opinion that additional flexibility is being requested by the developer without any additional benefits to the City. Quite a few of the concessions the developer is requesting benefit the developer and could arguably negatively impact the City or the public. City Council Meeting May 16, 2017 5/8/17 Page 5 FISCAL IMPACT: None. OPTIONS: The Council has the following options: 1. Adopt Resolution 2017-__ denying the PUD Amendments 2. Adopt Resolution 2017-__ approving the reduction in the rear yard setback for Lots 17 and 18, Block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition from 20 ft. to 15 ft. and to allow Lots 12 and 13, block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition to have driveway access from Sunflower Lane N and denying the request to reduce the side yard corner lot setbacks on preliminary plat lots 1 and 8, Block 13 from 15ft. to 10ft. 3. Amend Resolution 2017-__ providing findings for approval or denial for PUD Amendment requests. PUBLIC HEARING/PLANNING COMMISSION: A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on 5/8/2017. At the public hearing only one resident spoke and his question was about the ownership of the courtyard open spaces. It was clarified that these were HOA amenities. The Planning Commission had a long discussion about the proposal and expressed reluctance to granting the many requests. Rolf Larson felt the Commission should consider all the benefits of the development when considering each request and respect the need for artistic freedom. Commissioner Fields was concerned about creating a precedent that PUDs can be negotiated endlessly. The developer subsequently withdrew a number of the requests from consideration to simplify the request to only focus on those items they feel they need the most flexibility as listed above, items 1-4. The Commission discussed each of the items individually as follows: Comments Item #1. Dorschner did not agree with the reduced rear yard setback. The developer knew the lot size and planned a home too large for the site. Dodsen felt the setback requests were inappropriate and the need for the setbacks should have been anticipated and planned for up front. Fields was concerned for the adjacent lot owner who is building a home with the expectation of a 20’ rear yard setback. Comments Item #2. The Commission was opposed to the request. Comments Item #3. Commissioners Dodsen and Dorschner felt the driveway requests were reasonable. Commissioner Dodsen proposed the following finding related to item #3 the Commission finds the preliminary plat design for lots 12 and 13 are problematic in the courtyard and are too close together. Comments Item #4. Commissioner Dorschner was opposed to the increase in impervious coverage limits and felt the courtyard lots were already condensed and that stormwater would not recharge. The lot size was an issue discussed during the platting of the development. Commissioner Lunquist noted that there was flooding near Bergmans in the Fall and Spring. City Council Meeting May 16, 2017 5/8/17 Page 6 Commissioner Dodsen was opposed to the increase impervious coverage. Hartley reminded the Commission that it is probable that if the coverage limit is increased, residents will use all of it. Findings in support of Item #1: • Lots 17 and 18, Block 3 of Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition are shorter, east to west, than other similar corner lots in phase 4. Findings in support of Item #3: • The preliminary plat design for lots 12 and 13 are problematic in the courtyard and are too close together. • The driveway changes are minimal in number and do not represent a change the PUD Concept. Planning Commission motions: • To allow lots 12 and 13, Block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition PUD to allow driveways with access to Sunflower Lane subject to the 4 conditions of approval. (passed 7-0) • To reduce the rear yards setback from 20 ft. to 15’ for Lots 17 and 18, Block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition, subject to the 4 conditions of approval. (passed 4-3) • To increase in impervious coverage from 50 to 55% subject to the 4 conditions of approval. (motion failed) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the PUD Amendment for Wildflower at Lake Elmo Planned Unit Development because the requested changes are not consistent with the concept plan and do not meet any of the PUD objectives. Furthermore, the flexibility requested by the developer does not show any additional benefits to the City which is required for a PUD. Therefore, staff recommends the following motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-__ denying the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Planned Unit Development PUD Amendment with the based on the findings in the Staff report.” The Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Resolution 2017 - __ approving of the a reduction in the rear yard setback for Lots 17 and 18, Block 3 Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition from 20 ft. to 15 ft. and to allow Lots 12 and 13, block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition to have driveway access from Sunflower Lane N. subject to the 4 conditions of approval and based on the established findings approval with the following motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-__ approving the reduction in the rear yard setback for Lots 17 and 18, Block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition from 20 ft. to 15 ft. and to allow Lots 12 and 13, block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition to have driveway access from Sunflower Lane N and denying the request to allow an increase in impervious coverage for courtyard lots from 50% to 56% and reduce the side yard corner lot setbacks on preliminary plat lots 1 and 8, Block 13 from 15ft. to 10ft, based on the findings for denial.” ATTACHMENTS: • Planning Commission packet, dated 5/8/2017 • Option 1 - Resolution 2017-048 denial City Council Meeting May 16, 2017 5/8/17 Page 7 • Option 2 - Resolution 2017-048 approval and denial 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 STAFF REPORT DATE: 5/8/16 AGENDA ITEM: 4B – PUBLIC HEAR ITEM CASE # 2017-19 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Rezoning/PUD Amendment – Wildflower at Lake Elmo REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Emily Becker, City Planner Mike Bent, Building Official Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Robert Engstrom Companies is requesting approval of an amendment to the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Agreement. PUD Amendments are processed as zoning amendments according to Lake Elmo Code Section 154.757 requiring a public hearing. The PUD Agreement was originally codified in Resolution 2015-24, approved by the City Council on April 14, 2015. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Robert Engstrom Companies; 4801 West 81st Street, #101, Bloomington, MN Property Owners: Robert Engstrom Companies; 4801 West 81st Street, #101, Bloomington, MN Location: Part of Sections 12 and 13, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elmo, north of 39th Street, west of Lake Elmo Avenue, and south of the northern Village Planning Area boundary line. Request: Application for a PUD Agreement Amendment Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant outlots and MDR/PUD. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – vacant/agricultural land, rural residential; west – Village Preserve / LDR zoning; south – offices/General Business zoning; east - open space/ Field of St. Croix II subdivision Comprehensive Plan: Village Medium Density Residential (3-4 units per acre)/Village Open Space Overlay Planning Commission Meeting 5/8/17 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 History: The property is within the Village Planning Area boundary and municipal sewer service area. The site was historically been used for farming activities. A large portion of the site is located in a FEMA Flood District. The City approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment in 2014 that removed portions of the site from the open space land category. The City approved a PUD Concept Plan for the property on June 17, 2014, and a preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plans on April 14, 2015. Wildflower 1st Addition received final plat and PUD plan approval on 7/21/15. Wildflower 2nd Addition received final plat and PUD plan approval on 12/6/16. Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 4/21/17 60 Day Deadline – 6/20/17 Extension Letter Mailed – 120 Day Deadline – Applicable Regulations: Article XVIII, Chapter 154.750-760, PUD Regulations Article XII – Urban Residential Districts Article V – Zoning Administration and Enforcement REQUEST DETAILS: Robert Engstrom Companies is requesting approval of an amendment to the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Agreement. The requested changes to the Agreement are: 1. Reduce the rear yard setbacks on some corner courtyard lots from 20 ft. to 10 ft. 2. Reduce the side yard setbacks on some corner lots from 20 ft. to 10 ft. 3. Allow front doors to face the corner sideyard. 4. To allow the reorientation of certain courtyard lots to allow driveway access locations to be more flexible 5. To reduce the side yard setbacks for Conservancy and Ridge Lots from 15 ft./10 ft. to 10 ft./5 ft. 6. Increase the courtyard lots allowed impervious surface coverage from 50% to 56%. PUD Amendments are processed as zoning amendments according to Lake Elmo Code Section 154.757 requiring a public hearing. The PUD Agreement was originally codified in Resolution 2015- 24, approved by the City Council on April 14, 2015. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: Robert Engstrom Companies is seeking approval of a PUD Amendment to allow changes to the PUD Plans and to amend the PUD Agreement. When Wildflower at Lake Elmo was approved, the PUD Plans and an associated PUD Agreement were approved that set forth specific site design elements and established specific setbacks, impervious coverages and other zoning specifics associated with the development. Once approved, the plans and agreement determine how the site will develop. Since approval, Engstrom Companies has been seeking additional PUD flexibilities as builders and residential buyers have made proposals that do not meet the strict enforcement of the PUD plan and Agreement that were not foreseen when the PUD plans and PUD Agreement were approved. 1. Rear Yard Setbacks. The rear yard setbacks for the courtyard lots were codified in the PUD Agreement. It was established that the rear yard setbacks would be 20’ for all courtyard lots. The developer is seeking to reduce the rear yard setback for Lots, 17 and 18, Block 3 and similar lots in Planning Commission Meeting 5/8/17 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 future phases from 20 feet down to 10 feet (shown by asterisk on Exhibit). By doing so, the developer will be essentially eliminating the small rear yard area on these lots, bringing the garage up to the 10 foot drainage and utility easement. The change will also lessen the distance between the garages on Lots 17 and 18 and on similar lots in future phases and the adjacent courtyard homes. The change may also result in an increase in impervious surfaces beyond the allowed 50%. Approved PUD Plan 2. Reduce Corner Side Yard Setbacks. The developer is requesting that the corner side yard setbacks be reduced from 15 ft. to 10 ft. to provide more flexibility in home design and layout, such as on Lot 18, Block 3 (shown in red on Exhibit). This request is somewhat tied to the request to allow the front doors to face the corner side yard (essentially making it the front yard). 3. Allow Front Doors to Face Corner Side Yard. This request is to allow front entrances of homes to face the corner side yard (presently a 15’ setback, but requesting a 10’ setback). The purpose is to allow flexibility to take advantage of sun angle, such as on Lot 18, Block 3 (shown in blue on Exhibit). 4. Reorienting Driveway Access. The developer is also requesting flexibility to allow re- orientation of certain courtyard lots, such as Lots 12 and 13, Block 3 (shown in yellow on Exhibit) to allow flexibility to take driveway access from perimeter streets rather than from the courtyard as shown on the approved PUD plans. The developer is requesting this change to facilitate the ability to take advantage of sun angle, views, and to vary rooflines and building elevation details. With this request, it is unclear whether the rear yards would remain facing the courtyards as planned. The proposal is a deviation from the general plan concept having garage doors and driveways accessed from the rear and front entrances and porches from the primary streets. Another issue to consider is the curbing in the Sunflower Lane cul-de-sac is a B6-12 curb type, and is not surmountable. The existing curbing in the cul-de-sac would need to be replaced with a surmountable curb to accommodate a driveway and would need to be replaced prior to the installation of the final lift of asphalt. The request would also result in more driveways crossing pedestrian sidewalks which is a deviation from the general PUD Concept Plan. There may also be public utility or joint trench conflicts associated with this change that would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis if allowed. If the Planning Commission and Council are considering allowing this change, Staff recommends that a condition be added that prior to approval, the individual building permits for each Planning Commission Meeting 5/8/17 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 lot will need to be reviewed by the City Engineer for potential conflicts before the driveway will be allowed by the City. Approved PUD Plans 5. Sideyard Setbacks for Ridge and Conservency Lots. The developer is also requesting a reduction in the side yard setbacks for Ridge and Conservency lots to allow for larger homes on these lots. The current PUD setbacks are: The developer would like to reduce the House Side Yard Setback to 10 feet and the Garage Side Yard Setback to 5 feet consistent with the LDR Zoning District. This change would result in a more urban look to the Ridge and Conservancy Lots and a loss of some of the openness. This will change the look of the PUD development and is a general deviation from the Concept PUD Plan. Approved PUD Plans Planning Commission Meeting 5/8/17 Page 5 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 6. Maximum Impervious Coverage. The developer is seeking a change to the allowed maximum impervious coverage for the courtyard lots. The PUD Agreement did not address the allowed maximum impervious coverage per lot, so therefore the base zoning district standards apply (MDR). The MDR Zoning District allows a maximum impervious coverage of 50% per lot. The developer is seeking an increase to 56% to allow for some of the changes previously discussed. Any such change would need to be subject to Valley Branch Watershed District approval. The original stormwater management stormwater model was based on impervious surface assumptions. These will need to be reviewed by the VBWD against the changes being proposed. PUD Flexibility. The PUD process is a give and take process where the City grants flexibility in exchange for higher quality development meeting the objectives identified in City Code Section 154.751. In the case of Wildflower at Lake Elmo, the City allowed smaller streets, lesser setbacks, and tighter arrangement of homes surrounding the courtyards in exchange for a larger preserved open space, trail networks, architecture standards, public art and a variety of lot sizes among other things to justify the PUD flexibility. These features and amenities were codified with the approval of the PUD Plans and PUD Agreement. Now the developer is seeking to amend the PUD, and seeking additional deviations from City zoning, particularly the MDR setbacks and maximum impervious surface coverages with no obvious additional benefit to the City. The request for lesser structure setbacks for the Conservancy and Prairie lots are still consistent with the underlying LDR Zoning District, although somewhat contrary to the PUD Concept Plan. The reorientation of courtyard lots is not a zoning code issue, but a PUD Concept plan deviation. There are some courtyard lots with driveway access, but these were minimized to provide for an improved pedestrian way minimizing driveways and garage doors facing the public street. The requested setback changes can have an impact on the sense of openness, reduction in green space, and impacting the public right-of-ways. The City does have some latitude in determining denial of the requested PUD amendments. PUD amendments are processed as a rezoning which means that this is a legislative decision by the City. When acting legislatively, the City has broad discretion and will be afforded considerable deference as to its decision by any reviewing court. Generally, a PUD allows greater “flexibility” in return for concessions or enhancements from the developer. In this case, it is staff’s opinion that additional flexibility is being requested by the developer without any additional benefits to the City. Quite a few of the concessions the developer is requesting benefit the developer and could arguably negatively impact the City or the public. DRAFT FINDINGS: In order to deny a rezoning, the Planning Commission shall consider findings and shall submit the same with its recommendation to the City Council. Staff does not find the PUD amendment to be consistent with the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Concept Plans and do not meet any of the Planned Unit Development Objectives, Section 154.751 of the City Code. Staff suggests the Planning Commission review each requested change against the following findings: 1. Generally, the developer has not shown that the additional flexibility being requested with respect to the PUD amendment provides any additional benefits to the City which is required for a PUD. 2. The developer has not shown how the PUD amendment would meet any of the identified PUD objectives set forth in Section 154.751 of the City Code. Planning Commission Meeting 5/8/17 Page 6 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 3. Reducing the rear yard setbacks on the requested lots will eliminate the already small rear yard area on these lots. It will also bring the garages right up to the drainage and utility easements which may cause access issues for the City in the event that work needs to be performed by the City within these easement areas. Furthermore, the reduction may also result in an increase of impervious surface on the lots beyond the allowed 50 percent. 