The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-06-15 CCMPJI IN (Try' or LAKE ELMO Our Mission is to Provide .011a/ity P8b/ie Seroicex in a Fiscal/y Resp Ma nner IF IV Prexerri t be Ciiy:c Open S Character NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday, October 6, 2015 7:00 P.M. City of Lake Elmo I 3800 Laverne Avenue North Agenda A. Call to Order B. Pledge of Allegiance C. Approval of Agenda D. Accept Minutes 1. Approve September 15, 2015 Minutes E. Council Reports F. Presentations/Public Comments/Inquiries G. Finance Consent Agenda 2, Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. 2015 Stormwater Assessments 4. 39'1' St. N. Street & Sanitary Sewer Improvements — Pay Request No. 7 H. Other Consent Agenda 5. Administrative Assistant Position Request 6. Approve Animal Humane Society 2016 Letter of Understanding for Impound Services 7. Approve Building Inspector Hiring Recommendation 8. Approve Purchase of Building Inspector Truck 9. Approve Hiring of City Planner I. Regular Agenda to. Kleis Minor Subdivision it. Preliminary and Final Plat — Halcyon Cemetery Resolution No. 2015-59 12. Plat Approval Process/Conditions of Approval (Eli/Jet request) 13. 2014 Street improvements — Assessment Hearing on Improvements & Adopt Final Assessment Roll -- Resolution 2015-78 14. 2016 Street Improvements — Approve Feasibility Report and Order Public Hearing — Resolution 2015-79 15. Inwood Booster Station Improvements — Approve Building Architecture/Site Plan (30% DesignlEOC) 16. Water Tower No. 4 — Approve Engineering Services Task Order for Design and Construction 17. 10:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Time Limit 18. Councilmember/Staff Corrununications (no attachment) J. Staff Reports and Announcements K. Adjourn CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 A. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Council Members Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer, and Jill Lundgren. Staff present: Interim Administrator Schroeder, City Attorney Snyder, City Engineer Griffin, City Engineer Sternpski, Finance Director Bendel, Community Development Director Klatt, and City Clerk Johnson. B. PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Fliflet removed items 8 and 9 and added item 19, Finance Committee Membership and item 20, City Council Workshop Agenda. Councilmember Snzith, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 4 — 1. (Bloyer— nay) D. ACCEPT MINUTES Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO TABLE THE SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 MINUTES TO THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pearson: Attended meetings with East Metro Strong, Washington County and the school district regarding road issues, and Public Safety Committee. Toured the Arts Center. Stated he would like the Council to hold a budget workshop. Encouraged residents to attend Volksmarch on Saturday, October 10th from 10:00 am to 3:00 pm at Sunfish Lake Park. Councilmember Fliflet: Addressed many small issues with residents and a workshop with BMS. Councilmember Smith: Toured the Arts Center with the City Administrator and noted it needs to be cleaned up. Attended training with BMS. Stated that she would like to step down from the HR committee and re -join the Finance Committee. Councibnember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER SMITH TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND COUNCILMEMBER LUNDGREN TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — nay) Councilmember Bloyer: Discussions with residents regarding the dog park proposal, met with a resident who commented that Sunfish Lake Park is in the best shape it's ever been in. Walked through the Arts Center and feels it is not safe for use. Also noted that document requested from staff has been released. Councilmember Lundgren: Discussed the cemetery proposal, dog park proposal and other issues with residents, walked through the Arts Center and agrees it needs work; and attended the quarterly Fire Relief meeting. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES None PRESENTATIoN5 None FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. 2015 Stormwater Assessments 4. 39th St. N. Street & Sanitary Sewer Improvements — Pay Request No. 7 Councihnember Smith, seconded by Councihnember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. OTHER CONSENT AGENDA 5. Administrative Position Request 6. Approve Animal Humane Society 2016 Letter of Understanding for Impound Services 7. Approve Building Inspector Hiring Recommendation Coutwihnember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. ITEM 10: KLEIS MINOR SUBDIVISION: Community Development Director Klatt presented the planning report on the request to divide a 54.29 acre parcel into three lots. Klatt reviewed the layout of the new lots, noting that the layout was designed to preserve the original farmstead and farm operations while creating two ten acre lots that can be sold. Klatt also reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation for approval with four conditions. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-79 WITH AN ADDED CONDITION THAT THE ASSESSMENTS BE PAID OFF. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ITEM 11: PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT — HALCYON CEMETERY Community Development Director Klatt presented a summary of the request previously reviewed by the Council to plat a cemetery at 11050 50th Street North with changes and new information. Site plan was reviewed, noting parking, existing structures and proposed future structures and burial sites. Klatt also reviewed a summary of questions and concerns from the neighboring property owners. Klatt provided a review of the zoning code update in 2013 that added cemeteries as an allowed use, noting the distinction between a church and cemetery and that funeral homes are not permitted. Klatt identified four options for Council action with two alternatives for further discussion, one option for approval and one option for denial. Page 2 of 7 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Jean Mandrinich, 11240 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, noting that her property is adjacent to the proposed site and she feels the proposed cemetery would disrupt the rural residential character of the area. Jeff Saffle, 11180 50tn Street N., spoke in opposition, stating that he and his wife chose to live in Lake Elmo because of the rural character and stated the proposed cemetery as described is not a ceinetery. Susan Saffle, 11180 50111 Street N., spoke in opposition, stating that the proposed cemetery is a large, for profit venture and does not fit the rural residential area. Saxe Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, stating that he has water quality and runoff concerns, concerns about property values and feels the proposal is much more than a cemetery. Christy Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, expressing concerns over traffic across the road from her young children and water runoff. Joe Fleming, 5040 Lake Elmo Avenue N., spoke in opposition, stating that a mature cemetery without a mausoleum wouldn't impact property values much but the proposed project would. Richard Day, 11049 50111 Street N., spoke in opposition regarding the impact the project would have on his property that has been in his family since 1847, listing concerns over traffic and water runoff Stated this proposal is a privately owned business and should not be allowed in a rural residential district. Margaret Schmidt, 4525 Lake Elmo Avenue N., spoke in opposition stating concern that the proposed cemetery would affect the entire city. Mrs. Schmidt noted that she and other volunteers collected signatures on a petition requesting denial of the application from residents and asked the Council to consider public opinion along with facts. Robert Williams, attorney representing concerned residents, reiterated that the intent of the rural residential zoning is not for corrunercial use and parking, and requested denial of the application. Yvette Oldendorf, 5418 Lake Elmo Avenue N., spoke in opposition, noting this is a permanent decision that cannot be reversed once a cemetery is built. Dean Dodson, 2915 Jonquil Tr. N., spoke as a Planning Commissioner and stated he would have voted against the proposal if he had known there was a legal basis to do so. Lee Rossow, applicant, stated he wanted to design something special and worked to design the parking to avoid on street parking that would disrupt the neighbors. Mr. Rossow stated he was not proposing this project to make money, but was doing it for the greater good. Councilmember Flitlet stated this proposal is not what the zoning code allows for, as it is a large scale business and has overwhelming citizen opposition. Mayor Pearson stated that a cemetery is a reasonable use and could be an asset but the funeral home component of this proposal doesn't fit. Page 3 of 7 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015- 59A DENYING THE HALCYON CEMETERY PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ITEM 13: 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS — ASSESSMENT HEARING ON 1MPROVMENTS & ADOPT FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL Item 13 was moved up on the agenda in consideration of residents in attendance. City Engineer Stempski reviewed the project areas, work done to the streets, gutters and road shoulders and street signs replaced to meet current standards. Stempski explained the process and criteria used to assess property owners. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved to open the public hearing at 9:20 pan. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. Finance Director Bendel reported that she met with Jean Durand regarding her property at 1332 20'1' Street. The property was assessed in the past for four units versus five in the current project. Bendel stated that staff is recommending the current assessment be changed to four units. Joan Richert spoke on behalf of her sister, Jean Durand, explaining there is 15 acres of water on the property due to runoff and that leaves only three buildable lots. Ms. Richert requested a reduction to 3 units for assessment on the property. Linda Bernier, 2257 Legion Lane, stated her street did not have curb and gutter installed but another area did and both areas are being assessed the same amount. City Engineer Griffin explained that there some drainage improvements included in the Eden Park portion of the project and the reclaim process makes the cost for the two areas very close to the equal. Griffin added that completing the projected together saves cost. Ann Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue N., presented a written objection to the assessment on her property and requested a recalculation due to Packard Park having curb and gutter installed and Eden Park did not. Dave Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue N., stated that about a mile of curb and gutter was installed in Packard Park and feels Eden Park should not be combined with Packard Park for computing the assessment. Paul Bultman, 8243 Deer Pond Ct., stated that the rebuilt street in front of his house does not increase his property value and feels the assessment is an unconstitutional tax as it is not applied to all residents. Councihnentber Smith, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING/IT 9:44 P.M. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. Discussion held concerning the resident objections to the assessment cost distribution and amount of the assessment relative to the benefit to the property. Discussion also held concerning the number of units to assess the Durand property. Page 4 of 7 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Councihnember Moyer moved TO TABLE ITEM 13. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councihnember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2015-78 ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-78 ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS WITH AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE DURAND PROPERTY AT 11332 20TH ST. FROM 5 UNITS TO 3 UNITS. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO CONSIDER ITEM 17 NEXT ON THE AGENDA. MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) ITEM 12: PLAT APPROVAL PROCESS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Councilmember Fliflet stated concerns over the number of conditions on approvals and the follow up on compliance with the conditions. Discussion was held with Community Development Director Klatt explaining that the sixty day rule limits the amount of work that can be done prior to approval. Klatt added that the number of conditions typically found on approvals is in line with other cities. Councihnember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved THAT RELEASE/REALLOCTION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND LIENS WITH THE COUNTY NEED CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. MOTION WITHDRAWN. Finance Director Bendel stated she will provide a draft policy for conditions of approval for collection and reallocation of special assessments. ITEM 14: 2016 STREET IMPROVEMENTS — APPROVE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDER PUBLIC HEARING City Engineer Stempski reviewed the project area and schedule, noting that the Kirkwood residents submitted a petition to the pave their gravel road and staff was directed to include that area in the project. Sternpski also reviewed the planned improvements and estimated cost per unit for each area. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, ntoved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-79, RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING A HEARING FOR THE 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ITEM 15: INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS & ADOPT FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL City Engineer Griffin reported on the process and costs for the booster station building and asked for direction on the final design. Page 5 of 7 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE PRAIRIE STYLE BUILDING FOR THE INWOOD WATER BOOSTER STATION. MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Bloyer, Fliflet, Smith — Nay) Councilmember Fliflet stated the building should have unique rural character, such as a barn style. Councilmember Smith asked about removing stone from the back of the building and applying it on the front where it is more visible. Engineer Griffin stated he would seek the input of the adjacent land owner on the final design. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Fliflet, Smith — Nay) ITEM 16: WATER TOWER NO. 4— APPROVE ENGINEERING SERVICES TASK ORDER FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION City Engineer Griffin reported this is the third component in the project. RFPs were sent to five engineering firms and the bids were analyzed for completeness and quality of work. Griffin discussed the design and materials to be used. Councihnember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES CONTRACT WITH SHE FOR THE INWOOD WATER TOWER NO 4 PROJECT IN AN AMOLWT NOT TO EXCEED $108,500. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ITEM 17: 10:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL MEETING TIME LIMIT Interim Administrator Schroeder introduced the item, and rioted that the Ordinance proposed is based on information collected from other cities that have passed a similar Ordinance. Discussion held. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 08- 127. MOTION FAILED 1 — 4. (Bloyer, Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) ITEM 18: COUNCILMEMBER/STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Interim Administrator Schroeder stated that an individual has filed a complaint that a Councilmember was communicating in an unprofessional manner. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved THAT IF COUNCILMEMBER BLOYER WANTS TO COMMUNICATE WITH STAFF IT WILL BE VIA EMAIL OR WITH ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER PRESENT. QUESTIONS FOR MEETINGS WILL BE GIVEN AHEAD OF TIME OR QUESTIONS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE CHAIR. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — Nay) Wally Nelson, 4582 Lilac, stated he has known Councilmember Bloyer for two years and has never seen him threaten or accost anyone. ITEM 19: FINANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Councilmember Fliflet reported that Finance Committee members are currently being recruited and noted that the Finance Director and City Administrator are considered members of the Committee. Page 6 of 7 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 ITEM 20: CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA Councilmember Fliflet reported that the entire budget will be reviewed at the next Finance Committee meeting and suggested the budget be removed from the October 13th workshop agenda and invited Councilmembers to attend the Finance Committee meeting to discuss the budget. Couneilmember Fliflet, seconded by Couneihnember Smith, moved TO CONDUCT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14711 AT 4:30 P.M. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Interim City Administrator Schroeder: Report to be provided via email due to the hour City Clerk Johnson: No report Finance Director Bendel: Stonnwater assessments went out to residents for a final reminder, 3' quarter water bills will be going out, finishing financial reports for the Finance Committee meeting, working on budget updates, working through CIP updates. City Attorney Snyder: No report. Community Development Director Klatt: No report. City Engineer Griffin: No report. Meeting adjourned at 12:50 a.m. ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor Page 7 of 7 CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 A. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Council Members Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer, and Jill Lundgren. Staff present: Interim Administrator Schroeder, City Attorney Brekken, City Engineer Griffin, Finance Director Bendel, Community Development Director Klatt, Library Director Deprey, Fire Chief Malmquist, Planner Gozola and City Clerk Johnson. B. PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Fliflet moved Item 14 to the Regular Agenda and tabled item 27. Mayor Pearson moved item 13 to the Regular Agenda. Councilmember Bloyer moved item 28 up to before item 23. Mayor Pearson moved item 15 to the Regular Agenda. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. D. ACCEPT MINUTES Minutes of the September 1, 2015 Regular Meeting were accepted as amended. E. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pearson: Announced Christ Lutheran Church Rally Day on September 20th, 9:00 a.m. would appreciate local support due to construction. Councilmember Fliflet: Attended Finance Committee meeting, Library Board meeting, Farmers Market and announced strong interest from residents in serving on an Environmental Committee. Thanked staff for all their assistance. Councilmember Smith: Spoke with a resident on property site issues, met with Lennar representatives at the Savona development. Councilmember Bloyer: Spoke with residents regarding 30th Street, the dog park proposal, downtown project and cemetery proposal. Reported on additional cost incurred by the City on legal publications. Noted a resignation from the Finance Committee and stated he does not feel he is an asset to the Finance Committee and submitted his resignation as a committee member. Councilmember Lundgren: Noted that September 26th is the last Farmers Market for 2015. F. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INOUIRIES None G. PRESENTATIONS Susan Schmidt, Trust for Public Land, reported that conserving Tartan Park as a public park does not have strong support at this time and the Trust for Public Land will not be pursuing this project any titrther at this time. H. FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Accept Assessor Report 4. Approve Financial Report Dated August 31, 2015 5. Approve Purchase of Replacement Skid Unit for Fire Department Brush Truck 6. Approve Eagle Point Blvd. Street Improvements - Pay Request No. 1 7. Approve Production Well No. 4 - Pay Request No. 10 (FINAL) 8. Approve Production Well No. 4 - Compensating Change Order No. 2 Councihnentber Flifiet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. I. OTHER CONSENT AGENDA 9. Accept Building Report 10. Approve Election Judge Appointments for November 4, 2015 Special Election — Resolution 2015-74 11. Phase 2 Downtown Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements: Request County to Proceed with 301h Street Right -of -Way Acquisition 12. Approve Lake Elmo Jaycees Temporary Liquor License for 2015 Volksmarch October 10, 2015 16. Approve Fire Station Parking Lot Paving 17. Approve Sanctuary Park Trail Paving Councilmember Smith, seconded by Mayor Pearson, nroved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. J. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 13: ADOPT TARTAN PARK RESOLUTION —Resolution 2015-75 Interim Administration Schroeder reviewed proposed Resolution 2015-75 summarizing the City's position on the future disposition of Tartan Park, Councilmenzber Flrflet, seconded by Councihnember Smith, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-75 RELATING TO TARTAN PARK. MOTION PASSED 4 — 1. (Bloyer — Nay) ITEM 14: STATUS OF ARTS CENTER Interim Administrator Schroeder reviewed his memo to the Council reporting on the present use and condition of the Arts Center, noting that the property is in disrepair and may not meet standards for a public facility. Schroeder reviewed photos of the property and current utility and insurance cost information. Mike Kramer, 142500 45`11 Street, Stillwater, offered a history of the Arts Center as a member of the New Century Artists painting group that has been meeting every Monday night since 2008 at the Arts Center. Noted that the building was a true arts center and utilized more heavily for that purpose prior to the Library moving in. The group has provided over 50 paintings currently hanging at the Lake Elmo Library. Page 2 of 8 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 Susan Kane, 4372 Little Bluestem, Lake Elmo, spoke on behalf of the Valley Friendship Club that has been meeting at the Arts Center and storing supplies there since 2010. The group provides activities for kids and young adults with disabilities. Councilmembers discussed the condition of the property with no support for demolish the building at the present time. Consensus was to obtain costs for repairing the building and assessing the current uses. Interim Administrator Schroeder noted that if the building is retained for public use it should be updated to ensure safety. Bill Walker, 3603 Laverne Avenue N., stated he lives across from the Arts Center and expressed concern over the exterior condition of the house and property. He encouraged the Council to tour the property and consider demolishing it. Councihnember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO NOT DEMOLISH THE ARTS CENTER AND TO ALLOW ART GROUPS TO CONTINUE TO USE THE BUILDING AS THEY HAVE BEEN. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — nay) Mayor Pearson stated that the City has a liability with public use of the building, a neighbor objection and the City is setting a bad example by allowing the property to fall into disrepair. Pearson suggested that the building should be winterized and investigated. Councilmember Bloyer stated that the City has an obligation to make sure the building is safe before people use it any longer. Finance Director Bendel noted that the Arts Center is currently insured as a vacant building and coverage will need to be added if it will continue to host the public. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO INSTRUCT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO IMMEDIATELY PLACE INSURANCE COVERAGE ON THE BUILDING AND INSTRUCT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO INSPECT THE BUILDING. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ITEM 15. DOWNTOWN PHASE I AND PHASE 2 STREETSCAPE AND LANDSCAPE PLANS — APPROVE ALLEY CONCEPT PLAN CHANGES City Engineer Griffin reviewed the features of the proposed plan changes and noted that curbs will be installed on Laverne Avenue in the next week so decisions need to be made on where curb cuts will go. Library Director Deprey thanked the engineering department for their work on the alley design. Deprey reported that the Library Board heard concerns from residents and neighboring businesses at a board meeting and felt this was the best compromise after weighing all the input. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO APPROVE THE REVISED ALLEY PLAN FOR THE PHASE I DOWNTOWN STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ASK THE LIBRARY BOARD TO COVER ADDITIONAL COST OF THE REVISED ALLEY PLAN FROM LIBRARY FUNDS. MOTION FAILED I — 4. (Moyer, Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) Page 3 of 8 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 ITEM 18: GATEWAY CORRIDOR MARKET AND FISCAL IMPACT STUDY Interim Administrator Schroeder introduced the East Metro Strong and Bus Rapid Transit concept. Community Development Director Klatt noted that the Planning Commission also received information from East Metro Strong at the last meeting. Will Schroeer, Executive Director of East Metro Strong, explained that the market study would not bind the City to anything and explained how the information may be useful to the City. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved to remove the ,notion from the table TO CONTRIBUTE $20,000 TO THE LAKE ELMO MARKET AND FISCAL IMPACT STUDY. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Bloyer, Smith — Nay) ITEM 19. MANNING AVENUE REDESIGN/REALIGNMENT Interim Administrator Schroeder reviewed a map of the area, noting staff recommendation to approve Concept C. Frank Ticknor, Washington County Public Works, discussed the phases and timeline for the project. Councilmember Bloyer„seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ACCEPT THE STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE CONCEPT C. MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) Discussion held concerning stoplight locations, traffic patterns and safety issues. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ACCEPT CONCEPT C2, TO NOT BUILD THE ROAD FROM OLD HIGHWAY 5 TO CSAH 14 AT THIS TIME, ANDTO EXPLORE OPTIONS ON TEMPORARY EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS BETWEEN THE CUL DE SAC AND CSAH 14. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — Nay) ITEM 20: PEBBLE PARK PICNIC SHELTER Public Works Superintendent Bouthilet presented itemization of costs for add on features of the Pebble Park picnic shelter recommended by the Parks Commission, Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE PEBBLE PARK PICNIC SHELTER WITHOUT THE LOGO AND ORNAMENTATION ON THE GABLE END. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ALLOW THE LASER CUT CITY LOGO TO REMAIN AMENDMENT PASSED 5 — O. PRIMARY MOTION PASSED 4 — 1. (Bloyer — Nay) ITEM 21: DOWNTOWN PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 STREETSCAPE AND LANDSCAPE PLANS — APPROVE SCOPE OF IMPROVEMENTS Frank Ticknor, Washington County Public Works, provided a review of the process of the project and asked for the Council's guidance on burying the overhead utilities. Discussion was held concerning the cost of burying the utilities and potential funding sources. Barry Weeks, 3647 Lake Elmo Avenue, stated concern that the cost of burying the overhead utilities could increase and stated that this money could be spent on a lot of other things. Page 4 of 8 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 Dick Wier, 3645 Laverne Avenue, stated that there will be power lines everywhere else so there is not value in burying lines on one street and also expressed concern over hidden costs. Stuart Johnson, 3603 Lake Elmo Avenue, expressed concern about the cost of the project and feels the costs will increase. Wally Nelson, 4582 Lilac, stated a franchise fee is a tax and asked why the city would pay for the cost for upgrades inside buildings when that was not done for sewer hookups. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO NOT BURY THE UTILITIES OWNED BY XCEL ENERGY AND COMCAST ALONG LAKE ELMO AVENUE FROM THE RAILROAD TO OLD HIGHWAY 5. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. Discussion held concerning the lighting portion of the project. David Faint, 3617 Laverne Avenue, stated there are too many lights in the proposed plan. Councihnember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE EVANS STYLE LIGHT FOR THE DOWNTOWN PROJECT AND FOLLOW THE REVISED LAYOUT PROVIDED BY WASHINGTON COUNTY. After discussion and receiving fitrther infornzinformation from SEH, MOTION FAILED 0 — 5. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO MIX THE EVANS LIGHT WITH ACORN LIGHTS WITH CAPS IN THE DOWNTOWN AND DIRECT THE LIGHTING DESIGNER TO REVISIT THE PLAN WITH DIRECTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS AS FEW LIGHTS AS POSSIBLE AND WORK WITH STAFF TO FIND FIXTURES THAT COMPLY WITH CITY CODE AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Bloyer, Smith — Nay) Discussion held concerning the landscaping portion of the project. Revised plans were presented based on past input from the City Council. Cost and need for irrigation was discussed with alternatives offered such as asking for businesses and other to adopt planting areas for purposes of providing maintenance. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE THE PRIOR WORKSHOP PLAN AS IT RELATES TO THE PLANTING BEDS. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren — Nay) Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, ',toyed TO APPROVE THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PLAN FOR TREES IN THE DOWNTOWN PROJECT. MOTION PASSED 4 — 1. (Fliflet — Nay) ITEM 22: INTERNAL FINANCIAL CONTROLS. Councilmember Fliflet introduced the request for Council support of the City's internal control policy passed earlier this year, noting concurrence from the City's auditor and bond counsel. Page 5 of 8 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 Councilmember Bloyer expressed concern over transparency and stated that past City Council members have had access to full working documents. Mayor Pearson stated that the City should have written policies concerning this subject. Date Doerschner, 3150 Lake Elmo Avenue, stated he has been hearing the Council ask for proformas that haven't been provided, and expressed concern over the Finance Committee agendas. Stuart Johnson, 3603 Lake Elmo Avenue. stated that models are essential and it seems unusual to not provide working documents to the Council. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO SUPPORT THE STAFF AND UPHOLD THE CITY'S INTERNAL CONTROL POLICY SURROUNDING THE RELEASE OF PROPRIETARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — Nay) Councihnember Bloyer moved TO MOVE AGENDA ITEM 28 TO BEFORE ITEM 23. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councihnember Fliflet, seconded by Councihnember Smith, moved TO CONSIDER THE SAVONA AGENDA ITEMS NEXT. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — Nay) ITEM 24: SAVONA 3" ADDITION FINAL PLAT — RESOLUTION 2015-70 Community Development Director Klatt reviewed prior City Council action on the plat and clarified areas of past concern. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLTUION 2015-70 APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR SAVONA 38° ADDITION WITH CONDITIONS 11 AND 12 STRICKEN. Councilmember Smith moved TO LEAVE CONDITON 12 IN THE APPROVAL AND DIRECT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO LOOK AT THE PLANS. AMENDMENT DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND. PRIMARY MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) Councilmember Smith stated that she met with representatives at the Savona development and thanked them for their attempts to make the exterior of the townhomes look better. Discussion held regarding multifamily classification and design standards. Councilmember Fliflet suggested rewording the City's code to better define multifamily and single family. Challenges related to landscaping around the stormwater pond retaining wall were discussed. Councilmember Fliflet stated the City should review the park to be installed by the developer. Councilmember Bloyer stated that he would not support that condition, as the park is on private property. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilntentber Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-70, STRIKING CONDITION 11. MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Pearson, Bloyer, Fliflet — Nay) Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councihnember Smith, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-70 APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR SAVONA AS PRESENTED AND RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. MOTION PASSED 3 — 2. (Pearson, Bloyer — Nay) Page 6 of 8 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 ITEM 25 — SAVONA 3" ADDITION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT — RESOLUTION 2015-71 Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-71 APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SA VONA 3RD ADDITION. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ITEM 23: APPROVE 2016 PRELIMINARY GENERAL FUND AND LIBRARY FUND ANNUAL BUDGET AND TAX LEVY — RESOLUTION 2015-76 Finance Director Bendel reviewed the timeline for the 2016 budget process, noting that the preliminary budget and levy up for approval can be reduced, but not increased once approved. Budget assumptions, key considerations, staffing costs, library levy and CIP were presented. Bendel noted that the levy as presented, if not reduced later, would impact the average homeowner by $60 per year in additional property taxes. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2015-76 ADOPTING THE PRELIMINARY 2016 GENERAL FUND AND LIBRARY FUND ANNUAL BUDGETS AND LEVIES. MOTION PASSED 4 -I. (Bloyer — Nay) ITEM 28: LAKE ELMO MUNICIPAL WATER AND SEWER ENTERPRISE FUNDS STATUS (WACs AND SACO Finance Director Bendel provided a brief explanation on the proforma for water and sewer funds. Detailed discussion was held on the proforma, water rates and fund balances. Councilmember Bloyer expressed concern that the numbers don't add up. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO SEND THE PROFORMA OUT TO A THIRD PARTY VENDOR TO CHECK THE ASSUMPTIONS FOR ACCURACY. MOTION FAILED 2 — 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay) ITEM 26: PLAT APPROVAL PROCESS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Councilmember Fliflet„ seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO POSTPONE ITEM 26 TO THE NEXT MEETING DUE TO THE LATENESS OF THE HOUR. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Interim City Administrator Schroeder: Attended Washington County water meeting and Planning Commission, Manning Ave. redesign, Parks Commission. Interviews for the City Planner position will be held in the coming days. Congratulated the city on receiving the Pollinator Friendly award, has been working on the Tartan Park transition. City Clerk Johnson: No report. Finance Director Bendel: No report. City Attorney Snyder: No update due to the hour but will have input for items on the next agenda. Page 7 of 8 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 Community Development Director Klatt: Reported on the September 14, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. City Engineer Griffin: Noted dates and times for upcoming neighborhood meetings concerning CSAH 13/Inwood project. Meeting adjourned at 12:50 am. ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor Page 8 of 8 TI IN CITY OF lAKE ELMO AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION DATE: October 6, 2015 CONSENT ITEM #2 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the amount of S332,052.87 SUBMITTED BY: Patty Baker, Accountant THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director sp(.,',GEsTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item ..... ......... „ ......... _City Administrator ..... Administrator Questions limn Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion Mayor & City Council - Discussion ...... ....... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion.... ..... ............. Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: S332,052.87 SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $332,052.87. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the Consent Agenda. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: NA -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda lien October 6, 2015 BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: The City of Lake Elmo has the fiduciary responsibility to conduct normal business operations. Below is a summary of current claims to be disbursed and paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures. Claim # Amount Description ACH $ 10,815.12 Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept of Revenue 10/1/15 ACH $ 5,323.78 Payroll Retirement to PERA 10/1/15 DD6662-DD6681 $ 27,388.71 Payroll Dated (Direct Deposits) 10/1/15 43374-43385 $ 22,196.17 Accounts Payable 9/30/15 43386-43439 $ 266,269.09 Accounts Payable 10/6/15 2746 60.00 Library Card Reimbursement 10/6/15 TOTAL $ 332,052.87 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council approve as part of the Consent Agenda the aforementioned disbursements in the amount of $332,052.87. ATTACHMENTS: Accounts Payable — check registers -- page 2 -- Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: P al ty13 Printed: 09/30/2015 - 1(1:51 AM Balch: 007-09-2(115 I nN'oice # Inv Date Amount (in:tidily Punt Date Description Reference Task Type 110 # Close Pt)1.,ine ASPENM I Aspen Mills, Inc. 169888 (19/04/2015 1,468.50 0.00 09/.30/2015 Traffic Safety Vests No 0(100 101-4 )(1-2220-42400 Small Tools & Equipment 169888 Total: I .4-68,50 ASPENM1 Total: 1,468,50 C A C Companion Animal Control, 1..1.,C Jun- 15 06/30/2015 500.00 0.00 09/30/2015 Animal Control Services - June 2015 - No 0000 I 01-420-2700-43160 Impounding Jun- 15 06/3030.00 /2015 0.00 09/30/2015 Impound 7am-7pm No 0000 101-420-2700-43160 Impounding Jun- 15 06/30/2015 9(1.00 0,00 09/30/2015 Impound 7pm-7ain No 0000 101-420-2700-43160 Impounding Jun- 15 Total: 620,00 620,00 C A C Total: RI V RCOOP River Country Cooperative 08/31/2015 169.43 0.00 09/30/2015 Fuel No 0001) 101-420-2220-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids Total: 169.43 RI V RCOOP Total: 169.43 SAFEASSU Safe Assure Consultants Inc. 909 09/62/7015 3,087.00 0.00 09/30/2015 Safety Training No 0000 101-430-3100-44370 Conferences & Training 909 Total: 3.087.00 Si1FEASSU Total: 3,087.00 SEFECTAC SelectAccount 1121310 09/0312015 101-410-1520-43150 Contract Services 6.33 0.00 09/30/2015 Participant Fee 9/01-9/30/15 No DO(0) AP - To 13c Paid Proof Fist (09/30/15 - 10:5 ) AM) Page 1 Invoice t,4- Inv Onte Amount Quantity Pint Dat'. escription Reference Task 'Fne PO # se POLine 1121310 'iota,: 6.33 SELECTAC Total: 6.33 SPRINT Sprint 761950227-150 09/18/2015 101-410-1940-43210 Telephone 761950227-150 09/18/2015 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 761950227-150 09/18/2015 101-420-2400-43210 Telephone 761950227-150 09/18/2015 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 761950327-150 09/18/2015 I 01-450-5200-43210 Telephone 761950237-150 09/18/2015 11)1-410-1450-4321(1 Telephone 76(950277-150 09/18/2015 101-410-1910-43210 Teleplurne 761950227-150 Total: SPRINT Total: SW/\VC SW/WC Service Cooperatives 07/31/2015 07/31/2015 I (11 -000-(1000-21706 Medical Insurance 07/3172015 Total: SW/WC Total: 60.3 I (IMO 09/3012015 Admin No 0000 223.21 0.00 09/30/2015 Fire No 0000 44.02 0,00 09/30/2015 Building No 0000 85.62 0.00 09/30/2015 l'W No 0000 119,90 0.00 09/30/2015 Parks No 0000 55.83 0.00 09/30/2015 Taxpayer Services No 0000 14.90 0,00 09/30/2015 Planning - No 0000 603.79 603.79 11,7 16,00 0.00 09/30/2015 September Premium 11,716.00 11,716.00 No 0000 TDS 'IDS Metrocom - LLC 651-779-8882 09/15/2015 89.57 0.00 09/30/2015 Analog - Fire No 0000 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 651-779-8882 09/15/2015 214.47 0,00 09/30/2015 Analog - P kV No 0000 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 651-779-S882 09/150015 87.67 0.00 09/30/2015 Analog - Litl Station Alarms No MOO 602-495-9450-43210 Telephone 651-779-8882 09/15/2015 43,31 0.00 09/30/2015 Alarm - Well house 2 No 0000 601-494-9400-43210 Telephone 651-779-8882 Total: 429.97 TDS Total: 429.97 TMOBILE T Nlohile 947226095 09/110015 71.34 0,00 09/30/2015 SCADA line No 0000 601-494-9400-43210 Telephone AP - To 13e Paid ('roof List (09130/15 - 10:51 AM) Page 2 Invoice tt Inv Dale 947226095 Total: TMOF3ILE Total: VERIZON Verizon Wireless 9752149915 09/10/2015 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 9752149915 Total: VER1ZON Total; Rciporl Amount Quantity fescription Reference Task 21.34 21.34 35,01 0,00 09/30/2015 Wireless charges 35.01 35.01 I 3,157.37 ype 1'0 It ,se POLinett No 0000 AP - 13e Paid Proof' I..is1 019/30/1 5 - 0:5 I AM 1 Page 3 Accounts Payable rfo Be Paid Proof List User Patty13 Printed: 09730/2015 - 11:02 AM Batch: 008-09-2015 Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quattlity Pint Pate Description Reference DELTA Deka Dental of Minnesota 0178394 09/150015 01-000-0000-2 I 706 Medical Insurance 6178894 Tola1: DELTA Total! LEASSOC Lake Elmo Associates, 1,,,L1' October. 15 (19/3(1/2(115 101-410-19,10-44120 Rentals- Building October 15 Total: LEASSOC Total: 1,577,80 0.00 09/30/2015 October Premium 1,577.80 1,577.80 2,461,00 0.00 09/30/2015 October rent 2,461.00 2,461,00 Report Total: 4,038,80 Task Type PO ft Close l'OLitte if No 0000 No 0001) AO - To Be Paid Proof list ((19/30/15 - 11:02 AM) Page 1 Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: PatlyB Printed: 09730/2015 - 2:01 P 1\4 13a1eli: 010-09-2015 Invoice it Inv Date CTYROSEV City of Roseville 20669 09/24/2015 101-410-1450-43I80 Information Technology/Web 220669 Total: 220695 09/24/2015 101-410-1320-43210 Telephone 220695 09/24/2(115 1111-420-2400-432 I 0 Telephone 220695 09/24/2015 101-410-1450-43210 Telephone 220695 09174/2015 101-410-1930-43210 Telephone 270695 09/74/2015 101-410-1520-43210 Telephone 20695 09174/2015 101-410-1910-43210 Telephone 270695 09/24/2(115 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 72(1695 Total'. CTYROSEV Total: /knitting Quantity Plitt Date Description Reference Task Type I'() # Close POLine 7.951.42 0.00 10/06/2015 IT Services No 0000 2,951 A2 107.64 0,00 10/06/2015 Phone - Admin No 0000 17.00 0,00 I 0/(16/2(115 Phone - Building No 0000 17.00 0,00 10/06/2015 Phone - Communication No 0000 17,00 0.00 I 0/06/2015 Phone - Engineering No 0000 34.00 0,00 10/06/2015 Phone - Finance No 0000 47.1 5 0.00 10/06/2015 Phone - Planning No 0(100 774.65 0.00 10/(16/2015 Phone - P W No 00(10 464.44 3,415.80 urs (-yrs Educational Events 0972977015 330.00 00 0.10/06/2015 PLanning Workshop - 3 No 0000 I 01-4 I 0-19 I 0-441370 Conferences & Training Commissioners Total: 330.00 GIS Total: 330.00 NCPERS 566200-NCPERS Minnesota 5662915 09722/2015 f 01-000-0000-21708 Other Benefits 5662915 Total: 80.00 0.00 10/06/2015 October Premium 80.00 Nu (1000 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (09/30/15 - 2:))1 PM,1 Page 1 Invoice 0 Inv Pale ERS Total: RA130UIN RABOUIN. INC 10/01/2015 101-410-1320-43100 Assessing Services Total: RABOUIN Total: WASIVRIA Washington County Bill 70852 10101/21)15 106-450-5300-45200 Buildings Bill 20852 Total: WASHrRTA Total: NC[[. X cel Energy 091571)15 09/25/2015 I -430-3100-43810 Street Lighting 09257015 09/15p0 I 5 101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility 09252015 0917512/15 I 01-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility (19252(115 09/25/2015 1111-450-5700-43810 Electric Utility 09252015 09/2512015 612-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility 09757015 09/25/2015 601-495-94150-43810 Electric Utility 09152(115 09/75/2015 101-420-2220-43810 Electric Utility 0057015 (19050015 I 01-450-5200-438 I 0 Electric Utility 00257015 09/25/2015 I 01-4130-3160-43810 Street Lighting 09252015 09/25/2015 I 01-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting 09252(115 09/2572015 601-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility (19251015 097250015 601-494-9400-43810 Electric Utility 09257015 09/25/2015 I 01-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility 09152015 09/75/2015 101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting Amount Quantity t Jescription 80.00 Reference Task 2,500,00 0,00 10/06/2015 October Monthly Installment 2,500.00 2,500.00 1,167.00 0.00 10/06/2(115 Property Tax P ID 13,029,21.23.0054 1,167.00 1,167.00 27,29 0,00 17.59 0.00 37.59 0.00 00.04 0.00 20.22 18.47 0.00 320.33 0.00 0.00 31.56 0.00 13.89 0.00 184.50 0.00 116.35 0.00 15.06 0.00 47.98 0.00 /0/2015 Utility Services 10/06/2(115 10/06/2015 10706/2015 Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services 0.00 10/06/2015 Utility, Services 10/06/2015 Utility Services 10/06/2015 I 0/06/2015 10/06/2015 I 0/06/2015 10/06/2015 I 0/0672015 10/06/20 15 10/06/2015 Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Type PO 11 ,,se POLine No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0(1)0 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 AP - To Bc Paid Proof Lis( 009/30/15 - 2:01 PM) Page 2 Invoice Inv 1)fite Amount Quantity Pint Oat, escription Reference Task Type PO tt se POLine 0(1152015 00125720 l 5 40.00 0,00 10:116/2015 Utility Services No 0000 101-430-31o0-438 I 0 Street Lightitil_,,, 09252015 00/25/2015 1,86127 0.00 I 0/06/20 l 5 Utility, Services No 0000 601-40-1-9400-43810 Electric Utility 09252015 'Fowl: 2.830,55 XCEL Total: 2,830.55 Report Total: 10,323.41 Al' - To Be Paid Proof' List (09/30/15 - 2:01 P1‘1) Ptige 3 Accounts Payable Jo Be Paid Proof List User: PattyB Printed: 09/30/2015 - 1:49 Phi Balch: (109-09-7015 Invoice 1 Inv Dale Anionitt Quantify Pint Date Description Ref erence rl ask. `11) pe P() 4 Close POI.ine -6, A B RAIIAIYIS Abrahamson Nurseries Corp 159039 09/18/2015 3,550.00 0.00 10/1)6/2015 Tree replacement at 10390 39tli St No 0000 409-480-8000-43150 Contract Set -vices 159(139 Total: 3,550,00 ABRAIIAIVIS Total: 3.550.00 ANIMAL-1U Animal lluiiimie Society 2668 I 0/06/20 I 5 345.01) 0.00 I 0/06/2015 Animal Impound Fees 1/01/15-4/01/I 5 No 0000 I 01-420-2700-43150 Contract Services 2668 Total: 345,110 ANIkIALI-IU Total: 345.00 BERTELso Bert elson's WO-146748-I 09/25/20 I 5 35.37 0.00 10/06/2015 Supplies No 0000 I (1 t -410-19)0-42000 Orrice Supplies WO-146748-1 (19/25/2015 96.75 0.00 10/06/2015 Supplies No 0000 101-430-3100-42000 Office Supplies WO-146748-1 Total: 132.12 [3 FRTELSO Total: I32,12 BIFFS Bill's Inc, W574483-574492 09/16/2015 101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings W574483-574492 'Iota]: BIFFS Total: 826.00 0.00 I 0/06/2015 Portable Restrooms - Parks No 11000 826.00 826.00 BOL'IONME Bolton & 1vIenk. Inc 0182261 09/16/2015 1,092.50 0.00 10/(16/2015 Construction Admin 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 0182261 09/16/2015 277.50 0.00 I 0706/2015 Construction Observation 409-4811-8000-43030 Engineering Services No 0000 No 0000 AP - To 13e Paid Proof List 019/30/15 - IN-1 Page 1 Invoice # Inv Dale 0182261 Total: BOIAT1NME CAIZONILMB Carchnember Service 09/2(112015 001-494-9400-42270 Utility System Maintenance 09/20/2015 101-430-3100-44300 1\4iscellaneous 09120/2015 101-000-0000-11500 Accounts Receivable 09120/2015 I 01-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous 09/20/2(115 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 09/20/2(115 101-420-2220-44370 Conferences (C:. Training 09/20/2015 101-421)-2270-44370 Conferences & Training 09/20/2015 101-420-2400-44170 Uniforms 09/2(117015 101-420-240(1-4212(1 Fuel, Oil and Fluids 09/20/2015 101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing 09120.42015 101-410-1910-44.300 M iscel laneous 09/20/2015 206-450-5300-42230 Building Repair Supplies 09/20/2015 700-4511-5300-44010 Repairs/Maint Bklg Total: CAR DM E,NIB Total: CAIQUEST Car Quest Auto Parts 7055-312730 090 I/2015 1(11-430-3120-42210 Equipment Parts 2055-312230 Total: 2055-359661 09/21/2015 101-430-3120-42210 Equipment Parts 2055-359661 Total: CA Rt)t) EST Total: Amount Qaantily Jescrip(ion Reference Task l'ype 1)(1 ft .ose POI.hie 1,370,01) 1,370,00 725.69 0.00 10/06/2015 Pump parts 57.82 0,00 10/06/2015 Phone case 38.78 0.00 10/0612015 Fuel - personal 64.26 0.00 10/06/2015 Holiday 3.2(1 0.00 10/06/2015 Otterbox 598.40 0.00 I 0106/2015 \'COS a irhire 500.00 0.00 10/06/2015 State Fire Chief Registration I 04.47 0.00 10/06/21/15 Uniforms 40.15 0.00 10/06/2015 Fuel 217.20 0.00 10/(16/21)15 Hearing notice 6.00 0.00 10/06/2015 parking 7.49 0.00 10/06/2015 Building repair supplies 1,740.18 0,00 10/06/2015 Tables 4,103.64 41,103.64 48.98 0.00 10/0612015 Parts 00-2 48.98 168,20 0.00 10/06/2015 Parts 00-2 168.20 217.18 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No (1(1(1(1 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (09/30/15 - :40 PM) Page 2 Invoice # Inv Date CEN"1--POW Century Power Equipment 668736 09/1612015 101-450-5200-42210 Equipment Parts 668736 Total: CENTPOW Total: (7 EN -FURY L CenturyLink 9/19/ I 5 00/19/015 206-450-5300-43210 Telephone 9/19/15 09/19/2015 206-451)-5300-43250 Internet 9/19/15 Total: CENTURYL Total; CTY-STPALI City or St. Paul 11493 09/1)4/2015 101-430-3120-42240 Street klaintenance Materials 11493 Total: CTYSTPAL1 Total: Enright Enright Robert Bonus 09/16/2 I 05 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations Bonus Total: Cable 00/2812015 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations Cable 00/ I 6/2105 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations Cable Total: Enright Total: FOCUS Focus Engineering, Inc, ) 92_2106 09/27/2015 101-420-2400-43030 Engineering 2 I (0-2196 09/27/2015 101-430-3100-43030 Engineering Services 2192-2196 09/37/2015 101-410-1930-43030 Engineering Services 2192-' I 06 09/27/20I5 101-410-1910-43030 Engineering Services 2192-2196 0907/2015 101-430-3100-43030 Engineering Services Amount Quantity I'mt Dalt. eseription Reference Task Type 1'0 It se POLine 165.42 0,00 I 0/06/2015 Mower - Parks 165.42 165.42 1 10,115 I I 5.00 225,05 225.05 2,317.68 2,317.68 2317.68 0,00 I 0/06/2015 Phone - Lihiary 0.00 I 0/06/2015 Internet - Li bray)/ 0.00 10/06/2015 Asphalt 25.00 0,00 10/116/2015 Operations - PC 9/14/15 25.00 55.00 0.00 10/06/20 15 Operations PC 9/28/15 55.00 0.00 10/06/2015 Operations - PC 9/14/15 I 1.1,00 I 35.00 802.50 530.00 2,484,50 472.00 923.75 0,00 10/06/2015 Build tig 0.00 I 0106/20 I 5 P W 0.00 I 0/06/2015 General 0.00 10/06/2015 P Limning 0.00 I 01(.16/21,115 ROW No No No No No No No No No No No No 0000 0000 0000 MOO (WOO (1000 0000 0000 0000 (1000 0000 0000 AI, - To Be Paid Proof" Lict (091'311/15 - (:49 Pi\ ) Page 3 Invoice // Inv Date Amount ()itanlity Pint Dal ieseription Reference Task Type # ise POLine 7192-2196 Total: 5,217.75 7197 09/77/7015 592,00 0.00 10/06/2015 Water 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 7197 09/27/2015 289.50 0.00 10/06/2015 Sewer 602-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services 2197 09/77/7015 737.00 (1,00 10/06/2015 Surface Water 603-496-9500-43030 Engineering Services 2197 Total: 1,113.50 Qs 09/77/7015 1,021,55 0,00 10/06/2015 Transportation 1119-480,8000-43030 Engineering Services 2198 (19/27/7015 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2198 09/7717015 247.51) 0,00 10706/2015 Municipal Aid 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2198 Total: 2,149.10 cm (19177/2015 219.00 0.00 10/06/2015 Production Well 601 -494-9400-43(130 Engineering Services 2199 Total: 719,00 7 )00 0907/7015 711.10 0.00 10/06/2015 CSAIL 15 002-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services 72(10 Total: 711,111 7 )01 09/27/2015 583.15 0.00 10/06/2015 LE Ave Trunk Waterman' 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 2201 Total: 583.15 -nu) 090712015 I 0.062,85 0.00 10/06/201 5 LE Ave Corridor 409-4S0-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2202 Total: 1 0,06-).S5 203 007,0015 3116,50 OM I 0/06/2015 2014 Street Improvement 4119-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2203 Total: 306,50 2204 09/27/2015 59.00 0,00 10/06/2015 State f I iway 36 Corridor 409-480-S000-43030 Engineering Services 22(1,1 Total: 59.0(1 2205 09/270015 824.50 0.00 10/06/2015 Inwood Booster Station 601-494 -9400-43030 Engineering Services 2205 Total: 824.50 22(16 00/27/7015 408,50 0.00 10/0612015 Inwood Trunk Waterman) 001 --404-9400-131130 Engineering Services 77(16 Total: 408.50 7 -107 09i77/7015 1,485.50 0,00 10/06/2015 3901 Street 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2207 Total: 1,485.50 770S 09;77f7015 -109-460-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2208 Total: 830,05 0.00 I 0/0612015 Street Maim 3.037,50 0,00 10/06/2015 Hans Hagen 1037,50 No 0000 No 0000 No (HMO No 0000 No 0000 No DON No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No (WOO No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 000(1 0000 No 0000 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (09/30;15 - 1:49 PI\1) Page Invoice # Int' Date 220) 09127/2015 4119-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2209 Total: 2710 09/270015 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2210 Total: 221 09/27/7015 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 2211 Ton-d: 2212 0907/7015 803-000-0000-229 I 0 Developer Payments 2212 Total; 2213 09070015 810_000-0000-22910 Developer payments 7713 Total: 2214 09/770015 803-000-0000-2291(1 Developer Payments 2214 Total: 2215 09,07/2015 803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments 7715 Total: 2216 09,070015 803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments 2216 Total: 2217 09/77:0015 803-000-0000-229 10 Developer Payments 2217 Total: 2218 09/2712015 803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments 2218 Total: 72 to 09/27/2015 803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments 7219 Total: >720 09i27,0015 803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments /170 )2)1 nop7/-)015 803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments 2221 Total: 27/2 09,177/7015 803-000-01100-22910 Developer Payments 2222 Total; 7273 09/27/2015 803-000-0000-229 I Developer Payments 7273 Total: Amount Quantity Pntt Dat ,escriplion Reference 1 ask 1,163.5 I 0.00 10/06/2015 CSA1) 13 Type PO # !se I( )I # No 0000 ,I63,51 2A15.00 0,00 10106/20 15 2016 Street Improvements No 0000 2,415.00 901.50 0.00 10/0612015 Inwood Water 'rower No 0000 901.50 633,47 0.00 10/06/2015 Lennar 1-94 Nest No 0000 633.42 7,439.79 0.00 10/0612015 Boulder Ponds No 0000 7,439,79 2,735.87 0,00 10/06/2015 Wildflower No 0000 2,785,87 1,222.04 0.00 I 0/06/2015 Village Preserve No 0000 1,777.04 I 1,786,72 0.00 10/06/2015 Easton Village No 0000 11,786,72 2,151.93 0,00 10/06/2015 Savona No 0000 7,151,93 8,363,94 0.00 0/06/2015 HEMS Hagen 8,363,94 5;13,37 0,00 10/06/2015 Hunters Crossing - 2nd 5043.3) 3.849,88 0.00 10/06/2015 Savona - 3r1 3,849.88 383.50 0,00 10/06/2015 Auto Owner Building 383,5(1 590,0(1 590.011 560.50 560.50 0.00 10/06/2015 Legends 01' 0,00 10/06/2015 Arbor Glen Senior Living No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No (100)) No 0000 NJn 00(10 AP - lo ie Paid Proof List (09t30/15 - 1:49 1 Page 5 1 n1 nice # Inv Pale "id 01)07/1(115 60)_495_945()-13030 Engineering Services 2224 Total: FOCUS Total: GEISLING Geislinger & Sons, INC oy No 7 09/78/7015 409-480-3000-43030 Engineering Services Po y No 7 Total: CiFISLING Toll& (J1(.SFAV IC GkIsi. Services 1 I 8227977Q 09/07/7015 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 1182279779 Total: 11313(17503 09/160015 1(11-430-3 I 00-41170 Uniforms 1187307503 Tool: 1182313872 09173/7015 101_430,310(1-44170 Uniforms 1182313872 "Ifolal; GKSERV1C Total; GRAINGER Grainger 9834411408 n9/03/7015 101-470-2270-42090 Fire Prevention 9834411403 Total: 9341521496 (19/03/7015 I 01-420-2220-42090 Fire Prevention 9841521496 Total: 9841571504 (19/03/2015 101-470-2270-421190 Fire Prevention 9841521504 'Fool: ZINGER Total: GP EATAM Great America Financial I 7563633 09/15/2015 101-410-1940-44040 Repairs/Mint Contractual Eqpt I 7563633 Total; GREATAM Tool: AP - To 13e Paid Proof List (09/30/15 - 1:49 PN4 Amount Quoutily 111111 1)at iescriptioa Reference Task Type t/ /se 11)1,iPe It 5,003.85 0,00 I 0/06/2015 Village East Trunk Sewer No 0000 5,003,85 8(1,667,72 55,437,06 (400 I 0/06/2015 390i Street No 0000 55,487.06 55,437.06 36.84 0,01) 10/06/2015 Uniforms No 0000 36.84 36.84 0.00 10/0672015 Uniforms No 0000 36.34 36.84 (1,00 I0/06/2(115 Uniforms No 0000 36.84 I 1(452 75,46 ((00 10/06/2015 Smoke -house props No (100(1 25.46 -2.74 0.00 I 0/06/2)) 15 Credit memo No MOO -2,74 -1.31 0.00 10/0612015 Credit memo No 0000 -1.31 20,91 396.49 OMO 10/06/20 m 15 Copier aintenance No 00110 396.49 396.49 Page 6 Invoice tt Inv Dale Amount Quantity Pini I):ik eseriplion Reference Task Type l'() # se POLine fi GRLIPALLE Gruber Pallets, Inc 8550 09/ 1 6/20 15 2,500.00 1 01 -430-3 1(10-424(10 Small 'Tools if. Minor Equipment 8550 Total: 2.500.00 C, ALLE Total: 2,500.00 0.00 10/0612015 Honda Conveyor 411)SLIPPLY I ID Supply Waterworks, Lid, E4 1903 7 09/03,120 1 5 4,560,12 0,00 1 (1/06/20 1 5 \Vatcr meters - 1 12" 6(11-494-9400-42300 \Vatcr Meters & Supplies E4 1 9037 'fond: 4,560.12 F44781 8 (19/16/2(115 1,842.65 0.00 10/06/2015 Water meters - Ncw Develop. 60 1 -494-9400-12300 Water Meters & Supplies F442818 Tolal: 1,842.65 1 IDSUPP IA Total: 6.4(12.77 I IDLIDAVC 1 loliday Credit 011ice 09/15/2015 217.12 0.00 10/06/201 5 Fuel 101-420-2220-42 I 20 Fuel, Oil and Fluids 2. I 7.1 2 11()LIDAVC Total: 217.12 11 (YTS)/ HotsyMitincsota.com 49794 09/1(0015 220.97 0.00 10/06/2015 Building maintenance 101-430-3 100-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 49794 'Fowl: 7120.97 HOTSY Total: 220.97 11 INISTAD I 1 unstad N4 erri (19/23/2(115 1,000.0(1 0,00 I 0/06/2015 Refund 2014 Street OP - 11420 24th 323-000-0000-36 100 Special Assessments St 1.000,00 II UN STA D Total: 1,000.00 HYDRO 1 lydromethods 2114509516 09104/2015 450.00 0.00 10/0612015 Auto Owner Bldg SW Mgnnit Review 03-000-0000-2291 Developer Payinetns 201509516 Total: 450.00 201511951 (19/04/2015 495.00 0.00 10/06/2015 ISD9 1 6 School SW Mgnitit Review S03-000-0000-229 1 Developer Payments 201509518 1otal: 4 95.00 AP - To 13c Paid Proof List 109/30/15 - I:49 l'M No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No (10(1)) Page 7 Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pint Dot )escription itelereitee Task pe # Jse POLine DRO Toml: 945,00 I NNOV AT Innovative ()ftice Solutions 1NO9091123 09/150015 157,20 (00 10/06/2015 Office Supplies No 0000 1111-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies IN0909(123 'rota': 157.20 I N0922438 0979417015 49,50 0.00 10/06120 15 Office Supplies No 0000 101-410-1320-42000 ()like Supplies I NO922438 09/24;2015 44,57 0.00 10/06/2015 Office Supplies No 000() I III -120-2400-420On Office Supplies I NO922438 I0P4/2015 29.25 0,00 10/06/2015 Office Supplies No 0000 I a I -410-1910-42000 Office Supplies I NO922438 09/2472015 130.91 0.00 1(1/06/2(115 Office Supplies No 00(10 101 -430-3100-42000 Office Supplies IN0922438 Total: 16123 INNOVAT Total: 420,,43 IVEASON It Iverson RellVerti C(111(1011 10513 ()Si I 0/2015 2.528.00 100 I 070612015 Legal Services No 000(1 I -4 I 0-1320-43040 Legal Services 10513 Total: 2,528.00 10581 09/10/2015 7,018.55 0.00 10/06/2015 Legal Services Nn 0(100 101-410-1320-43040 Legal Services 10581 Total: 2,018,55 1VERSONIZ Total: 4,546,55 JARDINE Jardine, Logan & O'Brien I'LLP 104536 05/19/2015 1,260.00 0.00 10/06/2015 Legal Services No 0000 1(11-410-1320-43040 Legal Services 104536 Total: 1,260.00 JARDINE Total: 1,260.00 J011 NSON & Johnson & Turner Attorneys 44090 09111/2015 4,512.50 0.00 I 0/06/20 I 5 Prosecution No 0000 101-470-2150-43045 Attorney Criminal 44090 Total: 4,512.50 44788 09/11/2(115 30.00 (1,00 10706/2015 Library No 0000 206_450-5300-13040 Legal Services 44788 Total: 30,00 44881 00/11/2015 15,00 0.01) 10/0612015 3N(1 Litigation No 0000 101-410-1320-43040 Legal Services 44881 Total: 15.00 AP Re Paid Proof List (09/3)1/ I 5 - 1:49 Page 8 Invoice t$ Inv Pate Amount Qilanffly Pint iescriplion Reference 44900 09711/2(115 (13-0011-0000-22910 Developer Payments 44900 Total: 44901 (19/1400)5 803-000-00110-2291 0 Developer Payments 449(11 Total: 44903 09/1112015 80,3-1100-0000-)2910 Developer Payments 44903 Total: 44946 09/1112015 1 01-4 10-1320-43040 Legal Services 44946 Total: 44948 09/11/2015 I 01-410-1320-43040 Legal Services 44948 Total: 44949 09/11/2015 101-410-1329-43040 Legal Services 44949 Total: 45100 09/11/2015 803-000-0000-229 1(1 Developer Payments 45100 Total; 45103 09/11/2(115 101-110-1320-43040 Legal Service,,s 45103 Total: 451114 09/11/2015 803-000-0000-2291 0 Developer Payments 45104 Total: JOIINSON& Total: KANICO K.anico, Corp 4215 0909/2015 101-430-3250-43150 Contract Services 4215 Total: KANICO Total: kailifuel Kalil Fuel Oil Service Co 528754 09/21/2(115 101-430-31(111-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids 52875-1 Total: katlifuel Total: Task Type 1'0 it ,sc ()Iine ft 750,00 0,00 10/06/2015 Easton V illne - No 0000 75(1,0(1 4,135,00 0.00 10/06,12015 \Writlower No 00011 4,135,00 160.00 0,110 10/06/2015 Hans Ilagen No 0000 160.00 935,00 0.0(1 1(1706/2015 Unemployment Matter No 0000 935.00 1,149.50 0400 I 0/06/20 I 5 Riley Bro Litigation No (HMO 1,149.50 626,50 0.0(1 10/06/2015 Tartan Park No 0000 626.50 900,00 0.00 10/06/2015 LC111181" No 0000 900.00 4,994.00 0,00 10/06/2015 Civil Matters No 0000 4,994,00 750.00 11.00 10/06/2015 Village Preserve No 00(10 750,00 18,957.5(1 1,500.110 0.00 10/06/2015 Trce Removal (6) Hidden Bay No 0000 1,500,00 1,500,00 761.07 0,00 Ill/06/2015 Fuel No 0000 761.07 76 I .0 7 A r - To Be )'aid Proof List (09130115 - 1:49 PM) Page 9 (nee ft ins Dale LANDMARK Landmark, 1 2014-651 01170015 803_000_0000-22000 Deposits Payable 2(114-651 Total: LANDMARK Total: Amount Quanlity Pit Rat ,eseription Reference Task ype V() // ,se l'OLine fi 5.000.00 0.00 I 0/06/20 15 Escrow Release 11888 58th St 14o 000(1 5,000.00 5,000,00 1...017 Loftier Companies, Inc. 2058797 09/0412(115 312.52 0.00 10/06/21)15 Copy machines - overage & hose No 0000 I 01-41(1-1940-44040 Repairs/N.1unit Contractual Eqpt 2(158797 Total: 312.52 LOFT Total: 312.5'7 MENARDSO Menards - Oakdale 86545 09119/2015 39.00 0.00 100612015 Shop supplies No 0000 101-430-3100-42150 Shop Materials 86545 Total: 39.00 86647 09/10/2015 46.86 0.00 10/06/2015 Shop supplies - No 0000 I 01-450-5200-42150 Shop Materials 86647 'utak 46.86 S6857 09113/2015 107.23 0,00 10/06/2015 Shop supplies No 0000 101_450-5)00-42150 Shop 1Materials 86857 Total: 107,23 87188 09/17/2015 35.72 0.00 10/06/2015 Landscaping supplies No 0000 101-450-520-42250 Landscaping Materials 87188 Total: 35,72 MENARDSO Total: 228.81 (\IFS Municipal Emergency Sr. Inc. 00659435 SNV 08/1312015 200.70 0.1)11 10/06/2015 Equipment for new ladder No 000(1 410-480-8000-45500 Vehicles ((0659435 SNV Total: 200,70 00670206 SNV no/17/7015 2,1)73.81 (1.0(1 10/06/2015 Electric Ventilation fan No 0000 410-48O-8000-45500 Vehicles 00670206 SNV Total: 2,073.81 1\1ES Total: 2.)74.51 ILLERFX Miller Excavating, Inc, 10826 08/28/2015 5.962.5(1 0.00 10/06/2015 Ironwood Trail ditch cleaning & restor, No 0000 603-496-9500-43150 Conn -act Services 19826 Torah 5,962.50 VOA 013e Paid Proof -Lis( (00/301(5 - 1:49 PM) Page l0 lavoicet lav Pale J1itiolint ()winlity I,,it 11)fn. iescription Reference Task Type PO II Jse r()Line If IVIILLER IA Total: 5,962.50 NTH IVITI Distributing Inc, I 037092 09/17/21115 72.68 0.00 10/06/2015 Parts/Repair No 0000 101-450-5200-44040 R.epairs/Maint Eqpt 1037092 Total: 72.68 MTI Total: 72,68 NET,SONMA Nelson Marine 25 1 68 09/11(7015 I 01-420-2220-44040 RepairsiMaint Eqpt 25168 Total! NELSONNIA Total: 1,015,94 0.00 10/06/2015 Repairs to boat motor 1,015,94 1,015.94 No WIN ERFORPO Performance Pools & Spa. Inc 2015-94 09/7412015 500.00 0.00 10/06/2015 Escrow Release 4037 Kindred Way No 0(100 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-94 Tolal: 500,00 P ERFOR PO Total: 500.00 RCM RCM Spech.ilties, Inc 5 136 09/01/2015 195.00 0.00 10/06/2015 Emulsion No 00(10 101-430-3120-4224(1 Street Maintenance Materials 5136 'rota!: I 95,01) 5 141 09/10/2015 315.75 0,00 10/06/2015 Emulsion No 1)000 101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials 514 I Total: 315,75 RCM Total: 51(1,75 SCT1ROEDE Schroeder Clark 09/04/2015 37.48 0.0(1 10/06/2015 Wireless presenter No 0000 101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 00iO4/2() I 5 5.49 0.00 I 0/06/2015 Water No 0000 101-4 10-1370-44300 IVIiscellatieous 42.97 SCIMOEDE Total: 42.97 S1.1-.CONSLI SIZE Consulting Group, Inc Task Order 1 OS/31/2015 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 3,)66„ 74 (U..)() 1(06/20 15 State fliL,lovay 36 Study AP - To Be Paid Proof List (09/30(15 - 1:49 PM) No 0000 Page 11 Invoice It Inv Pate Amount Quantity l'Int Da, )escription Reference Task Type PO tt.se IOI.ii,t tt Task Order I Total: SRI:CON:SU Total: S El.) Stillwater (ledical Group 09/08/2015 1(11-47(1-2220-43050 Physicals Total; STILLIVI EL) Total: STP AUL St Paul Stamp Works, Inc, 342324 09/1 i2015 191-420-2700-44300 Nliscellancous 342324 Total: 3-12778 09/1012015 101-4 I 0-1320-420(10 Office Supplies 342778 Total: STPAUL Total: TKDA TKDA. Inc. )01500)770 09711/2015 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 2015002770 Total: TKDA Too: 3,466,74 3,466.74 170.00 0,00 10/06/2015 Vaccinations 170.00 170.00 77.99 0100 10416/2015 Dog tags 77,99 24,40 0.00 10./06/2015 Notary Stamp - .1, Johnson 24.40 111).3 9 8,163.05 0.00 10/06/2015 Eagle Point Blvd 8,163.05 8,163.05 100 TGLIY The "Fool Guy, TLC 8.189 09/15/2015 21.50 ((.00 10/06/2015 Tools 101-430-3100-42400 Small Tools & Minor Equipment 8489 Total: 21.50 TOOLGOY Total: TRISTATE Tri State Bobcat, Inc. SIS070 09/22/2015 404-480-8000-45800 Olher Equipment S 18070 Total: TR ISTATE Total: WASRAI)10 1Vashington County S I g74 09/1512015 i1m_430-3100-43230 Radio 81974 'rota!: 29,602.87 0.00 l0/06/2015 ToolCat 29,602.87 /9,602,87 309.06 0.00 10/06/2015 Q3. (5 radio user fees 309.06 N o 0000 No 0000 No (IMO No MOO No 0000 No (100 0 No 0000 AP - Fo I3c Paid Lis( (00131115 - 1:49 P1\11 Page 12 Invoice # Inv Dale - - Amount C)uantitv Puil Dat description Reference Task Type PO t .)se Mine it 81975 (10130P015 3,914.76 101-120-22.20-43230 Radio 81975 To(al: 3,914.76 WASRADIO Total: 4,223,87 0.00 10/06/2015 Q3.15 riser fee for radios No 0000 \Vhiteatii White Anita lionus 09/16/2015 25.00 0,00 10;06/2015 Operations CC 9/15/15 No 0000 1(11-410-1450-43620 Cahlc Operations Bonus Total: 25,00 Cable (0/16/)015 .55.0(1 0,00 10/06/2015 Operations CC 9/15/15 No 0000 101-41(1-1450-43620 Cable Operations Cable Total: 55.00 Whiteani Total; 80,00 XCELNSP Xcel Energy 0912S/2015 5,323.45 0,00 10/06/2015 Relocate Power Poles - LE Ave No (10(1i1 409-4S0-8000-43030 Engineering Services Total:5323.45 XCELNSP ZACK Zack's, litc. 30736 09/11/2015 69,08 0.01) 10/06/2015 Tape measure, scraper No 0000 101-430-.3100-42,100 Small Tools & Minor Equipment 30736 Total: 69.98 ZACK Total: 60.98 Report Total: 255,945,6S AP - To He Paid Proof Eist (09/3(1/15 - I:419 ) Page I 3 N N SO TA DEPART T H A TH Protecting, nzaimaining and improving the health of Minnesotans October 21, 2015 Mr. Tim Butterfield Tim Butterfield Drilling, Inc. 395 Reed Street Somerset, Wisconsin 54025 Dear Mr. Butterfield and Mr. Heiser: Mr. Brian Heiser 9227 Wedgewood Point Woodbury, Minnesota 5512 Subject: Construction of a Water -Supply Well, Minnesota Unique Well Number 768672, at 9831 Whistling Valley Road, Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota, Within the Boundaries of the Lake Elmo/Oakdale Special Well and Boring Construction Area The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) has received your request to construct a new Franconia (Tunnel City) aquifer well, Minnesota Unique Well Number 768672, on the property at 9831 Whistling Valley Road, Lake Elmo, Minnesota. The property is located within the boundaries of the Lake Elmo/Oakdale Special Well and Boring Construction Area (SWBCA). The SWBCA has been established by the MDH because some groundwater aquifers in the northern portion of the SWBCA are contaminated with Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs), and several aquifers in a large portion of the SWBCA are contaminated with Perfluorochemicals (PFCs). PFCs are a heat and stain resistant class of chemicals and were used in Teflon nonstick coatings for cookware and bake ware; in Scotchguard, a stain resistant product used on clothing, other fabrics, and carpeting; and in fire fighting foams. PFC wastes were disposed of at the Washington County landfill and Oakdale Disposal sites, as well as at other locations. The PFC contamination plume extends from the Washington County landfill and Oakdale Disposal sites and spreads generally to the south. The highest levels of PFCs within the SWBCA have been found south of each disposal site. PFCs continue to move with the groundwater. PFCs have been detected in portions of the glacial sand and gravel, St. Peter sandstone, Prairie du Chien limestone, and Jordan sandstone aquifers near the proposed well site. Other aquifers available for use at this location include the Franconia (Tunnel City) and Ironton -Galesville (Wonewoc) sandstone aquifer, and the Mount Simon -Hinckley aquifer, which are deeper than the aforementioned aquifers. The Franconia (Tunnel City) and Ironton -Galesville (Wonewoc) aquifers are overlain by a protective geologic layer called the St. Lawrence confining layer, and the Mount Simon -Hinckley is overlain by the Eau Claire confining layer. Both confining layers have low vertical permeability and are thought to provide protection to the deeper aquifers. General Information: 651-201-5000 • Toll -free: 888-345-0823 • www.health.state.mn.us An equal opportunityemployer Mr. Tim Butterfield Mr. Brian Heiser Page 2 October 21, 2015 Levels of PFCs in the groundwater may increase in the future. A Franconia (Tunnel City) aquifer well at 9831 Whistling Valley Road, Lake Elmo, may encounter PFC contamination now or in the future. A municipal water -supply system does not currently exist in this portion of Lake Elmo. The PFC family of chemicals, including perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA), perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS) are relatively new, and are the focus of active scientific research. In laboratory animal studies, high concentrations of PFCs cause harmful changes in the liver and other organs. Developmental problems (e.g., delays in growth and maturation) have been seen in the offspring of rats and mice exposed to PFCs while pregnant. Both PFOA and PFOS in high concentrations over a long period of time also cause cancer in laboratory animals. There are very few studies of health effects in people. Studies by 3M of workers exposed to PFCs during the manufacturing process show no apparent impact on their health. The MDH continually reviews ongoing research on PFCs to ensure that our guidelines reduce exposures and protect public health. As new studies and science become available, our advice may be revised to reflect additional information. The MDH approves your request to construct a water -supply well that obtains water from the Franconia sandstone aquifer. You must comply with the following provisions: . Tim Butterfield Drilling, Inc., must notify Mr. Patrick Sarafolean at the MDH 651-201-3962; and Mr. Bruce Bloomgren, at the Minnesota Geological Survey 612-626 4108, ext. 201, at least 24 hours prior to starting well construction activities, so arrangements to inspect and collect drill cuttings and/or gamma log the hole may be made. 2. An outer casing(s) must be set into the top of the firm bedrock. A minimum 8-inch diameter bore hole must then be advanced at least 20 feet into the Franconia (Tunnel City) sandstone formation. Four -inch diameter, plain -end steel casing with welded joints must be seated into the Franconia (Tunnel City) sandstone at the base of the bore hole and the annular space must be filled with neat -cement grout in accordance with Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725. Any open hole drilled below the terminus of the 4-inch casing must be entirely within the Franconia (Tunnel City) sandstone formation. (Note: All outer casings must either be removed, or the annular space surrounding them must be filled with approved grout as required by Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725.) Mr. Tim Butterfield Mr. Brian Heiser Page 3 October 21, 20] 5 After the well has been grouted and developed, Tim Butterfield Drilling, Inc. must install a pump, and then pump at least three well volumes of water to waste prior to sampling. The MDH will collect a water sample from the well. The water sample will be analyzed for PFCs by the MDH laboratory. The well owner will be responsible for the analytical cost for the water samples. The cost for PFC analysis with standard reporting within 30 days is $309; and for priority reporting within 5 days is $463.50. You must notify Mr. Sarafolean whether you want standard or priority analysis before the sample is collected. 