4. Reducing the corner side yard setbacks does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 5. Allowing the front doors to face the corner side yard which will reduce the setback does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 6. Reorienting driveway access of certain courtyard lots is a deviation from the general concept of the development to have garage doors and driveways accessed from the rear and front entrances and porches from the primary streets. This will result in driveways crossing sidewalks which could cause a public safety issue if pedestrians in the neighborhood are accustomed to there not being driveway crossings on sidewalks. Furthermore, the driveways may cross public utilities or joint trenches that are already installed which may cause additional costs to the City and the property owner in the event that the City needs to perform work in the area and the driveway on the property needs to be removed in order for the City to be able to perform the work. 7. Reducing the side yard setbacks for Ridge and Conservancy lots is a deviation from the concept plan. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City and may cause impacts to the development’s stormwater management. 8. Changing the maximum impervious surface coverage for the courtyard lots may cause impacts to the development’s stormwater management. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 9. The requested setback changes will have an impact on the sense of openness and reduction in green space which go against the higher standard of building and site design which is one of the PUD objectives. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the PUD Amendment for Wildflower at Lake Elmo Planned Unit Development because the requested changes are not consistent with the concept plan and do not meet any of the PUD objectives. Furthermore, the flexibility requested by the developer does not show any additional benefits to the City which is required for a PUD. Therefore, staff recommends the following motion: “Move to recommend denial of the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Planned Unit Development PUD Amendment with the based on the findings in the Staff report.” If the Planning Commission wishes to recommend approval to one or all of the requested changes, Staff recommends the Commission consider each request separately by motion and to cite findings for each motion. In addition, certain conditions should be considered including: 1. That the PUD amendment be subject to Valley Branch Watershed District review and approval. 2. That any changes to the cul-de-sac curbing on Sunflower Lane occur prior to the installation of the final lift of asphalt. 3. That each building permit related to re-orientation of driveways be reviewed by City Engineer on an individual basis for conflicts with City and private utility or other Planning Commission Meeting 5/8/17 Page 7 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 499114v1 SJS LA515-28 infrastructure before the City will approve the driveway being installed in the desired location. 4. That the Preliminary and Final PUD plans be updated to reflect the Amendments. ATTACHMENTS: Applicant’s narrative Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Agreement Approved Courtyard Driveway Exhibit Developer Exhibit showing courtyard lot changes Developer Exhibit showing Prairie and Conservancy Lot areas Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Amendment Garden Villa Homes—(GVH) o Requesting review and approval for modifications of PUD subdivision site conditions based on actual construction experience and home owner comments. The Garden Villa Homes (Single Family Detatched) are unlike any currently being constructed in Lake Elmo and the Metro area. The homes in Wildflower are intended to be individually custom designed. Garden Villa Homes (GVH): Modifications requested o GVH Lot Set-Backs—Flexibility for Lot Conditions Flexibility requested for some 90 degree turned lots in phases I and III. These lots require additional customization due to unique locations. The advantage of turning the lots on the corners of some areas provides for more privacy, variety of streetscape elevations and roof lines. In addition, better sun orientations and garage locations. Home buyers have been very receptive to these lots and so this indicates that a few of these lots in the Garden Court area are desirable. Therefore, some flexibility in setbacks would make these lots work better o GVH Lot Set-backs Modifications—Permit 10’ Easements on all Corner Lots Due to the enhanced customization of the corner lots and turned lots (which also creates some very interesting street elevations) in Phases I and III, we currently have some corner lots and turned lots that have ten-foot easement off the courtyard drives and a fifteen-foot easement off the streets. We would like to have more flexibility in some of the architectural orientations with ten foot easements on all corner lots. o GVH Lot Coverage Percentage—Increase the Lot area Coverage from 52% to 56%. The current percentage of lot coverage is 50% currently. We would like to increase this to 56%. Now that there are a number of home owners in Phase I, we recognize that with the concept of patio areas front and back that a little extra coverage would provide homeowners more personalized space to develop for their private use. In addition, the large internal park dramatically reduces the overall lot coverage for each home on all three courtyard blocks. Ridge Lots and Conservancy Lots o Side Yard set-backs—Change side yards on Block 1, First Addition to the standard city set-backs of five and ten feet. o Side yard set-backs are currently fifteen and ten feet. This will provide some flexibility for accommodating larger homes on the Ridge Lots. General Landscaping—Average Tree Dimensions for the overall PUD. Our approach to landscaping greatly exceeds City requirements. We would like the City to consider some flexibility in how and where we plant the vegetation, based on the fact that we exceed the City’s quantity requirements. We request location caliber flexibility due to the fact that we are planting numerous machine-moved trees (4-8” caliber) that exceed minimum caliber size of two and a half inches. We also find that some unique species available at around one and one half inch caliber are a worthy planting stock to create a diversity of species and aesthetic appeal. Storage Shed—Permit an Association Shed for equipment and materials used for maintenance of common areas. Allow construction of a storage Shed of 400-500 sq. ft. The location to be on the south side of Sunflower Lane at the intersection with Swallowtail Lane. The minimum set-backs to be 2 feet from the south property line and 5 feet from the Sunflower Lane curb. An alternate location might be the Outlot A park of the Second Addition. Entrance Monument—Allow proposed Entrance Monument over small utility lines. o The location is on an Association Outlot and has written approval from Xcel Energy. Public Art—Allow Association-maintained sculptures, Art Forms, and Sidewalk Poetry. o Install a sitting area platform at water’s edge in Outlot C of the First Addition. o Allow Public Art in locations approved by the Planning Director. Resolution No. 2017-__ CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-048 A RESOLUTION DENYING THE WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENTS WHEREAS, Robert Engstrom Companies, 4801 West 81st Street, #101, Bloomington, MN (“Applicant”) has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (“City”) for amendments to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plans and PUD agreement for Wildflower at Lake Elmo; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council approved the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Concept Plan on June 17, 2014, and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on February 23, 2015 to consider the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plans for the PUD, and further reviewed said plat and plans at its March 9, 2015 meeting; and WHEREAS, on March 9, 2015 the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2015-023 approving the Wild t Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plans on April 7, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2015-060 on July 21, 2015 approving the Final Plat and Final PUD plans for Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2016-106 on December 6, 2016 approving the Final Plat and Final PUD plans for Wildflower at Lake Elmo 2nd Addition: and WHEREAS, Robert Engstrom Companies made application for amendments to the approved Planned Unit Development Plans and Agreement on April 21, 2017; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 8, 2017 and where the developer withdrew several requested changes from consideration; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of two amendments and recommended denial of the other; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the proposed Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Amendments at a meeting on May 16, 2017; and 2 Resolution No. 2017-__ NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1. Generally, the developer has not shown that the additional flexibility being requested with respect to the PUD amendment provides any additional benefits to the City which is required for a PUD. 2. The developer has not shown how the PUD amendment would meet any of the identified PUD objectives set forth in Section 154.751 of the City Code. 3. Reducing the rear yard setbacks on the requested lots will eliminate the already small rear yard area on these lots. It will also bring the garages right up to the drainage and utility easements which may cause access issues for the City in the event that work needs to be performed by the City within these easement areas. Furthermore, the reduction may also result in an increase of impervious surface on the lots beyond the allowed 50 percent. 4. Reducing the corner side yard setbacks does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 5. Allowing the front doors to face the corner side yard which will reduce the setback does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 6. Reorienting driveway access of certain courtyard lots is a deviation from the general concept of the development to have garage doors and driveways accessed from the rear and front entrances and porches from the primary streets. This will result in driveways crossing sidewalks which could cause a public safety issue if pedestrians in the neighborhood are accustomed to there not being driveway crossings on sidewalks. Furthermore, the driveways may cross public utilities or joint trenches that are already installed which may cause additional costs to the City and the property owner in the event that the City needs to perform work in the area and the driveway on the property needs to be removed in order for the City to be able to perform the work. 7. Reducing the side yard setbacks for Ridge and Conservancy lots is a deviation from the concept plan. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City and may cause impacts to the development’s stormwater management. 8. Changing the maximum impervious surface coverage for the courtyard lots may cause impacts to the development’s stormwater management. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 9. The requested setback changes will have an impact on the sense of openness and reduction in green space which go against the higher standard of building and site design which is one of the PUD objectives. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing, the Applicants’ application for a PUD Concept Plan is denied. 3 Resolution No. 2017-__ Passed and duly adopted this 16th day of May, 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. __________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk Resolution No. 2017-__ CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-048 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND DENYING WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENTS WHEREAS, Robert Engstrom Companies, 4801 West 81st Street, #101, Bloomington, MN (“Applicant”) has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (“City”) for amendments to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plans and PUD agreement for Wildflower at Lake Elmo; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council approved the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Concept Plan on June 17, 2014, and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on February 23, 2015 to consider the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plans for the PUD, and further reviewed said plat and plans at its March 9, 2015 meeting; and WHEREAS, on March 9, 2015 the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2015-023 approving the Wild t Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plans on April 7, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2015-060 on July 21, 2015 approving the Final Plat and Final PUD plans for Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2016-106 on December 6, 2016 approving the Final Plat and Final PUD plans for Wildflower at Lake Elmo 2nd Addition: and WHEREAS, Robert Engstrom Companies made application for amendments to the approved Planned Unit Development Plans and Agreement on April 21, 2017; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 8, 2017 and where the developer withdrew several requested changes from consideration; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of two amendments and recommended denial of the other; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the proposed Wildflower at Lake Elmo PUD Amendments at a meeting on May 16, 2017; and 2 Resolution No. 2017-__ NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1. Generally, the developer has not shown that the additional flexibility being requested with respect to the PUD amendment provides any additional benefits to the City which is required for a PUD. 2. The developer has not shown how the PUD amendment would meet any of the identified PUD objectives set forth in Section 154.751 of the City Code. 3. Reducing the corner side yard setbacks does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 4. Changing the maximum impervious surface coverage for the courtyard lots may cause impacts to the development’s stormwater management. It also does not provide any additional benefits to the City. 5. Lots 17 and 18, Block 3 of Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition are shorter, east to west, than other similar corner lots in phase 4. 6. The preliminary plat design for lots 12 and 13 are problematic in the courtyard and are too close together. 7. The driveway changes are minimal in number and do not represent a change the PUD Concept. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing, the Applicants’ application for a PUD Amendment to allow Lots 12 and 13, Block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition PUD driveways to access Sunflower Lane subject to the 4 conditions of approval and to reduce the rear yards setback from 20 ft. to 15’ for Lots 17 and 18, Block 3, Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition are approved, subject to the 4 conditions of approval: 1. That the PUD amendment be subject to Valley Branch Watershed District review and approval. 2. That any changes to the cul-de-sac curbing on Sunflower Lane occur prior to the installation of the final lift of asphalt. 3. That each building permit related to re-orientation of driveways be reviewed by City Engineer on an individual basis for conflicts with City and private utility or other infrastructure before the City will approve the driveway being installed in the desired location. 4. That the Preliminary and Final PUD plans be updated to reflect the Amendments. Based on the foregoing, the Applicants’ application for a PUD Amendments to allow an increased impervious surface coverage for courtyard lots from 50% to 56% and to reduce the side yard corner lot setback from 15 ft. to 10 ft. for preliminary plat lots 1 and 8, Block 13 (preliminary plat dated 11/5/14) are denied. 3 Resolution No. 2017-__ Passed and duly adopted this 16th day of May, 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. __________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 18 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Lions Park Improvements REVIEWED BY: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Emily Becker, City Planner BACKGROUND: Last September the City Council approved a design contract with Miller Architect for improvements to Lions Park. The Parks Commission has held a series of meetings since last fall to gather more public input and refine the proposed improvements. Through this process, they have worked to develop a general master plan with multiple phases. At their April 17, 2017 meeting, the Parks Commission passed a motion to increase the cost of Phase 1 improvements, as shown in the attached plan P-104 (with the exception of relocating volleyball courts; demolition of existing concessions; and new south parking lot) to $425,000. Council discussed this at their May 9th work session. ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION: Should Council approve plans and authorize advertisement for bids for Lions Park Improvements? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: P104 Phase I improvements would include re-grading the field and moving it north so that the 45th parallel is along the first base line, a perimeter fence, warning track, infield, dugouts, bullpens, lighting(metal poles), batting cages, relocating the volleyball courts and demolition the art center building. Estimate $404,000 P106 Phase I improvements include re-grading the field in its current location, perimeter fence, warning track, infield, dugouts, bullpens, lighting (wooden poles) and batting cages. Estimate $247,550 Another option would be for the Council to just focus on improving the safety of the field. This would involve at a minimum having staff and a volunteer regrade the field. Other safety concerns mentioned include the limited lighting due to the height of the poles. It should be noted that certain variances might be required for the proposed layout, as some of the proposed structures do not meet City standards. FISCAL IMPACT: The 2016-2020 CIP included $40,000 for grading the field at Lions Park. The 2017-2021 CIP includes $150,000 for improvements to Lions Park. The total request therefore was $190,000. The City’s parkland dedication as of 3/16/17 is $975,417. This does not take in to account the funds ($150,000) approved for Savona Park and other items approved for the 2017-2021 Capital Improvement Plan. Miller’s not to exceed cost is $27,500. In addition, the cost of the survey for the Lions Park was $3,685 (including location of the 45th parallel). This would leave approximately $158,815 available for improvements in the $190,000 budget. Aligning home plate with the 45th parallel would increase the cost of grading by an estimated $39,800, as indicated in the attached price breakdown. The estimated cost of Phase I for Layout P-106 would still exceed the budget for Lions Park as approved in the 2017-2021 CIP by $57,550. OPTIONS: 1) Direct staff to advertise for bids for Phase 1 improvements in the P104 plan 2) Direct staff to advertise for bids for Phase 1 improvements in the P106 plan 3) Amend Phase 1 in either P104 or P106 and direct staff to advertise for bids for those improvements 4) Approve up to $60,000 for staff to complete the field regrading in house 5) Do not make any improvements to Lions Park RECOMMENDATION: Motion to direct staff to advertise for bids for Phase 1 improvements (as amended) in the P106 plan OR Motion to approve up to $60,000 for staff to complete the field regrading in house ATTACHMENTS: • Lions Park Proposed Layout P104 (presented to Parks Commission) • Lions Park Proposed Layout P106 • Price breakdown (Note: The cost estimate compares P-105 to P-106. P-105 was a plan that was presented to Staff on 4/28/17 and not included in the attachments. P-104 was the plan presented to the Parks Commission). 320.251.4109 | 320.251.4693 fx 3335 West St Germain Street PO Box 1228 St Cloud, MN 56302 © Copyright, Miller Architects & Builders, LLC63 - PRESENTATION : Plotted on 4/11/17 at 2:53 PM - /Users/brh/Public/Miller Projects/37003•Lake Elmo LP Baseball Field/LAKE ELMO-PRELIM DN4.pln SHEET NO. P-104 LIONS PARK BASEBALL FIELD FIELD RECONFIGURATION LAKE ELMO, MN 02/20/2016 20'-0"60'-0"10'-0"10'-0"ICE RINK W/ BOARDS (SEASONAL) 45TH PARALLEL MONUMENT RELOCATE EXISTING VOLLEYBALL COURT NEW VOLLEYBALL COURT NEW 'LIONS PARK' SIGN CAP & REMOVE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANTSCAP & REMOVE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANTS E GV GV HY DGV S00°07'43"E 346.6136TH STREET NORTH LAVERNE AVENUE NORTHS89°51'21"W 389.90 S00°06'06"W 431.16S75°50'00" W 1 2 3 . 8 2 S89°23'19"E 91.55 S72°39'07 " W 1 8 8 . 4 1 45TH PARALLEL EX. TENNIS COURTS240'250'240'SN A C K S P/A B O O T H DUGOUTDUGOUT BATTING C A G E BATTING C A G E 36 PARKING SPACES 36 PARKING SPACES BLEACHERSBLEACHERSMENSWOMENS EX. JUNGLE GYM EX. MERRY GO ROUNDEX. BASKETBALL COURT EX. BITUMINOUS PATHBULLPENBULLPEN SWINGSETWARM-UP AREA BLEACHERSBL E A C H E R S GRAVEL PATHGRAVEL PATH POLLINATOR GARDENS WELCOME CORNER PICNIC PAVILLION PROPOSED BITUMINOUS PATH (BY CITY)GRAVEL PATHPARK LAWN PARK LAWNRAIN GARDENBLEACHERS PHASE I: BASEBALL FIELD • RE-GRADE FIELD • PERIMETER FENCE • GRAVEL WARNING TRACK • GRAVEL INFIELD • DUGOUT • BULLPENS • UPDATED LIGHTING RELOCATE VOLLEYBALL COURTS DEMO EXISTING CONCESSIONS NEW SOUTH PARKING LOT PHASE II: CONCESSIONS & RESTROOMS DEMO EXISTING ARTS HOUSE NEW NORTH PARKING LOT PHASE III: NW CORNER • NEW PICNIC PAVILION • POLLINATOR GARDENS • WELCOME SIGN • WALKING PATHS HY DPLANTED AREA RELOCATE, ABANDON, OR BURY OVERHEAD POWER-LINES AS NEEDED 0 10'20'40' 1" = 20'1 BASEBALL FIELD RECONFIGURATION NORTH 320.251.4109 | 320.251.4693 fx 3335 West St Germain Street PO Box 1228 St Cloud, MN 56302 © Copyright, Miller Architects & Builders, LLC63 - PRESENTATION : Plotted on 5/3/17 at 7:45 PM - /Users/brh/Public/Miller Projects/37003•Lake Elmo LP Baseball Field/Lake Elmo Lions Park Baseball Field_Site Plan_DN6.pln SHEET NO. P-106 LIONS PARK BASEBALL FIELD FIELD RECONFIGURATION LAKE ELMO, MN 05/03/2017 18'-0"22'-0"36'-0"11'-0"24'-0"99'-0"11 STALLS 24'-0" 60'-0"46'-0"R 50'-0" ICE RINK W/ BOARDS (SEASONAL) 45TH PARALLEL MONUMENT RELOCATE EXISTING VOLLEYBALL COURT NEW VOLLEYBALL COURT NEW 'LIONS PARK' SIGN E GV GV HY DGV S00°07'43"E 346.6136TH STREET NORTH LAVERNE AVENUE NORTHS89°51'21"W 389.90 S00°06'06"W 431.16S75°50'00" W 1 2 3 . 8 2 S89°23'19"E 91.55 S72°39'07 " W 1 8 8 . 4 1 45TH PARALLEL EX. TENNIS COURTS250'250'250' DUGOUTDUGOUT BATTING C A G EBATTING C A G E 33 PARKING SPACES 11 PARKING SPACES BLEACHERSBLEACHERS EX. JUNGLE GYM EX. MERRY GO ROUNDEX. BASKETBALL COURT EX. BITUMINOUS PATHBULLPENBULLPEN SWINGSETWARM-UP AREA BL E A C H E R S GRAVEL PATHGRAVEL PATH POLLINATOR GARDENS WELCOME CORNER PICNIC PAVILION PROPOSED BITUMINOUS PATH (BY CITY)GRAVEL PATHPARK LAWN PARK LAWNRAIN GARDENPHASE I: BASEBALL FIELD • RE-GRADE FIELD • PERIMETER FENCE • GRAVEL WARNING TRACK • GRAVEL INFIELD • DUGOUT • BULLPENS • UPDATED LIGHTING PHASE II: RENOVATE EXIST. CONCESSION & RESTROOM NEW SOUTH PARKING LOT DEMO EXISTING ARTS HOUSE RELOCATE VOLLEYBALL COURTS PHASE III: NEW NORTH PARKING LOT NEW WARMING HOUSE/PAVILION NW CORNER • NEW PICNIC PAVILION • POLLINATOR GARDENS • WELCOME SIGN • WALKING PATHS HY DRELOCATE, ABANDON, OR BURY OVERHEAD POWER-LINES AS NEEDED WARMING HOUSE/PAVILION EXISTING CONCESSIONS/ RESTROOMS BLEACHERSPA BOOTH 0 10'20'40' 1" = 20'1 BASEBALL FIELD RECONFIGURATION NORTH Concept Estimate: 7/28/17 Masterplan Estimate (P-105): 4/28/17 Adjusted Masterplan Estimate (P-106): 5/3/17 Baseball Field Baseball Field Baseball Field Re-grade $34,100 Re-grade $120,500 (------------->Re-grade Breakdown:4/28/17 5/3/17 Re-grade $80,700 Perimeter Fence $22,000 Perimeter Fence $28,200 Surveying & Staking $8,000 $4,000 Perimeter Fence $28,200 Warning Track $10,000 Strip Sod, Import Fill, Regrade $33,000 $33,000 Warning Track $10,000 Infield $13,200 Infield $10,000 Demo Fence $1,200 $1,200 Infield $10,000 Dugouts $24,750 Dugouts $20,000 Remove Trees $3,500 $0 Dugouts $20,000 Bullpens $3,000 Erosion Control $5,000 $5,000 Bullpens $3,000 Lighting $170,000 Relocate Power Lines $10,000 $1,500 Lighting $85,000 Batting Cages $5,500 Batting Cages $22,300 Irrigation $14,000 $14,000 Batting Cages $10,650 $384,000 Landscape, Sod $22,000 $22,000 $247,550 Irrigation $6,600 Sidewalk (concrete)$13,770 $0 Relocate Volleyball $5,000 Misc. $10,030 $0 PHASE I Total:$247,550 Demo Ex. Arts Bldg.$15,000 $120,500 $80,700 Bleachers $19,800 Relocate Volleyball (Move to Phase II)$5,000 Demo Ex. Arts Bldg.(Move to Phase II)$15,000 PHASE I Total:$404,000 Demo Ex. Conc./RR $4,000 Renovate Conc./RR $20,000 South Parking Lot $32,000 South Parking Lot $16,000 PA Booth $11,000 Concesssions/RR/PA Booth $120,000 PA Booth w/ Bleacher $15,000 Concession (re-paint)$1,000 PHASE II Total:$156,000 PHASE II Total:$71,000 Total:$137,950 North Parking Lot $22,000 North Parking Lot $22,000 Picnic Pavilion $21,000 Picnic Pavilion $21,000 Gardens $10,000 Gardens $10,000 Welcome Sign $500 Welcome Sign $500 Pavilion/Warming House $25,000 Pavilion/Warming House $25,000 Walking Paths $8,500 Walking Paths $8,500 PHASE III Total:$87,000 PHASE III Total:$87,000 PHASE I-III Total:$647,000 PHASE I-III Total:$405,550 Total General Req's $22,250 Total General Req's $22,250 Total Contingency $30,000 Total Contingency $30,000 Total Construction Fee $47,000 Total Construction Fee $47,000 Arch & Eng. Fees $39,750 Arch & Eng. Fees $39,750 $139,000 $139,000 GRAND TOTAL:$786,000 GRAND TOTAL:$544,550 LION'S PARK BASEBALL FIELD STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 19 AGENDA ITEM: Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements – Accept Bids and Award Contract SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Project Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept bids and award a contract for the Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements? BACKGROUND: On December 20, 2016, following a Public Improvement Hearing, the City council ordered the improvements and preparation of the plans and specifications for the Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements. The improvements include the extension of sanitary sewer to the Lake Elmo Elementary School, City Hall and the Brookman II Building (3825 Lake Elmo Avenue) as well as extending sanitary sewer along Laverne Avenue, from 39th Street North to CSAH 14; 31st Street North, from CSAH 17 to the east end; Laverne Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac; and Layton Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac. The scope of improvements is consistent with the approved feasibility report which was adopted by the City Council on November 15, 2016. The feasibility report was prepared in response to the receipt of petitions for sanitary sewer service from the Lake Elmo Elementary School (Independent School District #834) at 11030 Stillwater Boulevard, and from the property owners along 31st Street North, from CSAH 17 to the east end, Laverne Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac, and Layton Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Bids were received, publicly opened, and read aloud on Thursday, May 4, 2017. The City’s design consultant has prepared and attached a Tabulation of Bids and a letter of recommendation for the award of the contract. The City received 10 bids for this project, with Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC providing the lowest bid in the amount of $1,576,039.15. Contractor references for Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC were reviewed and verified. The City Engineer and his consultant are therefore recommending that the Council award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC as outlined in the attached letter. As a part of this award Staff is requesting Council to provide the City Administrator authorization to purchase individual grinder stations from a supplier in the not-to-exceed amount of $39,000 and enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000. Each of these items are budgeted in the total cost figures presented below and are necessary to complete the project. The City Council approved the Plans and Specifications for the Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements on April 4, 2017 and authorized staff to advertise the Project for bids. The Project was advertised on QuestCDN.com and in the Oakdale-Lake Elmo Review in accordance with the Minnesota Competitive Bidding requirements. The improvements include the reconstruction of the existing streets with concrete curb and gutter, installation and repair of storm sewer, the replacement of the aged watermain, and a sanitary sewer service stub extended to the property line for each benefitting property. The improvements also include the construction of a sidewalk and trail along Laverne Avenue from 39th Street North to CSAH 14 as part of the Downtown Master Plan. The watermain along Laverne Avenue will be upsized to a trunk 16-inch diameter main as the final connection for the intermediate/low pressure zone relocation to the Union Pacific Railroad and watermain is proposed to be extended to the Brookman II building at the property owner’s request. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution commits the council to enter into a construction contract for the project with a construction contract amount of $1,576,039.15. The estimated total cost for the Old Village Phase 3 improvements is $2,200,500 with the street, sidewalk and storm sewer improvements estimated at $1,128,000; the sanitary sewer improvements estimated at $604,800; and the watermain improvements estimated at $467,700. The improvements are proposed to be assessed against the benefitting properties consistent with the City’s Special Assessment Policy and the Old Village Sewer Assessment Policy. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2017-051, thereby accepting bids and awarding a contract to Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC, in the amount of $1,576,039.15, for the Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements. Staff is also recommending that the City Council authorize the City Administrator to purchase individual grinder stations from a supplier in the not-to-exceed amount of $39,000 and enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000. The recommended motions for these actions are as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2017–051, accepting bids and awarding a contract to Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC., in the amount of $1,576,039.15 for the Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements.” and “Move to authorize the City Administrator to purchase individual grinder stations from a supplier in the not-to-exceed amount of $39,000 and enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2017-051 Approving the plans and specifications and ordering the advertisement for bids for the Old Village Phase 3 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements. 2. Engineer’s Letter of Award Recommendation and Tabulation of Bids. 3. Project Schedule. CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-051 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE OLD VILLAGE PHASE 3 STREET, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage, and Utility 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, Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC, for the amount of $1,576,039.15. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk and 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 Base 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 MAY, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mike Pearson (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk TABULATION OF BIDS12Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsEngineer's EstimateDouglas-Kerr Underground, LLC Kuechle Underground Inc.Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPO Box 85 10998 St. Hwy 55SEH No.: LAKMO 140215Mora, MN 55051-0085 Kimball, MN 55353Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price1 Mobilization LS 1 $133,940.00 $133,940.00 $58,045.95 $58,045.95 $31,000.00 $31,000.002 Clearing & Grubbing ACRE 1.15 5,000.00 5,750.00 6,000.00 6,900.00 6,000.00 6,900.003 Clearing & Grubbing TREE 42 500.00 21,000.00 200.00 8,400.00 200.00 8,400.004 Remove Water Main Pipe LF 2884 10.00 28,840.00 1.20 3,460.80 1.30 3,749.205 Remove Sewer Pipe (Storm) LF 144 10.00 1,440.00 11.45 1,648.80 5.00 720.006 Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 440 3.00 1,320.00 3.00 1,320.00 3.30 1,452.007 Remove Backstop Fence EACH 1500.00 500.00 450.00 450.00 500.00 500.008 Pulverize Bituminous Pavement (P) SY 10246 2.00 20,492.00 1.10 11,270.60 1.50 15,369.009 Remove Bituminous Driveway & Parking Lot Pavement SY 765 3.00 2,295.00 3.75 2,868.75 4.00 3,060.0010 Remove Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 300 6.00 1,800.00 6.25 1,875.00 4.00 1,200.0011 Remove Catch Basin or Manhole (Storm) EACH 3 300.00 900.00 260.00 780.00 130.00 390.0012 Remove Gate Valve & Box EACH 14 400.00 5,600.00 90.00 1,260.00 100.00 1,400.0013 Remove Hydrant EACH 6 500.00 3,000.00 450.00 2,700.00 150.00 900.0014 Sawing Concrete Pavement (Full Depth) LF 240 6.00 1,440.00 3.50 840.00 3.00 720.0015 Sawing Bit Pavement (Full Depth) LF 610 3.00 1,830.00 2.75 1,677.50 3.00 1,830.0016 Salvage and Install Fence LF 200 25.00 5,000.00 27.00 5,400.00 22.00 4,400.0017 Salvage Retaining Wall LF 100 5.00 500.00 24.00 2,400.00 28.00 2,800.0018 Salvage Sign (Type C or Street Name Sign) EACH 8 50.00 400.00 35.00 280.00 25.00 200.0019 Salvage & Install Sign Type C EACH 5 150.00 750.00 160.00 800.00 130.00 650.0020 Salvage & Install Mailbox Assembly EACH 26 100.00 2,600.00 90.00 2,340.00 50.00 1,300.0021 Salvage & Install Pavers (Incl. Flagstone Steps & Wall) SF 200 10.00 2,000.00 23.00 4,600.00 8.00 1,600.0022 Common Excavation (P) CY 12605 10.00 126,050.00 10.85 136,764.25 8.00 100,840.0023 Infiltration Basin Excavation (EV) CY 467 20.00 9,340.00 32.50 15,177.50 10.00 4,670.0024 Subgrade Correction (EV)(Includes Select Granular CY 400 30.00 12,000.00 29.85 11,940.00 30.00 12,000.0025 Select Granular Borrow - Mod. 5% (CV)(P) CY 7764 18.00 139,752.00 19.00 147,516.00 24.00 186,336.0026 Geotextile Fabric, Type V SY 1000 3.00 3,000.00 1.50 1,500.00 1.50 1,500.0027 Agg. Base, Cl. 6 (CV) (P) CY 2288 30.00 68,640.00 31.95 73,101.60 34.00 77,792.0028 Street Sweeping HOUR 40 100.00 4,000.00 150.00 6,000.00 150.00 6,000.00$1,936,776.00$1,576,039.15 $1,576,694.13Shaded area denotes corrected figureShort Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 1 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDS12Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsEngineer's EstimateDouglas-Kerr Underground, LLC Kuechle Underground Inc.Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPO Box 85 10998 St. Hwy 55SEH No.: LAKMO 140215Mora, MN 55051-0085 Kimball, MN 55353Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,936,776.00$1,576,039.15 $1,576,694.13Shaded area denotes corrected figure29 Bit. Material for Tack Coat GAL 501 7.00 3,507.00 1.40 701.40 1.40 701.4030 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (2,C) (Parking Lots, TON 230 90.00 20,700.00 101.00 23,230.00 77.00 17,710.0031 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 590 65.00 38,350.00 54.50 32,155.00 55.00 32,450.0032 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,C) TON 315 70.00 22,050.00 63.00 19,845.00 63.00 19,845.0033 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 790 60.00 47,400.00 48.75 38,512.50 49.00 38,710.0034 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,.C) TON 420 65.00 27,300.00 56.25 23,625.00 57.00 23,940.0035 Bituminous Wedge Paving TON 170 100.00 17,000.00 0.01 1.70 0.01 1.7036 Saw & Seal Joint (40' Intervals) LF 1400 2.00 2,800.00 3.25 4,550.00 3.30 4,620.0037 Pipe Foundation Rock LF 1600 6.00 9,600.00 0.01 16.00 2.00 3,200.0038 15" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 1 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,024.05 1,024.05 940.00 940.0039 18" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 1 1,300.00 1,300.00 1,095.10 1,095.10 1,000.00 1,000.0040 21" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 2 1,500.00 3,000.00 1,470.00 2,940.00 940.00 1,880.0041 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 2 2,500.00 5,000.00 2,466.45 4,932.90 1,700.00 3,400.0042 Infiltration Basin Underdrain System LF 410 12.00 4,920.00 0.01 4.10 22.00 9,020.0043 4" PVC Perf. Edge Drain w/ Backfill & Wrap LF 1300 10.00 13,000.00 10.50 13,650.00 12.00 15,600.0044 Draintile Cleanout EACH 20 300.00 6,000.00 175.00 3,500.00 270.00 5,400.0045 8" PVC Pipe Sewer (SDR 26) LF 3236 60.00 194,160.00 35.10 113,583.60 39.00 126,204.0046 12" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 125 30.00 3,750.00 36.55 4,568.75 35.00 4,375.0047 15" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 741 35.00 25,935.00 32.60 24,156.60 37.00 27,417.0048 18" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 350 40.00 14,000.00 30.35 10,622.50 40.00 14,000.0049 21" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL III LF 178 50.00 8,900.00 37.85 6,737.30 45.00 8,010.0050 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Sewer CL IIA LF 101 110.00 11,110.00 100.90 10,190.90 114.00 11,514.0051 Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer EACH 2 1,500.00 3,000.00 2,939.55 5,879.10 1,800.00 3,600.0052 Construct Drainage Structure 2'x3' (w/ Casting) EACH 7 1,700.00 11,900.00 1,580.75 11,065.25 2,000.00 14,000.0053 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 48" (w/ Casting) EACH 8 2,400.00 19,200.00 2,432.30 19,458.40 2,500.00 20,000.0054 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 60" (w/ Casting) EACH 2 2,800.00 5,600.00 3,484.05 6,968.10 3,400.00 6,800.0055 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 72" (w/ Casting) EACH 1 3,200.00 3,200.00 3,940.80 3,940.80 3,500.00 3,500.0056 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 84" (w/ Casting) EACH 1 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,945.05 4,945.05 4,800.00 4,800.