4. The well may not be placed into service until after the analytical results have been reviewed by the MDH. If PFCs are detected in the water sampled from the well at levels exceeding health risk limits, treatment will be required to remove the PFCs. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has committed to providing installation of a whole house, granular activated carbon filter, and will provide ongoing water testing, maintenance, and filter repair for as long as the PFC contaminants exceed the health limits. 5. Tim Butterfield Drilling, Inc., must notify Mr. Sarafolean at least 24 hours before grouting begins so that arrangements for inspection may be made. 6. All other provisions of Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725, shall be in effect. Mr. Heiser, when you sell the home, please provide copies of this letter, the Well and Boring Construction Record, and the water quality results to the buyer of the home. In addition, you must comply with Minnesota Statutes, section 1031.236. It requires sellers of property with water -supply wells in Washington County, to disclose in writing to the buyer, if the property is located within a "Special Well and Boring Construction Area." You must disclose to any potential buyer, that this property is located within the "Lake Elmo/Oakdale Special Well and Boring Construction Area." The well owner is advised that the water quality of the well cannot be guaranteed and that the water quality may change over time. The MDFI recommends that the well be tested periodically for PFCs. We have enclosed information regarding PFCs for your review. Mr. Tim Butterfield Mr. Brian Heiser Page 4 October 21, 2015 If you have questions about the contamination investigation, please contact Ms. Laura Marti with the MPCA at 651-757-2823. If you have any questions about well construction or the SWBCA, you may call Mr. Sarafolean at 651-201-3962, or me a 651-201-3658. Sincerely yours, Ronald D. Thompson, Supervisor Metro Compliance and Inspection Well Management Section P.O. Box 64975 St. Paul, Minnesota 55164-0975 RDT:PTS:mj Enclosure cc: Laura Marti, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Gary Krueger, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Bruce Bloomgren, Minnesota Geological Survey Lowell Johnson, Washington County Department of Public Health and Environment Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator, City of Lake Elmo Mr. Tim Butterfield Mr. Brian Heiser Page 5 October 21, 2015 I have read the provisions regarding well construction and monitoring requirements listed above and agree to abide by them. I understand that the water quality of the proposed well is not guaranteed and that I may have to take remedial action to be able to use the water; and, under the worst case scenario, I may be required to have the well sealed by a licensed well contractor or limited well sealing contractor at my own expense. Date Brian Heiser Note: Applicant's signature must be obtained and form returned to the MDH, Well Management Section, prior to beginning construction of the well. TI IF CITY OF K E EL'IO AYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: October 6, 2015 CONSENT ITEM #3 MOTION Resolution 2015-77 AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Certification to Washington County Auditor for the Unpaid Surface Water Utility Bills SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director THROUGII: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Patty Baker, Accountant SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item .......„...„ ..... .......... ............... ..... ........ City Administrator - Report/Presentation.......... ........ ..............................City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff__ ..... . ..... ......... .............. Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........ ...... ....... ............... ................ Mayor & City Council - Discussion ............. ....... ...... ....... ......... ....... ..... . ..... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion..................... ..... ................ ...... ......... ..... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: Up to $30,857.15 in cash flow to the storm water fund in 2016 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is respectfully asked to approve the certification of the delinquent Surface Water Bills to the Washington County Auditor. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the ConsentAgenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has authority by Minnesota State statute 444.075, subd.3 to assess property owners for unpaid surface water utilities and services. Affected homeowners with past due balances were sent notification of the proposed assessment Property owners have until October 9th to pay these amounts to be removed from the final assessment list. STAFF REPORT: The City operates the water, sewer and surface water under its Enterprise funds. Enterprise funds account for specific City operations that are financed and operated -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 3] October 6, 2015 similar to a private business. Generally, the services are provided to identifiable beneficiaries, as well as the general public, and all or most of the costs come from user fees. All parcels in the City are charged for this fee. The user fees collected are utilized to operate the City's respective water, sewer and surface water systems. Assessing the property owners listed on Exhibit A (attached) for unpaid services will assure collection of charged fees. The deadline to certify the unpaid surface water utility to Washington County is October 15, 2015, RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the certification of the delinquent surface water accounts to the Washington County Auditor. ATTACHMENTS: I. Resolution 2015-77 2. Exhibit A -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2015-77 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CERTIFICATION TO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY AUDITOR FOR UNPAID SURFACE WATER UTILITY BILLS WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. 444.075, subd. 3, permits certification of unpaid charges to the county auditor for collection with taxes payable; WHEREAS, the Municipal Code for the City of Lake Elmo contains a provision to certify delinquent accounts to the County Auditor for the collection with taxes payable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA, THAT: The list of delinquent accounts, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and made part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall be certified to the Washington County Auditor for collection with taxes payable. 2. The certified amount shall be payable over a period of one year, with interest as provided in Exhibit A. The owner of the property may, at any time prior to certification to the County Auditor, pay the delinquent amount to the City Finance Director. 4. The City Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of Exhibit A to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of Washington County. Such delinquent accounts shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of October, 2015. By: ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk Mike Pearson Mayor Resolution 2015-77 CiwofLake Elmo | Svvuh\itvBills Tn Be Assessed o8inmzO/5 for znmtax rolls | / *mua/ 05-00000170-00-3 05V0000240-00'/ 05-00000250-00A 05'00000300-00-6 05o0000470n0-4 05'0000052*00-6 05'00000550'00'5 05-00000590-00-7 05'00000830-00'0 05'00000840-003 05-00000920'00+ 05'00000950'00'3 05'00000960'00'6 05'00001280n0'2 05'00001510-00-2 05'00001520-00'5 05f000/530'00'8 05'00002/90'00'7 05-00002410-00'* | /mVO0240000-y 05'00002570'00-9 05'00002590-00'5 05V0002880'00-3 05'00002890'00'6 05'00003160'00'7 05-00003460-00-8 05'00003510'00'0 05-00003530'00-6 05'00003550-002 105-00003710-00-4 05'00003820'00-4 05'00004100^0'8 05-000x4240'00'7 05'000044/*00-2 05'00004440A0'1 05-00004570'00'7 05-00004610'00'6 05'00004750'00'7 05'00004760-00'8 05'0004810'00-0 05'08005200'00-4 05-00/05450-00a 05o0005470-00'9 05'00005700'00'9 05+0005900o0-3 05-00005910u0-6 0540005950-00'x 05o000598000'7 05'00006090'00'6 05-00006220-00-* 05-00006300-00-0 amun, 99.45 14173 s].o 75,99 40.99 05/w 5|,4v 'm4 53,22 e7+ z|7.o5 187,23 157,00 30,25 oVO 55.00 »5oo 55,00 55.00 55»o 000 Exhibit Fee Total ovcI Property ,oNo. 25M z5M sMO 25.00 25.00 z5M z5oo zlOo 25,00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25,00 25.00 2».00 a5M 25.00 z5M z5un 25,00 x5M 25.00 25.00 zzoo z5.0n 25,00 25,00 25,00 25.00 z5»o 25.00 u5M 15xm 25.00 25.00 25.OV z5M z5»n zsxn a5M z5m/ z5/m 25.00 25.00 25»o 25.00 25.00 z5Mo 25,00 25,00 25.00 /24/Q |oz73 48.13 |mz99 65.99 130.04 76,49 65,94 78.22 7\J4 mz,m z/2.z8 |8z,oV 55.25 Woo 8v.m)| 8000| xuuO ounn oHo nuoo 80.00 voxo 80.00 80,00 oouo 80.00 75.00 «5.5» 80,00 MOO xvoo nn.m »«.»» 80,00 80.00 80.00 80.00 ooM on/m 0000 ouoo no»o 80mO� uzOzv |a|nVo 002921220002 0302921220005 040292//30002 | 1101-92114000 /102921,110002 110292142000* 1202921220002 1402921310001 | wD2p o/008 15029o|Nm| /5019w|mW| /50291*2nno 35029/z40V0/ V|uzY |uuuo 01029 |\+oO0 0102921140003 8|ozo//wmO 02029|/zOou6 0202921230001 02029w/Oom 02029w/O0o mozv |/2nom [mnzo ||zonu 030292/220004 oznzy oz000 0302921320018 03029'3znoz 0302921330003 030292134000/ 0302921340012 0302921438010 0302921440011 04029nzoou 04029 |luN|/ 04029212/000 04029212/0011 04029|zsmn 0402921220009 mozvz|zzou* 0402921320007 0*02921330039 040292130044 04029214,10018 0502921/30003 050292/13000d 0502921140006 0502921140001) | uu/zvzw/onos om2nzwzom4 0502921-120022 16600-00-1 55.00 25,00 05-00006640-00-3 55.00 25.00 05-01)006860-00-3 55.00 25,00 05-00006980-00-6 29.59 25.00 `5-00007030-00-7 55.00 25.00 3-00007040-00-0 55,00 25,00 05-00007200-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00007480-00-0 44.58 25.00 05-00007490-00-3 55.00 25.00 05-00007570-00-4 55,00 25,00 05-00007670-00-1 50.00 25,00 05-00007890-00-1 60.50 25.00 05-00007900-00-1 55.00 25.00 05-00007950-00-6 55.00 25,00 05-00008130-00-3 55.00 25.00 05-00008220-00-7 55.00 25.00 05-00008290-00-8 55,00 25.00 05-00008490-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00008690-00-60 55.00 25.00 05-00008950-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00009000-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00009010-009 55.00 25.00 05-00009030-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00009060-00-4 19.50 25.00 05-00009090-00-3 115.50 25.00 05-00009330-00-6 55.00 25.00 05 000(}9710-00-8 55.00 25.00 05-00009770-00-60 25.83 25.00 -00010060-00-6 55.00 25.00 105-00010070-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00010200-00-2 176.00 25,00 05-00010330-00-8 55.00 25.00 05-00010740-00-9 55,00 1 25.00 05-00010870-00-5 55,00 I 25.00 05-00010940-00-3 55.00 ' 25.00 05-00010980-00-5 55.00 I 25.00 05-00011190-00-1 55.00 25.00 05-00011200-00-1 55.00 25.00 05-00011330-00-7 55.00 25.00 05.00011770-00-7 55.00 25.00 05-0001(790-00-3 55.00 25.00 105-00011850-00-8 55,00 25.0(1 05-09011950-00-5 55.00, 25.00 05-00012100-00-3 50.00 25.00 05-00012120-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00012200-00-0 55.00 25,00 05-00012310-00-0 55,00 25.00 05-00012350-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00012800-00-2 55.00 25.00 I05-00012810-00-5 55,00 25.00 105-00012930-00-8 55.00 25.00 00012960-00-7 55.00 25.00 105-00013320-00-2 50,00 25.00 05-00013340-011-8 55.00 25.00 I05-00013.140-00-5 55.00 25.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 54.59 80.00 80.00 80.00 69.58 80,00 80.00 75.00 85,50 80.00 80.00 80,00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 44.50 140.50 80.00 80,00 50,83 80.00 80.00 201,00 80.00 80,00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80,00 80.00 80.00 75.00 80.00 80.00' 80,00 80.00 80.00 80,00 80.00 80.00 75.00 80.00 80,00 0502921430024 0502921430028 0502921440032 0502921440046 0502921440046 0602920230007 0602920310028 0602920320018 0602920320019 0602920320027 0602920320044 0602920320066 0602920320067 0602920330005 0602920330023 0802921110004 0802921110013 0902921110004 0902921130004 0902921220007. 0902921220013 0902921220014 0902921220016 0902921220023 0902921230003 0902921240015 0902921320010 0902921320016 0902921330019 0902921330020 0902921340013 0902921410010 0902921430005 0502921430018 0902921430025 0902921430029 0902921440019 0902921440020 1002921210004 1002921240010 1002921240012 1002921240020 1002921310002 1002921320005 1002921320009 1002921410018 1102921140005 1102921230003 1102921420008 1102921420009 1102921430017 1202921110009 1202921120018 1202921120020 1202921141)007 105-00013920-00-4 105-00014000-00-4 05-00014090-00-1 05-00014120-00-7 05-00014 140-00-3 05-00014 I, 90-00-8 05-00014320-00-1 05-00014350-00-0 05-00014420-00-8 05-00014480-00-6 05-00014510-00-2 05-00014550-00-4 05-00014750-00-8 05-00014870-00-1 05-00015020-00-9 05-00015050-00-8 05-00015060-00-1 105-00015200-00-7 05-00015290-00-4 05-00015450-00-6 05-00015480-00-5 05-00015500-00-8 105-00015510-00-1 05-00015580-00-2 05-00015600-00-5 05-00015680-00-9 05-00015780-00-6 05-00015900-00-6 05-00015980-00-0 05-00016000-00-2 05-00016090-00-9 05-00016160-00-7 05-00016430-00-9 105-00016530-00-6 05-00016570-00-8 05-00016630-00-3 05-00016760-00-9 05-00016770-00-2 05-00016790-00-8 05-00016870-00-9 05-00017030-00-0 05-00017040-00-3 05-00017170-00-9 05-00017230-00-4 05-00017300-00-2 05-00017350-00-7 05-00017360-00-0 05-00017380-00-6 05-00017470-00-0 05-00017500-00-6 05-00017540-00-8 105-00017560-00-4 105-00017640-00-5 05-00017650-00-8 05-00018000-00-0 05-000180Q0-00-7 1 55.00 1 50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 1 55.00 55.00 50.00 55.00 55.00 55,00 60.50 55.00 55,00 55,00 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 60,50 11.65 30.00 53,00 55.00 55.00 1 55.00 55.00 1 55.00 55.00 1 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 60.50 55.00 32.12 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 115.50 55.00 2940 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 25.00 80,00 1202921410029 25.00 75,00 1202921420019 25,00 80.00 1202921420028 25.00 80.00 1202921420031 25,00 80.00 1202921420033 25.00 80.00 1202921420038 25.00 80.00 1202921430018 25.00 80.00 1202921440002 25.00 75.00 1202921440016 25.00 80.00 1302921230008 25.00 80.00 1302921230012 25.00 80.00 1302921230016 25.00 85,50 1302921240006 25.00 80.00 1302921310013 25.00 80.00 1302921320036 25.00 80.00 1302921320039 25.00 80,00 1302921320040 25.00 80.00 1302921320068 25.00 80.00 1302921320064 25.00 80,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 80.00 85.50 36.65 55,00 80.00 80.00 25.00 80.00 25.00 80.00 25,00 80,00 25.00 80,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 80.00 80,00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80,00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 1 85.50 80.00 57.12 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 25.00 14(1.50 25.00 25,00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 80.00 54.40 80.00 80.00 1 80.00 80.00 1 80.00 1302921330018 1302921330022 1302921330024 1302921330025 1302921330035 1302921330038 1302921340007 1302921340017 1302921340029 1302921430007 1302921430009 1402921210010 1402921210017 1402921320016 1402921410012 1402921410016 1402921410027 1402921440009 1402921440010 1402921440012 1402921440020 1502921310002 1502921310004 1502921320013 1502921320020 1502921320021 1502921320022 1502921320027 1502921330003 1502921330(104 1502921330021 1502921330029 1502921330033 1502921340006 1502921340007 1602921140005 16029211400105_ 05-00018330-00-0 55,00 25.00 05-00018620-00-8 42.50 25.00 05-00018650-00-7 45,00 25.00 05-00018790-00-6 55.00 25.00 1 '5-00019020-00-5 55.00 25.00 -00019090-00-6 55.00 25.00 105-00019260-00-1 55.00 25.00 05-00019300-00-0 05-00019360-00-8 55.00 25,00 55.00 25.00 05-00019670-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00019700-00-8 55.00 25.00 05-00019770-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00019830-00-4 55,00 25.00 05-00020100-00-8 55.00 25,00 05-00020160-00-6 55.00 25.00 105-00020220-00-1 55.00 25,00 105-00020310-00-5 55.00 25.00 105-00020320-00-8 55.00 25.00 I05-00020380-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00020450-00-4 55.00 25.00 05-00020500-00-6 55,00 25.00 05-00020560-00-4 55.00 25.00 05-00020670-00-4 55.00 25.00 05-00020740-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00020760-00-8 50.00 25.00 05-00021020-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00021160-00-5 55.00 25,00 1°5-00021240-00-6 154.86 25.00 00021350-00-6 50.83 25.00 105-00021380-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00021470-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00021510-00-8 55.00 25.00 05-00021520-00-1 60.50 25.00 05-00021690-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00021700-00-9 55.00 25.00 105-00021820-00-2 55,00 25.00 05-00021920-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00022200-00-3 55,00 25.00 05-00022210-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00022550-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00022680-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00022790-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00022800-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00022890-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00022900-00-2 55.00 25.00 105-00022980-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00023010-00-1 55.00 25.00 105-00023050-00-3 55.00 25.00 05-00023280-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00023590-00-0 55.00 25.00 05-00023920-00-7 55.00 25.00 1 30023930-00-0 55.00 25.00 105-00023940-00-3 55.00 25.00 05-00023980-00-5 55.00 25.00 1 05-00024100-00-4 55.00 25.00 80.00 1 1602921210003 67,50 1602921220011 70.00 1602921220014 80,00 1602921220030 80.00 1602921410012 80.00 160292143001 1 80.00 2102921120009 80.00 2102921120014 80.00 2102921120022 80.00 2102921 120056 80.00 2102921130004 80.00 2102921130012 1 80.00 2102921130019 80,00 2102921210014 80.00 2102921210020 80.00 2102921220007 80.00 2102921230006 80.00 2102921230007 80.00 2102921230013 80.00 2102921240006 80,00 2102921240012 80.00 2102921330006 80,00 2102921340004 80.00 2202921210001 75.00 2202921210011 80.00 2202921230012 80.00 2402921110012 179.86 2402921110022 75.83 2402921120013 80.00 2402921120016 80.00 2402921120030 80.00 2402921120034 85.50 2402921120035 80.00 2402921140008 80.00 2402921140009 80.00 2402921210013 80,00 2402921210024 80.00 2402921310003 80.00 2402921310004 80.00 2402921330006 80.00 2402921420003 80.00 2402921420014 80.00 2402921420015 80.00 2402921420024 80.00 2402921420025 80.00 2402921430009 80.00 2402921430012 80.00 2402921430016 80.00 2402921440018 80.00 2502921330010 80.00 2602921110002 80.00 2602921330001 80.00 2602921330002 80.00 26029214300(12 80,00 2702921330001 05u0024/20-00-0 551w 25.00 05'00/24230'00-0 57,17 zzon muoo 4svo-0v-5 oou 25.00 05-OV024520-00-8 55,00 25A 05'0024560-00-0 oon 25A 05-00024580-00-6 55/0 25M 05'00024610'00-2 55,00 | zsoo 05-00024620'00z 55M 25MO 05'00024700-00u 5500 25o0 05'00024810-00-6 55,00 25,00 05'0002400'00-2 55.00 25,00 05'00024970'00'1 55.00 25.0u 05w[o5|00003 55,00 25-00 | 05-0005zoo-0o-8 25/00 05o8025270-00'/ oxo 25o0 05'00025400-00-4 55,00 25.00 05'00025530-00-0 55.00 25x0 05-00025570'00-2 55.00 25o0 05o0025580'00-5 ouV 25,00 0'00025590'00-8 55.00 25.on 05*0025600-00p 0.00 25�00 05'00025750'00-0 ouo 25u0 05-00025920-00-8 ozm 25,00 05-00025830-00'7 oou z5�0o ! 05-0002900-00-9 55v0 25,00 05'00025910'00'2 oM 25n0 v5'00025950'00-4 5I00 25.00 05'000259uO'00-3 55zm 25o0 05'00026150'00-7 000 25.00 05o0026270-00-0 oMV i 25M 05'00026280'00-3 o.OV 25M 05'00026380'00-0 60.50 z;oV 05'00026430'00-2 55.00 25xo 05-00026440'00-5 55.00 25M 05'00026*60m0'/ 55,00 25.00 v-5'000zwm'oo'o 55.00 25o0 05-00026900'00-8 ouo 25x0 osuonmv|o'oo'/ oM 25,00 05-00026990'00'5 55V0 25.00 05o0027020'00-0 55M | 215.uo 105-0027240-00-0 55u0 25x0 05-00027350o0-0 oon 25Mu � 05-0002741e0-5 55MO o.m 05-00027490-00-9 ozm 25,00 05-00027610'00-9 55u0 25.00 05-00027700-00o 55,00' 25.00 105-000Snuo-0w 55.00 25Mo 05-0002x540-00-0 55x0 25M 05'00028550'00a 550u 25M 105-00028560-x0'0 55.00 II00 05'0002x600'00'5 55.00 25,00 05-00028860-00-7 136.62 2 i»o 05-000xx7o-0n-0 */,I3 ozw 05-000 x9oo-0V-6 4L53 23zw --- 80/w 80,00 8(ViO /O|,*z wz} 66,53 85.50 270292133000 2702921420013 2802921/200/2 2802921/30000 280292/130010 280292//30012 zxmv00000 280292/130016 2802921140008 2802921*/0003 2802e1440002 3*02921210005 e02921220001 3+0292/23000x 34mvzo3mmo 3402921210000 350292/110004 350292/120002 35/292/120003 3502921120004 3502921140003 3502921420005 3502921440007 3602921320007 /302921320081 u/vzpz\)|onnx 0/02921120016 _ omzYz|ocm\\ 010292113002 u\ozv /|4non| 010292/140004 om29onwm\o 0/0292114002 0/0292114002 mnzv |44unox muzu/x0006 0oz92/wmn 03029212/0007 0402921330015 mozv w4on}^ 090292/240018 10029/z^0O o /002921*100/6 1002921410825 1002*214w0014 10292/320010 //Vzvuomz| 1302921320076 o02921320080 1302921320082 130291-1330005 2z029/z|0mD 220292121000/ 220292|2|nn07 2202921210017 05-00029050-00-7 05-00029210-00-9 05-0002922D-00-2 _- 19230-00-5 -00029240-00-8 ,-00029250-00-1 05-00029260-00 -4 05-00029280-00-0 105-00029290-00-3 I05-00029510-00-0 105-00029550-00-2 05-00029740-00-3 05-00029820-00-4 05-00029980-00-9 05-00029990-00-2 05-00030000-00-4 Ios-00030010-oo-7 105-00030020-00-0 105-00030030-00-3 05-00030060-00-2 05-00030080-00-8 05-00030390-00-2 05-00030650-00-1 05-00031330-00-3 05-00031350-00-9 05-00031910-00-9 05-00031930-00-5 05-00031940-00-8 55.00 L 25.00 80.00 2202921220020 I 55.00 25,00 80.00 2402921110004 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120018 55,00 25.00 80.00 2402921120019 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120020 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120021 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120022 45.76 25.00 70.76 2402921140005 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921220003 55.00 25.00 80,00 2702921410015 55.00 25.00 80.00 2702921420007 55.00 25.00 80.00 2702921440011 43.25 25.00 68.25 2802921130003 103.87 25.00 128.87 3602921130001 204.98 25.00 229.98 3602921210001 65.68 25.00 90.68 3602921210001 51.85 25.00 76.85 3602921230001 51.88 25.00 76.88 3602921230002 103.72 25.00 128.72 3602921240001 832.02 1 66.56 898.58 3302921440036 2,278.38 1 182.27 2,460.65 0302921210003 51.17 25.00 76.17 1302921240016 40.67 25.00 65.67 1302921320088 1,685.02 1.34.80 1,819.82 3402921330004 874.23 69.94 944.17 3402921340004 176.74 25.00 201.74 3402921130001 27.76 25.00 52.76 3402921430002 150.50 25.00 175.50 3502921220001 23,003.58 7,853.57 30,857.15 crry or, KE FLMO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AYOR & COUNCIL CO DATE: CONSENT ITEM MOTION UNICATION October 6, 2015 #3 Resolution 2015-77 Authorize Certification to Washington County Auditor for the Unpaid Surface Water Utility Bills Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Patty Baker, Accountant SU(;(;ESTEI) ORI)Elt OF IIIJSINESS: Introduction of Item ..... (7ity Administrator ...... .City Administrator •st. s Council to Staff... ..... ...,................................. Mayor Facilitates Call t-)r Motion ............ .......... . ..... Mayor & City Council Discussion ..... ..... Mayor & City Council Action ori Mot ....... ....... ...................... ........ Ivlayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: Up to $30,857.15 in cash flow to the storm water fund in 2016 SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is respectfully asked to approve the certification of the delinquent Surface Water Bills to the Washington County Auditor. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the ConsentAgenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has authority by Minnesota State statute 444.075, subd.3 to assess property owners for unpaid surface water utilities and services. Affected homeowners with past due balances were sent notification of the proposed assessment. Property owners have until October 9`11 to pay these amounts to be removed from the final assessment list. STAFF REPORT: The City operates the water, sewer and surface water under its Enterprise funds. Enteiprise funds account for specific City operations that are financed and operated -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 3J October 6, 2015 similar to a private business. Generally, the services are provided to identifiable beneficiaries, as well as the general public, and all or most of the costs come from user fees. All parcels in the City are charged for this fee. The user fees collected are utilized to operate the City's respective water, sewer and surface water systems. Assessing the property owners listed on Exhibit A (attached) for unpaid services will assure collection of charged fees. The deadline to certify the unpaid surface water utility to Washington County is October 15, 2015. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the certification of the delinquent surface water accounts to the Washington County Auditor. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2015-77 2. Exhibit A -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2015-77 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CERTIFICATION TO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY AUDITOR FOR UNPAID SURFACE WATER UTILITY BILLS WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. 444.075, subd. 3, permits certification of unpaid charges to the county auditor for collection with taxes payable; WHEREAS, the Municipal Code for the City of Lake Elmo contains a provision to certify delinquent accounts to the County Auditor for the collection with taxes payable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA, THAT: The list of delinquent accounts, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and made part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall be certified to the Washington County Auditor for collection with taxes payable. The certified amount shall be payable over a period of one year, with interest as provided in Exhibit A. The owner of the property may, at any time prior to certification to the County Auditor, pay the delinquent amount to the City Finance Director. 4. The City Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of Exhibit A to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of Washington County. Such delinquent accounts shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of October, 2015. By: Mike Pearson Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk Resolution 2015-77 �CitvmrLake Elmo 11 SWUtility Bills roBcAssessed zminq 20ofor 20mtax rolls � Account 05-00000170-00-3 05'00000240-00'1 05-0000050-004 05-00000300-00-6 |05*0000470-004 05'000020'00'6 05'00000550'00'5 05-00000590-007 05'00000830-00'0 05-00000840-00'3 105�00000920'00-4 05'00000950'00'3 05-00000960-00'6 05'000012m'00'2 05-000015 10'00-2) 05'0000/520-00'5 105'*00v1530'00'8 05-00002/90-00-7 05f0002410-00-4 05o0002*60-00-9 05'00002570'00'9 05-00002590-00'5 05'00002880'00'3 05'0000890'00'6 05'00003160'00'7 05'00003*60'00'8 05'000835/0'00'0 105-00003530-00-0 05-00003550-00'2 05-00003710'00-* 05-0000820-00-4 05'0004100-00-8 05-00004240'00'7 05'00004410'00'2 05'00004440-00'/ 05-00004570-00-7 05'00004610-00+ 05'0000*750-00-7 05-00004760'00'8 105'00004810'00-0 05-00005200'00-* 05'00005450-00-3 05-00005,470-009 05-00005700-00-9 05-00005900-00'3 05o0005910-00-6 _ 05-00005950o0'8 05-0000598o'00-7 05-00006090-00-6 05-00006220-00w 05o006300-00-0 Balance Fee Total Due Property [D No. 99A5 25,00 124,45 142.73 25.00 /67,73 o.s 25uo 48,13 75/9 25.00 100.99 +vvv 2I00 ulvp 105.04 25l0 |]Vzw 5/,49 25no 70A9 40,94 25.00 65.9* 53.22 25,00 78,22 46�7* 25,00 71,74 217o5 i 25,00 24205 187z9 25.00 21128 157,00 25.00 182,00 30l5 25.00 55.25 55/0 25.00 muoV 55.00| 25,00 80-00 o.oV 25,00 80,00 000 25.n0 80-00 55n0 25,00 Moo ooxn zsoo 80.00 55on 25.00 80.00 55�00 25.00 unuv oun zs.on unon 55,00 25/00 8000 55.00 25.00 80.00 55.80 ' 25Mn 80,0' 55.00| 25.8n 80.00 svA). 2500 75,00 60.50 25.00 85JO 55.00 25,00 WOO oM / 25o0 80.00 55.00 25M MN) 63o9 | zsom 88,09 55.00 25�00 ouoo 55,00 oM 80.00 55.00 oM xvxo oxn 25.00 80x0 55.00 25uO 80,00 000 as»n xnuo 4100 25,00 0000 55o0 25M 80,00 oM 25M xnuo 55u0 000 80u0 55M 25.00 mou0 o/m 25.00 80oo 50.00 25V0 75.00 55.00 25M 80.00 55Mo 25M0 80.00 55.00 25Mu xoOu 55Mn 25oo 80.00 020292131000 00292120002 0302921220005 0402921/30002 1102921140003 )m2vumOo0 nozvz|^xonn /20292122000 14029nlmm| 140I921310002 1502921310001 1502921410001 15029/*z0on 3502921240001 o|ozv lU0o0 010292//4000 o|uzv nfouo 01029 |s4uv0 020292112000 02029212300/ [2n22w/oom 0202921410012 0302921120003 0302921120005 0302921220004 0302921320013 0ozv oom|o 0302921320020 002921330003 030292/340001 030292/3*0012 002921430010 0302921440011 0402921120000 04029211200/1 m0292o\00m 0*029I1210011 04029'z2o0n 0402921220009 04029212200e 040292/320007 0*02921330038 0402921330044 0402921440/18 mm9z/omo3 0502921130004 0502921140000 muoz/Moo 00292w}OO(� nmzyzwznun 050292/420022 05-00000600-00-1 05-00006640-00-3 05-00006860-003 05-00006980-00-6 '5-00007030-00-7 3-00007040-00-0 05-00007200-00-2 05-00007480-00-0 05-00007490-00-3 105-00007570-00-4 05-00007670-00-1 05-00007890-00-1 05-00007900-00-1 05-00007950-00-6 05-00008130-00-3 05-00008220-00-7 05-00008290-00-8 05-00008490-00-2 05-00008690-00-60 05-00008950-00-5 05-00009000-00-6 05-00009010-00-9 05-00009030-00-5 05-00009060-00-4 05-00009090-00-3 05-00009330-00-6 05-00009710-00-8 05-00009770-00-60 -00010060-00-6 05-00010070-00-9 05-00010200-00-2 05-00010330-00-8 05-0001(174(1-00_9 05-00010870-00-5 05-00010940-00-3 05-00010980-00-5 05-00011190-00-1 05-00011200-00-1 05-00011330-00-7 05-00011770-00-7 05-00011790-00-3 05-00011850-00-8 05-00011950-00-5 05-00012100-00-3 05-00012120-00-9 (15-00012200-00-0 05-00012310-00-0 05-00012350-00-2 05-00012800-00-2 05-00012810-00-5 05-00012930-00-8 00012960-00-7 5-00013320-00-2 0 40-00-8 3440-00-5 55.00 25,00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 29.59 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25,00 44.58 25.00 80.00 0502921430024 I 80.00 0502921430028 I 80.00 0502921440032 _0 54.59 0502921440046 80.0(1 0502921440046 80.00 0602920230007 80.00 0602920310028 69.58 0602920320018 1 55.00 25.00 55.00 25,00 50.00 25.00 60.50 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55,00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 19.50 25.00 115.50 25.00 55.00 25,00 55.00 25.00 25.83 25.00 55.00 25.00 55,00 25.00 176.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 j 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 j 25.00 55.00 j 25.00 55,00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 j0 25.00 55,00 25.00 50.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55,00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55,00 25.00 55.00 25.00 50.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 55.00 25.00 80.00 0602920320019 80.00 0602920320027 75.00 0602920320044 85.50 0602920320066 80.00 80.00 0602920320067 0602920330005 80.00 (1602920330023 80.00 0802921110004 80.00 0802921110013 80.00 0902921110004 80.00 0902921130004 80.00 0902921220007 80.00 0902921220013 80.00 0902921220014 80.00 09(12921220016 44.50 0902921220023 140.50 0902921230003 80,00 0902921240015 80,00 0902921320010 50.83 0902921320016 80.00 (1902921330019 80.00 0902921330020 2(11.00 0902921340(113 80.00 0902921410010 80.00 0902921430005 80.00 0502921430018 80.00 0902921430025 80.00 0902921430029 80.00 0902921440019 80.00 09()2921440020 80,00 1002921210004 80.00 1002921240010 80.00 1002921240012 80,00 1002921240020 80.00 j 1002921310002 75.00 1002921320005 80.00 1002921320009 80.00 1002921410018 80.00 1102921140005 80.00 1102921230003 80.00 1102921420008 80.00 1102921420009 80.00 1102921430017 80.0(1 1202921110009 75.00 1202921120018 80,00 1202921120020 80.00 1202921140007 105-00013920-00-4 105-00014000-00-4 05-00014090-00-1 05-00014120-00-7 05-00014140-00-3 105-00014190-00-8 05-00014320-00-1 05-00014350-00-0 05-00014420-00-8 05-00014480-00-6 105-00014510-00-2 I05-00014550-00-4 105-00014750-00-8 05-00014870-00-1 05-00015020-00-9 05.00015050-00-8 05-00015060-00-1 05-00015200-00-7 05-00015290-00-4 I05-00015450-00-6 I05-00015480-00-5 105-00015500-00-8 05-00015510-00-1 105-00015580-00-2 105-00015600-00-5 05-00015680-00-9 05-00015780-00-6 05-00015900-00-6 05-00015980-00-0 05-00016000-00-2 05-00016090-00-9 05-00016160-00-7 05-0001(1431)-00-9 05-00016530-00-6 105-00016570-00-8 05-00016630-00-3 05-00016760-00-9 05-00016770-00-2 05-00016790-00-8 05-00016870-00-9 05-00017030-00-0 05-00017040-00-3 05-00017170-00-9 105-00017230-00-4 05-00017300-00-2 05-00017350-00-7 05-00017360-00-0 05-00017380-00-6 (15-00017470-00-0 105-00017500-00-6 105-00017540-00-8 05-00017560-00-4 05-00017640-00-5 1(15-00017650-00-8 05.00018000-00-0 (15-00018090-00-7 55.00 50.00 55.00 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 50.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 60.50 55.00 55.00 55.00 I 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55,00 60.50 11,65 30.00 55.00 55.00 55,00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 1 I 55.00 l 55,00 55.00 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 60,50 55,00 32.12 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 115.50 55.00 29.40 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 25,00 1 80.00 1202921410029 25.00 75.00 1202921420019 25.00 80.00 1202921420028 25.00 80.00 1202921420031 25.00 80,00 1202921420(133 25.00 80.00 1202921420038 25.00 80.00 1202921430018 25,00 80,00 12(12921440002 25.00 75.00 12(1292144(1016 25.00 8 0. 