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 2 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDS12Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsEngineer's EstimateDouglas-Kerr Underground, LLC Kuechle Underground Inc.Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPO Box 85 10998 St. Hwy 55SEH No.: LAKMO 140215Mora, MN 55051-0085 Kimball, MN 55353Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,936,776.00$1,576,039.15 $1,576,694.13Shaded area denotes corrected figure57 8"X4" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 21 175.00 3,675.00 500.75 10,515.75 100.00 2,100.0058 8"X6" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 9 225.00 2,025.00 1,004.55 9,040.95 150.00 1,350.0059 6" Clean-Out Assembly (SCH 40) EACH 4 200.00 800.00 324.60 1,298.40 220.00 880.0060 2" Pressure Cleanout & Curbstop Assembly EACH 1 3,000.00 3,000.00 986.40 986.40 1,700.00 1,700.0061 2"x1-1/4" Fused Tee EACH 4 250.00 1,000.00 254.20 1,016.80 210.00 840.0062 1-1/4" Curb Stop & Box EACH 5 300.00 1,500.00 429.50 2,147.50 250.00 1,250.0063 4" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 815 25.00 20,375.00 11.05 9,005.75 19.00 15,485.0064 6" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 760 30.00 22,800.00 20.45 15,542.00 21.00 15,960.0065 1-1/4" HDPE Service Pipe LF 250 30.00 7,500.00 9.70 2,425.00 20.00 5,000.0066 2" HDPE Pressure Pipe LF 290 40.00 11,600.00 14.15 4,103.50 20.00 5,800.0067 Tracer Wire Box - (at property line) EACH 36 75.00 2,700.00 167.60 6,033.60 120.00 4,320.0068 Sanitary Sewer Manhole (10' Deep) EACH 14 3,000.00 42,000.00 3,175.50 44,457.00 3,800.00 53,200.0069 Sanitary Sewer Manhole Extra Depth LF 48 140.00 6,720.00 137.15 6,583.20 102.00 4,896.0070 Sewer Televising LF 3236 2.00 6,472.00 1.25 4,045.00 1.20 3,883.2071 2" Rigid Insulation SY 120 20.00 2,400.00 14.30 1,716.00 23.00 2,760.0072 Temporary Water Service LS 1 20,000.00 20,000.00 25,028.00 25,028.00 11,000.00 11,000.0073 1" Corporation Stop EACH 27 175.00 4,725.00 279.20 7,538.40 190.00 5,130.0074 2" Corporation Stop EACH 3 400.00 1,200.00 726.45 2,179.35 420.00 1,260.0075 1" Curb Stop & Box EACH 27 250.00 6,750.00 362.85 9,796.95 190.00 5,130.0076 2" Curb Stop & Box EACH 3 500.00 1,500.00 839.00 2,517.00 440.00 1,320.0077 8" x 1 -1/4" Saddle Tap EACH 1 400.00 400.00 390.95 390.95 580.00 580.0078 Connect to Existing Water Main EACH 3 1,500.00 4,500.00 1,025.40 3,076.20 1,200.00 3,600.0079 Connect to Existing Water Service EACH 34 500.00 17,000.00 382.35 12,999.90 36.00 1,224.0080 Hydrant EACH 8 4,000.00 32,000.00 4,199.10 33,592.80 4,100.00 32,800.0081 6" Gate Valve & Box EACH 14 1,500.00 21,000.00 1,586.10 22,205.40 1,600.00 22,400.0082 8" Gate Valve & Box EACH 8 1,900.00 15,200.00 2,036.45 16,291.60 2,200.00 17,600.0083 16" Butterfly Valve & Box EACH 4 3,500.00 14,000.00 3,023.65 12,094.60 3,400.00 13,600.0084 1" Type K Copper Pipe LF 1095 30.00 32,850.00 9.20 10,074.00 25.00 27,375.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 3 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDS12Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsEngineer's EstimateDouglas-Kerr Underground, LLC Kuechle Underground Inc.Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPO Box 85 10998 St. Hwy 55SEH No.: LAKMO 140215Mora, MN 55051-0085 Kimball, MN 55353Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,936,776.00$1,576,039.15 $1,576,694.13Shaded area denotes corrected figure85 2" Type K Copper Pipe LF 90 40.00 3,600.00 22.95 2,065.50 31.00 2,790.0086 6" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 394 45.00 17,730.00 24.45 9,633.30 35.00 13,790.0087 8" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 2424 55.00 133,320.00 32.30 78,295.20 40.00 96,960.0088 16" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 892 85.00 75,820.00 60.95 54,367.40 73.00 65,116.0089 Water Main Fittings LB 3606 8.00 28,848.00 3.25 11,719.50 4.53 16,335.1890 Random Rip-Rap, Class III (includes Geotextile Fabric) CY 40 100.00 4,000.00 115.00 4,600.00 70.00 2,800.0091 5" Concrete Walk SF 5100 5.00 25,500.00 4.90 24,990.00 5.19 26,469.0092 6" Concrete Walk - Pedestrian Ramp SF 480 6.00 2,880.00 6.10 2,928.00 6.39 3,067.2093 B612 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 365 15.00 5,475.00 19.00 6,935.00 18.00 6,570.0094 B618 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 5525 13.00 71,825.00 12.25 67,681.25 11.25 62,156.2595 6" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 300 40.00 12,000.00 47.75 14,325.00 52.00 15,600.0096 8" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 125 55.00 6,875.00 55.75 6,968.75 60.00 7,500.0097 Truncated Domes SF 72 30.00 2,160.00 30.00 2,160.00 31.00 2,232.0098 Traffic Control LS 1 12,000.00 12,000.00 2,300.00 2,300.00 2,400.00 2,400.0099 Sign Panels, Type C SF 21 40.00 840.00 43.50 913.50 34.00 714.00100 Sign, Type Special (Street Name) EACH 3 200.00 600.00 495.00 1,485.00 260.00 780.00101 Silt Fence, Preassembled LF 2400 3.00 7,200.00 1.25 3,000.00 1.25 3,000.00102 Storm Drain Inlet Protection EACH 23 100.00 2,300.00 125.00 2,875.00 50.00 1,150.00103 Filter Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 125 30.00 3,750.00 39.50 4,937.50 35.00 4,375.00104 Common Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 1500 20.00 30,000.00 24.75 37,125.00 23.00 34,500.00105 Sodding, Type Mineral SY 6300 5.00 31,500.00 5.25 33,075.00 4.50 28,350.00106 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type 25-131) ACRE 2 2,500.00 5,000.00 1,108.00 2,216.00 1,100.00 2,200.00107 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type Basin) ACRE 0.2 4,000.00 800.00 777.00 155.40 780.00 156.00108 Erosion Control Blanket Category 3N SY 2400 1.75 4,200.00 1.35 3,240.00 1.31 3,144.00109 Sediment Control Log LF 800 2.50 2,000.00 2.10 1,680.00 2.10 1,680.00110 6' Wide Agg. Lime Walking Trail LF 700 10.00 7,000.00 15.50 10,850.00 13.00 9,100.00111 Temporary Rock Construction Entrance EACH 4 500.00 2,000.00 1,400.00 5,600.00 250.00 1,000.00TOTAL BID PRICE$1,936,776.00 $1,576,694.13$1,576,039.15Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 4 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity1 Mobilization LS 12 Clearing & Grubbing ACRE 1.153 Clearing & Grubbing TREE 424 Remove Water Main Pipe LF 28845 Remove Sewer Pipe (Storm) LF 1446 Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 4407 Remove Backstop Fence EACH 18 Pulverize Bituminous Pavement (P) SY 102469 Remove Bituminous Driveway & Parking Lot Pavement SY 76510 Remove Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 30011 Remove Catch Basin or Manhole (Storm) EACH 312 Remove Gate Valve & Box EACH 1413 Remove Hydrant EACH 614 Sawing Concrete Pavement (Full Depth) LF 24015 Sawing Bit Pavement (Full Depth) LF 61016 Salvage and Install Fence LF 20017 Salvage Retaining Wall LF 10018 Salvage Sign (Type C or Street Name Sign) EACH 819 Salvage & Install Sign Type C EACH 520 Salvage & Install Mailbox Assembly EACH 2621 Salvage & Install Pavers (Incl. Flagstone Steps & Wall) SF 20022 Common Excavation (P) CY 1260523 Infiltration Basin Excavation (EV) CY 46724 Subgrade Correction (EV)(Includes Select Granular CY 40025 Select Granular Borrow - Mod. 5% (CV)(P) CY 776426 Geotextile Fabric, Type V SY 100027 Agg. Base, Cl. 6 (CV) (P) CY 228828 Street Sweeping HOUR 40Shaded area denotes corrected figure345T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. LaTour Construction, Inc. Park Construction Co.2370 E. Hwy 36 2134 Co. Rd. 8 NW 1481 81st Ave. NENo. St. Paul, MN 55109 Maple Lake, MN 55358 Minneapolis, MN 55432Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$100,000.00 $100,000.00 $58,700.00 $58,700.00 $81,500.00 $81,500.006,300.00 7,245.00 6,200.00 7,130.00 6,470.00 7,440.50236.25 9,922.50 210.00 8,820.00 216.00 9,072.001.25 3,605.00 3.10 8,940.40 1.20 3,460.8011.97 1,723.68 8.00 1,152.00 11.50 1,656.001.56 686.40 3.60 1,584.00 4.50 1,980.00500.00 500.00 520.00 520.00 1,700.00 1,700.001.40 14,344.40 2.30 23,565.80 1.80 18,442.803.12 2,386.80 6.20 4,743.00 3.70 2,830.506.00 1,800.00 6.20 1,860.00 8.25 2,475.00271.70 815.10 410.00 1,230.00 260.00 780.0094.05 1,316.70 77.00 1,078.00 90.00 1,260.00470.25 2,821.50 260.00 1,560.00 450.00 2,700.005.00 1,200.00 5.10 1,224.00 5.25 1,260.002.00 1,220.00 3.10 1,891.00 2.30 1,403.0050.00 10,000.00 18.00 3,600.00 20.00 4,000.0010.00 1,000.00 16.50 1,650.00 5.55 555.0026.25 210.00 26.00 208.00 25.00 200.00157.50 787.50 129.00 645.00 125.00 625.00125.00 3,250.00 93.00 2,418.00 90.00 2,340.0020.00 4,000.00 19.00 3,800.00 9.00 1,800.0011.86 149,495.30 15.90 200,419.50 14.00 176,470.0011.86 5,538.62 13.00 6,071.00 14.40 6,724.8022.57 9,028.00 23.30 9,320.00 35.50 14,200.0010.71 83,152.44 16.70 129,658.80 16.40 127,329.604.16 4,160.00 1.75 1,750.00 2.85 2,850.0018.41 42,122.08 28.00 64,064.00 35.00 80,080.00110.00 4,400.00 124.00 4,960.00 125.00 5,000.00$1,613,457.67 $1,641,236.20 $1,644,741.50Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 5 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure29 Bit. Material for Tack Coat GAL 50130 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (2,C) (Parking Lots, TON 23031 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 59032 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,C) TON 31533 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 79034 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,.C) TON 42035 Bituminous Wedge Paving TON 17036 Saw & Seal Joint (40' Intervals) LF 140037 Pipe Foundation Rock LF 160038 15" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 139 18" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 140 21" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 241 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 242 Infiltration Basin Underdrain System LF 41043 4" PVC Perf. Edge Drain w/ Backfill & Wrap LF 130044 Draintile Cleanout EACH 2045 8" PVC Pipe Sewer (SDR 26) LF 323646 12" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 12547 15" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 74148 18" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 35049 21" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL III LF 17850 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Sewer CL IIA LF 10151 Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer EACH 252 Construct Drainage Structure 2'x3' (w/ Casting) EACH 753 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 48" (w/ Casting) EACH 854 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 60" (w/ Casting) EACH 255 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 72" (w/ Casting) EACH 156 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 84" (w/ Casting) EACH 1345T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. LaTour Construction, Inc. Park Construction Co.2370 E. Hwy 36 2134 Co. Rd. 8 NW 1481 81st Ave. NENo. St. Paul, MN 55109 Maple Lake, MN 55358 Minneapolis, MN 55432Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,613,457.67 $1,641,236.20 $1,644,741.500.01 5.01 1.45 726.45 1.70 851.7095.00 21,850.00 68.00 15,640.00 81.20 18,676.0051.89 30,615.10 56.00 33,040.00 53.70 31,683.0058.86 18,540.90 65.00 20,475.00 59.90 18,868.5047.43 37,469.70 50.00 39,500.00 48.90 38,631.0053.22 22,352.40 58.00 24,360.00 53.90 22,638.0090.00 15,300.00 0.01 1.70 101.00 17,170.002.75 3,850.00 3.35 4,690.00 3.25 4,550.000.01 16.00 1.75 2,800.00 0.01 16.001,279.13 1,279.13 920.00 920.00 1,020.00 1,020.001,144.38 1,144.38 1,010.00 1,010.00 1,100.00 1,100.001,536.15 3,072.30 1,100.00 2,200.00 1,470.00 2,940.002,577.44 5,154.88 1,775.00 3,550.00 2,470.00 4,940.0029.87 12,246.70 11.60 4,756.00 30.00 12,300.0020.09 26,117.00 9.20 11,960.00 10.70 13,910.00281.43 5,628.60 94.00 1,880.00 262.00 5,240.0036.68 118,696.48 42.00 135,912.00 35.10 113,583.6038.19 4,773.75 36.60 4,575.00 36.60 4,575.0034.07 25,245.87 38.80 28,750.80 32.60 24,156.6031.72 11,102.00 42.00 14,700.00 30.40 10,640.0039.55 7,039.90 47.00 8,366.00 37.90 6,746.20105.44 10,649.44 112.00 11,312.00 101.00 10,201.003,071.83 6,143.66 1,200.00 2,400.00 2,940.00 5,880.001,651.88 11,563.16 1,900.00 13,300.00 1,640.00 11,480.002,541.75 20,334.00 2,370.00 18,960.00 2,480.00 19,840.003,640.83 7,281.66 3,400.00 6,800.00 3,530.00 7,060.004,118.14 4,118.14 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,980.00 3,980.005,167.58 5,167.58 4,600.00 4,600.00 4,990.00 4,990.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 6 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure57 8"X4" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 2158 8"X6" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 959 6" Clean-Out Assembly (SCH 40) EACH 460 2" Pressure Cleanout & Curbstop Assembly EACH 161 2"x1-1/4" Fused Tee EACH 462 1-1/4" Curb Stop & Box EACH 563 4" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 81564 6" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 76065 1-1/4" HDPE Service Pipe LF 25066 2" HDPE Pressure Pipe LF 29067 Tracer Wire Box - (at property line) EACH 3668 Sanitary Sewer Manhole (10' Deep) EACH 1469 Sanitary Sewer Manhole Extra Depth LF 4870 Sewer Televising LF 323671 2" Rigid Insulation SY 12072 Temporary Water Service LS 173 1" Corporation Stop EACH 2774 2" Corporation Stop EACH 375 1" Curb Stop & Box EACH 2776 2" Curb Stop & Box EACH 377 8" x 1 -1/4" Saddle Tap EACH 178 Connect to Existing Water Main EACH 379 Connect to Existing Water Service EACH 3480 Hydrant EACH 881 6" Gate Valve & Box EACH 1482 8" Gate Valve & Box EACH 883 16" Butterfly Valve & Box EACH 484 1" Type K Copper Pipe LF 1095345T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. LaTour Construction, Inc. Park Construction Co.2370 E. Hwy 36 2134 Co. Rd. 8 NW 1481 81st Ave. NENo. St. Paul, MN 55109 Maple Lake, MN 55358 Minneapolis, MN 55432Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,613,457.67 $1,641,236.20 $1,644,741.50523.28 10,988.88 490.00 10,290.00 501.00 10,521.001,049.75 9,447.75 540.00 4,860.00 1,000.00 9,000.00339.21 1,356.84 270.00 1,080.00 325.00 1,300.001,030.79 1,030.79 1,000.00 1,000.00 986.00 986.00265.64 1,062.56 97.00 388.00 254.00 1,016.00448.83 2,244.15 390.00 1,950.00 430.00 2,150.0011.55 9,413.25 21.70 17,685.50 11.10 9,046.5021.37 16,241.20 22.20 16,872.00 20.50 15,580.00101.37 25,342.50 17.00 4,250.00 9.70 2,425.0014.79 4,289.10 13.75 3,987.50 14.20 4,118.00175.14 6,305.04 170.00 6,120.00 168.00 6,048.003,318.19 46,454.66 3,240.00 45,360.00 3,180.00 44,520.00104.11 4,997.28 118.00 5,664.00 99.60 4,780.801.31 4,239.16 1.60 5,177.60 1.25 4,045.0014.94 1,792.80 32.00 3,840.00 14.30 1,716.0026,154.26 26,154.26 12,800.00 12,800.00 25,000.00 25,000.00291.76 7,877.52 260.00 7,020.00 279.00 7,533.00759.14 2,277.42 616.00 1,848.00 726.00 2,178.00379.18 10,237.86 350.00 9,450.00 363.00 9,801.00876.76 2,630.28 710.00 2,130.00 839.00 2,517.00408.54 408.54 330.00 330.00 391.00 391.001,071.54 3,214.62 1,370.00 4,110.00 1,030.00 3,090.00398.51 13,549.34 210.00 7,140.00 382.00 12,988.004,388.06 35,104.48 4,400.00 35,200.00 4,200.00 33,600.001,657.47 23,204.58 1,500.00 21,000.00 1,590.00 22,260.002,128.09 17,024.72 1,980.00 15,840.00 2,040.00 16,320.003,159.71 12,638.84 2,850.00 11,400.00 3,020.00 12,080.009.61 10,522.95 16.35 17,903.25 9.20 10,074.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 7 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure85 2" Type K Copper Pipe LF 9086 6" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 39487 8" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 242488 16" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 89289 Water Main Fittings LB 360690 Random Rip-Rap, Class III (includes Geotextile Fabric) CY 4091 5" Concrete Walk SF 510092 6" Concrete Walk - Pedestrian Ramp SF 48093 B612 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 36594 B618 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 552595 6" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 30096 8" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 12597 Truncated Domes SF 7298 Traffic Control LS 199 Sign Panels, Type C SF 21100 Sign, Type Special (Street Name) EACH 3101 Silt Fence, Preassembled LF 2400102 Storm Drain Inlet Protection EACH 23103 Filter Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 125104 Common Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 1500105 Sodding, Type Mineral SY 6300106 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type 25-131) ACRE 2107 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type Basin) ACRE 0.2108 Erosion Control Blanket Category 3N SY 2400109 Sediment Control Log LF 800110 6' Wide Agg. Lime Walking Trail LF 700111 Temporary Rock Construction Entrance EACH 4TOTAL BID PRICE345T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. LaTour Construction, Inc. Park Construction Co.2370 E. Hwy 36 2134 Co. Rd. 8 NW 1481 81st Ave. NENo. St. Paul, MN 55109 Maple Lake, MN 55358 Minneapolis, MN 55432Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,613,457.67 $1,641,236.20 $1,644,741.5023.98 2,158.20 35.00 3,150.00 23.00 2,070.0025.55 10,066.70 33.00 13,002.00 24.50 9,653.0033.75 81,810.00 37.00 89,688.00 32.30 78,295.2063.69 56,811.48 68.00 60,656.00 61.00 54,412.003.40 12,260.40 4.90 17,669.40 3.25 11,719.50120.18 4,807.20 79.00 3,160.00 115.00 4,600.003.90 19,890.00 3.90 19,890.00 4.75 24,225.008.68 4,166.40 6.70 3,216.00 6.00 2,880.0014.56 5,314.40 29.00 10,585.00 18.40 6,716.0012.27 67,791.75 12.00 66,300.00 11.50 63,537.5054.76 16,428.00 56.00 16,800.00 46.00 13,800.0062.24 7,780.00 78.00 9,750.00 54.20 6,775.0048.88 3,519.36 46.00 3,312.00 30.70 2,210.406,825.00 6,825.00 2,400.00 2,400.00 2,350.00 2,350.0068.25 1,433.25 35.00 735.00 34.00 714.00367.50 1,102.50 260.00 780.00 250.00 750.002.00 4,800.00 1.30 3,120.00 1.25 3,000.00120.00 2,760.00 134.00 3,082.00 222.00 5,106.0027.46 3,432.50 16.50 2,062.50 44.00 5,500.0026.00 39,000.00 8.20 12,300.00 29.20 43,800.004.64 29,232.00 4.65 29,295.00 4.55 28,665.002,060.00 4,120.00 1,140.00 2,280.00 1,120.00 2,240.005,082.00 1,016.40 800.00 160.00 785.00 157.001.55 3,720.00 1.35 3,240.00 1.30 3,120.003.09 2,472.00 2.20 1,760.00 2.10 1,680.006.00 4,200.00 15.00 10,500.00 13.20 9,240.00750.00 3,000.00 1,100.00 4,400.00 1,160.00 4,640.00$1,641,236.20 $1,644,741.50$1,613,457.67Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 8 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity1 Mobilization LS 12 Clearing & Grubbing ACRE 1.153 Clearing & Grubbing TREE 424 Remove Water Main Pipe LF 28845 Remove Sewer Pipe (Storm) LF 1446 Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 4407 Remove Backstop Fence EACH 18 Pulverize Bituminous Pavement (P) SY 102469 Remove Bituminous Driveway & Parking Lot Pavement SY 76510 Remove Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 30011 Remove Catch Basin or Manhole (Storm) EACH 312 Remove Gate Valve & Box EACH 1413 Remove Hydrant EACH 614 Sawing Concrete Pavement (Full Depth) LF 24015 Sawing Bit Pavement (Full Depth) LF 61016 Salvage and Install Fence LF 20017 Salvage Retaining Wall LF 10018 Salvage Sign (Type C or Street Name Sign) EACH 819 Salvage & Install Sign Type C EACH 520 Salvage & Install Mailbox Assembly EACH 2621 Salvage & Install Pavers (Incl. Flagstone Steps & Wall) SF 20022 Common Excavation (P) CY 1260523 Infiltration Basin Excavation (EV) CY 46724 Subgrade Correction (EV)(Includes Select Granular CY 40025 Select Granular Borrow - Mod. 5% (CV)(P) CY 776426 Geotextile Fabric, Type V SY 100027 Agg. Base, Cl. 6 (CV) (P) CY 228828 Street Sweeping HOUR 40Shaded area denotes corrected figure678A1 Excavating Inc. McCabe Construction, Inc. Northdale Construction Co. Inc.408 26th Ave. (PO BOX 90 P.O. Box 1769 9760 71st St. NEBloomer, WI 54724 Eau Claire, WI 54702 Albertbille, MN 55301Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$63,800.00 $63,800.