00 13 0292123 0008 25.00 80.00 130292123 0012 25.00 80.00 1302921230016 25.00 85.50 1302921240006 25,00 80.00 1302921310013 25,00 80,00 1302921320036 25.00 80.00 1302921320039 25,00 80.00 1302921320040 25.00 80.00 131)2921320068 25.00 80.00 13029213 20064 25,00 80,00 1302921330018 25.00 80.00 1302921330022 25.00 85,50 1302921330024 25.00 36.65 1302921330025 25.00 55,00 1302921330035 25.00 80.00 1302921330038 25.00 80.00 1302921340007 25.00 80.00 1302921340017 25,00 80.00 1302921340029 25,00 80.00 1302921430007 25.00 80.00 1302921430(109 25.00 80,00 1402921210010 25.00 80,00 1402921210017 25.00 80.00 1402921320016 25.00 80,00 1402921410012 25.00 80,00 1402921410016 25.00 80.00 1402921410027 25.00 80.00 1402921440009 25.00 80,00 1402921440010 25.00 80.00 1402921440012 25.00 80.00 1402921440020 25,00 85.50 1502921310002 25.00 80.00 1502921310004 25,00 57.12 1502921320013 25.00 80.00 1502921320020 25.00 80,00 1502921320021 25.00 80.00 1502921320022 25.00 80.00 1502921320027 25.00 80.00 1502921330(103 25.00 140.50 15029213 3 0004 25.00 80.00 1502921330021 25.00 54.40 1502921330029 25.00 80.00 1502921330033 25,00 80.00 1502921340006 25.00 80.00 1502921340007 25.00 80.00 1602921140005 25.00 80.00 1602921140015 105-0001 8 - -0 55.00 25.00 05-00018620-00-8 42.50 25,00 05-00018650-00-7 45.00 25.00 105-00018790-00-6 55.00 25,00 1 I ' c -00019020-00-5 55.00 1 25.00 -00019090-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00019260-00-1 55.00 25.00 05-00019300-00-0 55.00 25.00 05-00019360-00-8 55,00 25.00 05-00019670-00-2 55.00 25,00 05-00019700-00-8 55.00 25.00 05-00019770-00-9 55.00 1 25.00 105-00019830-00-4 55.00 25.00 5-00020 I 00-00-8 55,00 25.00 05-00020160-00-6 i I 55.00 25.00 05-00020220-00-1 55.00 25.00 05-00020310-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00020320-00-8 55.00 25.00 05-00020380-00-6 55.00 25,00 05 -00020450-00-4 55,00 25.00 05-00020500-00-6 55.00 25,00 05-00020560-00-4 55.00 25.00 05-00020670-00-4 55.00 25.00 -00020740-00-2 55,00 25.00 05-00020760-00-8 50,00 i 25,00 05-00021020-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00021160-00-5 55.00 25,00 "5-00021240-00-6 154.86 25.00 000213504)0-6 50,83 25.00 105-0002 1380-00-5 55,00 25.00 105-00021470-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00021510-00-8 55.00 25,00 05-0002 I 520-00-1 60,50 25.00 05-0002 I 690-00-9 55,00 25,00 ( 05-0002 I 700-00-9 55 ) 25.00 ...... - 05-00021820-00-2 55.00 25.00 05-00021920-00-9 55.00 25.00 05400022200-00-3 55,00 25.00 05-00022210-00-6 55.00 25.00 05-00022550-00-9 55.00 25.00 05-00022680-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00022790-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00022800-00-5 55.00 25.00 05-00022890-00-2 55,00 25.00 05-00022900-00-2 55.00 25.00 105-00022980-00-6 55.00 25.00 105-00023010-00-1 55.00 25.00 105-00023050-00-3 55,00 25,00 05-00023280-00-6 55.00 25,00 05-00023590-00-0 55.00 25.00 105-00023920-00-7 55.00 25.00 )0023930-00-0 55,00 25.00 10)-00023940-00-3 55.00_ _ 25.00 05-00023980-00-5 55,00 25.00 05-00021100-00-4 55.00 25,00 80,00 1 1602921210003 67.50 1602921220011 70.00 1602921220014 80.00 160292 I 220030 80.00 1602921410012 80.00 1602921430011 80,00 2102921120009 80,00 2102921120014 80,00 2102921120022 80.00 2102921120056 80.00 2102921130004 80,00 1 2102921130012 80.00 1 2102921130019 80,00 2 [ 02921210014 80,00 2102921210020 80.00 2102921220007 80.00 2102921230006 80.00 2102921230007 80.00 2102921230013 80.00 21029212400(16 80,00 2102921240012 80.00 2102921330006 80.00 2102921340004 80,00 2202921210001 75.00 22(12921210011 80.00 2202921 230012 80.00 2402921110012 179.86 2402921110022 75,83 240292 [120013 80.00 2402921120016 80.00 2402921120030 80,00 2402921120034 85,50 2402921120035 80.00 2402921140008 80.00 1 240292 [140009 80.00 24029212100 [3 80.00 2402921210024 80.00 2402921310003 80.00 240292 [310004 80.00 2402921330006 80,00 240292 I 420003 80.00 2402921420014 80.00 2402921420015 80,00 2402921420024 80.00 2402921420025 80.00 2402921430009 80,00 2402921430012 80.00 2402921430016 80.00 2402921440018 80.00 2502921330010 80.00 2602921110002 80.00 2602921330001 80.00 2602921330002 80.00 2602921430002 80.00 2702921330001 05-00024120-00-0 105-00024230-00-0 05-00024390-00-5 05-00024520-00-8 05-00024560-00-0 05-00024580-00-6 05-00024610-00-2 5-00024620-00-5 05-00024700-00-6 105-00024810-00-6 105-00024830-00-2 105-00024970-00-1 05-00025100-00-3 05-00025260-00-8 05-00025270-00-1 05-00025400-00-4 05-00025530-00-0 05-00025570-00-2 05-00025580-00-5 05-00025590-00-8 05-00025600-00-8 05-00025750-00-0 05-00025820-00-8 05-00025850-00-7 05-00025900-00-9 05-00025910-00-2 05-00025950-00-4 05-00025980-00-3 05-00026150-00-7 05-00026270-00-0 05-00026280-00-3 05-00026380-00-0 05-00026430-00-2 05-00026440-00-5 (15-00026460-00-1 05-00026850-00-6 05-00026900-00-8 05-00026910-00-1 05-00026990-00-5 05-00027020-00-0 05-00027240-00-0 05-00027350-00-0 05-00027410-00-5 05-00027490-00-9 05-00027610-00-9 05-00027700-00-3 05-00028060-00-1 05-00028540-00-0 05-00028550-00-3 05-00028560-00-6 05-00028600-00-5 05-00028860-00-7 05-00028870-00-0 05-00028900-00-6 05-00028980-00-0 55.00 57.17 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 1 55.00 55.00 55.00 1 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.0(1 55.00 55.00 55.00 50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 60.50 55.00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.0(1 I 55.00 55.00 55.00 55,00 55,00 55,00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 136.62 41.53 41,53 60.50 I 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 j 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25,00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25.0(1 25.00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 j 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25,00 25,00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 80.00 82,17 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.()0 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 1 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 75,00 80,00 I 80.00 80,00 80.00 80,00 , 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 85,50 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 2702921330004 2702921420013 2802921120012 2802921130006 2802921130010 2802921130012 2802921130015 2802921 130016 2802921140008 2802921410003 2802921440002 3402921210005 3402921220001 3402921230(108 3402921230009 3402921240008 3502921110004 3502921120002 3502921120003 3502921 120004 3502921140003 3502921420005 3502921440007 3602921320007 1302921320081 0102921110008 0102921120016 0102921120011 0102921130023 0102921140001 0102921140004 0102921140016 0102921140023 0102921140024 0102921440005 0302921110006 0302921140011 030292121(1007 0402921330015 050292 I 440016 0902921 240018 1002921240008 1002921410016 80.00 1002921410025 80.00 1002921440014 80.00 1102921320010 80,00 110292133002.1 80.00 1302921320(176 80.00 1302921320080 80.00 1302921.320082 80.00 1.302921330005 161,62 2202921210003 66.53 2202921210004 66.53 2202921210007 85.50 j 2202921210017 05-00029050-00-7 105-00029210-00-9 105-00029220-00-2 05-00029230-00-5 s-00029240-00-8 )-00029250-00-1 (>5-00029260-00-4 05-00029280-00-0 105-00029290-00-3 05-00029510-00-0 05-00029550-00-2 05-00029740-00-3 05-00029820-00-4 05-00029980-00-9 05-00029990-00-2 05-00030000-00-4 05-00030010-00-7 05-00030020-00-0 05-00030030-00-3 05-00030060-00-2 05-00030080-00-8 05-00030390-00-2 05-00030650-00-1 05-00031330-00-3 05-00031350-00-9 05-00031910-00-9 05-00031930-00-5 105-00031940-00-8 55.00 25,00 80.00 2202921220020 55.00 25,00 80.00 2402921110004 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120018 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120019 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120020 55.00 25.00 80,00 2402921120021 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921120022 45.76 25,00 70,76 2402921 140005 55.00 25.00 80.00 2402921220(103 55.00 25.00 80.00 2702921410015 55.00 25,00 80.00 2702921420007 55.00 25.00 80.00 2702921440011 43.25 25.00 68.25 2802921130003 103.87 25.00 128.87 3602921130001 204,98 25.00 229.98 3602921210001 65.68 25.00 90.68 3602921210001 51.85 25.00 76.85 3602921230001 51.88 25.00 76.88 3602921230002 103.72 25,00 128.72 3602921240001 832.02 66.56 898.58 3302921440036 2,278.38 182.27 2,460.65 0302921210003 51.17 25.00 76.17 1302921240016 40.67 25.00 65.67 1302921320088 1,685,02 134.80 1,819.82 3402921330004 874.23 69.94 944.17 3402921340004 176.74 25.00 201.74 3402921130001 27.76 25.00 52.76 3402921430002 150.50 25.00 175.50 3502921220001 23.003,58 7J5,53,57 30X57.15 crry KE ELAN, 0 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AYOR ....COUNCIL CO UN/CAT/ON DATE: CONSENT ITEM # October 6, 2015 4 39th Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer Improvements — Pay Request No. 7 Chad Isakson, Project Engineer Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director S UGG ESTED ORDER OF 13 USIN ES S if removed from the Consent Agenda): Questions from Council to S1L1 Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate__ ..... „.._............Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion... ..... ......... Mayor & City Council Discussion... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates ,POLICyRECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the approved Contract and change orders for the project. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 7 for the 391h Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer Improvements project. if removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 7 to Geislinger & Sons Inc. in the amount of $55,487.06 for the 39111 Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer Improvements". -- page City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 41 October 6, 2015 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Geislinger & Sons Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 7 in the amount of $55,487.06. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $98,604.51. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of he Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 7 for the 39th Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer Improvements project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 7 to Geislinger & Sons Inc. in the amount of $55,487.06, for the 39th Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer Improvements". ATTACHMENT(S): Partial Pay Estimate No. 7. -- page 2 -- PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 7 39TH ST N: STREET AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2014.131 PROJECT OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 ATTN: JACK GRIFFIN, CITY ENGINEER No. CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUNIMARY Approval Amount Date Additions Deductions 1 9/16/2014 $118,975.00 2 2/3/2015 $22,214.00 3 2/24/2015 $19,435.00 4 4/7/2015 $154,440.00 TOTALS $315,064.00 NET CHANGE $315,064.00 START DATE: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: FINAL COMPLETION: 9/2/2014 6/30/2015 8/15/2015 F • CUS ENGINEERING, inc. PERIOD OF ESTIMATE FROM 7/21/2015 TO 9/24/2015 CONTRACTOR: GEISLINGER & SONS, INC. 511 CENTRAL AVE S, PO BOX 437 WATKINS, MINNESOTA 55389 ATTN: GARY LUEBBEN, PROJECT MANAGER PAY ESTIMATE 1. Original Contract Amount 2. Net Change Order Sum 3. Revised Contract (1+2) 4, *Work Completed 5, *Stored Materials 6. Subtotal (4+5) 7. Retainage* 5.0% 8. Previous Payments 0 9. Amount Due (6-7-8) *Detailed Breakdown Attached CONTRACT TIME ORIGINAL DAYS REVISED DAYS REMAINING 347 0 -40 ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: FOCUS Engineering, inc. The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and to the best of their knowledge and belief, the quantities shown in this estimate are correct and the work has been performed in accordance ENGINEER with the contract documents. 9/28/2015 DATE CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief the work covered by this paymentBY „It. estimate has been completed fn accordance with the contract documents, that all amounts have been paid by the contractor for work for which previous payment estimates was issued and paymentsDATE received from the owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. CONTRACTOR APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BY BY DATE DATE SUMMARY $1,760,458.80 $315,064.00 $2,075,522.80 $1,972,090, 21 $0.00 $1,972,090.21 $98,604.51 $1,817,998.63 $55,487.06 ON SCHEDULE YES NO FOCUS Engineering, inc. PROJECT PAYMENT FORM TE VI F F §§, 8s 0 0 52 2 `-^4 7; C -7, '-- ; 5,588899899988888888 9588888888858888888 98 00 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P P srrP r r r r 88 88E888888888888688888888 cc 88 88 Itg'r Wwwww w CC1 W ',49] .'438 88 8 g 686 5F 7,1'4 54 7, -7,7, 7 --, 7, -7-, rts 8889998 c8gf3 8588888 0 r. VS. VI ,„,...„ s . - ,, 0 ,,,o,,, :.„,,,,, - > K g, 2 88 8889898889888 8888888898989898998898 F., 2 I" . 0 0 c, c, c, . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CC 0 0 0 'i 0 0 5 8 6' r, 8 80000 ppppp E t 5t; 3 S 52 6.• 8868868888888888 8888888888888888888888 8 r, 8 3 8 8 8 8 8 66888 688E88888 0-5E. 5888858588 n Kr, 88C8 88888888888888 88888 rn `9NIM33N19N3 sn3 rn CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT 3 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA 3 51,200.00 53,600.00 0.00 $0.00 1 51,200.00 4 CLEAR AND GRUB TREES AND BRUSH LS 1 $4,50000 54,500.00 0.00 50.00 1 54,500,00 5 TEMPORARY ACCESS GRADING LS 7 $2.,000.00 $2,00000 0.00 50.00 1 52,000,00 6 TEMPORARY ACCESS AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TN 60 530.00 $1,800.00 0.00 $0 00 60 51,800.00 7 TEMPORARY ACCESS MAINTENANCE HR 10 512500 51,250.00 0.00 $0 00 10 51,250.00 8 REMOVE TEMPORARY ACCESS 15 1 51,500.00 51,500,00 0.00 50.00 1 $1,500.00 9 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 290 $6.00 51,740.00 0,00 $0.00 290 $1,740.00 10 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT St 9160 52.00 518,320.00 0.00 $0.00 9,487 518,974.00 11 REMOVE ANC/ DISPOSE. Of EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT(DRIVEWA' SY 335 $4.00 $1,3,10.00 0.00 50.00 300 51,200.00 12 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OE EXISTING LIGHT BASE EA 4 $300.00 51,200.00 0.00 50.00 0 $0.00 13 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 8 $200.00 51,600.00 000 50,00 0 50.00 14 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAIL DROPBOX EA 1 $2$0.00 $250,00 000 $0.00 0 50.00 15 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL RETAINING WALL LS 1 $7.50000 $7,500.00 0.00 $000 0 50.00 16 5AWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LE 200 $3.00 5600.00 000 50.00 200 $600.00 17 COMMON EXCAVATION (P) CY 7750 $9.00 51,9,750.00 0.00 50.00 7,750 $69,750,00 18 SUBGRAD£ CORRECTION{EV) CY 340 512.00 54,08000 0.00 $0 DO 216 $2,592.00 19 SUBGRADE PREPARATION R5 24.34 $465.0U $11,31810 0.00 $0.00 24.34 511,31810 20 4" PERFORATED PVC DRAWN TILE W1TH AGGREGATE AND WRAP LE 1000 512.00 $12,000.00 0.00 $0,00 980 $11,760,00 21 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 1N 6380 $10.50 $66,990.00 0,00 50,00 8,380 566,989.79 22 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW(P) CY 4090 510.00 540,900,00 000 $0.00 4,485 544.850.00 23 TYPE SP9.5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURI(2,8) (6PWEA230E TN 800 566.50 $53,200.00 785,36 552,226,44 785 $52,226.44 24 TYPE SP 12.5 BITI2N11NC41JS NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE {2,13) (SPN0 TN 3335 $57.75 $77,096.25 000 50 00 1,290.5 $74,526.38 25 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 565 52.00 $1,130.00 300.00 $600,00 325 $650.00 26 ADJUST MN CASTING- STEEL RING 12015) EA 12 $450,00 $5,400.00 0,00 $0.00 0 50.00 27 ADIU5T VANE BOx {2015) EA 20 $250.00 $5,000.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 28 8624 CONCRETE CURB ANO GUTTER 16 4310 $10,77 546,418.70 0,00 50.00 4,465 $48,098.05 29 B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LE 105 $14,80 $1,554,00 0.00 50.00 43 5636 40 30 CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN RAMP EA 12 5420 00 55.040.00 0.00 50.00 12 $5,040.013 31 5" CONCRETE SIDEWALK $F 13110 53,50 $45,885.00 0.00 50.00 12,840 $44,940.00 32 8" COMMERCIAL CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT (HIGH EARLY) SY 3440 $70,00 $23,800.00 0.00 $0.00 331 $23,170.00 33 6" CONCRETE FLUME SY 35 $5000 $1,750.00 25.00 51,2.50.00 GO $3,000.00 34 TRUNCATED DOME PANELS SF 168 542.00 $7,05600 0.00 $0-00 160 56,720.00 35 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 105 $50,00 $5,250.00 0.00 5000 160 58.000.00 36 TYPE SP9.5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSEMIXTURE- TRAIL O2,8) (SPW TN 270 565.00 517,55000 0.00 50.00 265 $17,219.15 37 SODDING SY 5000 54.25 521,250.00 000 $0,00 4.163 517,69275 38 IMPORT AND PLACE TOPSOIL BORROW ICV) CY $00 $35.00 $17,500,00 000 50.00 783 527,405.00 39 SEED & EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SY 2000 53 25 56,500.00 0.00 50.00 646 52,099.50 40 SEED & HYDROMULCH SY $500 52.15 511,825.00 0.00 50.00 3,499 57,522.85 41 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED LF 1000 $1.95 $1,950.00 000 5000 0 50.00 42 SILT FENCE, 'TYPE FLOATING LT 30 $22,50 5675.00 0.00 $000 0 $0.00 43 DITCH CHECK- BIOROLL 1E 200 $5.75 $1,150.00 000 $0.00 30 $172.50 44 STREET SWEEPING HR 15 5125.00 51,875.00 0.00 5000 0 $000 45 SIGN PANELS, TYPE C 5F 6 $45 00 $281,25 0.00 $0.00 0 50 00 46 4" DOU13d.4 SOLID VT LLOW LINE. EPDXY €E 2270 51.50 53,405.00 2,274.00 $3,411 U0 2,274 53,41 400 47 4" 50110 WHITE LINE, EPDXY LE 110 SO.75 $82.5D 100.03 $75 00 SOLI $75.00 48 RIGHT TURN ARROW, TAPE EA 1, 584500 5845.00 1.00 584500 0 5845.00 SUBTOTAL. PART4 5714,706.80 558,407.44 568446391 ALTERNATE NO. 1- SANITARY SEWER SOD1 H OE TN 5 1 CLEAR ANO GRUB TREES ANTI BRUSH LS 1 $4,000.00 54,000.00 2 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER LE 20 $10.00 5200.00 3 PATCH GRAVEL DRIv0WAY TN 200 52000 $4,000.00 4 18" CMP DRIVEWAY CULVERT LF 20 545.00 5900,00 5 L8" CMP FLARED END SECTION EA 2 5480.00 $960.00 6 1$' PVC SANITARY SEWER, SOB 26,15'- 20' DEEP LF 625 594.00 558,750.00 7 15" PVC SANITARY SEWER, OR 26, 20' 25' DEEP LF 1255 $96.00 5120,480.00 k 14" PVC SANITARY SEWER, C905 DR 25, IN CASING LF 164 $40 00 $6,560.00 9 14" PVC SANITARY SEWER, C905 DR 25, 20- 25` DEEP LF 20 $76.00 $1,520.00 10 28" STEE7 CASING PIPE (TACK/AUG£RED) LF 164 5565 00 597,660 00 11 PIPE FOUNDATION ROCK LF 1000 50.01 510.00 12 TELEVISING LF 2061 57,00 54,122.00 13 4' DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER MH EA 8 $3,200,00 S25,600.00 14 4' DIAMETER EXCESS MANHOLE DEPTH LF 115 5125,00 514,375A0 15 50110E00MPACTION AC 5 51,20000 56,000.00 16 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED LF 300 51.95 5585.00 17 SEED AND BLANKET SY 1500 $3.25 $4,875.00 SUBTOTAL -ALTERNATE N0.1 5345,597.00 TOTALS - BASE CONTRACT $1,760,458.80 CHANGE ORDER NO, 1 t01"1 CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" WATER MAIN EA -2 0 5900.00-$1,800.00 C01,-2 CONNECT TO EXISTING 8" WATER MAIN EA 2.0 5950.00 $1,900.00 CO1-3 CONNECT TO EXISTING 16" WATER MAIN EA 1.0 51,600.00 $1,600.00 C01-4 CUT IN 8" X 8" TEE EA .1.0 52,600,00-52,600,00 C01.5 REMOVE ANO DISPOSE OF EXISTING 8" WATER MAIN LF 8150 56.00 55,250.00 50,00 1 54,000 00 50.00 0 $U.00 50.00 0 5000 $0.00 0 $0.00 50.00 O 50.00 50.00 625 058,75000 00 00 1.255 5120,480.00 5000 164 $6,560,00 5000 20 $1,520,00 $0.00 60 533,900.00 $000 0 $0.00 50.00 0 50,00 S0.00 8 525,600.00 5000 109.2 $13,650,00 $0,00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 5000 $0,00 $264,460,00 568,407,44 $1,611,435,21 $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 2 51,900.00 50.00 1 $1,600.00 $0 00 0 $0.00 $0.00 884 $5,304.00 ITEM DESCRIPTION Of PAY ITEM C01-6 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING GATE VALVE & BOX COE.) 16" DIP Cl, 51 WATER MAIN C01.8 8" GATE VALVE AND BOX 00E-9 16" BUTTERFLY VALVE AVID BOX C01-10 DUCTILE BION FITTINGS ... . _ CO NT RAC THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE UNO QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT EA 1.0 $1,500.00 91,500,00 0 $0,00 1 51,500.00 LE 875.0 959 00 $60,375.00 $0,00 575 $60,375,00 EA 2.0 51,700.00 $3,4.00.00 50.00 2 51,400 00 EA 2.0 53,000,00 $6,000.00 50.00 2 $6,000.00 LB 2,580.0 51003 $26,800.00 0 50.00 2,525 525,250.00 C01-11 8" DIP CL. 52 WATER MAIN Lf 100 $63 00 $530,03 50,00 9 5477,00 C01-12 101 HOPE DR 41 WATERMAIN INSTALLED BY DIRECTIONAL DRILL IF 90,0 $178,00 $15,020.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 TOTALS - CHANGE ORDER NO.1 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 CO2-1 MANHOLE CORE ORILL 15 CO2.2 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC sy TOTALS- CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 CO3,1 30-INCH CASING PIPE - PIPE HAMMER TOTALS - CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 C04-1 48'INCH CASiNG PIPE C04-2 DEDUCT 2B-INC El CASING PIPE INSTALLED) TOTALS - CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 TOTALS - REVISED CONTRACT 00 $3.825.00 9,940.0 Sim 5138,975.00 59-00 5105&06,00 53,825.00 513389,00 $22,214.00 LS I 00 519,436.00 $19,435,00 519,435.00 LF IF 164.0 $1,300,00 -104.0 $56600 5213,200.00 -558,760.00 $154,440.00 50.00 Soma 60.00 50-00 I 1 9,940 $3,525.00 $126389.00 S22,214.00 519,435 00 I $0.00 $19,435.00 $0,00 $0 00 50,00 164 $213,200.00 0 50.00 5213,200.00 52,075,522.80 $58,407.44 51,977,030.1 LAKE ELMO AYOR & COU CIL CO UNICATION DATE: Oct 6, 2015 REGULAR ITEM MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Administrative Assistant SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder Interim City Administrator THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Clark Schroeder S LJGGEST E1) ORDEIOFBUSINESS; Introduction of Rein ...... City Administrator Report/Presentation... .......... ..... ... „City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff ...... ...... Mayor Focilitates Call tier Motion Mayor & City ('ouncil Discussion ............. Mayor & City Council Action on Motion.......... ..... ....... ..... ............. ..... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Staff FISCAL IMPACT: Recommended salary of $40,000 to $45,000 with a fully load cost of $59,200 to $66,583. Upgrading planning assistant would be between $3,010 and $8,010 additional in salary and the same fully SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: With the recent staff turnover in Lake Elmo it has been determined that adding an Administrative Assistant and upgrading the current Planning Assistant would be in the best interest for the city. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths — Adding another position and adding responsibilities to current position will allow the city to have some redundancies in the administrative department as well as the Community Development Department. Weaknesses — Increased costs -- page City Council Meeting October 6, 2015 Opportunities — The city will have personnel to support policy review, procedure development, organization and maintenance of city records, communication to residents and overall support to all departments, Threats- Tax base could decline and make funding the position difficult. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council authorize the hiring of an administrative assistant and upgrade current planning assistant. "Move to authorize the City Administrator to advertise, recruit, interview, and present for employment an Administrative Assistant " -- page 2 -- Tlir: CI FY (17 KE ELMO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: SUC; ;ES AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICA T/O/V DATE: October 6, 2015 Consent #6 Animal Humane Society Contract Clark Schroeder Clark Schroeder Clark Schroeder 'EL) ORDER OFBUSINESS: Introduction of Rem ...... Administrator Report/Presentation........_.......„..„..................._.......Administrator Questions from Council to ...... Mayor Facilitates or Motion ________ ........ ..... Mayor & City Council Discussion. ...... __________ ....... _______________„__ Mayor & City Council Action on Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Clark Schroeder FISCAL IMPACT: $135 per day for dogs/cats, $41 other domestic animals. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: Attached is our 2016 municipal contract for housing small animals at their shelter. RECOMMENDATION: If item is pulled from consent agenda, the recommendation should read. "Approve administrator signing the 2016 contract with the animal humane society." ATTACHMENTS: 2016 Letter ofUnderstanding for Irnpound Housing Services -- page animaL humane society 9/25/2015 City ofLake Elmo 38OOLaverne Avenue N Lake Elmo, K4N 65042 Dear Municipal Administrator, 4uyou know, Animal Humane Society partners with local cities toimprove the lives and welfare ofanimals as well as the impact they have on people in our community. We look forward to continuing our partnership with your city )nZOl6. Last October we launched our successful Community Cats program, through which stray cats that are not candidates for adoption are sterilized, ear -tipped, and returned to where they were found, Returning cats to their environment in this manner will eventually stabilize and reduce the stray cat population, reducing costs to the city. As this program continues, your animal control officers may see more cats with tipped ears, These are cats that have thrived outside and are not suited for placement in a home environment, Please continue to communicate to your officers that these cats should be left in the community and not brought to the shelter, Two copies of your 2016 contract are enclosed, We anticipate no changes that will impact our municipal contracts, so the language in the new agreement is consistent with the one you signed for 2015. 1 am also pleased to share with you that our standard holding fees will remain at $135 per animal for cats and dogs and $41per animal for other domestic animals. It you have any questions, please free to contact me at the email or phone number below. Otherwise, please sign both copies of the contract and return them to the Woodbury address below, Janelle Dixon, our President & CEO, will then sign them, return one tnyou, and keep one for our records. We are starting this process earlier this year tn ensure that all contracts are signed and returned byJanuary 1, 2016, We appreciate your partnership as we seek to serve both the people and animals of our communities, Sincerely, Graham Boy5haw,0VM Director ofAnimal Services, Animal Humane Society gbrayshaw@anima|humonesoc|etv.o,g (763)489'2224 Animal Humane Society, Woodbury c/o Dawn Mathews, Site Manager 9785Hudson Rd. Woodbury, MN 55125 8vitalo ^ [non Rapids 6o|dcnVaKry ' St. Pal -it ^ Woodbury Tptephunersxnuu4xso *viwanimaihumaoesvoe'kyo@ animal humane society Animal Hmnane Society and The City of Lake Elmo, MN Letter of Understanding for Impound Housing Services 2016 Animal Humane Society (AHS) agrees to provide the following services: a. Housing for stray or abandoned animals that are retrieved or legally seized by your municipality's community service officer (CSO) or animal control officer (ACO), or for stray animals that are brought into the shelter by a citizen and verbal permission is given by your agency via phone for intake. Housing includes kennel space, daily cleaning, food and water. b. Herd management vaccination following our standard vaccination protocols, as well as medically necessary and/or emergency care for sick or injured animals impounded during regular business hours. c. Euthanasia services as deemed necessary by an AHS veterinarian. These services may be provided at the end of the legally required holding period or in the case of a medical situation that requires immediate euthanasia. d. Adoption services as deemed appropriate by AHS veterinary staff. The animals will he evaluated for these services at the end of the legally required holding period. e. Euthanasia services and body disposal as deemed appropriate by AHS veterinary staff The animals will be evaluated for these services at the end of the legally required holding period. f Provide animal rabies quarantine or diagnostic service for stray felines or canines that have bitten a person. g. Hold animal for the legally required stray holding period: 5 days in MN, 7 Days in W1 or until reclaimed by owner within this holding period. h. Al -IS will follow internal policy and best practice for unclaimed animals. The City of Lake Elmo may request and view AHS policies at any time. Al -IS expectations: a. AHS is not responsible for sick or injured animals that are left after hours. Outside treatment must be sought for these animals by the animal control officer or community service officer prior to leaving the animals at the AHS facility when veterinary staff members are not on duty. b. AHS has the sole authority to disposition all animals that have not been reclaimed upon the expiration of the legally designated holding period. c. AHS will not accept feral cats seized under municipal authority by your municipality's CSO or ACO. Buffalo Coon Rapids Golden Valley St. Paul Woodbury Telephone. 763 522 4:325 wiiiviionimolhurnanesociety.org animal. humane society 3. The City of Lake Elmo agrees to: a. Adhere to the drop offprocedure set -forth by Al -IS including animal housing at the shelter and paperwork. Drop off procedures and paperwork training for community service or animal control officers will be provided, b. Adhere to state laws and local ordinances that apply to the handling of stray or abandoned animals and the seizure and return ofanimals to their owners. c. Direct citizens where to take stray animals when not receiving permission for impoundment at AHS. d. Seek care for injured or sick animals prior to drop off in the event that it is after hours and/or AHS veterinary staff is not on duty. e. Pay the designated fees for each animal cared for from your municipality. AHS will charge a standard stray holding fee of $135 per canine or feline and a $41 fee per "other" domestic animals (rabbits, guinea pigs, birds etc.) not reclaimed by its owner. AHS will charge a $10 administrative/processing fee to the municipality for each animal reclaimed by its owner in place of the stray holding fee. In these instances AHS will charge the owner reclaim fees. Fees for animals seized by the municipality (such as rabies quarantine) may vary due to the differing nature of their holding periods and services required. Adhere to AHS policy and best practice for unclaimed animals. The City of Lake Elmo may request and view AHS policies at any time. g. Adhere to building access rules and ensure that the service access door is closed and locked after use in an after hours drop off. h. Ensure that the municipality's CSO/ACO uses hislher discretion in the field as to whether or not to impound an animal. AHS is not responsible for those decisions. i. Be available to members of your community to resolve their concerns related to the actions of your ACO/CSO officers and your municipality's procedures, policies and requirements. j Release AHS from all liability of claims resulting from or related to providing impound housing services. The City of Lake Elmo accepts responsibility for the CSO/ACO while in the course of impounding animals at AHS. 4. Administration a. AHS will bill the municipality at the end of each quarter on a fiscal calendar year. Billing will be mailed in the first month following the end of the quarter. Payment is expected within 30 days of receipt of billing, b. AHS will assign a contact person who should be contacted in the event of any problems, concerns or to receive feedback regarding the program. c. Any billing disputes must be raised within 10 days of receipt of billing. Buffalo Coon Rapids Golden Valley St, Paul Woodbury 2 Telephone 763 522 4325 viryvvyaniinalhumanesociety.org animal humane society This agreement is based on a one year commitment, which is renewed annuallyfrom the date your administrator signs the agreement below. The agreement can be ended at anytime by either party with a 30 day notice. This agreement is entered into on the day of , 2016 by Janelle Dixon, President & CEO Signed on behalf of Municipal Authority Animal Humane Society Printed Name and Title Buffalo Coon Rapids Golden Valley .% 51. Paul Woodbui y Telephone 763 522 4325 ,,,/ww.animalhumanesociety,org nik cmOF LAKE ELMO AYOR & COU CILCO UNICATION DATE: October 6, 2015 CONSENT ITEM # 7 AGENDA ITEM: Hiring of Building Inspector SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item Development Director Report/Presentation............ ........... .......Community Development Director Questions from Council to Staff ................... ....... ................... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ............ ....... .............................. .............. Mayor & City Council Discussion ..... ...... ....... ....... ........... ....... ..... ..... ...... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion ........ ......... ............. Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Clark Schroeder POLICY BEING SET: Fulfilling council direction to recruit, interview and recommend for employment a City Planner. FISCAL IMPACT: Upgrading from part-time contract position to full-time position. $30.00/hr salary with estimated $29,000 benefits SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: We had 11 individuals submit applications for this position, of those, 4 were interviewed. Out of those 4 we are recommending that Toni Liljedahl be hired with a start date on or around 10/26/15. Mrs Liljedahl has been offered the position of Building inspector contingent on the approval by the City Council and passing a background check at a salary of $30/hr with benefits offered to all City of Lake Elmo Full Time Equivalent employees. RECOMMENDATION: If pulled from consent agenda motion should be "Move to affirm the hiring of Toni Liljedahl as Building Inspector effective 10/30/15" -- page iI crry LAKE ELM() AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION DATE: September 1, 2015 CONSENT ITEM # 8 AGENDA ITEM: Building inspector truck purchase SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Rick Chase SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of item ....... ............... ...Administrator Report/Presentation_ _ ...... ............ ..... ...... . ..... ...Administrator Questions from Council to Staff ....... ..... . ............. ..... ............. Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..... ..... ......... ......... .......... Mayor & City Council Discussion ................... ..... ......... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion.......... ..... ............ ..... ....... ...... ......... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Clark Schroeder POLICY BEING SET: No policy being set, affirming the purchase of a budgeted item. FISCAL IMPACT: $21,560- $24,267 SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: In the 2015 budget a new truck was budgeted at $23,000 to be purchased upon the hiring of an additional building inspector. Based on the quotes given based on State pricing, staff is recommending purchasing the 2016 Jeep Compass Sport 4x4 for $21560.8. ATTACHMENTS: Two quotes based on State Pricing -- page 1 -- 11 CITY OF LAKE ELMO AYOR COU CIL CO UNICAT 0 DATE: October 6, 2015 CONSENT ITEM # 9 AGENDA ITEM: Hiring of City Planner SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item un i ty Development Director Report/Presentatioil ............. ........ ..... ....Community Development Director Questions from Council to Staff........................ ....... ......... ..... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..... ......... ...... .................................. Mayor & City Council Discussion ..... ............ ....... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion...................... ..... ......................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Clark Schroeder POLICY BEING SET: Fulfilling council direction to recruit, interview and recommend for employment a City Planner. FISCAL IMPACT: Replacing vacant position. $60,000 salary with estimated S31,000 benefits SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Administrator requests the authorization to hire the individual recommended by staff. RECOMMENDATION: If pulled from consent agenda motion should be Move to affirm the hiring of recommended City Planner effective on or about 10/30/15. page Tlir. on or KE ELM(,) AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AYOR & COU C L CO UNICATION DATE: October 6, 2015 REGULAR ITEM # 10 RESOLUTION 2015-060 Kleis Farm Minor Subdivision Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator Planning Commission SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ........... ....... Development Director Report/Presentation ...... .......Com ty '1)evelopment Director Questions from Council to Staff ......... ......... ......... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........ Mayor & City Council Discussion ..... ....... ..... . ...... ..... ...... ...... Mayor & ('ity Council Action on Motion......... ........ ......... ............... ...... . ............ Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council approve a minor subdivision that will facilitate the creation of two 10-acre parcels from a larger 54.29 acre parcel presently owned by the Kleis Family Trust FISCAL IMPACT: None SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a request from Peter Kastler, 9130 55th Street North, for a Minor Subdivision to split property that has historically been called the Kleis farmstead at the same address into three parcels as follows: Two 10-acre parcels along the western edge of the larger farmstead property that would each have direct access to 55th Street North. The remaining 34.29 acres that would consist of the existing farmstead and related buildings and surrounding land east of the two new lots. -- page City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 15] May 19, 2015 The Planning Commission considered this matter at its September 14, 2015 meeting and recommended approval of the minor subdivision as presented. The suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-060 approving the Minor Subdivision" LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The attached Staff report to the Planning Conunission a summary of the proposed minor subdivision along with details concerning the application. The Planning Commission reviewed the application at its September 14, 2015 meeting and asked general questions concerning the surrounding properties and conditions on the site to be subdivided. The Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the minor subdivision consistent with the findings as noted in the attached Resolution No. 2015-060. The vote on the motion was unanimous (5 ayes, 0 nays). BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths • The minor subdivision meets all underlying subdivision and zoning requirements, Weaknesses • None Opportunities • The minor subdivision will allow the Kleis family to retain ownership of the larger farmstead parcel. Threats • None RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission and Staff are recommending that the City Council approve the Kleis family minor subdivision by adopting Resolution No. 2015-060. Te suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-060 approving the Minor Subdivision" ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2015-060 2. Planning Commission Staff Report — 9/14/15 3. Application Form 4. Application Narrative 5. Minor Subdivision Survey 6. Proposed Legal Descriptions 7. Septic Report 8. Wetland Delineation Report (Available Upon Request) -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-060 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF THE KLEIS FAMILY FARMSTEAD WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Peter Kastler, 9130 55th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN, (Applicant) has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (City) for a Minor Subdivision to split the farmstead property located at 9130 55th Street North into three separate parcels in accordance with the certificate of survey dated August 31, 2015 signed by Timothy J. Freeman, P.L.S., License #16989, a copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elmo Planning and Zoning Department; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Department has reviewed the Minor Subdivision request for consistency with the City of Lake Elmo Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Minor Subdivision at a meeting held on September 14, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Conuinssion has submitted its report and recommendation concerning the Minor Subdivision as part of a memorandum to the City Council from Community Development Director Kyle Klatt for the October 6, 2015 Council Meeting; arid WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Applicant's Minor Subdivision request at a meeting held on October 6, 2015. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS That the Minor Subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 2, That the Minor Subdivision complies with the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the City's RR — Rural Residential Zoning District. That the Minor Subdivision complies with the City's subdivision ordinance and specifically the requirements concerning exceptions to platting. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION NOV, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT that based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby approves the Minor Subdivision request, provided the following conditions are met: The applicant shall pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of $3,600 per buildable lot ($7,200 total) prior to any formal City authorization to split the existing parcel into three lots. The future location of any driveways providing access to the two 10-acre parcels shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant must obtain any perrnits, if required, from the Valley Branch Watershed District either in conjunction with the City's approval of a Minor Subdivision or prior to the commencement of any construction activity on each parcel. 4. The minimum low floor elevations for the individual lots must be depicted on any future surveys for building permits on each lot. Passed and duly adopted this 6th day of October 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk LAKE ELMO ITEM: Kleis Farm Minor Subdivision PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 9/14/15 AGENDA ITEM: 6A — BUSINESS ITEM CASE # 2015-30 SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director k, (L._ REVIEWED BY: N/A SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a minor subdivision request from Peter Kast]er to create two new 10-acre parcels from a larger 54.29 acre parcel presently owned by the Kleis Family Trust. Staffis recommending approval of the minor subdivision as presented with conditions of approval related to any future building on the new parcels. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Peter Kastler, 9130 55th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN Property °WIWI'S: Klcis Family Trust, 9130 55th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN Location: 9130 55'h Street North Request: Application for a Minor Subdivision to split said property into three separate parcels with two new lots of 10 acres in size. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Agricultural land with farmstead. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Rural Residential, Agricultural, Rural Single Family, and Residential Estates lots. Located across from Green Acres. Comprehensive Plan: RAD — Rural Agricultural Density History: The site has historically been used for farming. There are multiple agricultural buildings on the premises, in addition to two separate single family residential dwelling units, Based on Staffs review of the property, these units appear to be a legal non -conforming use of the property. Deadline for Action: Application Complete — 8/27/15 60 Day Deadline — 10/27/15 Extension Letter Mailed —No 120 Day Deadline — 12/27/15 Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 — Subdivision Regulations §154.400-408 Rural Zoning District Standards BUSINESS ITEM 6A 2 REQUEST DETAILS The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Peter Kastler, 9130 55th Street North, for a Minor Subdivision to split property that has historically been called the Kleis farmstead at the same address into three parcels as follows: Two 10-acre parcels along the western edge of the larger farmstead property that would each have direct access to 55th Street North. The remaining 34.29 acres that would consist of the existing farmstead and related buildings and surrounding land east of the two new lots. The subdivision will facilitate the sale of the larger 10 acre parcels while allowing the Kleis family to retain ownership of the larger farmstead. Each of the parcels that will be created with the minor subdivision will meet the City's minimum requirements for lot size, frontage, and ratios for parcels in the rural residential zoning district. The applicant has provided a wetland delineation report with the application to the City, and there is an existing wetland in the extreme southwestern portion of "Parcel A" as labeled on the attached survey. Any future construction on this property will need to observe appropriate setbacks from the wetland. The applicant has also submitted a site evaluation performed by a licensed septic designer establishing two preliminary sewage treatment areas on the two new lots. Prior to permitting any building on the property, any future owners will need to demonstrate that there is 20,000 square feet of land suitable for septic drain fields and area sufficient for 2 separate and distinct drain field sites on each parcel, The City's Subdivision regulations allow for certain subdivisions of land to be exempt from the City's requirements for platting when nor morc than four lots are being created and when these lots comply with the minimum road frontage and area requirements of the underlying zoning. The lots that would be created as part of the minor subdivision each meet or exceed the RR- Rural Residential zoning requirements concerning lot size and lot frontage (10 acres and 300 feet respectfully), REVIEW AND ANALYSIS With the configuration of the lots as proposed, Staff is recommending that the City's review include conditions to ensure that future reviews are properly conducted on the site, Of particular importance will be the placement of the driveways for each lot so that they do not create a public safety issue at the intersection of Jamaca Avenue North and 55th Street North, therefore, any future driveway locations should be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Staff is also recommending a condition of approval related to any required Watershed District permitting necessary for either subdivision approval or future construction on the site. Because the proposed subdivision will create two new buildable lots, the applicant will need to pay a fee in lieu ofland dedication for the newly created lots consistent with the City's adopted fee schedule. In this case, the applicant will need to pay a fee of $3,600 for each lot. Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the minor subdivision with conditions intended to address the future review issues noted above. The recommended conditions are as follows: BUSINESS ITEM 6A Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1) The applicant shall pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of $3,600 per buildable lot ($7,200 total) prior to any formal City authorization to split the existing parcel into three lots. The future location of any driveways providing access to the two 10-acre parcels shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 3) The applicant must obtain any permits, if required, from the Valley Branch Watershed District either in conjunction with the City's approval of a Minor Subdivision or prior to the commencement of any construction activity on each parcel. 4) The minimum low floor elevations for the individual lots must be depicted on any future surveys for building permits on each lot. DRAFT FINDINGS Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to the proposed Minor Subdivision: That the Minor Subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. That the Minor Subdivision complies with the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the City's RR - Rural Residential Zoning District. That the Minor Subdivision complies with the City's subdivision ordinance and specifically the requirements concerning exceptions to platting. RECCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission reconunend approval of the minor subdivision request from Peter Kastler to split the parcel at 9130 55111 Street North into three separate parcels, thereby creating two new buildable lots of 10-acres each. Suggested motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Kleis Farmstead Minor Subdivision" ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application Form 2. Application Narrative 3. Minor Subdivision Survey 4. Proposed Legal Descriptions 5, Septic Report 6. Wetland Delineation Report (Available Upon Request) BUSINESS ITEM 6A 4 ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction Planning Staff - Report by Staff ....... Planning Staff Questions from the Commission Chair & Commission Members - Discussion by the Commission Chair & Commission Members Action by the Commission ..... ..... Chair & Commission Members BUSINESS ITEM 6A Date Received: Received By: Permit #: 651-747-3900 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 LAND USE APPLICATION 0 Comprehensive Plan 0 Zoning District Amend 0 Zoning Text Amend 0 Variance'(see below) 0 Zoning Appeal El Conditional Use Permit (C.U,P.) 0 Flood Plain C.0 P. 0 Interim Use Permit (I.U.P.) Eli Excavating/Grading El Lot Line Adjustment Minor Subdivision 0 Residential Subdivision Sketch/Concept Plan PUD Concept Plan 0 PUD Preliminary Plan 0 PUD Final Plan *- Applicant: Address: cl t 30 Phone # ! 2 1 Email Address: K4..y:k4 t Fee Owner: 5 fr-4/11/ Address: .13-7Z1 ci• Phone #12)2 Email Address: I 1"/ evn V ,Lf EL4c M' C 117ct, • - 0:1-1 I7i'VJT z c y 2_ tirvola Property Location (Address C2omple_te. (tong) Desc_2r/ipt,ionc:,zqw'[)-13I7504: )/ sieci2 Vat; Detailed Reason for Request: -ill LS A, - rir-rz .c.„:-,;?4,041cA; 1-1 0 c PruZiT Ci--c 1 5- / iv cSro FAc-c./4.05c 71rC/4-p 'I irvtil 0 jr7C.:±i7r &'/11.7b 71-16 (7)- i'vurrv-412: ( arik. /m.irLiL. r -rikC rkqt&kii. t sti k4 t...7741:4ra wr CI)vt-odilieTZ I aeion- 15 14 6 114-a-rttc-'fz •1 & A60-- re;' 17,/tilfv4( &ex 0 c- /1/1--er -rpies The: ivs-69 Fce -rifC &Ulu; Variance Requests: As outlined in Section 301.060 C. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code, the applicant must demonstrate practical, difficulties before a variance can be granted. The practical difficulties related to this application 2re as follows: 4J/4 In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning ordinance and current administrative procedixes. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay11 sjments received from the City pertaining to additional application expense. Signature of applicant: Signature of fee owner: -'( P C Pf-,?&,0:15( C Etc F-777/64,/"..y -FP 1,',17- Date: 17 Dale: 77145- J.//1/J04 CC - P4'41PO.kry ttrirA‘ci2 C er' -75 - X-ZEif 4,/zi.,./ 774;5 Ei E lin Se tic istigost ?Olt, 2 t:72t:t :7;7' '1,1d1t7,A..t,qtpiqkt: P.1N yste 2303 Cokititv Road I' 1:,:tst - Bei 651-U5-2300 itt!. es N 55 I 0 2IEevaq Vit)S1CflCI 2 ti7,e pit,,Ottly t1 3 , St c'102921/.4(irIlli rw.3. ;tat r.f-tt! ;CI 8P1110 ;t:ititt ttiti4tOitt1I1,?6 fOf flys tr,t, vitt,s7t,:f 1,rotItt,,',,,7,d it!.11;,1qtrIttiq.2 bif (11,7! qttitttSt-,..d itttkrAtt. ttittiqt,tAtttt ftafft,els w2 41:),4 illttiL3y 10 EV:A eF: , A.:qtt qt,144IT 1,"[At.;; 011.4At:t‘t: it: Writ:A.:I!, 10 tttt' 1A.4 areaS St4rt74 trie kj2 47 771E- =sc,!!„,/iige mos! L)C,. att 2JAcer7 q :Aft/ t,,,tesp,ty!,„z qtr ilAtattt.'3e uj b74tL'ft tqt „ r, \It' I(\I11 1 ., OSTP Preliminary Evaluation Form \ I ‘1„\,It_Si - 41 OSTP Preliminary Evaluation Form UNIVLI011 PF NIINNF.SulA OSTP Field Evaluation Form tritortriatt,)r. 11-,".1-;,ftv Over,:q .4 item P,..te, f,c,nt;,ir "it .10 ViEtt St ti. a io‘eFU , ,Arttc,Ihr1.1 5110 .111,,f t1,611,:,f trO,o,.,f tr ritdtioy IT %v +11., .1 4•12,7i, Tf' I 1,1 .14 ,1 /o111O, 1- 11 -.../orOd1 ,k1O 1." Adcitional Soil Observation Logs r8z,,Ttett tzt, tts .1,4)4)4- 2'41 1 titt1tt ott84.44 ))1 11 Vic,:lthr) ():-nritti)),, (1144f4)\48,JOrt ,tt Lt-ttt 8710111 Otk8,--t,k De1-tttitt t'tt t ; t)X18,te _ )„, t 1 14 0,1P14, tttt; ttt-tlittit t'ttttt ,t)1441',1ti' it, Oek, kk kkk1 : k.),,ttk1.411 1),rP11. Ike: 1 kee, tt3141tty ' kkkk, 4k.,114; 1 ttt Akiekk,-kurk- tioce,)-kkkk-, •;r1o,,..:icit- 1-4,ck t'sk1 -p,tt ttttitartt t ttw t.tttitji3t:tt r-t‘ttt tktittttri. tt.t tt ' )8, 2 ',kik k 'kkk'kk kk, At re:r k Pk ok;ke Structure- ------- rIpe ittttttkt t • 1 ttttt ,tit144, Struc UNIVERSIIA OF MI N NESOTA OSTP Soil Observation Log - Pete,- Ktle!" t tt:'," ne,TICOC tri,i .... . _ W c,r1,-,..ir., ,.)1,-r--. SO r1110:- r; '.,.rtf.A.11(if" "..i,-1,, r :,,,,..-h: -,lup,... i ch. yt.. L., it 1;-/s- 1",--,- Sisopt- '.. )12,, st,.!pe.°: I i I -10r: I 1-&-rebv Infs. ;t1 Dt ! Structure Additional Soil Observation _ogs 111t IT,:a_,J5-1d!!„•:r.,)-:, Def)!_e e 1 Or ;To"' ;—,t1tVir1}1, uoutou t tot ',lop,. IC; T Aituvtor. _ 1 cof -uotn,u, tpuifu,--1 iE:pu 03.t.;0.1u .A up Prptyt St! ucture-- CUta.rie t\t1,14,e; Structure—•-----1 orup,:nup.nuo--:t nor Subdivision Fesla, Freeman, Erickson. LAND PLANT:LNG• SURVEYING •EfaiINGIRING SURVEY FOR: Per Kastler Kiies Family Tr 9130 551hSt N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See sepal -ate sheirt. kt 4k / 4: 1 Part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 3 Township 29 North, Range 21 Nest City of Lake Elmo, Washington Co., MN ,i0,50171.4 4,4,11 "im., Lax J V..' DP' ca.. 3M 433334 VIA° Pura A veo larotr;..vo Anoome, Vkinity Map - us,/ - 4234 aty 3 tak, arza i..x...tom Cow., },wooto Atertaartri 3332332 33. 44-4' '4474'44 7'44 : 7 1r433.04 A 5...C43..E 1 !NCH = 200 FFIT t)r) 200 .SCAL E l'FF 2 33 I 2+45 5111 STREET NORTH • 43433 4L430 MIMESOTA 350.1.7. Nat 0513 /9,V)3 Fa (fill 43041/1 LEGEND * Arnaerrl VA:rge PttAt ttottatt,ti, tot ttrt, mat twtt-t nti,., Ithettmatttollowtt vrt matt wal Ihrsal farm,: ,rtt,,t11. „NOTES na'rra.Wr-rIg „zits &aveyympt.redu,...h.ltIr buTtclit ,.112.1.11 3, 4 rm. carry ,,,,,freamfor oimmi Ahra afI,320.,,p,rey. 400 reettwor „iwt I heathy cerrify that this survey, Floe or eport was prenared hy ar under my three, roperaernm and then I am a duly licensee' Lam: under the Laws of Mole of Ifinnewno rmarhy Most. -.Nod Na. ,ON', 4/31/10,I5 Dare t'tt,rat tt,,tet,tt ttt tr. ttt,rt.`,'... nor Subdivision SLRVEY FOR: Peter Kasder Klies Family Trust 9130 55th SiN Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 3 Township 29 North, Range 21 West City of Lake Elmo, Washington Co., MN PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: Proposed Parcel A Legal Description That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section 3, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds East, bearings oriented to the Washington County Coordinate System, NA083, 1986 adjustment, along the north line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 660.21 feet; thence South 23 degrees 40 minutes 51 seconds West, a distance of 1220.40 feet to the north line of 55th Street North as dedicated on FOX FIRE ESTATES, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota; thence northwesterly along said north line of 55th Street North, on a non -tangential curve, concave to the north, chord bearing North 11 degrees 20 minutes 50 seconds West, radius 370.00 feet, central angle 11 degrees 20 minutes 50 seconds, 73.78 feet; thence North 27 degrees 58 minutes 20 seconds West along said north line of 55th Street North, a distance of 55,10 feet; thence northwesterly along a tangential curve, concave to the southwest, chord bearing North 36 degrees 24 minutes 40 seconds West, radius 530,00 feet, central angle 16 degrees 52 minutes 41 seconds, 156.13 feet, along said north line of 55th Street North to the west line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 44 minutes 12 seconds West, along said west line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 881.06 feet to the point of beginning. Proposed Parcel B Legal Description That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section 3, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing the northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds East, bearings oriented to the Washington County Coordinate System, NAD83, 1986 adjustment, along the north line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 660.21 feet to the point of beginning; thence continue North 89 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds East, along said north line, a distance of 373.45 feet; thence South 24 degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 1380.29 feet to the north line of 55th Street North as dedicated on FOX FIRE ESTATES, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota; thence northwesterly along said north line of 55th Street North, on a non -tangential curve, concave to the north, chord bearing North 64 degrees 44 minutes 58 seconds West, radius 370.00 feet, central angle 50 degrees 51 minutes 38 seconds, 328,44 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 23 degrees 40 minutes 51 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 23 degrees 40 minutes 51 seconds East, a distance of 1220.40 to the point of beginning. Proposed Remnant Parcel Legal Description That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section 3, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing the northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds East, bearings oriented to the Washington County Coordinate System, NAD83, 1986 adjustment, along the north line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 1033.66 feet to the point of beginning; thence continue North 89 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds East, along sold north line, a distance of 284.35 feet to the east line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 42 minutes 52 seconds East, along said east line, a distance of 1312.50 to the south line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 22 seconds West, along said south line, a distance of 358.74 feet to the north line of 55th Street North as dedicated on FOX FIRE ESTATES, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota; thence northwesterly along said north line of 55th Street North, on a non -tangential curve, concave to the north, chord bearing North 73 degrees 47 minutes 43 seconds West, radius 380.00 feet, central angle 32 degrees 38 minutes 52 seconds, 216.53 feet; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 13 seconds West along said north line of 55th Street North, a distance of 313.00 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 24 degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 24 degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 1380.29 to the point of beginning. Also, that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 3, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota lying southerly of the North 100.00 feet thereof and lying westerly of the following described line: commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, thence South 89 degrees 00 minutes 16 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 693.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 02 degrees 44 minutes 10 seconds West 1212.85 feet to the south line of said North 100.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and said line there terminate. Fol-z, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. LiN1) PLANNING • SVRVTIT,G • EKIFOXILINC R-FtS 55TH STREIT NORTH L,14EU(0, NSINNES Si542 Pb...' ;6:1,79-M31 n n +15913 I I n nnty that nn15 rorrro4 odors or wool worpropared by inc no end, ony three supinnwron and nun I an, 4 C44.1beell WI Lora gurveyor order the Lacs of the Sono ofMninennhn Tiovohy J ,%13n,ciinnn L 3/31/2015 Dolt TI (.:Iry LAKE ELMO AYOR & COUNCIL COUNICATION DATE: October 6, 2015 REGULAR ITEM #11 RESOLUTION 2015-59 (Approval) RESOLUTION 2015-59A (Denial) AGENDA ITEM: Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, interim City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner David Snyder, City Attorney Planning Commission Jack Griffin, City Engineer Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief Washington County Public Works SUCCESTEI) ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ..... C'ommunity Development 1)irector Report/Present al ion, _ _ unity Development Director Questions from Council to .............. Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..... ....... .................. Mayor & City Council ..... .,................................ Mayor & City Council Action on ...... .......................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary and final plat at its .luly 13, 2015 meeting. The City Council tabled taking action on this matter at its July 21, 2015 meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: None, all of the review activities on the part of the City are reimbursed by application and escrow fees submitted by the developer. All of the improvements to the site are private. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to bring back from the table and to consider a request from Mr. Lee Rossow for approval of a preliminary and final plat for a cemetery to be called Halcyon located at I 1050 50th Street North. The Planning -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agencla hem .16] October 6, 2015 Commission held a public hearing to consider the matter at its July 13, 2015 meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of approval. The City Council considered the application at its July 21, 2015 meeting; however, the Council tabled taking action on the request in order to provide the City with additional time to consider various aspects of the project. In response to the Council's concerns, Staff is offering additional information concerning the use of the property for review and is presenting alternative findings of fact that may be used by the Council to either move forward with the Planning Commission recommendation or to adopt a different set of findings for denial of the request. The suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-059, approving the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat." The suggested motion to deny the request is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-059A, denying the Halcyon Cemetoy Preliminary and Final Plat." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached is the original detailed Staff report that was provided to the Planning Commission regarding the applicant's request for preliminary and final plat approval in addition to the previous memorandum to the City Council. The staff report includes general information about the application, a summary of the relevant planning and zoning issues, a thorough review and analysis of the final plat (including a draft list of recommended conditions of approval), draft findings, and the Staff recommendation to the Planning Commission, The City Council report also includes a summary of the public hearing comments and a general summary of the Planning Commission discussion. APPLICATION HISTORY: As noted above, the City Council tabled the Cemetery preliminary and final plat request at its July 21, 2015 meeting. Prior to this rneeting, the history of this application is as follows: Date Event November 2014 Sketch Plan submitted to the City 11/24/14 Sketch Plan reviewed by the Planning Commission 12/2/14 Sketch Plan reviewed by the City Council January 20] 5 Plat application materials submitted to the City -- page 2 -- Action Scheduled for review No action required, Planning Commission meeting minutes attached No action required. Meeting minutes attached Application deemed incomplete pending wetland delineation and watershed district review City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 161 October 6, 2015 June 17, 2015 Revised plans submitted to City and watershed district with wetland delineation July 1, 2015 Valley Branch review complete July 13, 2015 Preliminary and Final Plat reviewed by Planning Commission July 21, 2015 Preliminary and Final Plat reviewed by City Council. Application deemed complete and review scheduled with Planning Commission Valley Branch Watershed District Permit issued to applicant (attached) Recommended approval with additional conditions. Meeting minutes attached. Tabled. Meeting minutes attached. During the course of its review of the combined preliminary and final plat application, the City received plans that were dated 1/5/15, 3/14/15, and 6/17/15. The only plans that the City could have taken action to approve were the latest submission, which included the wetland delineation for the property. The location of the wetlands required revisions to the earlier plan submissions and was a requirement before the watershed district would review the request. Staff had discussed splitting the review up between the preliminary plat and final plat, and told the developer that the preliminary plat could proceed in advance of the wetland delineation and watershed district review. The applicant elected to keep the joint review process moving forward, and understood that the City would therefore not be able to take action on the plans that had been submitted prior to June 17, 2015. ZONING REVIEW: As part of its discussion on July 21, 2015, the City Council raised questions about the zoning regulations for cemeteries and how they specifically apply to the applicant's property. In order to address these questions, Staff would like to focus on three specific aspects of the Cemetery request and how they apply to the present application as follows: Rural District Ordinance Amendments As part of the larger process of updating the City's Zoning Ordinance, the City Council approved revisions to the City's rural development districts, including the RR Rural Residential Zoning District, on May 19, 2013. The amendments were intended to being these sections of code into conformance with earlier ordinance amendments, which included a complete overhaul of the City's uses and use classification system and revised formatting throughout the document. Prior to these 2013 ainendments, the City only allowed cemeteries in PF — Public Facility zoning districts. As part of the 2013 revisions, cemeteries and other uses were added to the rural districts, and specifically identified as a permitted use in A and RR zoning districts. All new uses that were included in the rural development districts were recommended by Staff These uses included secondary dwellings, cemeteries, commercial kennels and stables, golf courses, restricted recreation, and agricultural production. All of these uses represent activities that are typically require a lot of room to operate or that are generally found in rural areas as -- page 3 -- City Council Mee [Regulcir Agencla Item 16] October 6, 2015 Use Definitions opposed to more heavily developed urban areas. The proposed changes were reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council and were adopted as presented. In reviewing the meeting minutes and other information associated with the meeting, there was no discussion on cemeteries at that time and only some general questions about any of the other uses shown on the chart. Since the submission of the applicant's request to construct a new cemetery at 11050 50th Street North, there have been a lot of questions raised about the inclusion of cemeteries in the rural development districts and whether or not this type of use should be permitted, conditional, or not allowed at all. In the near future, Staff will be conducting a review of all use classifications and where each type of use is allowed in the City with the Planning Commission to ensure that this aspect of the code accurately reflects the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Regardless of any future reviews, the applicant's request is based on cemeteries being a permitted use in Rural Residential zoning districts. Focusing on the actual use classification and definitions in the City Code that pertain to cemeteries, Staff would like to state the two definitions in the ordinance for a cemetery or related activity, in addition to the general requirements concerning these classifications. These provisions are as follows: Purpose of Use Types. The purpose of the Use Types is to establish a classification system for land uses and a consistent set ofterms defining uses permitted within various zoning districts. The Use Types section also facilitates the process of determining the applicable use type of any activity not clearly within any defined use type. Interpretation. In the event of any question as to the appropriate use type of any existing or proposed use or activity, the Planning Director shall have the authority to determine the appropriate use type. In making such a determination, the Planning Director shall consider the operational and physical characteristics of the use in question and shall consider the classification contained in the most recent edition of the Standard Industrial Classification Manual published by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. In addition, the Planning Director shall consider the specific requirements of the use in common with those included as examples of use types. Those examples, when included in use type descriptions, are intended to be illustrative, as opposed to exclusive lists. The Planning Director may also deten-nine that a proposed use or activity is sufficiently different from any use type listed below and will require an amendment to the text of this chapter. Public and Civic Uses - Cemetery. Land used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead and dedicated for cemetery purposes, including columbariums, crematories, mausoleums, and mortuaries when operated in conjunction with and within the boundaries of such cemetery. -- page 4 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16] October 6, 2015 Services - Funeral Home. Establishments engaged in undertaking services such as preparing the dead for burial, and arranging and managing funerals. Typical uses include funeral homes or mortuaries. Of particular note is the fact that funeral homes are considered an entirely different type of use than cemeteries, and do not show up in the City's list of uses allowed in rural development districts. The other issue that is pertinent to this particular property and proposal is that the applicant intends to make use of the existing house on the property as an administrative building/caretaker's residence. The City's definitions and regulations are silent on this aspect of the proposal. In these situations, the code will generally allow uses that are accessory to the principle use; however in this case, the use of an existing single family home as part of a cemetery is unique and perhaps not anticipated under the ordinance provisions. The Planning Commission did ask questions about the use of the existing house as part of its review, but did not make any findings specific to the repurposing of the home as an administrative building. Platting The creation of a new cemetery under Minnesota State Statutes requires the Procedures platting of the property to be used for a cemetery. Because the City has adopted a subdivision ordinance that regulates the subdivision and platting of property within the City, it has been Staffs interpretation that any new cemetery must be reviewed in accordance with the City's subdivision ordinance. The ordinance specifies that a subdivision may only be approved after the City has reviewed a sketch plan for the property to be subdivided, which must be submitted prior to a preliminary or final plat. As part of the current request, the applicant has asked that the City conduct a concun-ent review of the preliminary and final plat. The Subdivision Ordinance includes a series of requirements that must be met by an applicant in order to receive approval of a new subdivision. These requirements primarily relate to required plan submissions and required improvements within the subdivision. The applicant has submitted a plat document in addition to the required construction plans for the property. Although there are no public services being extended into the site, the applicant was required to submit grading, drainage, erosion control, and a storm water management plan for the site. This plan (as amended by the applicant) has been reviewed for conformance with City and watershed district requirements. As part of its review of the cemetery proposal and consideration of issues that have been raised throughout the City's subdivision review process, Staff has identified some of the more relevant questions that may impact the Council's decision of this matter. These questions include the following (along with a brief response): Can the applicant operate a funeral home on the premises? Response: No, the City's Zoning Ordinance clearly regulates cemeteries and fiineral homes differently, and funeral homes are not allowed in any of the rural development districts. -- page 5 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item IN October 6, 2015 • Is the applicant allowed to utilize or repurpose the existing single-family home as part of his plans for a cemetery? Response: The Zoning Ordinance is unclear on this matter. As an accessory use to a centeteg, it is reasonable to expect that there vll1 be some maintenance equipment stored on the premises. The applicant has stated that the home will not be used as a funeral home, and hasfurther indicated that building would be used for memorial services and gatherings in conjunction with burials. The plans identify the repurposed home as an administration building and show a proposed expansion that is intended to increase the amount of space available for gatherings. In this case, the Council does have the authority to decide that the use and incorporation of the existing structure into the development plans for the cemetery is not consistent with or allowed under the City's definition of a cemetery. • Is platting necessary? Can the City deny a preliminary plat the meets all City requirements? Response: Generally, the City cannot deny a plat application that meets the minimum requirements of the City Code. If the Council decided to deny the • preliminary and final plat, Staff would recommend that the Council focus on the first two findings listed in the draft resolution for consideration. These findings note that the plat must be consistent with the Lake Ehno Comprehensive Plan and that it must also comply with the City's RR — Rural Residential District requirements. • Is there a minimum amount of land or minimum number of burial plots needed to be considered a cemetery? Response: The City's ordinances include no such minimal levels; however any burial sites will have special protection under State law. Under the City's current ordinances, the only development standards specific to cemeteries are found in the PF zoning district section of the code, and do not apply to the current application. This is certainly an issue concerning cemeteries that warrantsjurther review by the City. • Is the use of the house as a gathering space and administration building allowed under the code? Is this a business use? Response: The Council may ;whit to consider the relative size of the proposed cemetery and the plans for other related activity taking place on the site. The proposed development plans show that there will be over 6,000 square feet of building area (for the administration and maintenance building) on the site, and that only roughly half of the IO acres will be used for burial sites. The size of these buildings and the amount of activity expected to take place within them are pertinent to any discussion concerning the accessory nature (or lack thereof) of these buildings. If the prhnary activity on the site is a public gathering space and parking, this would indicated that principle use is more than just a cemetery. • Are burial sites allowed within areas designated as flood plain? Response: The City and Watershed district regulations do not prohibit the placement of burial sites below the established I00-yearflood elevation on the property. In conducting research on this issue, Staff was not able to find any evidence that the burial sites would pose any threat to the City's near -by well or water supply. Because the applicant's proposal is very unique and unprecedented for the City, Staff is not surprised that there are numerous questions about the proposed activity and whether or not the development plans are consistent with the City Code. In order to help the City Council give -- page 6 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Ageltdo Item /6/ October 6, 2015 weight to all of the issues associated with the request, there are really two main issues that will need to be decided at the meeting: 1) Does the application meet the City's requirements for a preliminary and final plat, and more specifically, is the plat consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and RR zoning regulations? 