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $54,325.00 $54,325.006,500.00 7,475.00 6,000.00 6,900.00 6,300.00 7,245.00220.00 9,240.00 500.00 21,000.00 210.00 8,820.001.00 2,884.00 7.00 20,188.00 2.50 7,210.0014.00 2,016.00 10.00 1,440.00 10.00 1,440.005.00 2,200.00 3.00 1,320.00 4.00 1,760.001,500.00 1,500.00 500.00 500.00 5,250.00 5,250.002.70 27,664.20 1.50 15,369.00 3.18 32,582.284.00 3,060.00 3.00 2,295.00 5.00 3,825.008.00 2,400.00 5.00 1,500.00 5.00 1,500.00425.00 1,275.00 335.00 1,005.00 400.00 1,200.00225.00 3,150.00 114.00 1,596.00 70.00 980.00300.00 1,800.00 503.00 3,018.00 250.00 1,500.005.00 1,200.00 4.25 1,020.00 4.46 1,070.403.00 1,830.00 1.85 1,128.50 1.94 1,183.409.00 1,800.00 20.00 4,000.00 18.38 3,676.0018.00 1,800.00 5.00 500.00 16.80 1,680.0040.00 320.00 25.00 200.00 36.75 294.00160.00 800.00 125.00 625.00 168.00 840.00175.00 4,550.00 90.00 2,340.00 157.50 4,095.0020.00 4,000.00 15.00 3,000.00 19.69 3,938.0011.00 138,655.00 14.00 176,470.00 15.00 189,075.0017.50 8,172.50 13.00 6,071.00 20.00 9,340.0034.00 13,600.00 35.00 14,000.00 39.70 15,880.0017.00 131,988.00 21.00 163,044.00 23.70 184,006.802.75 2,750.00 1.60 1,600.00 2.57 2,570.0031.25 71,500.00 38.00 86,944.00 31.15 71,271.20130.00 5,200.00 127.00 5,080.00 125.00 5,000.00$1,802,842.40 $1,832,223.60 $1,839,226.15Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 9 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure29 Bit. Material for Tack Coat GAL 50130 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (2,C) (Parking Lots, TON 23031 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 59032 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,C) TON 31533 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 79034 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,.C) TON 42035 Bituminous Wedge Paving TON 17036 Saw & Seal Joint (40' Intervals) LF 140037 Pipe Foundation Rock LF 160038 15" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 139 18" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 140 21" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 241 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 242 Infiltration Basin Underdrain System LF 41043 4" PVC Perf. Edge Drain w/ Backfill & Wrap LF 130044 Draintile Cleanout EACH 2045 8" PVC Pipe Sewer (SDR 26) LF 323646 12" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 12547 15" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 74148 18" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 35049 21" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL III LF 17850 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Sewer CL IIA LF 10151 Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer EACH 252 Construct Drainage Structure 2'x3' (w/ Casting) EACH 753 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 48" (w/ Casting) EACH 854 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 60" (w/ Casting) EACH 255 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 72" (w/ Casting) EACH 156 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 84" (w/ Casting) EACH 1678A1 Excavating Inc. McCabe Construction, Inc. Northdale Construction Co. Inc.408 26th Ave. (PO BOX 90 P.O. Box 1769 9760 71st St. NEBloomer, WI 54724 Eau Claire, WI 54702 Albertbille, MN 55301Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,802,842.40 $1,832,223.60 $1,839,226.151.50 751.50 1.40 701.40 1.47 736.4770.00 16,100.00 68.00 15,640.00 69.30 15,939.0057.00 33,630.00 57.00 33,630.00 57.23 33,765.7066.50 20,947.50 65.00 20,475.00 66.15 20,837.2551.60 40,764.00 51.00 40,290.00 51.19 40,440.1059.50 24,990.00 58.00 24,360.00 59.06 24,805.200.01 1.70 0.01 1.70 0.01 1.704.00 5,600.00 3.25 4,550.00 3.40 4,760.001.00 1,600.00 16.00 25,600.00 6.00 9,600.00850.00 850.00 839.00 839.00 917.58 917.58970.00 970.00 913.00 913.00 981.00 981.001,080.00 2,160.00 1,880.00 3,760.00 1,074.53 2,149.061,780.00 3,560.00 3,190.00 6,380.00 1,713.10 3,426.209.20 3,772.00 10.00 4,100.00 28.23 11,574.3010.80 14,040.00 9.00 11,700.00 21.26 27,638.00180.00 3,600.00 376.00 7,520.00 261.25 5,225.0053.00 171,508.00 60.00 194,160.00 38.07 123,194.5238.00 4,750.00 34.00 4,250.00 37.95 4,743.7542.00 31,122.00 37.00 27,417.00 39.85 29,528.8546.00 16,100.00 44.00 15,400.00 42.94 15,029.0047.00 8,366.00 45.00 8,010.00 54.23 9,652.94123.00 12,423.00 115.00 11,615.00 113.16 11,429.162,500.00 5,000.00 671.00 1,342.00 1,911.25 3,822.501,950.00 13,650.00 1,730.00 12,110.00 1,930.35 13,512.452,570.00 20,560.00 2,420.00 19,360.00 2,400.13 19,201.043,850.00 7,700.00 3,670.00 7,340.00 3,225.73 6,451.464,100.00 4,100.00 4,280.00 4,280.00 3,907.88 3,907.885,450.00 5,450.00 5,790.00 5,790.00 5,340.97 5,340.97Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 10 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure57 8"X4" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 2158 8"X6" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 959 6" Clean-Out Assembly (SCH 40) EACH 460 2" Pressure Cleanout & Curbstop Assembly EACH 161 2"x1-1/4" Fused Tee EACH 462 1-1/4" Curb Stop & Box EACH 563 4" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 81564 6" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 76065 1-1/4" HDPE Service Pipe LF 25066 2" HDPE Pressure Pipe LF 29067 Tracer Wire Box - (at property line) EACH 3668 Sanitary Sewer Manhole (10' Deep) EACH 1469 Sanitary Sewer Manhole Extra Depth LF 4870 Sewer Televising LF 323671 2" Rigid Insulation SY 12072 Temporary Water Service LS 173 1" Corporation Stop EACH 2774 2" Corporation Stop EACH 375 1" Curb Stop & Box EACH 2776 2" Curb Stop & Box EACH 377 8" x 1 -1/4" Saddle Tap EACH 178 Connect to Existing Water Main EACH 379 Connect to Existing Water Service EACH 3480 Hydrant EACH 881 6" Gate Valve & Box EACH 1482 8" Gate Valve & Box EACH 883 16" Butterfly Valve & Box EACH 484 1" Type K Copper Pipe LF 1095678A1 Excavating Inc. McCabe Construction, Inc. Northdale Construction Co. Inc.408 26th Ave. (PO BOX 90 P.O. Box 1769 9760 71st St. NEBloomer, WI 54724 Eau Claire, WI 54702 Albertbille, MN 55301Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,802,842.40 $1,832,223.60 $1,839,226.15115.00 2,415.00 93.00 1,953.00 205.19 4,308.99180.00 1,620.00 163.00 1,467.00 273.62 2,462.58310.00 1,240.00 453.00 1,812.00 387.57 1,550.281,050.00 1,050.00 996.00 996.00 1,175.10 1,175.1070.00 280.00 171.00 684.00 266.13 1,064.52330.00 1,650.00 264.00 1,320.00 491.88 2,459.4032.00 26,080.00 23.00 18,745.00 31.33 25,533.9564.00 48,640.00 25.00 19,000.00 34.07 25,893.2027.00 6,750.00 23.00 5,750.00 29.97 7,492.5026.00 7,540.00 25.00 7,250.00 20.97 6,081.30120.00 4,320.00 144.00 5,184.00 228.47 8,224.923,850.00 53,900.00 2,720.00 38,080.00 2,791.25 39,077.50210.00 10,080.00 241.00 11,568.00 153.20 7,353.601.00 3,236.00 1.25 4,045.00 1.31 4,239.1624.00 2,880.00 19.00 2,280.00 34.31 4,117.207,500.00 7,500.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 20,588.24 20,588.24150.00 4,050.00 122.00 3,294.00 129.35 3,492.45450.00 1,350.00 337.00 1,011.00 432.72 1,298.16280.00 7,560.00 238.00 6,426.00 263.68 7,119.36620.00 1,860.00 514.00 1,542.00 645.60 1,936.80270.00 270.00 298.00 298.00 666.63 666.631,900.00 5,700.00 1,610.00 4,830.00 2,368.13 7,104.39200.00 6,800.00 168.00 5,712.00 98.38 3,344.924,150.00 33,200.00 3,670.00 29,360.00 4,036.43 32,291.441,325.00 18,550.00 1,180.00 16,520.00 1,325.54 18,557.561,800.00 14,400.00 1,650.00 13,200.00 1,763.94 14,111.522,700.00 10,800.00 2,770.00 11,080.00 2,731.40 10,925.6030.00 32,850.00 25.00 27,375.00 31.93 34,963.35Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 11 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure85 2" Type K Copper Pipe LF 9086 6" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 39487 8" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 242488 16" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 89289 Water Main Fittings LB 360690 Random Rip-Rap, Class III (includes Geotextile Fabric) CY 4091 5" Concrete Walk SF 510092 6" Concrete Walk - Pedestrian Ramp SF 48093 B612 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 36594 B618 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 552595 6" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 30096 8" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 12597 Truncated Domes SF 7298 Traffic Control LS 199 Sign Panels, Type C SF 21100 Sign, Type Special (Street Name) EACH 3101 Silt Fence, Preassembled LF 2400102 Storm Drain Inlet Protection EACH 23103 Filter Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 125104 Common Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 1500105 Sodding, Type Mineral SY 6300106 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type 25-131) ACRE 2107 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type Basin) ACRE 0.2108 Erosion Control Blanket Category 3N SY 2400109 Sediment Control Log LF 800110 6' Wide Agg. Lime Walking Trail LF 700111 Temporary Rock Construction Entrance EACH 4TOTAL BID PRICE678A1 Excavating Inc. McCabe Construction, Inc. Northdale Construction Co. Inc.408 26th Ave. (PO BOX 90 P.O. Box 1769 9760 71st St. NEBloomer, WI 54724 Eau Claire, WI 54702 Albertbille, MN 55301Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$1,802,842.40 $1,832,223.60 $1,839,226.1539.00 3,510.00 32.00 2,880.00 44.97 4,047.3047.00 18,518.00 41.00 16,154.00 34.28 13,506.3248.00 116,352.00 44.00 106,656.00 37.56 91,045.4481.00 72,252.00 74.00 66,008.00 66.92 59,692.646.00 21,636.00 6.00 21,636.00 4.23 15,253.3875.00 3,000.00 77.00 3,080.00 100.00 4,000.005.00 25,500.00 4.20 21,420.00 5.88 29,988.007.15 3,432.00 9.75 4,680.00 7.14 3,427.2018.50 6,752.50 21.00 7,665.00 18.90 6,898.5011.50 63,537.50 12.00 66,300.00 11.81 65,250.2557.00 17,100.00 61.00 18,300.00 62.25 18,675.0070.00 8,750.00 71.00 8,875.00 75.65 9,456.2535.00 2,520.00 43.00 3,096.00 31.50 2,268.004,500.00 4,500.00 2,350.00 2,350.00 2,415.00 2,415.0046.00 966.00 34.00 714.00 45.68 959.28530.00 1,590.00 250.00 750.00 519.75 1,559.252.10 5,040.00 1.95 4,680.00 1.58 3,792.00135.00 3,105.00 55.00 1,265.00 150.00 3,450.0039.00 4,875.00 37.00 4,625.00 41.96 5,245.0040.00 60,000.00 19.00 28,500.00 37.78 56,670.004.90 30,870.00 8.00 50,400.00 6.14 38,682.00675.00 1,350.00 5,750.00 11,500.00 6,352.50 12,705.002,600.00 520.00 9,700.00 1,940.00 2,688.00 537.601.50 3,600.00 1.45 3,480.00 1.37 3,288.003.25 2,600.00 3.25 2,600.00 2.89 2,312.0012.00 8,400.00 12.00 8,400.00 15.00 10,500.001,325.00 5,300.00 1,200.00 4,800.00 1,499.99 5,999.96$1,839,226.15$1,802,842.40 $1,832,223.60Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 12 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. Quantity1 Mobilization LS 12 Clearing & Grubbing ACRE 1.153 Clearing & Grubbing TREE 424 Remove Water Main Pipe LF 28845 Remove Sewer Pipe (Storm) LF 1446 Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 4407 Remove Backstop Fence EACH 18 Pulverize Bituminous Pavement (P) SY 102469 Remove Bituminous Driveway & Parking Lot Pavement SY 76510 Remove Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 30011 Remove Catch Basin or Manhole (Storm) EACH 312 Remove Gate Valve & Box EACH 1413 Remove Hydrant EACH 614 Sawing Concrete Pavement (Full Depth) LF 24015 Sawing Bit Pavement (Full Depth) LF 61016 Salvage and Install Fence LF 20017 Salvage Retaining Wall LF 10018 Salvage Sign (Type C or Street Name Sign) EACH 819 Salvage & Install Sign Type C EACH 520 Salvage & Install Mailbox Assembly EACH 2621 Salvage & Install Pavers (Incl. Flagstone Steps & Wall) SF 20022 Common Excavation (P) CY 1260523 Infiltration Basin Excavation (EV) CY 46724 Subgrade Correction (EV)(Includes Select Granular CY 40025 Select Granular Borrow - Mod. 5% (CV)(P) CY 776426 Geotextile Fabric, Type V SY 100027 Agg. Base, Cl. 6 (CV) (P) CY 228828 Street Sweeping HOUR 40Shaded area denotes corrected figure910R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. Lametti & Sons, Inc.2255 12th St. SE 16028 Forest Blvd. N.St. Cloud, MN 56304 Hugo, MN 55038Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,755.00 $80,755.006,200.00 7,130.00 6,000.00 6,900.00210.00 8,820.00 450.00 18,900.004.00 11,536.00 1.00 2,884.0010.00 1,440.00 1.00 144.008.00 3,520.00 2.00 880.003,000.00 3,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.003.00 30,738.00 1.00 10,246.008.00 6,120.00 3.00 2,295.0010.00 3,000.00 3.00 900.00300.00 900.00 1,100.00 3,300.00200.00 2,800.00 950.00 13,300.00400.00 2,400.00 1,100.00 6,600.006.00 1,440.00 4.00 960.003.00 1,830.00 2.00 1,220.0030.00 6,000.00 15.00 3,000.0040.00 4,000.00 50.00 5,000.0030.00 240.00 25.00 200.00150.00 750.00 150.00 750.00200.00 5,200.00 90.00 2,340.0050.00 10,000.00 10.00 2,000.0025.00 315,125.00 18.00 226,890.0050.00 23,350.00 40.00 18,680.0028.00 11,200.00 35.00 14,000.0020.00 155,280.00 19.00 147,516.003.00 3,000.00 1.00 1,000.0032.00 73,216.00 35.00 80,080.00145.00 5,800.00 100.00 4,000.00$2,265,500.00$1,992,511.95Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 13 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure29 Bit. Material for Tack Coat GAL 50130 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (2,C) (Parking Lots, TON 23031 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 59032 Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,C) TON 31533 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B) TON 79034 Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,.C) TON 42035 Bituminous Wedge Paving TON 17036 Saw & Seal Joint (40' Intervals) LF 140037 Pipe Foundation Rock LF 160038 15" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 139 18" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 140 21" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 241 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Apron w/Trash Guard EACH 242 Infiltration Basin Underdrain System LF 41043 4" PVC Perf. Edge Drain w/ Backfill & Wrap LF 130044 Draintile Cleanout EACH 2045 8" PVC Pipe Sewer (SDR 26) LF 323646 12" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 12547 15" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 74148 18" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V LF 35049 21" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL III LF 17850 36" Span RC Pipe-Arch Sewer CL IIA LF 10151 Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer EACH 252 Construct Drainage Structure 2'x3' (w/ Casting) EACH 753 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 48" (w/ Casting) EACH 854 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 60" (w/ Casting) EACH 255 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 72" (w/ Casting) EACH 156 Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC - 84" (w/ Casting) EACH 1910R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. Lametti & Sons, Inc.2255 12th St. SE 16028 Forest Blvd. N.St. Cloud, MN 56304 Hugo, MN 55038Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$2,265,500.00$1,992,511.951.50 751.50 2.00 1,002.0069.00 15,870.00 105.00 24,150.0057.50 33,925.00 62.00 36,580.0066.00 20,790.00 75.00 23,625.0051.00 40,290.00 60.00 47,400.0059.00 24,780.00 62.00 26,040.000.01 1.70 3.00 510.003.50 4,900.00 3.00 4,200.008.00 12,800.00 9.00 14,400.00900.00 900.00 900.00 900.001,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.001,100.00 2,200.00 1,100.00 2,200.001,800.00 3,600.00 1,500.00 3,000.002.00 820.00 175.00 71,750.0012.00 15,600.00 10.00 13,000.00200.00 4,000.00 370.00 7,400.0050.00 161,800.00 58.00 187,688.0038.00 4,750.00 46.00 5,750.0038.00 28,158.00 48.00 35,568.0042.00 14,700.00 40.00 14,000.0046.50 8,277.00 40.00 7,120.00128.00 12,928.00 125.00 12,625.003,500.00 7,000.00 400.00 800.002,100.00 14,700.00 5,450.00 38,150.002,500.00 20,000.00 5,750.00 46,000.003,400.00 6,800.00 10,000.00 20,000.004,000.00 4,000.00 11,000.00 11,000.005,200.00 5,200.00 11,000.00 11,000.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 14 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure57 8"X4" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 2158 8"X6" PVC Wye, SDR 26 EACH 959 6" Clean-Out Assembly (SCH 40) EACH 460 2" Pressure Cleanout & Curbstop Assembly EACH 161 2"x1-1/4" Fused Tee EACH 462 1-1/4" Curb Stop & Box EACH 563 4" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 81564 6" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe - Sch40 LF 76065 1-1/4" HDPE Service Pipe LF 25066 2" HDPE Pressure Pipe LF 29067 Tracer Wire Box - (at property line) EACH 3668 Sanitary Sewer Manhole (10' Deep) EACH 1469 Sanitary Sewer Manhole Extra Depth LF 4870 Sewer Televising LF 323671 2" Rigid Insulation SY 12072 Temporary Water Service LS 173 1" Corporation Stop EACH 2774 2" Corporation Stop EACH 375 1" Curb Stop & Box EACH 2776 2" Curb Stop & Box EACH 377 8" x 1 -1/4" Saddle Tap EACH 178 Connect to Existing Water Main EACH 379 Connect to Existing Water Service EACH 3480 Hydrant EACH 881 6" Gate Valve & Box EACH 1482 8" Gate Valve & Box EACH 883 16" Butterfly Valve & Box EACH 484 1" Type K Copper Pipe LF 1095910R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. Lametti & Sons, Inc.2255 12th St. SE 16028 Forest Blvd. N.St. Cloud, MN 56304 Hugo, MN 55038Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$2,265,500.00$1,992,511.95675.00 14,175.00 300.00 6,300.00725.00 6,525.00 400.00 3,600.00250.00 1,000.00 600.00 2,400.002,500.00 2,500.00 1,000.00 1,000.00100.00 400.00 100.00 400.00750.00 3,750.00 1,300.00 6,500.0014.00 11,410.00 95.00 77,425.0018.00 13,680.00 51.00 38,760.0022.00 5,500.00 6.00 1,500.0024.00 6,960.00 8.00 2,320.00100.00 3,600.00 250.00 9,000.003,200.00 44,800.00 8,500.00 119,000.00120.00 5,760.00 50.00 2,400.001.50 4,854.00 2.00 6,472.0020.00 2,400.00 5.00 600.0025,000.00 25,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00450.00 12,150.00 300.00 8,100.00700.00 2,100.00 500.00 1,500.00550.00 14,850.00 140.00 3,780.00800.00 2,400.00 200.00 600.00200.00 200.00 1,500.00 1,500.002,000.00 6,000.00 400.00 1,200.00200.00 6,800.00 85.00 2,890.004,600.00 36,800.00 3,500.00 28,000.001,050.00 14,700.00 1,200.00 16,800.001,400.00 11,200.00 1,500.00 12,000.004,000.00 16,000.00 2,000.00 8,000.0018.00 19,710.00 5.00 5,475.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 15 of 16 TABULATION OF BIDSOld Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility ImprovementsLake Elmo, MinnesotaSEH No.: LAKMO 140215Bid Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.Line No. Item UnitEst. QuantityShaded area denotes corrected figure85 2" Type K Copper Pipe LF 9086 6" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 39487 8" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 242488 16" Water Main DIP - CL 52 (Poly Encased) LF 89289 Water Main Fittings LB 360690 Random Rip-Rap, Class III (includes Geotextile Fabric) CY 4091 5" Concrete Walk SF 510092 6" Concrete Walk - Pedestrian Ramp SF 48093 B612 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 36594 B618 Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 552595 6" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 30096 8" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 12597 Truncated Domes SF 7298 Traffic Control LS 199 Sign Panels, Type C SF 21100 Sign, Type Special (Street Name) EACH 3101 Silt Fence, Preassembled LF 2400102 Storm Drain Inlet Protection EACH 23103 Filter Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 125104 Common Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV) CY 1500105 Sodding, Type Mineral SY 6300106 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type 25-131) ACRE 2107 Seeding (Seed Mixture Type Basin) ACRE 0.2108 Erosion Control Blanket Category 3N SY 2400109 Sediment Control Log LF 800110 6' Wide Agg. Lime Walking Trail LF 700111 Temporary Rock Construction Entrance EACH 4TOTAL BID PRICE910R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. Lametti & Sons, Inc.2255 12th St. SE 16028 Forest Blvd. N.St. Cloud, MN 56304 Hugo, MN 55038Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price$2,265,500.00$1,992,511.9526.00 2,340.00 6.00 540.0034.50 13,593.00 130.00 51,220.0040.00 96,960.00 50.00 121,200.0072.00 64,224.00 85.00 75,820.004.00 14,424.00 5.00 18,030.00100.00 4,000.00 30.00 1,200.005.00 25,500.00 4.00 20,400.006.10 2,928.00 8.00 3,840.0019.00 6,935.00 20.00 7,300.0011.85 65,471.25 15.00 82,875.0047.00 14,100.00 55.00 16,500.0055.50 6,937.50 75.00 9,375.0031.50 2,268.00 35.00 2,520.002,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.0036.00 756.00 60.00 1,260.00300.00 900.00 350.00 1,050.001.50 3,600.00 1.00 2,400.00200.00 4,600.00 50.00 1,150.0050.00 6,250.00 40.00 5,000.0037.00 55,500.00 25.00 37,500.004.75 29,925.00 4.00 25,200.001,200.00 2,400.00 600.00 1,200.001,000.00 200.00 8,500.00 1,700.001.35 3,240.00 3.00 7,200.002.20 1,760.00 3.25 2,600.0018.00 12,600.00 30.00 21,000.001,250.00 5,000.00 200.00 800.00$1,992,511.95 $2,265,500.00Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.Page 16 of 16 PROJECT SCHEDULE CITY OF LAKE ELMO OLD VILLAGE PHASE 3: STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2016‐133 FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283 MARCH 2017 SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 Council authorizes the preparation of the Phase 3 Feasibility Report. NOVEMBER 15, 2016 Presentation of Feasibility Report. Council accepts Report and calls Hearing. DECEMBER 20, 2016 Public Improvement Hearing. Council Orders the Improvement and orders the preparation of Plans and Specifications (Requires 4/5th vote). APRIL 4, 2017 Council approves Plans and Specifications and orders Advertisement for Bids. MAY 4, 2017 Receive Contractor Bids. MAY 16, 2017 Council accepts Bids and awards Contract. JUNE 5, 2017 Conduct Pre‐Construction Meeting and issue Notice to Proceed. OCTOBER 27, 2016 Substantial Completion. June 30, 2018 Final Completion. STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 20 AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Street Improvements – Accept Bids and Award Contract SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Project Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept bids and award a contract for the 2017 Street Improvements? BACKGROUND: On January 17, 2017, following a Public Improvement Hearing, the City council ordered the improvements and preparation of the plans and specifications for the 2017 Street Improvements. The improvements include the rehabilitation of residential streets located in 4 separate subdivisions, including Fox Fire Estates, Springborns Green Acres, Judith Mary Manor and Rolling Hills Estates. The street improvements include approximately 2.3 miles of local streets consisting of 55th Street North, from Demontreville Trail North to 57th Street North; 57th Street North, from Julep Way North to Keats Avenue North; Jamaca Avenue North, from 55th Street North to Jamaca Boulevard North; and Jamaca Boulevard North, from 55th Street North to Jamaca Avenue North. The improvements include a full depth reclamation of the existing pavement with the installation of new concrete curb and gutter and a new bituminous surface. Drainage improvements have been incorporated into the project to include storm sewer system replacement and drainage upgrades to prevent water from standing on or along the new street pavements. With the addition of one new 700 foot storm sewer run to correct a reoccurring drainage problem along 55th Street North, the scope of improvements remains consistent with the approved feasibility report which was adopted by the City Council on December 6, 2016. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Bids were received, publicly opened, and read aloud on Friday, May 5, 2017. The City’s design consultant has prepared and attached a Tabulation of Bids and a letter of recommendation for the award of the contract. The City received 4 bids for this project, with Hardrives, Inc. providing the lowest bid in the amount of $1,038,206.14. Contractor references for Hardrives, Inc. were reviewed and verified. The City Engineer and his consultant are therefore recommending that the Council award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Hardrives, Inc. as outlined in the attached letter. As a part of this award staff is requesting Council to provide the City Administrator authorization to enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000. This amount is budgeted in the total cost figures presented below and are necessary to complete the project. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution commits the council to enter into a construction contract for the project with a construction contract amount of $1,038,206.14. The estimated total cost for the 2017 Street improvements is $1,300,000. The improvements are proposed to be assessed against the benefitting properties consistent with the City’s Special Assessment Policy. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2017-052, thereby accepting bids and awarding a contract to Hardrives, Inc., in the amount of $1,038,206.14, for the 2017 Street Improvements. Staff is also recommending that the City Council authorize the City Administrator to enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2017–052, accepting bids and awarding a contract to Hardrives Inc., in the amount of $1,038,206.14 for the 2017 Street Improvements; and to authorize the City Administrator to enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2017-052 Accepting bids and Awarding a Contract for the 2017 Street Improvements. 2. Engineer’s Letter of Award Recommendation and Tabulation of Bids. 3. Project Schedule. CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-052 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE 2017 STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 2017 Street 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, Hardrives Inc., for the amount of $1,038,206.14. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk and hereby authorized and directed to enter into a Contract in the accordance with the above ordered Project, in the amount of the Contractor’s lowest responsible bid, and according to the plans and specifications thereof approved by the City Council. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders shall be retained until a contract has been signed. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MAY, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mike Pearson (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk TABULATION OF BIDS 2017 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BIDS OPENED: MAY 5, 2017 AT 10:00 AM CITY PROJECT NO. 2016-135 TKDA PROJECT NO. 16347.000 UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT BASE BID: GENERAL: 1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS 4,226.26$ 4,226.26$ 30,000.00$ 30,000.00$ 36,200.00$ 36,200.00$ 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS 1,890.12$ 1,890.12$ 5,325.32$ 5,325.32$ 1,820.00$ 1,820.00$ 3 SILT FENCE 180 LF 2.63$ 473.40$ 3.09$ 556.20$ 1.95$ 351.00$ 4 INLET PROTECTION 39 EA 90.00$ 3,510.00$ 75.15$ 2,930.85$ 95.90$ 3,740.10$ 5 CLEAR TREE 11 EA 231.01$ 2,541.11$ 144.20$ 1,586.20$ 232.00$ 2,552.00$ 6 GRUB TREE 11 EA 126.01$ 1,386.11$ 123.60$ 1,359.60$ 232.00$ 2,552.00$ 7 IMPORT AND PLACE TOPSOIL BORROW 2,080 CY 10.00$ 20,800.00$ 26.34$ 54,787.20$ 29.70$ 61,776.00$ 8 SODDING 10,330 SY 4.40$ 45,452.00$ 4.33$ 44,728.90$ 4.55$ 47,001.50$ 9 SEED, MULCH, & FERTILIZER 2,140 SY 1.95$ 4,173.00$ 0.67$ 1,433.80$ 0.43$ 920.20$ 10 REINSTALL PROPERTY CORNER 10 EA 472.53$ 4,725.30$ 391.40$ 3,914.00$ 370.00$ 3,700.00$ SUBTOTAL GENERAL 89,177.30$ 146,622.07$ 160,612.80$ STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS: 1 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER (ALL SIZES AND TYPES, INCL. END SECTIONS) 281 LF 5.25$ 1,475.25$ 10.30$ 2,894.30$ 19.30$ 5,423.30$ 2 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTURE 12 EA 420.02$ 5,040.24$ 278.10$ 3,337.20$ 528.00$ 6,336.00$ 3 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF ENERGY DISSIPATION STRUCTURE 1 EA 420.02$ 420.02$ 844.60$ 844.60$ 680.00$ 680.00$ 4 REMOVE CATCH BASIN CASTING 13 EA 159.82$ 2,077.66$ 132.18$ 1,718.34$ 127.00$ 1,651.00$ 5 R-3067 CATCH BASIN CASTING 13 EA 659.11$ 8,568.43$ 541.59$ 7,040.67$ 811.00$ 10,543.00$ 6 12" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE 66 LF 31.50$ 2,079.00$ 38.11$ 2,515.26$ 39.80$ 2,626.80$ 7 15" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE 1,773 LF 32.55$ 57,711.15$ 40.17$ 71,221.41$ 42.70$ 75,707.10$ 8 18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE 20 LF 60.90$ 1,218.00$ 77.25$ 1,545.00$ 46.70$ 934.00$ 9 15" FLARED END SECTION 5 EA 945.06$ 4,725.30$ 1,019.70$ 5,098.50$ 1,080.00$ 5,400.00$ 10 18" FLARED END SECTION 1 EA 2,205.12$ 2,205.12$ 1,545.00$ 1,545.00$ 1,160.00$ 1,160.00$ 11 CATCH BASIN TYPE 404 4 EA 1,732.60$ 6,930.40$ 2,369.00$ 9,476.00$ 2,590.00$ 10,360.00$ 12 CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE TYPE 406 17 EA 2,058.11$ 34,987.87$ 3,090.00$ 52,530.00$ 3,110.00$ 52,870.00$ HARDRIVES, INC. VALLEY PAVING, INC PARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Page 1 TABULATION OF BIDS 2017 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BIDS OPENED: MAY 5, 2017 AT 10:00 AM CITY PROJECT NO. 2016-135 TKDA PROJECT NO. 16347.000 UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT HARDRIVES, INC. VALLEY PAVING, INC PARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 13 RIP RAP INCL. GEOTEXTILE 39 CY 89.25$ 3,480.75$ 89.61$ 3,494.79$ 90.60$ 3,533.40$ 14 GRADE TO DRAIN 220 LF 17.85$ 3,927.00$ 22.66$ 4,985.20$ 22.70$ 4,994.00$ SUBTOTAL STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 134,846.19$ 168,246.27$ 182,218.60$ STREET IMPROVEMENTS: 1 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS OR CONCRETE 310 LF 1.00$ 310.00$ 4.29$ 1,329.90$ 5.45$ 1,689.50$ 2 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, ALL TYPES 130 LF 1.65$ 214.50$ 10.13$ 1,316.90$ 12.20$ 1,586.00$ 3 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAY) 680 SY 4.12$ 2,801.60$ 6.81$ 4,630.80$ 7.70$ 5,236.00$ 4 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAY) 220 SY 7.49$ 1,647.80$ 12.55$ 2,761.00$ 9.90$ 2,178.00$ 5 RECLAIM EXISTING BITUMINOUS AND BASE MATERIALS (8" DEPTH INCL. BIT. CURB) (P) 41,776 SY 1.35$ 56,397.60$ 0.60$ 25,065.60$ 0.67$ 27,989.92$ 6 HAUL OUT EXCESS RECLAIMED MATERIAL (LV)4,062 CY 9.47$ 38,467.14$ 7.93$ 32,211.66$ 13.20$ 53,618.40$ 7 2' AGGREGATE SHOULDERING 3,174 LF 1.01$ 3,205.74$ 1.23$ 3,904.02$ 0.97$ 3,078.78$ 8 SUBGRADE CORRECTION 370 CY 0.01$ 3.70$ 26.31$ 9,734.70$ 33.10$ 12,247.00$ 9 SUBGRADE PREPARATION OF RECLAIMED SURFACE (P) 121 RS 250.00$ 30,250.00$ 75.00$ 9,075.00$ 132.00$ 15,972.00$ 10 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT 893 SY 18.00$ 16,074.00$ 18.82$ 16,806.26$ 22.20$ 19,824.60$ 11 BITUMINOUS NON-WEARING COURSE 4,380 TN 48.75$ 213,525.00$ 47.63$ 208,619.40$ 46.70$ 204,546.00$ 12 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE 3,290 TN 51.45$ 169,270.50$ 52.56$ 172,922.40$ 50.50$ 166,145.00$ 13 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 2,020 GAL 1.25$ 2,525.00$ 1.34$ 2,706.80$ 1.55$ 3,131.00$ 14 SAW AND SEAL STREET (40' INTERVALS)9,560 LF 2.60$ 24,856.00$ 2.35$ 22,466.00$ 2.30$ 21,988.00$ 15 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, ALL TYPES 20,997 LF 10.25$ 215,219.25$ 10.42$ 218,788.74$ 10.20$ 214,169.40$ 16 6" CONCRETE FLUME (ALL TYPES)3 EA 523.98$ 1,571.94$ 515.00$ 1,545.00$ 505.00$ 1,515.00$ 17 6" CONCRETE DIRVEWAY PAVEMENT 220 SY 50.61$ 11,134.20$ 54.40$ 11,968.00$ 53.40$ 11,748.00$ 18 4" PERFORATED PVC EDGE DRAIN 2,000 LF 9.60$ 19,200.00$ 18.54$ 37,080.00$ 7.05$ 14,100.00$ 19 DRAINTILE CLEANOUT 20 EA 230.00$ 4,600.00$ 216.30$ 4,326.00$ 243.00$ 4,860.00$ 20 MANHOLE UPPER SECTION REHABILITATION 2 EA 1,454.34$ 2,908.68$ 3,708.00$ 7,416.00$ 1,730.00$ 3,460.00$ SUBTOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS 814,182.65$ 794,674.18$ 789,082.60$ TOTAL BASE BID 1,038,206.14$ 1,109,542.52$ 1,131,914.00$ Page 2 PROJECT SCHEDULE CITY OF LAKE ELMO 2017 STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2016.135 FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283 MARCH 2017 OCTOBER 4, 2016 Council authorizes Feasibility Report. DECEMBER 6, 2016 Presentation of Feasibility Report. Council accepts Report and calls Hearing. Authorizes Design Survey. JANUARY 17, 2017 Public Improvement Hearing. Council Orders the Improvement and orders the preparation of Plans and Specifications (Requires 4/5th vote). APRIL 4, 2017 Council approves Plans and Specifications and orders Advertisement for Bids. MAY 5, 2017 Receive Contractor Bids. MAY 16, 2017 Council accepts Bids and awards Contract. JUNE 12, 2017 Conduct Pre‐Construction Meeting and issue Notice to Proceed. SEPTEMEBER 22, 2017 Substantial Completion. OCTOBER 27, 2017 Final Completion. STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 20 AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Street Improvements – Accept Bids and Award Contract SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Project Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept bids and award a contract for the 2017 Street Improvements? BACKGROUND: On January 17, 2017, following a Public Improvement Hearing, the City council ordered the improvements and preparation of the plans and specifications for the 2017 Street Improvements. The improvements include the rehabilitation of residential streets located in 4 separate subdivisions, including Fox Fire Estates, Springborns Green Acres, Judith Mary Manor and Rolling Hills Estates. The street improvements include approximately 2.3 miles of local streets consisting of 55th Street North, from Demontreville Trail North to 57th Street North; 57th Street North, from Julep Way North to Keats Avenue North; Jamaca Avenue North, from 55th Street North to Jamaca Boulevard North; and Jamaca Boulevard North, from 55th Street North to Jamaca Avenue North. The improvements include a full depth reclamation of the existing pavement with the installation of new concrete curb and gutter and a new bituminous surface. Drainage improvements have been incorporated into the project to include storm sewer system replacement and drainage upgrades to prevent water from standing on or along the new street pavements. With the addition of one new 700 foot storm sewer run to correct a reoccurring drainage problem along 55th Street North, the scope of improvements remains consistent with the approved feasibility report which was adopted by the City Council on December 6, 2016. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Bids were received, publicly opened, and read aloud on Friday, May 5, 2017. The City’s design consultant has prepared and attached a Tabulation of Bids and a letter of recommendation for the award of the contract. The City received 4 bids for this project, with Hardrives, Inc. providing the lowest bid in the amount of $1,038,206.14. Contractor references for Hardrives, Inc. were reviewed and verified. The City Engineer and his consultant are therefore recommending that the Council award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Hardrives, Inc. as outlined in the attached letter. As a part of this award staff is requesting Council to provide the City Administrator authorization to enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000 and to approve a supplemental task order with TKDA to provide construction observation services for this project in an amount not to exceed $43,000. These amounts have been budgeted in the total cost figures presented below and are necessary to complete the project. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution commits the council to enter into a construction contract for the project with a construction contract amount of $1,038,206.14. The estimated total cost for the 2017 Street improvements is $1,300,000. The improvements are proposed to be assessed against the benefitting properties consistent with the City’s Special Assessment Policy. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2017-052, thereby accepting bids and awarding a contract to Hardrives, Inc., in the amount of $1,038,206.14, for the 2017 Street Improvements. Staff is also recommending that the City Council authorize the City Administrator to enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000 and to approve a supplemental task order with TKDA to provide construction observation services in an amount not to exceed $43,000. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2017–052, accepting bids and awarding a contract to Hardrives Inc., in the amount of $1,038,206.14 for the 2017 Street Improvements; and to authorize the City Administrator to enter into a material testing contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $30,000 and to approve a supplemental task order with TKDA to provide construction observation services in an amount not to exceed $43,000.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2017-052 Accepting bids and Awarding a Contract for the 2017 Street Improvements. 