2) Are the uses proposed allowed under the City's Zoning Ordinance? In considering the first question, Staff believes that the applicant has met the City's requirements for platting and receiving approval of a subdivision. On the latter issue, there do appear to be some legitimate questions about how the property will be used, and in particular, the inclusion of a building for public gathering space as part of the plans. This is especially apparent when looking at the proportionality between the size of the actual cemetery and what might normally he expected on a property of this size to provide care and maintenance of the grounds. The inclusion of this gathering space is not fully addressed by the underlying zoning or use classifications, and the City Council may want to consider this in making its final decision on the request. COUNCIL CONCERNS: The Council has previously expressed some concerns with the project if it were to move forward. Based on previous discussions by the Council during the review of this application, Staff has noted the following as the more significant issues that warrant repeating: • Perpetual maintenance. The Council has previously expressed concern that the long- term maintenance of the site will be the responsibility of a non-profit association that could someday go away. The applicant has stated that the association will be creating a permanent care trust fund that will be used to ensure that there are funds available for long-term maintenance and upkeep of the site. The Planning Commission recommended a condition of approval that the cemetery association provide copies of all annual minutes and financial reporting of the permanent care trust fund to the City on an annual basis so that the City would be aware of any pending problems with the association or fund. • Park land dedication or fees in lieu of dedication. The applicant has maintained that the City cannot levy any water assessments, park dedication, or other special assessments against the property. It is Staffs opinion that fees in lieu of park land dedication do not meet this requirement and can therefore be required as a condition of approval. If the Council chooses to require a park fee, it would be for the equivalent of 0.4 acres of land based on the dedication schedule found in the Subdivision Ordinance. Traffic. The applicant has revised the site plan to address comments from the City Engineer concerning the set back of the entrance road into the property from Lake Elmo Avenue. The property is located at the intersection of a County Road and a Municipal State Aid road, both of which were designed to accommodate higher levels of traffic. Floociplain issues. The previous section of this report notes that the site development plans conform to applicable City and watershed district requirements concerning floodplains. -- page 7 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 161 October 6, 2015 Please note that the City has received several mails written in support for the Cemetery since the Council's July 21g meeting. These emails were sent to all members of the Council and are attached to this report. DRAFT FINDINGS/ALTERNATIVES: With all of the questions that have previously been raised concerning the cemetery proposal, Staff is presenting an alternate set of findings so that the Council will have the ability consider either approving or denying the applicant's request at its meeting This additional recommendation and alternate findings are also being provided because the City has already extended its review beyond 60 days and the deadline for a final decision on this matter (without the applicant's consent) is October 15, 2015. In considering all of the options available to the Council, Staff has identified the following alternative actions that could be taken by the Council in response to the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat request: 1) Follow the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the preliminary and final plat with the findings and conditions as drafted by the Commission. a. Alternative action — approve the preliminary and final plat with amended findings or conditions of approval. 2) Approve the preliminary plat but take no action on the final plat in order to give the City and developer additional time to address review comments. The developer would then need to submit a final plat application consistent with the preliminary plat approval. 3) Deny the preliminary and final plat request with appropriate findings of fact. Staff has drafted alternate findings for denial that may be considered by the Council if it decides to take this action. 4) Approve the subdivision request but without the inclusion of the existing single family home and parking area as part of the approval so that the cemetery use remains the principle activity on the site. In order to carry out this alternative, the home would need to be removed from the site before the City would release the plat for recording. If the Council wants to pursue this alternative action, it may be more appropriate to deny the request and allow the applicant to bring forward a new application without the public gathering space as shown on the current plans. In order to take action to approve the cemetery request, the Council may consider adopting the attached Resolution No. 2015-059. This resolution incorporates all of the previous findings and conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. As an alternate action, the City Council may consider denying the request by adopting the attached alternative Resolution No. 2015-059A. This resolution includes the following findings of fact to support this action: 1) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is not consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. The site under consideration is located within the City's Rural Development Area land use classification, which allows for: large areas of rural residential development within the City. CO111111011 uses "blind in these areas include working farms, alternative agricultural uses as defined by City Code, and rural single family detached residences. Development -- page 8 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16J October 6, 2015 in these areas requires 10+ acres, or a conditional use permit to authorize a cluster development 'fleeting the City's Open Space Preservation regulations. The establishment of a private cemetery and related gathering space, administrative activities, funeral services, and large parking area is not consistent with the City's land use plan for this area. That the Halcyon Cemetery does not comply with the City's RR — Rural Residential zoning district because it includes uses and activities that are not allowed under the definition of a "Cemetery" in Section 154.102 of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the proposed site plan includes an administration building, a proposed expansion of this structure to add room for public gathering space, and parking lot that will accommodate 59 parking stalls. The definition of "Cemetery" offers no provisions for the conduct of services on the premises. The proposed buildings and parking areas exceed the activities allowed for "land used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead and dedicated for cemetery purposes". 3) That the combined size of over 6,000 square feet for the proposed administration building, expansion area, and maintenance garage is not proportional to the size of the proposed cemetery. The re -use and expansion of the existing single family structure far exceeds what would otherwise be required to provide for the car and maintenance of the cemetery. 4) The Zoning Ordinance does not allow for two principle uses to exist on property that is zoned Rural Residential. Specifically, the continued occupation of a single-family residence on the property is in conflict with the proposed platting of a cemetery on the same property. Because the site is 10 acres in size and is at the minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance for lot size in a RR zoning district, the applicant would not be able to separate the home from the cemetery use. STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS (SWOT): Please refer to previous Council report. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, if the Council decides to take action on the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat, it should do through the following motion: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-059, approving the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat." Based on the aforementioned, if the Council decides deny the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat, it should do through the following motion: ei "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-059A, the Halcyon Centetety Preliminary and Final PI -- page 9 -- 1, City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16] October 6, 2015 ATTACHMENTS: (all attachments previous provided to the Council except -where noted) 1. Resolution 2015-059 (Approval of the Plat) 2. NEW - Resolution 2015-059A (Denial of the Plat) 1 Staff Report to the City Council 7/21/15 4. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, 7/13/15 5. Location Map 6. Application Forms and Project Narrative 7. Preliminary and Final Plat and Plans 8. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 7/8/15 9. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15 10. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15 11. Valley Branch Watershed District Perrnit 12. Lake Elmo Transportation Plan, Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes 13. Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Horne Price Report (151 Half) 14. NEW - Letters/Emails Concerning the Request Received Since 7/21/15 INCLUDED IN THE ELECTRONIC PACKET BUT NOT PROVIDED IN HARD COPY: 1, 2nd Half of Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report — Supporting Data 2. Information Handout from League of MN Cities on Cemeteries -- page 10 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-59 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR THE HALCYON CEMETERY WHEREAS, the City of Lake Ehno is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Mr. Lec Rossow, 11050 50111 Street North, Lake Elmo MN 55042 has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo ("City") for a Preliminaiy and Final Plat for a cemetery to be called Halcyon, a copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elmo Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the proposed Final Plat includes a cemetery on one parcel of land (PID: 01.029.21.33.0003) in the Rural Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 2015 to consider the Preliminary and Final Plat application; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending approval of the Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation concerning the Preliminary and Final Plat as part of a memorandum to the City Council for the July 21, 2015 Council Meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat at its meeting held on July 21, 2015 and tabled taking action at that time; and WHEREAS, the City Council further reviewed the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat at its meeting held on October 6, 2015 and made the following findings of fact: 1) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 2) That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's RR — Rural Residential zoning district. 3) That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's subdivision ordinance. 4) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat meets other City zoning ordinances, such as landscaping, tree preservation, erosion and sediment control, off-street parking and other ordinances, except where noted in this report herein. Resolution 20 I 5-59 5) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards, except where noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015 and the Fire Chief s comments documented in a letter dated July 7, 2015. 6) The applicant has committed to establishing a permanent care trust fund consistent with the requirements established under State Statute. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall revise the Final Plat to accommodate all required right-of-way on Lake Elmo Avenue and 501" Street North as documented in review memorandums submitted by Washington County and the City Engineer. 2) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter dated July 8, 2015 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the City's execution of the Final Plat. 3) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland Conservation Act, and abide by all conditions of approval established in the approved Valley Branch Watershed District permit. 4) The applicant shall be responsible to address all review comments submitted by Washington County described in the review memorandum received from the County dated July 7, 2015. In addition, the applicant shall obtain all necessary right-of-way permitting from Washington County. 5) The Landscape Plan shall be revised to include 6 additional trees to fulfill the City's Landscaping Requirements. In addition, the plant material that is on top of utilities shall be moved to comply with the direction of the City Engineer per his memorandum dated July 8, 2015. Finally, prior to installation of plant material, the plan shall be reviewed by the City's Landscape Consultant for final approval. 6) The applicant must enter into an agreement with the City to own, operate and maintain the private ston-n water facilities on the property. The storm water maintenance agreement must be recorded with the Final Plat. 7) Prior to the issuance of grading/building permits, all review comments of the Fire Chief must be addressed by the applicant. 8) The applicant shall obtain the necessary permitting from Washington County to install a new septic system to serve the property prior to the City issuing and building permits for the remodel of the home. 9) Any future expansion of the site, including plans to install a crematorium, shall be reviewed and approved by the City. Resolution 2015-59 10) All lighting installed on the Halcyon Cemetery site must comply with the City's dark skies ordinance. 11) Any alterations to the existing single family home shall be reviewed for conformance to the City's design standards. 12) All transplanted trees transplanted on the site shall include a 2-year warranty period to ensure survival. Any trees that do not survive the two-year period shall be replaced. 13) The Landscape Plan shall be amended to add plantings along the Eastern and Northern property lines consistent with screening requirements specified in 154.258.F of the City Code. 14) Annual meeting minutes, including annual financial reporting and status of the permanent care trust fund, shall be submitted to the City on an annual basis. Passed and duly adopted this 6th day of October, 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Resolution 2015-59 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-059A A RESOLUTION DENYING A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR THE HALCYON CEMETER Y WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Mr, Lee Rossow, 11050 50th Street North, Lake Elmo MN 55042 has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo ("City") for a Preliminary and Final Plat for a cemetery to be called Halcyon, a copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elmo Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the proposed Final Plat includes a cemetery on one parcel of land (P1D: 01.029.21.33.0003) in the Rural Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 2015 to consider the Preliminary and Final Plat application; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending approval of the Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation concerning the Preliminary and Final Plat as part of a memorandum to the City Council for the July 21, 2015 Council Meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat at its meeting held on July 21, 2015 and tabled taking action at that time; and WHEREAS, the City Council further reviewed the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat at its meeting held on October 6, 2015 and made the following findings of fact: 1) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is not consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. The site under consideration is located within the City's Rural Development Area land use classification, which allows for: large areas ofrural residential development within the City. COMM017 uses found in these areas include working farms, alternative agricultural uses as defined by City Code, and rural single fancily detached residences. Development in these areas requires 10+ acres, or a conditional use permit to authorLe a cluster development meeting the City's Open Space Preservation regulations. The establishment of a private cemetery and related gathering space, administrative activities, funeral Resolution 2015-59A services, and large parking area is not consistent with the City's land use plan for this area. That the Halcyon Cemetery does not comply with the City's RR — Rural Residential zoning district because it includes uses and activities that are not allowed under the definition of a "Cemetery" in Section 154.102 of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the proposed site plan includes an administration building, a proposed expansion of this structure to add room for public gathering space, and parking lot that will accommodate 59 parking stalls. The definition of "Cemetery" offers no provisions for the conduct of services on the premises. The proposed buildings and parking areas exceed the activities allowed for "land used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead and dedicated for cemetery purposes". 3) That the combined size of over 6,000 square feet for the proposed administration building, expansion area, and maintenance garage is not proportional to the size of the proposed cemetery. The re -use and expansion of the existing single family structure far exceeds what would otherwise be required to provide for the car and maintenance of the cemetery. 4) The Zoning Ordinance does not allow for two principle uses to exist on property that is zoned Rural Residential. Specifically, the continued occupation of a single-family residence on the property is in conflict with the proposed platting of a cemetery on the same property. Because the site is 10 acres in size and is at the minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance for lot size in a RR zoning district, the applicant would not be able to separate the home from the cemetery use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby deny the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat. Passed and duly adopted this 6th day of October, 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk 2 Resolution 2015-59A Mike Pearson, Mayor Hon. Mike Pearson Mayor City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 mpearsolzglakeelmaorg Justin Bloyer Council Member City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 jbloyer@lakeelmo.org Julie Fliflet Council Member City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 ifliflet@lakeelmo.org MORRISON SUND PLLC SUITE 200 5125 COUNTY ROAD 101 MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55345 TEL (952) 975-0050 FAX (952) 975-0058 www.morrisonsund.com Writers Direct Dial: 952.277.0129 rwilliams@morrisonsund.com October 2, 2015 Jill Lundgren Council Member City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 flundgren@lakeelmo.org Anne Smith Council Member City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 asrnith @lakeelmo.org RE:halcyon Cemetery I Denial of Application is Warranted Preliminary and Final Plat Application of Lee Rossow ("Develope Dear Mayor Pearson and Council Members: I represent a group of Lake Elmo residents and homeowners (collectively, the "Concerned Neighbors") in connection with their objection to the Preliminary and Final Plat Application dated June 17, 2015 ("Application") for the Halcyon Cemetery and funeral establishment proposed for 11050 50th Street North in Lake Elmo ("Project"). Accordingly, I respectfully submit this letter in advance of the October 6th City Council meeting to supplement the 147 signed petitions collected from members of the community and the testimony to be provided from the Concerned Neighbors and other Lake Elmo residents in opposition to the Project. For the reasons set forth below, the City Council is urged to depart from the recommendations of City Staff and the Planning Commission and deny the Application for the Project. At the outset, it is important to reiterate the purpose of rural districts according to the Lake Elmo City Code ("City Code") is to "preserve and enhance quality ofliving, and regulate structures and uses which may affect the character and desirability of the area." (§ 154.400) Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 2 . Although a cemetery is a permitted use in the City's RR -Rural Residential zoning district ("RR District"), the Project itself does not comply fully with applicable zoning controls. Denial of the Application is warranted and defensible. Generally, a landowner is allowed to engage in a permitted use, except where that use does not otherwise comply with the zoning code or development controls. Chase v. City oPlinneapolis, 401 N.W.2d 408, 413 (Minn. 1981). In the event of such non-compliance, a municipality is under no obligation to approve a land use application allowing the permitted use. Chanhassen Estates Residents Association v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 335, 340 (Minn.1984). This concept is echoed in the Lake Elmo City Code. Section 154.005 states: Except as in this chapter specifically provides, no structure shall be erected, converted, enlarged, reconstructed or altered, and no structure or land shall be used for any purpose in any manner which is not in conformity with this chapter. Therefore, while the "cemetery" facet of the Project may be considered a permitted use in the RR - Rural Residential zoning district pursuant to Table 9-1 of City Code § 154.401, all accessory uses and other improvements comprising the Project must also strictly conform to Lake Elmo's zoning code and applicable law, and the Developer must observe those controls throughout the planning, development, and operation of the Project. Based on the contents of the Application and the Developer's on -the -record narrative at public hearings, the Project appears to violate a number of applicable controls. Consequently, denial of the Application is appropriate and supported under existing Lake Elmo ordinances and Minnesota law. a. In violation of City Code, the Project will be operated as a mixed -use Cemetery Funeral Home/Mortuary, and Single Family Dwelling. The Application describes the Project as a cemetery and nothing more, and it is through that thin lens that the public discourse and City review of the Project has been focused and framed. Whether it was the too -broad definition of "cemetery" contained in the City Code that caused additional use regulations to be overlooked, a fresh eye to the operational aspects and business plan regarding the Project indicate the true uses of the property are multiple and nuanced. Troublingly, the separate uses are impossible to harmonize and as such denial of the Application is warranted.. i. Cemetery use is permitted in the RR District. The City Code defines a "cemetery" as land that is "used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead and dedicated for cemetery purposes, including columbariums, crematories, mausoleums, and mortuaries when operated in conjunction with and within the boundaries of such cemetery." (§ 154.012(B)(2)(a)) (hereinafter "Cemetery Definition"). Classified as a Public/Civic use type, Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 3 cemeteries are allowable uses in only two o f Lake Elmo's zoning districts: 1) in the PF-Public/Quasi- Public Open Space zoning district ("PF District") as a conditional use subject to performance standards (see City Code §§154.600 (B)(1)(a-b)); and 2) in the RR District as a permitted use without performance standards, as contemplated in the Application (see Table 9-1 of City Code § 154.401). There is broad agreement between all stakeholders that the Project will be partially used as a "cemetery", which is a permitted use in the RR District pursuant to Table 9-1 of City Code. ii. Funeral Home/Mortuary use is prohibited, in the RR District. The City Code does not specifically define the term "mortuary", however "mortuary" uses are allowed in cemeteries pursuant to the Cemetery Definition above, and also in "Funeral Homes." The City Code defines "funeral homes" as leistablislunents engaged in undertaking services such as preparing the dead for burial, and arranging and managing funerals. Typical uses include funeral homes or mortuaries." § 154.012(B)(3)(h) (hereinafter "Funeral Home Definition"). Classified as a Service use type, a funeral home is an allowable use in four of Lake Elmo's zoning districts. I However, as the Developer conceded at the July 21s1 City Council meeting, a funeral home use is prohibited in the RR District (City Council Meeting Video Archive, July 21, 2015; and see City Code § 154.401 explaining that uses not identified upon Table 9.1 as either permitted or conditional "shall be considered prohibited").2 The opposite is also true — while funeral home uses are prohibited in the zoning districts where cemetery uses are allowed, cemetery uses are prohibited in the four zoning districts where funeral homes are allowed.3 The use conflict between funeral homes and cemeteries is irreconcilable. If mortuaries fall under the "funeral home" classification, by rule they cannot also be associated with the "cemetery" classification because the applicable zoning district regulations prevent cemetery uses and funeral home (mortuary) uses from coexisting as envisioned within the Cemetery Definition. So what use classification does "mortuary use" slot into? Before diving deeper into the mire, some perspective: the "mortuary use" conundrum is only worth solving if the Developer plans to engage (or is deemed to engage) in a funeral home/mortuary use on the property under the existing Cemetery Definition (currently allowing for both a cemetery and a mortuary). The Application does 1 Funeral Homes are allowable in: 1) in the HDR-Urban High Density Residential zoning district as a conditional use subject to performance standards (see City Code Table 10-2 and § 154.454(1)); 2) in the VMX-Village Center zoning district as a conditional use without performance standards (see City Code § 154.501; Table 11.1); 3) in the CC - Convenience Comrnercial zoning district as a conditional use (see City Code Table 12.1); and 4) in the C-Commercial zoning district as a permitted use (see City Code § 154.551; Table 12.1). 2 Resolving the "allowable use" discrepancies by way of use variances would also be ineffective. City Code § 154.109 B (prohibiting use variances for all uses that are not listed as permitted or conditional use in the zoning district where the property is located.) 3 See provisions cited in Note 1 above, where each provides that all uses not classified as permitted or conditional in thc respective zoning district shall be considered prohibited. Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 4 not reference a planned mortuary/funeral home use and the Developer has consistently stated the Project "will not be a mortuary." (City Council Meeting Video Archive, July 21, 2015). However, in light of the Developer's articulated business plan and the related analysis below, there is little doubt the Project will be used as a mortuary, perhaps even despite the Developer's best efforts. Therefore, it is important to determine whether a "mortuary" use should be included in the "Public/Civic — cemetery" classification, and thereby allowed in the RR District, or whether a mortuary is in the "Service — funeral home" classification. Section 154.012(A)(2) of the City Code guides interpretation of zoning use types and classifications "in the event of any question as to the appropriate use type of any existing or proposed use." In determining what classification an undefined use fits into, the Planning Director shall (a) "consider the operational and physical characteristics of the use in question" and (b) "shall consider the classification contained in the most recent edition of the Standard Industrial Classification [SIC] Manual published by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget." (City Code § 154.012(A)(2)) The following analysis applies (a) and (b) to the undefined mortuary use: (a) Operational and physical characteristics of a proposed mortuary use. As a starting point, common language usage suggests "mortuary" and "funeral home" are closely related terms, if not identical, whereas a practical distinction can be drawn between "mortuary" and "cemetery" uses. Webster's Dictionary defines "mortuary" as "a place in which dead bodies are kept until burial; especially: funeral home," and defines "cemetery" as "a place where dead people are buried."4 Regarding operational and physical characteristics, the Developer's own public narrative suggests that mortuary/funeral use will occur upon the Project. Aside from interment of the deceased in the facilities identified upon the Project's site plans, the Project's planned features also include a parking lot designed to park up to 53 multiple -occupant vehicles,5 plus a 1,600 square -foot addition to the Administrative Center (currently the single family residence on the property), which according to the Developer will be known as the "Palacstra" and will accommodate up to 295 guests for the purpose of hosting wakes, memorial services, funeral services, and related celebrations and ceremonies at the Project. Therefore, the Project will be used as both "a place where dcad people are buried" (Webster's: cemetery) and as "a place in which dead bodies are kept until burial" (Webster's: mortuary) that is "engaged in...arranging and managing funerals" (City Code: Funeral IIome Definition). The operational and physical characteristics of the Project suggest a mortuary use, if any, should be classified as a "Service — funeral home" type and therefore prohibited in the RR District. (b) Government classification of a proposed mortuary use. In 1997, the Office of Management and Budget replaced the SIC system identified in City Code with the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Under the NAICS, mortuaries and funeral homes are 4 Webster's Dictionary accessed via http:7/wwwinerriam-webster.com/dictionwy. 5 Based on City Staff s trip forecasting data. (City Planning Commission Meeting Video Archive; July 13, 2015; City Council Meeting Video Archive, July 21, 2015) Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 5 classified as code 812210: "Funeral Homes and Funeral Services."6 This classification "comprises establishments primarily engaged in preparing the dead for burial or interment and conducting funerals (i.e., providing facilities for wakes, arranging transportation for the dead, selling caskets and related merchandise)." Meanwhile, the NA1CS classifies cemeteries as code 812220: "Cemeteries and Crematories," which comprises "establishments primarily engaged in operating sites or structures reserved for the interment of human or animal remains and/or cremating the dead." Illustrative examples provided include "Cemetery Associations, Memorial Gardens, Mausoleums, and Crematories (except combined with funeral homes.)" The N A ICS classifications suggest both a mortuary use, if any, should be classified as a "Service — funeral home" type and therefore prohibited in the RR District.' Finally, in the Developer's own words, the Project is "not just a lot where people will be buried," but rather a state -of -the art establishment designed to facilitate funeral and gravesite services as well as wakes "where people come to grieve" and to "be by the side of a deceased loved one prior to interment." (City Council Meeting Video Archive, July 21, 2015). To the extent the City Council believes a conflict exists in the City Code regarding what a "mortuary use" is and what zoning district(s) it fits into, the Council may direct the City Attorney to advise the Planning Director to issue a determination pursuant to City Code § 154.012(A)(2). However, it is abundantly clear the Developer seeks to engage a prohibited "funeral home" use within the Project, which use type has no place in the RR District. Whether this violation is intentional or not, the City Council should nonetheless deny the Application. iii. Single Family Dwelling use is permitted in the RR District, but not as an accessory to cemetery or funeral home use. The Project contains an existing single family residence structure that will be retrofitted to house the Administration Center, Palaestra, and resident caretaker's quarters. This arrangement does not work in the RR District. City Code Section 154.401(A) allows for principal and accessory uses to be combined within a single RR District parcel. Although the term "principal use" is not specifically defined in the Code, the provisions regarding accessory uses in the RR District, and limitations imposed thereon, prohibit the Project's implied mixed -use concept. Here, the single family residence is being entirely repurposed to support the cemetery use. On this basis, we will presume the cemetery is the principal use of the Project, and the single family dwelling and residential use of the Project for the caretaker to be an accessory use. This is 6 NAICS searches for terms "mortuaries" and "cemetery" conducted at https://wvcensusgov/ees/www/naics/using 2012 edition of NAICS. 