2. Engineer’s Letter of Award Recommendation and Tabulation of Bids. 3. Project Schedule. STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 21 AGENDA ITEM: CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) – Approve Concurrence to Award a Construction Contract and Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 10904 with Washington County for Engineering and Construction Costs SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Assistance City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council concur with Washington County to award a construction contract and approve Cooperative Agreement No. 10904 with Washington County for Design and Construction for the CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) Improvements? BACKGROUND: In 2017, Washington County will be reconstructing CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) from 44th Street North to 50th Street North including street, drainage, and trail improvements. At the request of the Cities of Lake Elmo and Oakdale the project also includes the Phase 2 extension of sanitary sewer for the Olson Lake Trail municipal urban service area. The Phase 1 sanitary sewer extension project was constructed in 2013 with Phase 2 intended to be constructed in coordination with Washington County’s street reconstruction along CSAH 13. Washington County has programmed the CSAH 13 street improvements to be constructed in 2017 and initiated the planning and preliminary design work accordingly. The Lake Elmo City Council provided municipal consent for the CSAH 13 Improvements as presented by Washington County on July 19, 2016. The street is owned and operated by Washington County and the City boundary between Oakdale and Lake Elmo is along the center of the street. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) Street, Drainage, Trail and Sanitary Sewer Improvements will be implemented as a joint effort between Washington County, the City of Lake Elmo, and the City of Oakdale, coordinated through Cooperative and Joint Powers Agreements. Washington County is the lead agency for the project design and construction. In accordance with the County Cost Participation Policy, the County is requesting City cost participation for these improvements, as outlined in the agreement, in the amount of $548,394.40. The City’s cost share includes permanent and temporary right-of-way acquisition, pedestrian trail improvements, curb and gutter, retaining walls, sanitary sewer and storm water pond construction costs. Cooperative Agreement No. 10904 sets forth the provisions that authorizes the County to implement the improvements including engineering design, construction administration, and testing, right-of-way and easement acquisition, including the use of eminent domain, and retaining a contractor for project construction. The Agreement also outlines the City’s obligations for cost participation including payment terms and schedule. The costs are estimated for the purpose of the Cooperative Agreement, however the actual cost participation by the City will be determined using the City’s share of the actual project costs for each respective cost participation item. The County has finalized the project design and contractor bids were obtained on May 2, 2017. The County received 5 bids with the low bid in the amount of $2,924,191.21 from Arnt Construction, Inc. The engineer’s construction cost estimate was in the amount of $3,612,835.60. The Cooperative Agreement has not been updated with the Post-Bid project costs. FISCAL IMPACT: Post-bid Estimated City Cost Share is $611,000. The estimated total project cost is $4,820,800 with the City cost share estimated to be $611,000. The City share of the street, drainage, and trail improvements is estimated at $383,000 and City share of the sanitary sewer improvements estimated at $228,000. The improvements are proposed to be assessed against the benefitting properties consistent with the City’s Special Assessment Policy including proposed assessments in the amount of $128,800 for the street, drainage and trail improvements and $230,500 for the sanitary sewer improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council concur with Washington County to award a construction contract and approve Cooperative Agreement No. 10904 with Washington County for Design and Construction for the CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) Improvements. The recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2017-053 concurring with Washington County to award a construction contract and approving Cooperative Agreement 10904 with Washington County for the Design and Construction for the CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) Street, Drainage, Trail and Sanitary Sewer Improvements.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2017-053 Concurring with Washington County to Award a Construction Contract and Approving Cooperative Agreement 10904. 2. Cooperative Agreement 10904. CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-053 A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AND APPROVING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT 10904 FOR THE COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY (CSAH 13) IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the County intends to reconstruct County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 13 from CSAH 14 (34th Street) to CSAH 35 (50th Street) in the City of Lake Elmo; and WHEREAS, items included in the project require City cost participation in accordance with “Washington County Cost Participation Policy #8001 for Cooperative Highway Improvement Projects”; and WHEREAS, the City desires to use local funds for these improvements; and WHEREAS, the County desires to use State Aid funds and State Grants for these improvements; and WHEREAS, Washington County received, opened, and tabulated bids, and is recommending the award of a construction contract; and WHEREAS, a cooperative effort between the City and County is the appropriate method to facilitate the construction of these transportation improvements; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to statutory authority contained in Minnesota Statute 162.17 sub.1 and Minnesota Statute 471.59. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. The City Council hereby concurs with Washington County to award a construction contract. 2. That Cooperative Agreement 10904 between the City of Lake Elmo and Washington County are hereby approved and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized execute the agreements on behalf of the City of Lake Elmo. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MAY, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mike Pearson (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk Page 1 of 5 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO AND WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION COST OF COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY (CSAH) 13 THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the City of Lake Elmo, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as the "City", and Washington County, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "County.” WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County intends to reconstruct County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 13 from CSAH 14 (34th Street) to CSAH 35 (50th Street) in the City of Lake Elmo; and WHEREAS, items included in the project require City cost participation in accordance with “Washington County Cost Participation Policy #8001 for Cooperative Highway Improvement Projects”; and WHEREAS, the City desires to use local funds for these improvements; and WHEREAS, the County desires to use State Aid funds and State Grants for these improvements; and WHEREAS, a cooperative effort between the City and County is the appropriate method to facilitate the construction of these transportation improvements; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to statutory authority contained in Minnesota Statute 162.17 sub.1 and Minnesota Statute 471.59. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: A. PURPOSE The purpose of this agreement is set forth in the above whereas clauses which are all incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein and shall consist of this agreement, Exhibit A (Location Map) and Exhibit B (Estimated Cost and Cost Splits). B. PLANS AND SPECIFICATION PREPARATION 1. The County shall be responsible for the preparation of all the plans and specifications for the project, including but not limited to, compliance with all applicable standards and policies and obtaining all approvals required in formulating the bid specifications for all County and City components of this Project. 2. The following County project number has been assigned to the project: SAP 082-613-033 (CSAH 13). C. RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS 1. The County shall acquire all permanent rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary slope easements. All permanent rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary easements will be acquired in the name of the County. 2. Any rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary slope easements that cannot be obtained through negotiation will be acquired by the County through eminent domain proceedings. D. ADVERTISEMENT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT After plans and specifications have been approved by the County, all permits and approvals obtained, and acquisition of necessary rights-of-way and easements, the County shall advertise WASHINGTON COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 10904 DEPT. PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION TRANSPORTATION TERM SIGNATURE – END OF PROJECT Page 2 of 5 for construction bids and with City concurrence, the County shall award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. E. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION, OBSERVATION, AND TESTING The County shall be responsible for the construction administration, inspection, and for the observation and testing for all construction items. F. COST PARTICIPATION ITEMS AND ESTIMATED COSTS Items included in the project require City cost participation in accordance with “Washington County Cost Participation Policy #8001 for Cooperative Highway Improvement Projects”, which is incorporated into this agreement by reference. The City’s cost participation, as set forth in Table 1, is broken down into four categories which are: 1.) Construction; 2) Design Engineering; 3) Construction Engineering/Contract Administration; 4) Right of Way. 1. Construction Construction costs include the cost to construct the project. The County has prepared a projection cost and cost splits hereto attached as Exhibit B. The total project cost for construction is estimated to be $3,790,266.40 as indicated in Exhibit B. The City shall pay to the County its share of the total cost as shown in Exhibit B and summarized in Table 1. After the County has awarded the construction contract, Exhibit B will be updated to reflect the actual contractor’s unit prices. 2. Design Engineering Design engineering costs include the cost for professional design engineering services, project coordination, preparation of plans and specification, stake holder engagement, geotechnical studies and other administrative functions necessary for the project. The City shall pay $38,999.17 for design engineering. The City share is 5.7% of the preliminary and final design cost of $684,196.00 and is based on the City’s cost share of the total construction cost. 3. Construction Engineering/Contract Administration Construction Engineering/Contract Administration cost includes the cost of construction observation, construction testing, construction administration, staking, conducting and recording the pre-bid, pre-construction and weekly construction meetings, reviewing monthly pay estimates, labor compliance, and other administrative functions necessary for the project. The City shall pay $16,419.42 for construction engineering/contract administration. The City share is 5.7% of the total estimated cost for construction engineering/construction administration of $288,060.07 and is based on the City’s cost share of the total construction cost. 4. Right of Way Right of Way cost includes the cost of all permanent right-of-way, permanent utility and/or drainage easements, temporary easements, title work costs, appraisal costs, relocation specialist costs, relocation costs, and condemnation commissioner costs. The estimated purchase cost for right of way is $96,855.00 and is 36.1% of the total estimated cost of $268,000.00. In addition, the estimated purchase cost for the storm pond right of way is $68,000.00 and is 20% of the estimated total cost of $340,000.00 as summarized in Table 1. Page 3 of 5 Table 1 City of Lake Elmo Cost Summary ITEM COST 1. Construction $328,120.80 2. Design Engineering $38,999.17 3. Construction Engineering / Contract Administration $16,419.42 4. Right of Way Total Cost- Road Improvements: $268,000.00 City Cost: 36.1% $96,855.00 Total Cost- Storm Pond: $340,000.00 City Cost: 20% $68,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $548,394.40 5. The construction costs and right of way costs attributable to the City and payable to the County in section F are merely estimated costs. Actual construction costs will be based on the contractor's unit prices and quantities, and a reconciliation of actual costs to the estimated costs will be made pursuant to section G of this agreement. Actual costs associated with right of way shall be determined at the end of the project. 6. Costs associated with design engineering and construction engineering/contract administration will not vary based on actual construction costs and shall be as stipulated in Table 1. G. PAYMENT 1. Construction a. After the County has awarded the construction contract, Exhibit B will be updated to reflect the actual contractor’s unit prices and will submit a copy of the revised summary to the City. Upon receipt of the revised summary and invoice, the City shall pay Washington County an amount equal to 10 percent of the City's estimated construction cost. b. During construction the County shall submit to the City an estimated cost of the partial work performed by the Contractor. Upon receipt of this estimated cost, the City shall pay to the County its share of the cost of the partial work performed as determined in Section F of this Agreement. c. Upon substantial completion of the work the County shall prepare a final cost participation summary which will be based upon the contract unit prices and the actual units of work performed and shall submit a copy of this summary to the City. The County shall submit to the City a final reconciliation of costs, which will add or subtract contract amendments to the City’s Project components; adjustments for liquidated damages pursuant to Section I. and previous Project cost payments made by the City to the County. If the amount of the total of the payments made by the City pursuant to Section G.2 is less than the actual cost to the City of its portion of the Project, the City agrees to pay the difference between the estimated amount paid by the City and the actual cost of the City’s portion of the project. 2. Costs associated with design engineering, construction engineering/contract administration, and right of way shall be invoiced by the County and paid by the City on a reimbursable basis. 3. In the event that the City paid more in advance than the actual cost of the City’s portion of the project, the County shall refund without interest the amount to the City. 4. The City shall pay 100 percent of an invoice amount within 30 days of receipt. Page 4 of 5 H. CONTRACT CHANGES 1. Any modifications or additions to the final approved plans and/or specifications of the City’s portion of the project shall be made part of the construction contract through a written amendment to the construction contract, but only after concurrence by the City Engineer, and the cost for such changes shall be appropriated as set forth in Section F of this Agreement. 2. Any utility or facility which is subsequently modified or added to the final approved plans and/or specifications shall become part of the construction contract and shall be paid for in accordance with the County Cost Participation Policy as summarized in Section F of this Agreement. I. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Any liquidated damage assessed the contractor in connection with the work performed on the project shall be shared by the City and the County in the following proportion: The respective total share of construction work to the total construction cost without any deduction for liquidated damages. J. CONDITIONS The City shall not assess or otherwise recover any portion of its cost for this project through levy on County-owned property. K. CIVIL RIGHTS AND NON-DISCRIMINATION The provisions of Minn. Stat. 181.59 and of any applicable ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set further herein, and shall be part of any Agreement entered into by the parties with any contractor subcontractor, or material suppliers. L. WORKERS COMPENSATION It is hereby understood and agreed that any and all employees of the City and all other persons employed by the City in the performance of construction and/or construction engineering work or services required or provided for under this agreement shall not be considered employees of the County and that any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker’s Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said City employees while so engaged on any of the construction and/or construction engineering work or services to be rendered herein shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the County. M. INDEMNIFICATION 1. The City agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the County may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the City, its agents, officers or employees during the performance of this agreement. 2. The County agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the City may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the County, its agents, officers or employees during the performance of this agreement. 3. To the fullest extent permitted by law, actions by the parties to this Agreement are intended to be and shall be construed as a “cooperative activity” and it is the intent of the parties that they shall be deemed a “single governmental unit” for the purposes of liability, as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subd. 1a(b). The parties to this Agreement are not liable for the acts or omissions of another party to this Agreement except to the extent they have agreed in writing to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other parties as provided for in Section 471.59, subd. 1a. Page 5 of 5 4. Each party’s liability shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466 and other applicable law. The parties agree that liability under this Agreement is controlled by Minnesota Statute 471.59, subdivision 1a and that the total liability for the parties shall not exceed the limits on governmental liability for a single unit of government as specified in 466.04, subdivision 1(a). N. DATA PRIVACY All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated, or used for any purposes in the course of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes 1984, Section 13.01, et seq. or any other applicable state statutes and state rules adopted to implement the Act, as well as state statutes and federal regulations on data privacy. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized officers. WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF LAKE ELMO Chair Date Mayor Date Board of Commissioners Molly O’Rourke Date City Administrator Date County Administrator Approved as to form: Approved as to form: Assistant County Attorney Date City Attorney Date )m )m)s GuWX SËSË ?öA@)m)s GuWXGvWXGvWX?öA@ Sh"19A GsWXSÊ)m)s G«WX G«WXGªWX GªWX)s)m %&f(GrWX GtWX SÉGvWX GvWX GsWX GrWX GlWX GlWX GlWX GzWXGpWX GpWX GpWX %&f( %&h( %&h( !"b$)n GsWX ?öA@ ?öA@ GoWX Sf"17B GqWX GqWX GeWX GeWX?©A@ ?©A@ GiWX GiWX GlWX?lA@ SÆ SÆ SÆ GuWX GuWX GuWX GuWX !"b$)n !"b$)n GrWX GrWX GrWX GrWX GiWX ?öA@ ?öA@ GuWXGnWXGnWX GnWXGnWX GoWX ?©A@ GdWX SÁ?ÇA@?ÇA@?ÇA@ GqWX GqWX GlWX G§WX U¡WX U¡WX GkWX GkWX GoWX GoWX S¿ S¿ GwWX GwWX GyWX GyWX GjWX?÷A@?÷A@ GuWXG§WX %&h( ?lA@ ?lA@ ?ÇA@ ?¸A@ G|WX ?¸A@ ?¸A@ ?÷A@ )s GgWX GgWX GgWX GgWX GfWX GfWX GfWX GfWX GfWX GhWX GhWX S¸ S¸ GoWX GoWX S¼ S¼ S³ S³ S³GjWX GjWX GdWX GdWX ?öA@ ?öA@ S¬ S¬Sº ?öA@ ?öA@ GfWX GcWXGcWXGcWXGcWXS¸S³GbWX GbWX GbWX GbWX ?öA@ S° S°?øA@?øA@?øA@?øA@?øA@?øA@?øA@ SÚ SÚGoWX GoWX GoWX GoWX S« S«S« Sø"A4 U¥WX U¤WX )s )s GaWXGaWX !"`$)s ?öA@ ?öA@ GzWX ?lA@ GfWX SÀ SÍ GlWX )l)l GeWX GkWX S½S¾GwWXG{WW DENMARKTOWNSHIP WOODBURY WEST LAKELANDTOWNSHIP STILLWATERTOWNSHIP STILLWATER OAK PARK HEIGHTS OAKDALE SCANDIA NEWPORT MAYTOWNSHIP MARINEON STCROIX MAHTOMEDI LAKEELMO LAKE STCROIXBEACH HUGO GRANT FORESTLAKE DELLWOOD COTTAGEGROVE BAYTOWNTOWNSHIP BAYPORT AFTON ST PAULPARK This map is the result of a compilationand reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices.This map should be used for referencepurposes only. Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies. COUNTY ROAD ........................................ U.S. TRUNK HIGHWAY ............................ COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY ............... STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY ........................ INTERSTATE HIGHWAY ........................... Road Classification §¨¦494 £¤61 456721 Æÿ74 8 GeWXGlWX GlWX G§WX GeWX 34TH ST N 32NDS T NHELMOAVEN IRISAVENIDEALAVENLAKEJANETRLN 3 1ST ST N 50TH ST N 44TH ST N IMATION P L 42NDSTNOLSONLAKE T R LN 40TH ST N 36THSTN STILLWATER BLVD N 38TH ST N 39TH ST N INT 694H A DLEYAVENHI LLVALEAVE NHIDDENBAY TRLN DEE RPONDTRLNHAMLET AVENHILLT R L N OAKDALE LAKEELMO CSAH 13 - From TH 5 to CSAH 35Oakdale & Lake ElmoProject # SAP 82-613-033 0 2 4 6 81Miles 1:250,000Scale / TH 5 / CSAH 35 CSAH 13 (Olson Lake Trl N & Ideal Ave N)Project Location Map ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Placeholder By: SRF CONSULTING GROUP, Inc. ESTIMATED ROADWAY STORM SHARE NON-PART SHARE PART SHARE NON-PART SHARE 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM $200,000.00 1 0.88 $176,000.00 0.06 $12,000.00 0.06 $12,000.002031.501 FIELD OFFICE TYPE D EACH $20,000.00 1 1 $20,000.00 2101.501 CLEARING ACRE $6,000.00 9.2 9.2 $55,200.002101.506 GRUBBING ACRE $6,000.00 9.2 9.2 $55,200.00 2104.501 REMOVE PIPE CULVERTS LIN FT $15.00 647 647 $9,705.00 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM)LIN FT $20.00 164 164 $3,280.002104.501 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT $8.00 140 140 $1,120.002104.501 REMOVE STONE RETAINING WALL LIN FT $6.00 160 160 $960.002104.501 REMOVE FENCE LIN FT $6.00 220 220 $1,320.002104.503 REMOVE BITUMINOUS WALK SQ FT $1.50 9770 9770 $14,655.00 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD $8.00 770 770 $6,160.00 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD $8.00 2150 2150 $17,200.002104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD $3.00 14400 14400 $43,200.00 2104.507 REMOVE RIPRAP CU YD $30.00 6 6 $180.002104.509 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH $500.00 1 1 $500.00 2104.509 REMOVE MARKER EACH $35.00 2 2 $70.00 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN TYPE C EACH $35.00 36 36 $1,260.002104.509 REMOVE MAIL BOX SUPPORT EACH $65.00 40 40 $2,600.00 2104.509 REMOVE BOULDER EACH $100.00 14 14 $1,400.002104.511 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT $5.00 190 190 $950.00 2104.513 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT $5.00 660 660 $3,300.00 2104.521 SALVAGE WOODEN FENCE LIN FT $25.00 55 55 $1,375.002104.523 SALVAGE MARKER EACH $80.00 7 7 $560.00 2104.523 SALVAGE LIGHTING UNIT EACH $500.00 2 2 $1,000.002104.523 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE C EACH $80.00 2 2 $160.00 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE D EACH $80.00 1 1 $80.002104.523 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE SPECIAL EACH $50.00 2 2 $100.002104.618 SALVAGE BRICK PAVERS SQ FT $5.00 490 490 $2,450.002104.618 REMOVE BRICK PAVERS SQ FT $4.00 180 180 $720.002105.604 PLASTIC LINER SQ YD $15.00 594 356 $5,340.00 119 $1,785.00 119 $1,785.00 2106.501 EXCAVATION - COMMON (P)CU YD $12.00 20406 16196 $194,352.00 2105 $25,260.00 2105 $25,260.002106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE (P)CU YD $14.00 7873 7873 $110,222.00 2106.522 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV)(P)CU YD $19.00 8076 8076 $153,444.002106.523 COMMON EMBANKMENT (CV) (P)CU YD $10.00 11655 11121 $111,210.00 267 $2,670.00 267 $2,670.00 2118.607 AGGREGATE SURFACING (CV) CLASS 2 CU YD $40.00 140 140 $5,600.00 2130.501 WATER M GALLON $50.00 10 10 $500.002131.502 CALCIUM CHLORIDE SOLUTION GALLON $1.25 2890 2890 $3,612.50 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 (P)CU YD $25.00 4950 4538 $113,450.00 206 $5,150.00 206 $5,150.002232.501 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.0")SQ YD $1.50 27800 27800 $41,700.00 2301.602 DRILL & GROUT REINF BAR (EPOXY COATED)EACH $20.00 11 5 $100.00 3 $60.00 3 $60.00 2360.501 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3,B)TON $75.00 240 240 $18,000.002360.501 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3,C)TON $80.00 6930 6930 $554,400.00 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (3,B)TON $60.00 1730 1730 $103,800.002401.501 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (3B52)CU YD $700.00 65 33 $22,820.00 16.2 $11,340.00 16.2 $11,340.00 2401.541 REINFORCEMENT BARS (EPOXY COATED)POUND $1.20 3180 1590 $1,908.00 795 $954.00 795 $954.00 2402.583 ORNAMENTAL METAL RAILING TYPE SPECIAL 1 LIN FT $140.00 196 98 $13,720.00 49 $6,860.00 49 $6,860.002411.521 GRANULAR BACKFILL MOD (CV)CU YD $40.00 600 390 $15,600.00 210 $8,400.002411.618 SPECIAL SURFACE FINISH (MULTI-COLOR)(P)SQ FT $7.00 1500 750 $5,250.00 375 $2,625.00 375 $2,625.002411.618 ARCH CONC TEXTURE (ASHLAR STONE)SQ FT $14.00 1500 750 $10,500.00 375 $5,250.00 375 $5,250.002451.507 GRANULAR BEDDING (CV)CU YD $25.00 1 1 $25.00 TOTAL PROJECT QUANTITIESITEM NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT PRICE S.A.P. 082-613-033 WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY OF OAKDALE S.A.P. 185-020-003 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Placeholder By: SRF CONSULTING GROUP, Inc. ESTIMATED ROADWAY STORM SHARE NON-PART SHARE PART SHARE NON-PART SHARE TOTAL PROJECT QUANTITIESITEM NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT PRICE S.A.P. 082-613-033 WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY OF OAKDALE S.A.P. 185-020-003 2451.515 COARSE AGGREGATE BEDDING (CV)CU YD $29.00 547 247 $7,160.10 195 $5,655.00 105 $3,045.00 2451.607 MEDIUM FILTER AGGREGATE (CV)CU YD $70.00 21 12 $861.00 4.1 $287.00 4.1 $287.002452.618 STEEL SHEET PILING (PERMANENT)SQ FT $45.00 3908 1954 $87,930.00 977 $43,965.00 977 $43,965.002501.515 18" GS PIPE APRON EACH $400.00 2 2 $800.002501.515 18" RC PIPE APRON EACH $600.00 2 2 $1,200.00 2501.515 24" RC PIPE APRON EACH $700.00 3 3 $2,100.002501.515 42" RC PIPE APRON EACH $1,300.00 1 1 $1,300.00 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 18" PIPE APRON EACH $300.00 3 1 2 $900.002501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 24" PIPE APRON EACH $500.00 1 1 $500.00 2502.541 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT $15.00 200 200 $3,000.00 2502.541 6" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT $14.00 476 286 $4,004.00 95 $1,330.00 95 $1,330.002503.511 18" CS PIPE SEWER LIN FT $40.00 136 36 100 $5,440.00 2503.511 6" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT $60.00 32 19 $1,152.00 6.4 $384.00 6.4 $384.002503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V LIN FT $65.00 1400 1400 $91,000.00 2503.541 18" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 LIN FT $36.00 1253 1253 $45,108.00 2503.541 24" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 LIN FT $45.00 707 707 $31,815.002503.541 30" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 LIN FT $55.00 273 273 $15,015.00 2503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 LIN FT $70.00 280 280 $19,600.002503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL IV LIN FT $135.00 207 207 $27,945.00 2503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V LIN FT $100.00 538 538 $53,800.00 2503.541 42" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL IV LIN FT $120.00 37 37 $4,440.002503.541 42" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V LIN FT $140.00 171 171 $23,940.002503.602 CONSTRUCT BULKHEAD EACH $600.00 1 1 $600.002503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLES (SAN)EACH $1,500.00 2 1.3 $1,950.00 0.7 $1,050.002503.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH $800.00 1 1 $800.00 2503.602 SADDLE TAP FOR 1.25" HDPE TO 8" PVC EACH $1,000.00 12 7.8 $7,800.00 4.2 $4,200.00 2503.602 8"X4" PVC WYE EACH $750.00 8 5.2 $3,900.00 2.8 $2,100.002503.603 4" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT $30.00 395 256.7 $7,701.00 138.3 $4,149.00 2503.603 8" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT $35.00 1897 1233 $43,155.00 664 $23,240.002503.603 TELEVISE 8" SANITARY SEWER LIN FT $1.50 1897 1233 $1,849.50 664 $996.00 2503.603 1.25" HDPE PIPE SEWER LIN FT $30.00 680 442 $13,260.00 238 $7,140.00 2503.604 4" INSULATION SQ YD $30.00 25 16.3 $489.00 8.7 $261.002504.604 4" POLYSTYRENE INSULATION SQ YD $30.00 7 7 $213.00 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SD-48 LIN FT $400.00 28.5 28.5 $11,400.002506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SD-60 LIN FT $500.00 20.4 20.4 $10,200.00 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SD-72 LIN FT $650.00 6 6.0 $3,900.00 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL LIN FT $250.00 108.3 70.4 $17,600.00 37.9 $9,475.002506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT $300.00 160.4 160.4 $48,120.00 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 60-4020 LIN FT $425.00 56.1 56.1 $23,842.502506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 66-4020 LIN FT $500.00 35.7 35.7 $17,850.00 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 78-4020 LIN FT $700.00 7.4 7.4 $5,180.00 2506.502 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPEC 1 EACH $9,000.00 1 0.6 $5,400.00 0.2 $1,800.00 0.2 $1,800.002506.503 RECONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE LIN FT $500.00 66.8 66.8 $33,400.002506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH $700.00 61 52 $36,400.00 5.9 $4,130.00 3.1 $2,170.002506.521 INSTALL CASTING EACH $400.00 10 10 $4,000.00 2506.522 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH $500.00 2 2 $1,000.002511.501 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS II CU YD $70.00 112.2 4.9 71.3 $5,334.00 18 $1,260.00 18 $1,260.00 2511.501 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CU YD $70.00 17.4 17.4 $1,218.002511.515 GEOTEXTILE FILTER TYPE IV SQ YD $3.00 441 22.9 294.5 $952.20 61.6 $184.80 61.6 $184.80 2521.501 6" CONCRETE WALK SQ FT $10.00 630 314 $3,140.00 158 $1,580.00 158 $1,580.00 2521.511 3" BITUMINOUS WALK SQ FT $2.00 39050 24030 $48,060.00 7510 $15,020.00 7510 $15,020.002531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B424 LIN FT $16.00 8090 4044 $64,704.00 2023 $32,368.00 2023 $32,368.00 2531.507 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD $50.00 620 620 $31,000.002531.507 8" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD $55.00 540 540 $29,700.00 2531.618 TRUNCATED DOMES SQ FT $50.00 48 24 $1,200.00 12 $600.00 12 $600.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Placeholder By: SRF CONSULTING GROUP, Inc. ESTIMATED ROADWAY STORM SHARE NON-PART SHARE PART SHARE NON-PART SHARE TOTAL PROJECT QUANTITIESITEM NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT PRICE S.A.P. 082-613-033 WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY OF OAKDALE S.A.P. 185-020-003 2540.602 MAIL BOX SUPPORT EACH $150.00 40 40 $6,000.00 2540.618 INSTALL BRICK PAVERS SQ FT $20.00 150 150 $3,000.002545.602 INSTALL LIGHTING UNIT EACH $1,000.00 2 2 $2,000.002554.501 TRAFFIC BARRIER DESIGN B8338 LIN FT $30.00 100 50 $1,500.00 25 $750.00 25 $750.002554.509 GUIDE POST TYPE B EACH $55.00 14 2 9.6 $638.00 1.2 $66.00 1.2 $66.00 2554.523 END TREATMENT-TANGENT TERMINAL EACH $3,000.00 2 1 $3,000.00 0.5 $1,500.00 0.5 $1,500.002557.603 INSTALL WOODEN FENCE LIN FT $50.00 55 55 $2,750.00 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM $100,000.00 1 0.9 $88,000.00 0.06 $6,000.00 0.06 $6,000.002563.610 FLAGGER HOUR $70.00 1200 1056 $73,920.00 72 $5,040.00 72 $5,040.00 2564.531 SIGN PANELS TYPE C SQ FT $40.00 247.700 247.7 $9,908.00 2564.537 INSTALL SIGN TYPE C EACH $200.00 2 2 $400.002564.537 INSTALL SIGN TYPE D EACH $200.00 1 1 $200.00 2564.537 INSTALL SIGN TYPE SPECIAL EACH $200.00 2 2 $400.002564.552 OBJECT MARKER TYPE X4-5 EACH $100.00 4 1 $100.00 1.8 $180.00 0.5 $50.00 0.7 $70.00 2564.602 INSTALL MARKER EACH $200.00 7 7 $1,400.00 2564.602 INFILTRATION AREA MARKER X3-6A EACH $100.00 3 1.8 $180.00 0.6 $60.00 0.6 $60.002564.618 CONSTRUCTION SIGNS-SPECIAL SQ FT $44.00 100 88 $3,872.00 6 $264.00 6 $264.00 2572.501 TEMPORARY FENCE LIN FT $10.00 500 500 $5,000.002572.502 CLEAN ROOT CUTTING LIN FT $5.00 500 500 $2,500.00 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS LIN FT $2.50 6330 5612 $14,030.00 359 $897.50 359 $897.50 2573.530 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH $200.00 51 45 $9,000.00 3 $600.00 3 $600.002573.533 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE STRAW LIN FT $3.50 1010 894 $3,129.00 58 $203.00 58 $203.002573.535 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM $2,500.00 1 1 $2,200.00 0.06 $150.00 0.06 $150.002573.560 CULVERT END CONTROLS EACH $300.00 5 4 $1,200.00 0.5 $150.00 0.5 $150.002574.508 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 POUND $1.50 970 970 $1,455.00 2574.508 FERTILIZER TYPE 4 POUND $5.00 170 170 $850.00 2574.525 FILTER TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD $60.00 1050 630 $37,800.00 210 $12,600.00 210 $12,600.002574.575 SUBSOILING ACRE $1,500.00 0.3 0.2 $270.00 0.06 $90.00 0.06 $90.00 2574.578 SOIL BED PREPARATION ACRE $1,000.00 5 5 $4,800.002575.501 SEEDING ACRE $400.00 2 2 $880.00 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 25-151 POUND $20.00 160 160 $3,200.00 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 33-261 POUND $50.00 20 12 $600.00 4 $200.00 4 $200.002575.502 SEED MIXTURE 35-221 POUND $50.00 20 20 $1,000.00 2575.505 SODDING TYPE LAWN SQ YD $20.00 33 10 23 $660.002575.505 SODDING TYPE SALT TOLERANT SQ YD $8.00 12670 12670 $101,360.00 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 0 SQ YD $6.00 1270 762 $4,572.00 254 $1,524.00 254 $1,524.00 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3N SQ YD $2.00 8740 8216 $16,432.00 262 $524.00 262 $524.002575.571 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON $250.00 100 88 $22,000.00 6 $1,500.00 6 $1,500.00 2582.501 PAVT MSSG PREF TAPE GR IN SQ FT $50.00 170 170 $8,500.002582.502 4" SOLID LINE PAINT LIN FT $0.50 60 60 $30.00 2582.502 4" DBLE SOLID LINE PAINT LIN FT $1.00 70 70 $70.00 2582.502 4" SOLID LINE EPOXY GR IN (WR)LIN FT $1.00 23290 23290 $23,290.002582.502 24" SOLID LINE EPOXY GR IN (WR)LIN FT $15.00 180 180 $2,700.002582.502 4" BROKEN LINE EPOXY GR IN (WR)LIN FT $1.00 620 620 $620.002582.502 8" DOTTED LINE EPOXY GR IN (WR)LIN FT $2.50 230 230 $575.00 2582.502 4" DBLE SOLID LINE EPOXY GR IN (WR)LIN FT $2.50 6510 6510 $16,275.002582.502 24" SOLID LINE PREF THERMO GR IN LIN FT $20.00 70 70 $1,400.00 $328,120.80 $66,296.00$204,901.30$3,790,266.40 $3,190,948.30ESTIMATED TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST STAFF REPORT DATE: May 16, 2017 ITEM #: 22 TO: City Council FROM: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief AGENDA ITEM: Direct fire department truck committee to begin specification process for Rescue/Engine in preparation of 2018 CIP. REVIEWED BY: Public Safety Committee BACKGROUND: At its April 25th meeting, the Public Safety Committee reviewed the recommended 2018 CIP purchase of a Rescue/Engine. Committee members reviewed records for the past 5 years on E2 (primary vehicle to be replaced) including repair costs, time “out of service”, the fleet replacement plan and CIP. Committee was advised on the fire department truck committee and their role in developing the specifications for purchase of the vehicle. It was explained that this is a very lengthy and time consuming process. This vehicle has been discussed during several budget cycles and was vetted extensively during the budget/CIP process last year by the Finance Committee ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Whether or not to direct fire department truck committee to begin the lengthy process of designing the specifications for a Rescue/Engine to be purchased in 2018. While it is understood that Council cannot commit to 2018 CIP expendatures at this time, by directing the fire deparment truck committee to begin the specification process, Council is supportive of moving the project along in the process. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: If approved, the approximate timeline is as follows: Developing specifications for vehicle, 6 – 8 months. If vehicle is then ordered in early 2018, delivery would not be until late 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact to begin the process. OPTIONS: Either direct the truck committee to begin the process or to not begin. RECOMMENDATION: Public Safety Committee made a motion to support the 2018 CIP purchase of the Rescue/Engine and to direct the fire deprtment to move forward with beginning the process of developing the specificatons. Motion passed: 3-0