7 Although not directly at issue for the purposes of this letter, it is extremely important to note that Chapter 149A of Minnesota Statutes will require the cemetery association operating the Project, and possibly engaged individuals as well, to be licensed by the Minnesota Department of Health. "No person shall, without bale licensed by the Minnesota Department of Health arranee. direct, or sunervise a funeral. memorial service, or eraveside service." Minn. Stat. § 149A.01, Subd 2(3). Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 6 problematic however, because a residential use does not appear to be an allowed Accessory Use in the RR District. (see § 154.401, Table 9.1 (list of "Accessory Uses" does not include "residential use"). Moreover, because the single family residence pre-exists the cemetery use on the property, the Project further violates the "phasing" requirement of City Code § 154.405(A). Third, and as a practical matter, the Developer has explained that he does not expect profitability prior to year eight because "cemeteries take a long time to mature." (Planning Commission Meeting Video Archive, July 13, 2015; City Council Meeting Video Archive, July 21, 2015). If true, the immediate need for a resident caretaker at the Project seems dubious at best, and an accessory residential use likely does not meet the Code's "incidental to principal use" or "function" requirements, which provide that an accessory use "shall be incidental to and customarily associated with the principal use..." and "shall contribute to the comfort, convenience, or necessity of the... principal use served." (City Code §§ 154(B)(D)) This is especially true in considering the extensive security fencing the Developer has demanded. Under any permutation, the principal use vs. accessory use analysis generates a non- compliant mix of uses. Therefore, the Application does not meet with zoning regulations and should be denied. b. The "maintenance garage" violates accessory structure regulations. In the RR District, accessory buildings are limited to a size of 2,000 square feet. (City Code § 154.406, Table 9-3). The survey of the property contained within the Application depicts the "maintenance garage" accessory structure to measure 30.1 feet by 72.1 feet for a rough total area of 2,170 square feet. In addition, no detached accessory in the RR District may be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building, except by resolution of the City Council. (City Code § 154.406 (C)(2)) The survey depicts the accessory structure to lie 104.5 feet from the front lot line, while the principal structure lies 166.2 feet from the front. Upon information and belief, the City Council has not passed a resolution to approving this non -conformity. Alternatively, in the event the accessory structure is presently considered a legal non -conforming use, the Board of Adjustment will need to approve the accessory structure's proposed change in use from residential to cemetery use, which upon information and belief such approval has not been sought or granted. (City Code § 154.151(F)) As a result, the Application does not comply with applicable zoning regulations and should be denied. c. The proposed security fence violates fence regulations. In the RR District, no permanent fence shall be installed without a fence permit. (City Code § 154.205(C)(1). Even with a permit, "a fence within a front or side (corner) yard setback may not exceed forty-two (42) inches in height and must be 50% open to air and light" and under no circumstances may a fence in a residential district exceed six (6) feet in height. (City Code §§ I54.205(E)(1-2)). The security fence proposed in the Application, which according to the Developer is essential to "keep out vandals," is eight (8) feet in height. The proposed security fence for the Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 7 Project does not comply with applicable zoning regulations and therefore the Application should be denied. d. The proposed off-street parking does not comply with zoning regulations. City Code provides that "development of land within the rural districts shall follow established standards for traffic circulation, landscape design, parking, signs and other considerations as specified in Articles 5, 6, and 7" of the zoning code. (§ 154.404) In residential areas, on -street and off-street parking is limited to the use of residents and guests. (City Code § 154.210(C)(5)) As depicted in the site plans contained in the Application, the Project will provide off-street parking for up to 53 vehicles in a paved parking lot, plus parking along the 16 foot -wide bituminous driveways between the in -ground burial sections of the cemetery and around the perimeter of the property. According to Table 5-2 in Section 154.210 of the City Code, the minimum parking requirement for cemeteries is "as determined by the Planning Director." According to the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated July 13, 2015, the Table 5-2 standard was applied by Staff to analyze the parking on the Project based on the Application, and the 53 provided spaces were deemed sufficient for the cemetery use articulated in the Application. However, City Code dictates that in the event of a conflict between more restrictive and less restrictive regulations for comparable conditions, "the regulations which are more restrictive... shall prevail." (§ 154.006(B)) Alternatively, it is apparent from the Staff Report that the parking analysis of the Project contemplated cemetery use only. (Staff Report to the Planning Commission, July 13, 2015) The Developer has since articulated a business plan that implicates additional uses on the Project, including a funeral home use. (Planning Commission Meeting Video Archive, July 13, 2015; City Council Meeting Video Archive, July 21, 2015). In the scenario this impermissible mixed use is approved and if the Table 5-2 "minimum permissible parking" standard is determined to be the applicable standard for off-street parking, as opposed to the above standard limiting all parking in residential areas to residents and guests, a shared -use parking analysis will need to be conducted by staff pursuant to Section 154.210(G), which upon information and belief has not been completed. Based on all of the foregoing, the Application does not comply with applicable zoning regulations and denial is warranted. 2. Denial of the Application will not create legal precedent binding the City vis-a-vis future developments that properly comply with the City Code and community objectives. Municipal officials can be reluctant to deny land use applications due to concerns that such decision will limit their discretion in approving or denying later land use applications submitted by different property owners for different projects. However, such concerns are not supported by Minnesota law. Minnesota courts have consistently declared that land use decisions made by local Letter to Lake Elmo Mayor and Council Re: Halcyon Cemetery Application October 2, 2015 Page 8 governments fail to create any sort of binding precedent because every application involves different facts and circumstances and takes place at different times from previous situations whereby similar applications were considered and granted. The Minnesota Court of Appeals rejected a property owner's argument that a county zoning board was required to grant him a setback variance because the zoning board had granted his neighbor a similar setback variance. Stotts v. Wright County, 478 N.W.2d 802, 806 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991), citing In re Johnson, 404 N.W. 2d 298, 301 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987), rev'd on other grounds 562 N.W. 2d 21 (Minn. Ct, App. 1997). In In re Johnson, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that "an applicant for a variance is not entitled to a variance merely because similar variances were granted in the past. Otherwise, the granting of one variance would likely result in the destruction of the entire zoning scheme." Id. at 301. Accordingly, the City Council's decision to reject the Application must not be swayed by the false pretense that doing so would unfairly preclude this Developer or others from submitting plans that duly comply with City Code and the comprehensive plan while carefully considering the fabric of the community in which the development sits. 3. Conclusion Based on the foregoing and on behalf of the Concerned Neighbors, we respectfully urge the City Council to deny the Application and take such follow-up action it deems necessary to further "preserve and enhance the quality of living" of Lake Elmo's distinguished and desirable rural areas. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, MORRISON SUND PLLC Robert Q. Williams, Esq. Cc. Julie Johnson, City Clerk (jjohnson@lakeelmo.org) Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator (cschroeder@lakeelmo.org) Dave Snyder, City Attorney (david@johnsonandturner. com) TI CITY ( LAKE ELNIO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AyoR & COUNCIL co UNICATION DATE: July 21, 2015 REGULAR ITEM #17 RESOLUTION 2015-59 Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat Nick M. Johnson, City Planner Julie Johnson, City Clerk Planning Corrunission Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief Washington County Public Works SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ...... .................Community Development Director Report/Presentation..................... , __Community Development Director - Queslious Ironi Council to Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ........ Mayor & City Council Discussion ..... ...... ..... ... 'Mayor & City C:ouncil - Action on Motion.... ........ ..... ....... ........ ...... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Planning Commission FISCAL IMPACT: None, all of the review activities on the part of the City are reimbursed by application and escrow fees submitted by the developer. All of the improvements to the site are private. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a request from Mr. Lee Rossow for approval of a preliminary and final plat for a cemetery to be called Halcyon located at 11050 50th Street North. The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the matter at its July 13, 2015 meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of approval. The suggested motions to adopt the Planning Commission recon-unendation is as follows: -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17] July 21, 2015 "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-59, approving the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached is the original detailed Staff report that was provided to the Planning Commission regarding the applicant's request for preliminary and final plat approval. The staff report includes general information about the application, a summary of the relevant planning and zoning issues, a thorough review and analysis of the final plat (including a draft list of recommended conditions of approval), draft findings, and the Staff recommendation to the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the preliminary and final plat application at its July 13, 2015 meeting. During the public hearing, the Planning Commission received the following testimony: • Jean Madrinich, 11420 50th Street N., noted that there are multiple flood plains in the area. She asked how the flood plains are being addressed. Lee Rossow noted that they have worked through those issues with the watershed district. Ms. Madrinich also noted concern about additional traffic that would be generated on 50'1' Street. • Deb Kreuger, 4552 Lake Elmo Ave. N., asked questions about the need for parkland dedication associated with this property. In addition, she referenced several State Statutes that relate to cemeteries. She wanted to ensure that the statutory requirements are being followed with the project, especially the establishment of a permanent care trust fund for the cemetery association. The applicant noted that a trust fund is being established with the project. • Janet Thompson, 11491 50'1' Street N., noted that she is concerned about a commercial venue being placed in a residential area. She stated that her family moved here to live in a rural area, and this use is not in keeping with that goal. • Rebecca Tenpas, 11330 5011' Street N., stated that she does not believe the proposed use is consistent with the rural character that the City desires. She also stated that the traffic on 50th Street is a concern, and the use will add to the existing problem. • Rich Day, owner of a property to the south of the proposed cemetery, asked if the project has undergone an environmental review, such as an EIS. Johnson noted that the project did not meet the threshold to trigger an environmental review, but that the City does have the discretion to request environmental review. Mr. Day also voice his concern about the storm water on the site that travels to his property. The applicant noted that they have received permit approval from the Valley Branch Watershed District for the proposed storm water management design. -- page 2 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17] July 21, 2015 • Jeffrey Saffle, 11180 50th Street N., asked if the lights on the site would be compliant with dark skies standards. He noted that is important to follow the City's dark skies ordinance. • Saxe Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., noted his concern about the effect of cemeteries on property values. Mr. Roberts agreed with staff that research is inconclusive on the matter, but he worried that the presence of the cemetery would eliminate some buyers for his property in the future. The full account of the testimony can be reviewed in the draft Planning Commission minutes dated 7/13/15. The Planning Commission discussed a variety of topics in considering the preliminary and final plat application for the cemetery. In discussing the project, the Planning Commission added the following conditions: A condition was added that any future expansions for the cemetery use would need City review and approval. A condition was added to ensure that dark skies ordinances were followed. A condition was added that any expansion of the home meet design criteria contained in the City's design standards. A condition was added to add a warranty period for the transplanted trees on the site. A condition was added to provide additional screening along the east and north property lines. Finally, a condition was added that the cemetery association provide copies of all annual minutes and financial reporting of the permanent care trust fund to the City on an annual basis. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat with 14 conditions of approval. The vote to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat was unanimous (Vote: 6-0). STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS (SWOT): Strengths: The proposed preliminary and final plat are compliant with the City's subdivision ordinance, as well as other ordinances found in the zoning code. Weaknesses: Neighboring property owners have expressed concerns about traffic generated by the use. Opportunities: N/A Threats: N/A RECOMMENDATION: -- page 3 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda lion 17] July 21, 2015 Based on the crIbretnentioned the Planning COMMiSSi011 and Staff are recommending that the City Council approve the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat through the.following 17701i011: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-59, approving the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminaiy and Final Plat." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2015-59 2. StallReport to the Planning Commission, 7/13/15 3. Location Map 4. Application Forms and Project Narrative 5. Preliminary and Final Plat and Plans 6. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 7/8/15 7. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15 8. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15 9. Valley Branch Watershed District Permit 10. Lake Elmo Transportation Plan, Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes 11. Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report (Pt Half) INCLUDED IN THE ELECTRONIC PACKET BUT NOT PROVIDED IN HARD COPY: 1. 2"d Half of Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report — Supporting Data 2. information Handout from League of MN Cities on Cemeteries -- page 4 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-59 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR THE HALCYON CEMETERY WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Mr. Lee Rossow, 11050 50th Street North, Lake Elmo MN 55042 has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo ("City") for a Preliminary and Final Plat for a cemetery to be called Halcyon, a copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elrno Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the proposed Final Plat includes a cemetery on one parcel of land (PID: 01.029.21.33.0003) in the Rural Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 2015 to consider the Preliminary and Final Plat application; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending approval of the Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation concerning the Preliminary and Final Plat as part of a memorandum to the City Council for the July 21, 2015 Council Meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat at its meeting held on July 21, 2015 and made the following findings of fact: 1) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 2) That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's RR — Rural Residential zoning district. 3) That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's subdivision ordinance. 4) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat meets other City zoning ordinances, such as landscaping, tree preservation, erosion and sediment control, off-street parking and other ordinances, except where noted in this report herein. 5) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards, except where noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's Resolution 2015-59 comments documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015 and the Fire Chief s comments documented in a letter dated July 7, 2015. 6) The applicant has committed to establishing a permanent care trust fund consistent with the requirements established under State Statute. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall revise the Final Plat to accommodate all required right-of-way on Lake Elmo Avenue and 50th Street North as documented in review memorandums submitted by Washington County and the City Engineer. 2) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter dated July 8, 2015 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the City's execution of the Final Plat. 3) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland Conservation Act, and abide by all conditions of approval established in the approved Valley Branch Watershed District permit, 4) The applicant shall be responsible to address all review comments submitted by Washington County described in the review memorandum received from the County dated July 7, 2015. In addition, the applicant shall obtain all necessary right-of-way permitting from Washington County. 5) The Landscape Plan shall be revised to include 6 additional trees to fulfill the City's Landscaping Requirements. In addition, the plant material that is on top of utilities shall be moved to comply with the direction of the City Engineer per his memorandum dated July 8, 2015. Finally, prior to installation of plant material, the plan shall be reviewed by the City's Landscape Consultant for final approval. 6) The applicant must enter into an agreement with the City to own, operate and maintain the private storm water facilities on the property. The storm water maintenance agreement must be recorded with the Final Plat. 7) Prior to the issuance of grading/building permits, all review comments of the Fire Chief must be addressed by the applicant. 8) The applicant shall obtain the necessary permitting from Washington County to install a new septic system to serve the property prior to the City issuing and building permits for the remodel of the home. 9) Any future expansion of the site, includin reviewed and approved by the City. p ans to install a crematorium, shall be 10) All lighting installed on the Halcyon Cemetery site must comply with the City's dark skies ordinance. 2 Resolution 2015-59 11) Any alterations to the existing single family home shall be reviewed for conformance to the City's design standards. 12) All transplanted trees transplanted on the site shall include a 2-year warranty period to ensure survival. Any trees that do not survive the two-year period shall be replaced. 13) The Landscape Plan shall be amended to add plantings along the Eastern and Northern property lines consistent with screening requirements specified in 154.258.F of the City Code. 14) Annual meeting minutes, including annual financial reporting and status of the permanent care trust fund, shall be submitted to the City on an annual basis. Passed and duly adopted this 21' day ofJuly, 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Resolution 2015-59 TI II-. CITY ()I' FAKE ELMO ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 7/13/2015 AGENDA ITEM: 4A —PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2015-06 Halcyon Cemetery — Preliminary and Final Plat REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer Ann Pung-Terwedo, Washington County Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing to consider a Preliminary and Final Plat application request from Mr. Lee Rossow for a cemetery to be platted on a 10-acre parcel located at the northeast corner of Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) and 50th Street North. Staff is recommending approval of the request subject to compliance with 8 conditions as noted in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Lee Rossow, 11050 50th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Property Owners: Lee Rossow, 11050 50th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Location: Part of Section 01, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elmo, immediately north of 50th Street and immediately east of Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17). PID Number: 01.029.21.33.0003 Request: Application for preliminary and final plat approval of a cemetery to be called Halcyon. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Single Family Detached, Rural Residential (RR) zoning Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North — single family home (RR); west — single family home (RR); south — Agricultural (RR); east — single family residential (RR) and Municipal Well Site #4. Comprehensive Plan: Rural Area Development History: Sketch Plan review by Planning Commission on 11/24/2014. Deadline for Action: Application Complete — 6/17/2015 60 Day Deadline — 8/17/2015 Extension Letter Mailed — No 120 Day Deadline — 10/16/2015 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 — Subdivision Regulations Article IX — Rural Districts Article V — Off Street Parking Article VI -- Landscaping and Tree Preservation §150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment REQUEST DETAILS The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Mr. Lee Rossow to plat a 10-acre cemetery at 11050 50'1' Street North to be called Halcyon. Under State Law, cemeteries must be filed and recorded with the County. In order for the cemetery plat to be filed and recorded at the County, the City must approve a final plat for the cemetery. The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing on the proposed cemetery plat. The proposed cemetery would be located at the northeast corner of Lake Elmo Ave. and 50'1' St. North. The 10-acre parcel has historically been used as a single family residential home. It should be noted that a Sketch Plan of the Halcyon Cemetery was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 24'1' of 2014. At the Sketch Plan review level, the City completed a high- level review of the proposal to inform a future preliminary/final plat application. There is no formal approval issued by the City at the time of Sketch Plan review. According to standard subdivision procedures, a typical plat will go through both a preliminary and final plat review process. However, it is possible to proceed with preliminary and final plat review concurrently for plats of more limited scope and size. In the judginent of staff, the review of the Halcyon Cemetery represents such an application of more limited scope/size where the review of preliminary and final plans should be permitted to proceed in a concurrent fashion. Therefore, the applicant has prepared a final plat and construction plans for consideration by the City. The existing condition of the property is that of a single family residential home with an accessory building on the eastern side of the property. It should be noted that the existing home has access off both 50'1Street and Lake Elmo Avenue. The proposed cemetery would eliminate the access on Lake Elmo Ave., improving the access spacing related to driveways on the County arterial road. Access to the proposed cemetery would be accommodated off of 50th Street North approximately 270 feet east of Lake Elmo Ave. (CSAH 17). As part of the proposed cemetery use, the existing home and accessory building would be repurposed to support the cemetery use. The home would be used as an administrative office, caretaker quarters and gathering space for the bereaved. The existing accessory building would be utilized as a maintenance garage. In addition to these existing improveinents, the applicant is planning to construct private storm water management facilities along the eastern portion of the site to address the additional impervious surface. It should be noted that these facilities have been designed to comply with the rules of the City of Lake Elmo and the Valley Branch Watershed District. With regards to the cemetery, the applicant is planning a total of 5 sections or areas to serve as burial sites or columbariurn/mausoleums. Sections 1, 2 and 5 are within the planned Phase 1 area of the cemetery, while Sections 3 and 4 are in the planned Phase 2 area of the cemetery. The options for burial or interment include in -ground burials, mausoleums, columbarium, in -ground cremation and estate lots. At full capacity, the 5 sections could host the remains of 1,995 persons according to the site plan. Finally, there is also a 58-stall parking area planned for the cemetery. The parking lot would be utilized to accommodate larger parties for various burial ceremonies or rituals. As far as utilities are concerned, the existing building will be served by a private septic system. The applicant has completed a compliance inspection and submitted to Washington County. The inspection revealed that the existing system is not compliant per Washington County ordinance. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM Therefore, the applicant will need to construct a new septic system in consultation with Washington County Health Department (Condition #8). With regards to water, the site does have access to the City's municipal water system within 50th Street. Water service will be extended to the site to provide proper fire suppression for the home once it is converted to serve the cemetery use. It should also be noted that there is an existing well on the site. It is the understanding of the City that the well is to be protected and maintained for irrigation purposes. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES The Halcyon Cemetery parcel is guided Rural Area Development (RAD) according to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The existing zoning of the parcel is Rural Residential (RR). According to Article XI — Rural Districts of the Zoning Code, cemeteries are considered a permitted use within the Agricultural (A) and Rural Residential (RR) zoning districts. Therefore, the proposed use of a cemetery on this property is in compliance with the City's Zoning Code. It should also be noted that the Zoning Code does not contain any specific development standards for the cemetery use. Based on Staff's review of the preliminary and final plat, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with all applicable code requirements at the level of detail that is required for a plat. As noted previously, the plat approval from the City is not required as a result of splitting the parcel into 4 or more lots, but rather as an approval of the proposed use prior to the filing of the property as a cemetery with Washington County. However, the platting procedures do allow the City and County to obtain the necessary right-of-way to serve both Lake Elmo Avenue and 50th Street. With regards to parkland dedication, the Subdivision Ordinance does require that residential and commercial plats provide parkland dedication based upon a percentage or fee set under the City's Fee Schedule. Residential developments typically require a dedication percentage in between 7-10%, whereas the City's Fee Schedule require $4,500/acre for commercial development be provided for parkland fees. In researching the cemetery use, staff has determined that the use is technically defined as a public cemetery association, meaning that the cemetery is owned privately but is open to the public. As a result of this definition and the fact that private cemeteries are considered a quasi - public use, staff does not believe that the City can require parkland dedication fees for the proposed use. The cemetery use is neither residential nor commercial, and thus staff is not reconunending to impose any parkland dedication fees. Finally, it should be noted that City staff has received some inquiries of concern from some surrounding property owners about the cemetery use. In speaking with the surrounding property owners, the general concerns staff has received relate to traffic, the effect on property values and the means to maintain the cemetery into perpetuity. Staff has completed some general research to look into these concerns: Traffic. With regards to increased traffic generated by the cemetery, the property is located at the intersection of a County arterial road and City major collector road. These facilities, as opposed to local residential streets, should be able to accommodate any increased traffic generated from the cemetery use. According to the City's Transportation Plan, the average daily traffic of 50th Street in 2009 was 500 trips, whereas the projected volume on 50'h Street in 2030 is 1500 trips per day. Given this lower average daily traffic as of 2009, it is unlikely that the cemetery use would generate the amount of traffic that would come within any proximity of the available capacity. Lake Elmo average daily traffic as of 2009 was 3100 vehicle trips per day. The projected traffic volume for 2030 is 9200 vehicle trips per day. The applicant has estimated that daily travel to the cemetery will be extremely limited, with peak PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 4 travel resulting from scheduled funerals on an infrequent basis. While staff understands the concern over additional traffic generated by the proposed cemetery, the fact that the subject property is located at the intersection of an arterial road and major collector provides assurance to staff that the use would be ideally located. In the judg,ment of staff, there is adequate capacity on Lake Elmo Ave. and 50`11 Street. Property Values. Staff has received two concerns about reduced property values as a result of the proposed cemetery. Staff has conducted some research into this concern. Based on the limited research conducted, staff is not confident that there is a documented or proven correlation between property values and cemeteries. In researching the matter, the connection between cemeteries and property values remains inconclusive. There are academic studies and anecdotal articles that fall on both sides of the argument. For the benefit of the Planning Commission, staff has attached the article (Attachment #9) that presented the most comprehensive look at the effect of cemeteries on property values based on the research conducted. Permanent Care of the Cemetery. One resident that contact staff inquired about how the cemetery would be well maintained into the future. In researching this question, staff found that some cemeteries depending on location and population are required to maintain a Permanent Care and Improvement Fund. Whether or not the Halcyon Cemetery is required to establish this fund is undetermined at this time. However, the applicant has noted in their narrative that they intend to utilize a percentage of funds from every burial and intemient to pay a permanent care and maintenance fund, which would be established and run by the cemetery association. The narrative notes that this fund will be in compliance with State Statutes. According to the applicant, this fund would be utilized to care for the grounds and complete capital projects and improvements to the cemetery. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS City Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary and final plat for the Halcyon Cemetery. It should be noted that the applicant chose to wait to submit the plat application until the Valley Branch Watershed Permit was approved and issued, which occurred on June 25, 2015. During the course of these review, staff has evaluated the proposed plans according to City ordinances and engineering standards. In completing the review, there are some elements of the plat that remain in conflict with City, County or Valley Branch Watershed District standards, which must still be addressed or corrected by the applicant. In general, the proposed plat will meet all applicable City requirements for conditional approval, and any deficiencies or additional work that is needed is noted as part of the review record. The City has received a detailed list of comments from the City Engineer, Fire Chief and Washington County concerning the proposed cemetery, all of which are attached for consideration by the Commission. In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report, Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the issues and comments related to the following discussion areas as well: • Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan for this area. The subject property is guided Rural Area Development (RAD), which correlates to Agricultural and Rural Residential land uses. Under the Comprehensive Plan, cemetery use is not in conflict with this land use guidance. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 5 Zoning. The zoning of the subject property is Rural Residential (RR). Under this zoning designation, cemeteries are a permitted use according to the Zoning Code. Subdivision Requirements. The City's Subdivision Ordinance details the process for platting and other pertinent design standards. The majority of the standards are not applicable as the parcel is not being subdivided in the manner that is typical of other development. Staff, as well as the City Engineer, have not identified any existing conflicts with the City's Subdivision Ordinance. However, staff has found that additional public right-of-way may need to be provided on both 50th Street and Lake Elmo Avenue. The requirements to provide public right-of-way is found in the Subdivision Ordinance. Infrastructure. No public infrastructure is proposed to be constructed as part of the cemetery use. The wastewater facilities will be private. The existing home will be connected to the City water system via a water service. In addition, the Fire Chief will be requesting a hydrant to be located on the property. Nevertheless, the water line and hydrant will be privately owned and maintained. Finally, the storm water management facilities will also be privately owned and maintained. The City will require the landowner or association to enter into a maintenance agreement for the storm water facilities. Wetlands. The landowner has completed a wetland delineation as part of the permitting process for the Valley Branch Watershed. The applicant will be required to meet all the rules and regulations of the Wetland Conservation Act and Valley Branch Watershed District (Condition #3). Landscaping. Staff has reviewed the landscape plan submitted by the applicant and found the plan to be in general conformance with the City's ordinance. However, the applicant must provide 6 additional new trees to meet the City's quantity standards. Aside from this issue, the plant material provided meets the City standards for variety and plant size. It should also be noted that the applicant is proposing to transplant many of the existing trees on the site. In combination with the new plant material, there should be a fairly significant amount of landscaping on the 10-acre site. Staff was unable to have the plan reviewed by a registered Landscape Architect prior to consideration by the City. Therefore, Staff would recommend that the plan be reviewed for final approval prior to the installation of the plant material on the site. Finally, it should be noted that the City Engineer has identified some areas where plant material or trees are located on top of proposed utilities. The Landscape Plan should be revised to provide separation between the proposed utilities and plant material. These recommendations are included in a recommended condition of approval (Condition #5). Tree Preservation Plan. Staff has reviewed the Tree Preservation Plan and found it to be in conformance with the City's regulations pertaining to tree preservation for sites undergoing development activity. The total number of caliper inches on the site according to the survey is 1,550 caliper inches of significant trees. According to the Tree Preservation Ordinance, an applicant is allowed to remove 30% of significant trees on the site before tree replacement schedule is initiated. 30% of 1,550 total caliper inches is 465 caliper inches. The applicant is proposing to remove 340 caliper inches of significant trees, which is below the threshold for tree replacement. It should be noted that the applicant is proposing to transplant a significant amount of existing trees on the site to install mature plantings from an early point. Under the Tree Preservation Ordinance, transplanted trees do not count towards the total tree removals. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 6 Staff finds the submitted tree preservation plan to be in conformance with the City's ordinance. Off -Street Parking. The proposed site plan for the cemetery shows 58 parking stalls. The City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance (154.210) includes the required number of off-street parking stalls for various uses. As for cemeteries, the ordinance does not provide concrete direction, but rather states that parking should be provided in an amount detennined by the Planning Director. Planning staff has reviewed the overall amount of parking on the plan and found it to he more than adequate. The amount of parking provided in the southern parking lot should prevent cars from parking on 50th Street or Lake Elmo Ave., both of which are currently designated no parking. Should an overflow parking be necessary, it is likely it could be accommodated within the various drive lanes that circulate the cemetery. In the judgment of staff, the amount of parking provided is more than adequate. Finally, it should be noted that the parking stall dimensions meet the City's minimum standards per the ordinance. City Engineer Review. The City Engineer has completed a review of the proposed cemetery and submitted his review comments in a memorandum dated July 8, 2015. With regards to the plat, he notes that 50'h Street North is a major collector road, requiring 80 total feet of right-of-way. The plat currently shows 35 feet granted on the north side of 50'h Street. He is requesting an additional 5 feet to establish the correct amount of right-of-way for collector roads. In addition, he is requesting additional right-of-way at the intersection to accommodate the sight line triangle. Finally, he is also requesting that a 10-foot drainage and utility easement be provided on the southern property line. This additional right-of-way and easement should not impact the proposed improvements on the site. Should any improvement be located in the drainage and utility easement, an easement encroachment agreement may be approved to allow fencing and other such improvements to be located there. In addition to the review comments on right-of-way, the engineer is requiring that the storm water management system be owned and maintained privately. The storm water facilities have not been designed to meet City standard. These facilities must be owned, operated and maintained privately. The City will expect a maintenance agreement to ensure proper operation of the facilities. Finally, the City Engineer has also noted several revisions and additions to the Construction Plan sheets. These review comments are mostly detail and plan notes that provide greater accuracy and clarity on the plans. Staff is recommending that the Engineer's review comments be adopted as a condition of approval (Condition #2). These modifications should be completed prior to the City executing the Final Plat. Fire Department Review, The Fire Chief has reviewed the proposed cemetery and identified some areas of further review. One request included additional information about the location of hydrants on the property. In addition, the Fire Chief is requesting additional infomiation related to the movement of emergency vehicle on the site. Staff is reconunending that the concerns identified by the Fire Chief be addressed prior to the issuance of grading or building permits (Condition #7) Washington County Review. County Staff has reviewed the cemetery plat and responded with a review memorandum dated July 7, 2015. Within the memo, County staff correctly notes that the amount of public right-of-way for Lake Elmo Ave. shown on the final plat is insufficient. In order to address this deficiency, an additional 25 feet must be provided. Staff is confident that the additional amount of right-of-way requested can be accoirunodated, as the Final Construction Plans include the correct amount of right-of-way, while the plat does PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 7 not. In other words, the additional right-of-way should not result in redesign of the site. In addition to the right-of-way issue, County staff notes that a right-of-way permit will be needed for the removal of the driveway and grading work associated with the retaining wall. In addition, the applicant must submit drainage calculations to review downstream impacts in the County ditch. Staff is recommending that all requirements and modifications identified in the County review memorandum be adopted as a condition of approval (Condition #4). Watershed District Review. The project area lies within the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). The Valley Branch Watershed District reviewed the proposed cemetery at their June 25111 meeting. At the meeting, the Valley Branch Board of Managers approved the permit for the cemetery with several conditions (see Attachment #7), It should be noted that the applicant must meet all the rules of the Wetland Conservation Act and the conditions of the VBWD permit. Staff is recommending a condition of approval (Condition #3) that these requirements be fulfilled. Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat with 8 conditions intended to address the outstanding issues noted above and to further clarify the City's expectations in order for the developer to move forward with a final plat. The recommended conditions are as follows: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1) The applicant shall revise the Final Plat to accommodate all required right-of-way on Lake Elmo Avenue and 50'1' Street North as documented in review memorandums submitted by Washington County and the City Engineer. 2) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter dated July 8, 2015 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the City's execution of the Final Plat. 3) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland Conservation Act, and abide by all conditions of approval established in the approved Valley Branch Watershed District pennit. 4) The applicant shall be responsible to address all review comments submitted by Washington County described in the review memorandum received from the County dated July 7, 2015. In addition, the applicant shall obtain all necessary right-of-way permitting from Washington County. 5) The Landscape Plan shall be revised to include 6 additional trees to fulfill the City's Landscaping Requirements. In addition, the plant material that is on top of utilities shall be moved to comply with the direction of the City Engineer per his memorandum dated July 8, 2015. Finally, prior to installation of plant material, the plan shall be reviewed by the City's Landscape Consultant for final approval. 6) The applicant must enter into an agreement with the City to own, operate and maintain the private storm water facilities on the property. The storm water maintenance agreement must be recorded with the Final Plat. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 8 7) Prior to the issuance of grading/building permits, all review comments of the Fire Chief must be addressed by the applicant. 8) The applicant shall obtain the necessary permitting from Washington County to install a new septic system to serve the property prior to the City issuing and building permits for the remodel of the home. DRAFT FINDINGS Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to the proposed Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat: • That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. • That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's RR — Rural Residential zoning district. • That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's subdivision ordinance. • That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat meets other City zoning ordinances, such as landscaping, tree preservation, erosion and sediment control, off-street parking and other ordinances, except where noted in this report herein. • That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards, except where noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015. RECCOMEN DATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat with the 8 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report. Suggested motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat rvith the 8 conditions o approval as drafted by Staff based on the findings offact listed in the StalfReport." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Application Fori-ns and Narrative 3. Preliminary and Final Plat and Plans 4. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 7/8/15 5. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15 6. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15 7. Valley Branch Watershed District Permit 8. Lake Elmo Transportation Plan, Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes 9. Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Horne Price Report (1" Hall) PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A -- ACTION ITEM 9 INCLUDED IN THE ELECTRONIC PACKET BUT NOT PROVIDED IN HARD COPY: 1. 2nd Half of Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report — Supporting Data 2. Inforniation Handout About Cemeteries from League of Minnesota Cities ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction .......... ....... ..... ...... .............,..Planning Staff - Report by Staff. ...... ..... ........ ..... ...... Staff Questions from the Commission.... ........ ......... Chair & Commission Members Open the Public Hearing ..................................................................................Chair Close the Public Hearing. ...................... , ..... ................. ....... .............................Chair Discussion by the Commission Chair & Commission Members Action by the Chair & Commission Members PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM Location Map: Proposed Halcyon Cemetery 11050 50th Street N. Data Source: Washington County, MN 11-17-2014 0 150 300 600 Feet l l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 "=300' Date Received: Received By: LIJ File #: l'Y LAKE ELMO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION Applicant: L. R 0 5- .5 0 4,..) Address: / 890 Rice .5 rRzr r-e. Phone it GJ - 30 9 Email Address: 339 A cN 4.1.46 Fee Owner: Address: Phone #: Email Address: in Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description: o rly ix 4r General information of proposed subdivision: C 001 Conducted pre -application meeting with Staff? 10 Yes 0 No 651-747-3900 3800 Laveme Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and current administrative procedures, I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional application expense. Signature of applicant: Signature of Fee Owner Siame Date: g o Date: SAFORMS \Planning Dept Forms - Permits - Forms - Current\Preliininary Plat Application only 10.7.13.docx Revised 3/10/2014 2:31 PM Date Received: Received By: LU Filet FINAL PLAT APPLICATION Applicant: Address: Phone #: Email Address: Fee Owner: Address: Phone #: Email Address: THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO L. E. v s o c.4) 8/20 Rice snez,cr 6e-7 - o e -?9?, 3T et .41 4: Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description: 0.s° ,5--0 17 as7 R ee General information of proposed subdivision: C iz V 651-747-3900 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and current administrative procedures, I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional application expense. Signature of applicant: Fee Owner Signature Date: o ts- Date: Revised 3/12/2014 11:36 AM :F. AKE EL 10 AFFIRMATION OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST Lake Elmo City Hall 651-747-3900 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 I hereby affirm that I am the fee title owner of the below described property or that I have written authorization from the owner to pursue the described action. Name of applicant R 0 sso(-../ (Please Print) Street addressIlegal description of subject property / 0 -6P Ocro Date If you are not the fee owner, attach another copy of this form which has been completed by the fee owner or a copy of your authorization to pursue this action. If a corporation is fee title holder, attach a copy of the resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing this action. If a joint venture or partnership is the fee owner, attach a copy of agreement authorizing this action on behalf of the joint venture or partnership, Revised 911./7013 3:04 PM *r* 1/1_, ELNIO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY Lake Elmo City Hall 651-747-3900 3800 Laverne Avenue Norlh Lake Elmo, MN 55042 This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have read and understand the instructions supplied for processing this application. The documents and/or information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and of the progress of this application. I understand that this application may be reviewed by City staff and consultants. I further understand that additional information, including, but not limited to, traffic analysis and expert testimony may be required for review of this application. I agree to pay to the City upon demand, expenses, determined by the City, that the City incurs in reviewing this application and shall provide an escrow deposit to the City in an amount to be deterrnined by the City. Said expenses shall include, but are not limited to, staff time, engineering, legal expenses and other consultant expenses. I agree to allow access by City personnel to the property for purposes of review of my application. Signature of applicant Name of applicant Date Cjc Tr-7.rafc 4 3 ° -? '2/ Phone 641 3 c)? (Please Print) Name and address of Contact (if other than applicant) 3 9 4) .Z c A/A5/ Revisa 911112V3 3:04 PM LeeRnssow Ha|cyon,GU] Properties, LLC, Rossow( INC l87ORice Street St. Paul, MN5S113 Nick Johnson City ofLake Elmo ]8OOLaverne Ave North Lake Elmo, MN. 5SO4Z Dear Nick Johnson, The following narrative is in response to the Final Plat Application Requirements. Item I:Submitted with the proper fees pnJanuary 9,ID1S. Item Z.Sub a.Contact. Lee Rosaow\1870Rice Street. (65I)308-2999, ennai|—]37(@|ach.net. Architect. William Sanders at LOUCKS Sub b. Halcyon at 11050 50'� Street North, 10 acres, Rural Residential, 435,600.sq. feet. Sub c.iHALCYON iv, Wetland cannot be exactly determined until May, 2015. The area where the proposed wetland is located is in the phase 11 construction area which will not be touched until after the exact delineation is completed. v. There are no dedicated rights of way within the property boundaries. There is a discussion with the County and right ofway along Lake Elmo Ave. 2Sfeet viThe general legal descriptions ofthe burial locations are listed on the plans. Sub d. Issues discussed after the sketch plan review: Park dedication and water assessment, Open issues are right of Way on Lake Elmo Ave. and the wetland delineation. Discussed in iv. v. Sub tAll ufthe site work during the first building season, except that which bdeemed necessary bythe V.B.VV.D, will be confined tothe western 4O0feet mfthe parcel. Including parking, sidewalks, storm sewer, mausoleums, columbariums, structure modifications and landscaping. Sub g. Issues raised by one of the neighbors were addressed at the sketch plan meetings. Sub h. At this time I am unaware of any issues with the neighbors. Sub i, Halcyon will develop into a serine park like setting with minimal impact the community. Traffic will beaccommodated entirely onsite. Any funeral processions will enter the property and be accommodated onthe property. Sub VVeintend tostart assoon asour plans are approved. Wewill work unphase 1during this building season and phase 11 probably in 2016. Target date to be operational is August 2015. Item l.Administrative Information. Sub 1LLabels with addresses ofadjacentpropertyownenweresecunedhomVVaxNngton[ountyand delivered to you on January 12, 2015. Item ]. Final grading. Signed copies. Once the Engineers and the Watershed agree onthe details, freshly signed plans will beresubmitted toyour office. Item 12. Spot elevations. I talked to Bill Sanders about including this on the plan if not already there. |nenn 17. Phasing plan. Aadiscussed the phase 1 and phase Zareas onthe erosion control plan will be clearly identified, Other topics: Care and Improvement: In compliance with Minnesota Statute 306.37, 306-41, 306,731, 20% of every burial lot and 10% of every mausoleum or columbarium space shall be paid to a permanent trust fund for the care, maintenance and improvement ofthe cemetery. Public Service Agreement. I'm at a loss to make a suggestion because the City doesn't currently have any public service agreements with the other three cemeteries or religious organizations. Lee Rossow SHEET INDEX OM COVER SHEET Cll EXISTMC CONDITIONS/ REMOVA1.5 Cl• I sat likYCILfr PLAN C34 GRAM< & DRANAGE PLAN C34 EROSION CONTROi PLAN C5.1 PREIIMINAR, FLAIL CEW CPA, DRAM C0.2 CiVa. DFIAILS C1.3 OK DETAILS 1.1.0 TREE PRESERVAVON PLAN 524 LANDSCAPING NAN t 7-1 IANDSCAPING UkEAII5 ALCY•N LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PLANS FOR: CEMETERY BURIAL LOCATIONS, PARKING, GRADING & DRAINAGE, UTILITIES AND LANDSCAPE VICINITY MAR 95 r o - PROPOSED SITE LOCATION WARNING: THE CONTRACrOR SHALI. OE RESPONSIBLE FOR Coat FOR LOCATSONS H EXIST ITHT UTILITIES. THEY SHAH LOTTFIRATT WITH ATT UTILITY LUSIYANITT 94 HA WANING rl ittk SERVICE AND 1 Og •LoCATION OF urIES. lttE CONMCTOR SHALL CONERLT CHM IER STATE ONE MT AT 1,4TTTMOT AT LEAST 4a HOURS HI ADVANCE FOR THE ICKATITITH Of Att UNITiRGROUNET AIRES, CMUS, CC:NHL/HS, NHS, MANHOU.-1, VALVES OR OTHER BLOW STRUI, 10.MS •FURt EMCING. tt a:MO.410g WAAL!. REPAIR t.• krtiAtt THT, MIME WHEN IPMAGLI., MANG cONsIgtx HON r COST TO 114E OWNER, C. OPINE VIA/ P.C1 Gopher State One Call karrn Oft .00 igt.4 ma.* Mkt al.rox - gipawa nen. • • 94 4 e,. 4 *Mt MT aKIXPIK9,3 DESIGN CONSULTANTS LANDSCIAPE ARCHITECT LOUCKS ASSOCRAITS 365 E. KELLOGG BLVD. HID SANDERS ST. PAUL, MINNE5OTA 55101 TEL 7E0,1946734 CIVIL ENGINEER (TUCKS ASSCX:EATtS 365 E. KEI WU; /WM VICM VANDELL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 TEL: 763-196-6720 HALCYON 50th 5t, N. MN 55042 haleyonsemeiery.com GTO PuNLHIH, 501. LeeRossow IsYo lan•e kwevite, 13 65140SIC, 7,15444416040 ASSOCIATES (16 fA/11/15 40094444044164 110 Vg.,1,44,64.0. COVER SHEET YeTkrel fita 145301 co-1 AY; „ ..„--4..2:2 • '.;;.• "' - t c, k 1,2,4 " '522 • 2 13 .f/2" A 2 333 • ' 053 411,4 ' 44 ; • t (-2 :=4,9-" , ; 04 ?; _ = t _ 5. • 4 , / 222 — at 4. , / 3f" Preliminary Plat of HALCY0 PRELIMINARY PLAT 14ENERA4. NOYES SURVEYOFT 3.222134520-5244. foc 73COHq,,'lackt,M Sm. 3.30 444444 O423. MN 553A A1222-3033 OWNORIORROLOPER: GE£2152252505, LIE 1520 AAR Ofrtrat thY &alt. 051 -30a-299$ LEGAL ORSCRIPTIONt 100 33520 5E-5 Mo ITA 3505/ AO RR 22 fro 32,033est (134,1e' 54 sS,40.10o SA5A , 2050042029 NAN 443.2-0544498444434491941 CAmy. 1422252535 DATE Of PREPARATION; 250402 V- 2015 BESCOMARK: 994 ya at brava ka.calortY. vroahvaat Cana at a.. Ean. Aaanry ora at. SM. Noah as sta. Elev. " 533 53 04344:1194 .2'' I : - • „of PROVOST* SONOtOt Zoos RR lAvra, .23 AY 22+ 3 52-22 4- :44' t .444.11 ;3' ^ - ,22 ,-.-•! ,-„„;,',..---.. -,----,--,,,,,,— ;. -,....,4-,-;;;;;-,„2:‘ --, .:,:___,,z,,,,,,,,,,,,,,E f - ;,..."2251 ff "MA tI123"m535°2214 5,____4i_2 ESISTINT ZOOMS: Zoo. RR mumt Rayder4A ARESM Telat laron. Aryl a 435,313 Offamf5f -2.32 OrntsfrdirrHINted E-9,154 Prir, PrOpkrAVAr. aat, 344 PROPOSES WILDING ST/OASTS; 0-84 A Rem 502 ICArnen 2 454444 Safe ftraen. 8 SO Fraat Rso .Feak 0.0_00 A.. VraaR $. kn./7Z SLOOO ZONE DESIGNATION. 11405553/41y is AAA° 3; 2222 043m 2,3202324 a -Y. ary. awat 018414.1 aaaart.... ava May Cataamar ray. „I/ Ea3f .45E. /1202.32 2.5 of Fabraray a, ralla 5"5.i51"5- 40 SO SEALE IS vEr.ar rritlh Ai fFsr, . 40.5,5 WS", SURVEY LEGEND • 11050 50th Street North Lake F11-002, Almneiota CIO /AAA% 111 I 50 kr22-50223 4,',,4l MN Sall $LOtICKSZ ASSOCIATES ay.; yar .23844 2.1 *41 Preimnary Nat 4-130 C5-1 ji „ 1.1 5 X s 1.4.1 as mos 0 LipoN OnUEMV OW3 0)(97 an:Apr:Pp_ pay a;s:s;',", stissapp` ItSL;;SSS, Sr".;;SI.SV g;V:Ss, z ; 3 q PvhmR4 4 tltie, jar: I 4-1 0 SECTION 6 ECtON 5 ti a al 4 01946316163 444464 SITE LAYOUT PLAN: NO CAR 342.6' SECTION 7 MINNNIKAN 4.„ 94/4666 4, INMMNIC #7 57A/U 06100114 '49 MCI 46,411,14120144141 SECTION 8 FU0IJE ROAD W1.16,014 VB.. SECTION 10 t NNW CNN Z' . / I -/ \ / vrasi L r SECTION 11 / 11 NANNN H.555.1 rgorirstIT_NT-- ' Nan-WM.1M riv..1 1664P 4403216 50th Street North LEGEND RITUMINOUS ROAD CONCRETE SURFACING PAVER SURFACING BURIAl 2141-31.3 54C110611» .3541U50LE8/61 C01.66416141J61 122 MO 501110411- 198/8/ROUND RAI SU/ IN -GROUND CHEMAllON —612 FST6TEL(175 48 SFC19018 5 166GRO8/N12 209 141-0501760801464172041-00 (S46111.015 48 528/11054 - 1380,801.1310 FULL 209 IN -GROUND CROstAT(0141-66 FSTAIT SECTION 5 I8.8/4104.1N0INFANT 72 57611044 8014.181 S0051936 7 , FUTURE 7(8720415. FUTURE SECTION 9 FUTURE SECTION 10- WR/111 5EC1106 11- FLICURC 10f -6 1995 NNIN HALCYON 11050 50th St. N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 1461cy0763069868.4666 I 666666066 , µ SICIL.Pf= gke Rommilk MN .5$11.3 741 -14-2VN MNIENNoN • ()LICKS ASSOCIATES tT66666-666,666 ;41110,. Qua116.1,rb. "74!1- 1435 WS 05/NI15 .4244 NN; ' PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN C2-1 14530 11 _J 13 0 10 / -24222, 22252ING 14,222N 21E20 22 40 41222,22 I 51q422224 COM 08801101(110 0 414* 0" „, te.vbq €Tha 4,0224212g \ / L _14140242 CETINCIL. 9}4 EXISTING CON ITIONS AND REMOVALS:or— / 0 oo a 0 Q / tv24,44;wa,,;k 44142244040 6)0 °C) 00 0° CID 0 0 .1, 09. 94 -441 4/9 1134115,12 4222- .5219:22111,0)- 1411 Th T T 4.22 221240.1C SRNS. 422 NNW 21 5 / ; 3 1 Lc REMOVALS /51TE PREPARATION NOTES: Nf 24 20 214S2 C 24 1(22 21,222422 C.22,1202 21 Ni AND momaN 22 5,22122 2. 244,422,2224 2,412 42412 Ril 5,144154153,340415442/ 1433. NMI' 2,2 Nit 4,24)E,C224122.42,2R121421142,,C CONINIEN2 NE14,21264 Mt N24121 240 222222 12i22412124, .2222122 C2.22222224142 WIN 422 AFFIXAE122.02244 2,22222,2t4;22,222022#22NC 42020,2412 4,1214,22151422211,2 4 ni,,e4 1222 22221444Ni042224201122412,44,12222212, Atf 51024102242,2 2121221221,222C202 2.22452045 1225211N22212 41412 ANN 20CAL 3(413 4,1400341414041111034400111411>2242,211142NORM112220,24AC,N11144 4, 222, ATKIN 2.22211222501 424 UNDERCNt2,42, (ARIUS OE 2212222411.42TENADA.R2 CCM, 114100.1041410411'1 ViNNAL122 412,1242S. C22,2222-22,222 Sts221 tfiNtrt 222342 ON, NA AU 11104N34.044021022112122 MN 10811 , moitX4: 2211,2222,422,24. 2204 4114141 N2C2222R2 24022C222412C2 EN12112.2;21212,21212-2422covalwox.Mm5lia:k4;2241,41,42,44 B2C1N4,21N244110'412,2,422214. N. NO 2.22222/2411VON 122.2,X12£22N2,21,42422004,2 20,242.4,,4N444222,240242,1212421 14114111 410411114144111141810 4242 4424.4, /NNW C22 44,0 424 OX 021421104212 NOUNS 222.24 Sh112120,445, 5142222422, ANN 51412 ANN 43o215; IN222424424;elsian2N424,4t2 300222224121,1220,04.521324 202,42,2 02,42,224 20 2,62,22;504 22Alutt22224-22222.442 42214 DA.22.4Ct TO 241,471,2C CT 4 ft„440kis 92412 HE 422424221122422NN122,0222 NRCF140C1 ANDC2242222222,1R 20 214422222,251,r210,42112;212S. 2.2222142.24C2 TOS.24A2 MCI 242422EN AT CO22 20 NC CaNNEN, tr-N-1,214,4240222422042;CONSINUCCON222224,0N2.4.2224244,22225214,282E0,201NAND ,41212221,4,65,22242,22222222 4 4,22,242,32gt1221042,24,12041.CON,RWIONPANXINC$22422 4244 011C122192 THE 2N24,212 2212.52,2412,221NNC; 12140222, 424,2240224 22,12242240, r, 512 1824`22 21-2. AND 2 24 -242t2 22224.aroN.44. 42.210,24/122.442522,420;5,,011444114. LEGEND T P X 2 EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO BE TRANSPLANTED EXISTINC: TREE TO FIE PROTECTED - SEE VCI-I EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED CONCRETE SURFACE TO 3E REMOVED 22;24;42 1144" 44002451422. 204,24,2221A.mm 42445,22,--4r cm, 41-tx:m.uxu,sa Paw. 4,41,4444,4AS4Rt4 I NETTING eurwatmmostroas ov (22,12202041,211222144222424224422221114111N010 222442,4.2,2 ARM TREE PROTECTION 822•2222 222E220220222, NN.322-1 4202,U222012ithtEAR1,222,24-421 RN, 20 PF2012C220 ANA 222 024024, 2ENCE NOUN 224C20 211120.22EACI ON CR31012002 MA4 Of 2222122225, 411,345,0 94,441, et No Cbt",$tq 24 10 UN INim; 02 MN NNEE TOR 222011020. 141101111111115104 2222.2 VENCP22/12020 212422 42 02$14,41,,ON42114,24.4441£12144 CONSTRUCCIONAC122211,040 NGNACE KUL 132141214,224DAT 41.2 11131540111131444004011404 1225121C14 WNW 25 IONIAN NV 3041043101140'141100411414 NEM 11.2212, 2R11242221CCON 22112. 22214210211.422122KNICTEU 150114105,0401441101111 CtS C212221274241024C2111;42212.42 2044221422022S34;212 2.511,425 ANDPAINIS. 2,4424C2 TO NUS PC SI 1405431101404118111144,1013'4110 242 421222,224 222 ,1F OWNIN ANN 2,42i2.12(21.22 NRCHrtfCr C.4“ !?;441,44e rap n4? Gopher State One Call 1"21'1 PPV2:2.8'88!N;r21E"r" HALCYON 11050 50111 51. N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 24212;yomerpettny.f2Non 2422222'22,,, " ' 01411) PropertAl, EfIC. Lt.a Roww 1670 .24 24. 822210284282 2,8 8,22 14 65121 4, 42,2 327024222/222 P54 44444444.44,444444 4444 "" LOL1CICS ASSOCIATES 28.228828-882222,2822282 2,2,88 828,2182 2228281 4,45 LA.? 4,44-444 44. 444 ;4222.2424,222 -4:242; 2228208 8222272222,22 28=8828 8,212 8888822221822.8 8,22„8 (S4I WS (WS7/15 28 8882801 'X) 2784.:'2114te” 228 888,8421,81222222 XISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS .88220882 1,222.24, 14530 Cl 1 AV At an =1! emctittRsto ttktte4tto CO- tt o tsstt NatJ'entitl Was Stt.,100iftr,,IX1.10t--t. 50th Street Worth — XXXitax.X.11 d ti.x.51xx tx1 .1.1itot PDXIinitttOAYMIttOS 044 x.Kr41 StX.POSitt WPM.. +watt rtt511.1414EllitR“ ettrtxtx NOTE: SEE C8-2 FOR EROSION CONTROL NOTES & DETAILS [MEND DISTitRct PROPOSED Trxffltaltx.” MattillUX SRA Xtfx&XtekV ent, 0.00t4ACESt.041- lot SiNVOC StEXCXX MANX tOlC 0 $.440.1 ;1,44 • xtxttlerakx Wfxtrift.t..xi at KONA.. IX;12k.SK,C1,1111A7, GlItlXtixtteXIMattMill X.EXX AttilStutit ttOtttli VII txxxx", 10.5114 61..E HALCYON 050 50th St, N, ke Elmo, MN 55042 haicynncemetryon GLCLR,erOrRtIRS,10E. 11170 M.SC. FtRitttRIR +AN 351 GRI-f08,1,194 337stilschtn. Ltxtt.t....R0RILtRt.txx-tt (..)11C1(S ASSOCIATES tR,t, t XI, X Re...4n, Sea..xx. 1,„ttItty trtrattts ws OAR Rh 5 RtttRt ttRkR tflltrC""''''V LTM`a"*.‘"' rintflgePSO,P, Itt;.-ttittttca int tAttott,,,,,tectu EROSION CONTROL PLAN C3-2 14530 0.6.1,1 &VAIN g WON P.MleAti 043 eNg7, c E44 4 kr.,” 1IhCZ 41 40 TREE INVENTORY: LEGEND,' SIGNIFICANT TREE TO REMOvED P 3:3 7 46*!?","T,.. • 750111111753030(45)30110 fl 110, 't 29 4 PP, SIGNIFICANT TREE TO DE TRANSPLANTED SIGNIFICANT TREE TO 8E SAVED / PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION SEE DETAIL 241-0 siGNIFILANT wc)outAroattEs TO FsL TRANSPLANTED 17 3,3 WOODLAND #1 26' 3 : 041401,...33•••• 9 \ 4IY 111130303115500 Vet /3A33,3 3,2 PS, 55 •••• OODL AND 42 - — — — — TREE INVENTORY SLMMARY: EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES 3055 ALLOWED REMOVAI SIGNIFICANT TREES TO II( REMOVED NO TREE MITIGATION 15 REQUIRED 34 • 3,3 59 4 4iTri WOODLAND #3 VI 333313041W1 40333,33113,33311,0,31, 333, 3,3 „ - XIV,* ,C1r3,33:31 A I ,-33413 187 I I SSW TOTAL CAL, DIANLI 56 4-165^ TOTAL CAL TIIAML 35 !NV," TOTAL CAI, DIAIRL) 33d SO3LE 14 PEPS 3,3 1 SIGNIFICANT TREE INVENTORY NEE # SPECIES OIAM UN.) DISPOSITION oA13- OAA DAR 33Ap OAP OAK 0,,P3 Oa( 3 7 ,1 1 13 14 t5 16 , 7 110 IS 2k Z2 21 si 21 37 28 20 70 21 33 3.3 47 38 333 WOODLAND PI 0011 OAK 0113 OAP OAK OAK us!, 1200 033; CsAk 0A ows 04(5 53310 OA X SPRUCE UCS 1100( 8 TRANSPLANT O TRAP35,33,3,31 DONSKANI SRANSPCANP-- TRANSPLANT TRANSPLANT TRANSitANT TRANSPLANT 1304135301,111111 TRANSPWIT RAP/PLANT- 6 TRAK:KANT 30 TRANSPLANT 6 TRANSKANT 6 IRANSWANT • TRANSPLANT 11 1RAN07131<13 • TRANSPLANT 4 TRANSPLAN, TRANS„10 AN, 3 • TRANSW 333-, TRANSWAsir 0 TRANSPLANS 11 THANSPIANT 1 t) TRANSPLANT (4 SAVED 14 WEE, REMOvED ASH 4 01<41000E31 COTTONWOOD 12 RfAtO,PED COTTONWOOD 12 REMOVED ,3,110341,,0013 REMUPEP, 00110070005) 315 303,3,309<0 snucr 9,3333CE SPRUCE SPRUCE SPRUCE SPRUCE SPRUCE SPRUCE SPRUCE sw-30D3ANO PI SPRUCE Spittia I WOCIOLANO P3 SPRUCE SPRIKS 4 TRANSPLANT • TRANSPLANT O TRANSPLANT 1 11 TRANSPLANT 11 1301111070005 • TRANSPRANT 071MP 0011(1(3 WW PPM T01ANS1ANTS0 4165 PPMCPPE IWO PM 4133,NSPLANTED 16I P31 NE,ICIVE 00, 010 TPANSPLANTSO OIR REMOvEtt pwsPrroRP NOM. S,C3,t31C333,11333ES tiVIEC, AXE 35 %SOWN 033 ANDIP,PoGRAPH,CP3 RAVES PI ATM 34.33 Pot 30310.5 53331CO3TED ( SEE ATFACNED, ItRANSPIAN3t1:3 TREE glee, NVICI BE vefif,V0 Mat TO N.3 11350111341 TREES 13SIES, AS OAP mAY Aus, sw333,4,3 wALiatit ANS, 30,P,36 533E,C-WS WOODIAND TREE EPAWAT3PP3 rsuANPITIES OASES, 0107117(01011W151 APPROVMMELY 15' Op. STE 533Err 033 FOR PROPOSES, PR.:13U 3 Asps ,,,33,3,33,3m3 SURFACE 306,3 Miss ,313,33,t33,3 3 30, 3,31331,31,3,3,3440,33313333,34,33,10333,3,3303,,,00 1,33,333,43,333.3.3,7,3,0,041,330,M2,337, :a." T33 ,4,5 a...333+,33,433CM P.9.I0 ,AWIM 401011114013100243034301010 333333333333,,,,u3.3,,,,,,,,, .0,33430 33, te 0.5.0.,13 VIRY.007,. 01.V.01.13 4,08133,131,3, Att4)...,10,14 MO... XX, ,n1.41. oz31.111,11C,15,0,,V.,.£111,4,...70 aht 40, ,,,,CAC SVO4 ..4£1.4.40441, !pf tot otsii 3,334 ,,33333,,,,, 3114 3,3 :3343 MO. E,33,3,3.33,33,33 0333,3”3333,3 3333 0.7.115, 3331 ,o0301131405101131 0101044,2100440121000llv0411011301*110350000l5001lU$1531011143410,3113 010.44,411( \\* TREE PROTECTION 3,33,11,r. w (751101701< HALCYON 50 50th St, N, ke Elmo, MN 55042 1311,,yourprnelerswors, tS3S,33,03,,,,333- GLCI:egt: Ent3 itin, Rips St, R"MhX1,31V 1333.313: km+ ,33,333, N. 333 Louc Ks ASSOCIATES [myna. ,an 43= 330.3,13. 333533 ,3,33,333 ..... 111101000(311150310 ((10300(1450 *"rf2 CA: WS MIAS 030 77..,';•=0-re4r0,— f1MT k 4 6. 1]-4 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 1 g3333-. 33, L1-0 14510 g a 0100 PLANTING PLAN: 004 10 433 :MI 6:MILLAR 03 3 313131S 3 r - 7-1.333- .- - - 50th Street North ,44444 .1.I.I......, ....1,-.11...-11.. NIPAPIPINPRIONI 5.3013,33,343.330.13- 444411 SCAL£ 44'l Pr 80' PLANT LIST, QTY, COMMON NAME OVENSTOR Y INES IN id euutivARn turno, AN 10 AUTUMN BLAQ4 AVSPIE CH VI COP,I(NI ILACKBPRRY PO 12 NIPERAL I IONE NA KLILF U0 2 KIR OAK LIAN. TRANSPLANTS ORLIN...10NX FREES SS 141 SPRING SNOW CILABANUL AP 4 KARP NUE CRAPAPPIL IS L PIK MAC EVERGREEN IREES 104 SNINCELLNANSPLANTS CONIFEROUS SHRUBS SN PP SEA CALM !LIMPER TL 21 TRANPTON PEW LIECUNIOUS UNMAN LAP 36 NEON NASH SPIRE", LP 01 11111E PRINCESS VIXEN TS S. TOR UMW PEPLNNINSt CLAIM Kr 52 KARL FOERSTPR CRASS SO i50 SIENA NE ORO NAM 't BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ampoLNL NPutevod- 2,,100CAL OS. /Nur iNemspii NPNINNP 0*L.2. CAL ON. PAU eL, NNW," 2.1L2P CPI MB. PPPPPLus pRuNPLELN tir CAL SAL Q000000000 . 10" CAL QPNPNL sups Ps V, 9 CP GAL NUN lining Spa,' 2. CAL el, ANN, 'P.p. LPL, r CAL ND. ULLNLNNpvtua INN PULP CPU RN. Fn. INNUN 405301110 funiNput ehuNPU IN Oren" PS COM' TNIPPN meNIPLaNune P CONT SAN iPpootra Nunn Nash. 42 CONT aptuaLLANNLL ILUNPNICN. 1144 Sphea LAPANLA 1NP PP CUNT 01uNNue4 Nutitkos PPLP1 ENNue Pt COM' NemerpLaN,SNIN (.1p0 Pt COW LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: I TREL PPR SP If. Of MUT LIONTAGE le LP IS TAM 5 TREES PEA 1 ACRE OP OtSTRUBLIL LAND P.S ACRES - 4; 'I REES 1135A1 TAM urquntED 14101045 LEGEND: 5:45,135.5 00801104100148 1133.11.15131M3EDOM3 ORNANINTAL TREE TRANSPLANTED SPUME SHRUB BED PERENNIAL OW 133R51S350 NANVE aLL) NUL NNW, L5-2Z1 N.LNULpp COMMENTS HALCYON T 0.C. 3..ILP .P0 C. 0.11. O.C. 2' 0 C. PROPOSED PLANT -TOTALS: 11050 50th St, N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 PruhrturpS. N ()LICKS Assoc ATES 3 PANALTORY 1REPS -NEW 44 OVEPSIORY LOLL - LMNSPLANT 24 ORNAMENTAL MU 24 3.13.31413333331335 Taal- TRANSPLANT el Si RUBS 221 31/3313333415335 SRASSEL 142 WM.. 404 StiAti YrSar StrifYWOR (55 Stlarrall*FU Uaidlrf Sat UFO arcaw. ;Milt. WITH I00111'G(01,101,013014451414441. EPL NP NOUN ANIP UPON OP .roo.. WOU1,1...MnghtUl APO' 5141104401134440#1441,410010104444411 3 A31333.1323 Ch3tIt .4014,” Akt Hitt, 11411410010404110440044 (1/41P-tarAti Off 0,-KUrt Anon, /341#1,0 tt ft VistUrf $Vx[rraktkit AitUtt LOVMPtirViif VVII/uUk. f.0.5 PPP RELLPAPPLN 11444.1.41,00i 1110WOO CUt ,Altiont”.0.1#17 4 CaPORAC/thrt.ttil PROIPLP Ned -NM. Ft-PAM NPLPSUNINN, IRPNL NUL NPNPULPLISar /3353.3333330 wimAz13 1333133,3 33300. OPEPAPPNI ANE MULLS. iNuPpot MI,. Pi MVA11,10 At NO WO Ns PLPPPN CONINALHIRLNitt LOU. AuGANINT ANN NICARON. Att {Mfg KGRowir, FUME 4RAVit 141114111414331070441044404 LNLNAPP NPLUILLAUL fOR iN04 PPIOPP COLUMN_ "441111414114014441400103014401 . LICAPNLN 144 UI,0100011'1401'14,401414041 84 404111411011111110034441 ut. CV, trIOLArli kv3r ,s4TV,t5 Of NV( (lb ittr, Off HS TORE.. T D:SYNC COW. IPUJAARS, VECtlAtkrUL 510#4UtUgra.04101141S 40104414144110011051115141400411414000010141104144111141 001401411004 .401.1UCT OV(,4'41L5(14,400l014140Y'**1004)14 MOZMANICILS BRklk 4,1 CrOtribUlirCIES AN£1,4111.4.f.A."40,Urt U, kurrult, urn, urfur, Ur....WuLurta 11.., soLLN 333.3-L 1104 WS OPAL MS r..” tuurrrY NauppoN e.N.LN NLLULLLNU - SurrEr...rru41ruur . trturtet us, 4NINUNNNI LANSCAPE PI AN 5117333 533 L2-0 14530 NFI,NG DLIAIL r .i 1 SHRUU PLAN fING DETAIL E0777177 RO TSCIF Ei C-Ct£ 17.712ELL PAW$, "(CAR:1t $01.11 770 ROES OF 1404f NKRTOPtANS5NG SHRUBS i0 SE PtACE0 501NM17 TM Of C07.'T317tE75RS F! VH9 4ia714 ek.05E0G007, RIXS Mi6C#1. 97i1LfP •lit N)TfS IAH05CAPE F48RIC.i4E 7.131iS, EI)UNC..AIMAL 5f17.71$ EDGE V4RIES • Wig MAAR PLiry IP£G SOIL t HE NU[ES $uliflll+G0.41 A4P', CONIFEROUS IREE PUNTING DMIL A IANUSCAPE INSTALLATION: 1JACItt0iri I10 Htwsi?t}P [ t9\'4Tety ldSN .4194 AH).4? ihs1.V 14€0a.4 14ki Ott. 194414.4490.4.9.414. i'.1a•na4c Tnu 4.t •xrat4. 1 40191+9:9119Gx+91ae 4.1xt.0u[n,?? 04el1-1149.t91w„ 4449n4u+4994.cl4.14u11494 [44w94ti449 iN iF R ,uvell,6lt 444 Y V. Al Pit41.1F.SPA'.t515111419.9.0444'*b.r4M141f WC 4[ .149 499.95.u'I €ta099VW i .9410.44 49.90 if,S.i +'tx 19.9 9OMR. 151.941 MAN. 94.1.1 WtM t4lU1?, ?, ttJ%Ust StNtlf tvnl4 1C ix.M9 <l.4. 41nt1 ',>5 3t: JlY. S+^di *,O ?9%4,1..1 94+<thsKA. 4 Si J, CA 1..419ty+.9.1 U. I,t. 102 ,tt Ar.4•n1.:9,1 AN49I Yh Pb SV•v CRt•N.x'+.14 iTiR 6r 5M[14Jfi 9t1 le#Anr.11-AIM 91t.t1109911Y. ih,?Ht tilt?P E?'€1rcsv, ? oft A.+7.6AH7777441'0?e#up 999911» S#t.,(90141v;i949.1.4alt 41 000?-WN tl MOW tn...tr{RIH:Ut15 Sa,4t4Ni41x411It194 ni tf•s t 9... 1,n W114 ?41 ?1M,aA 1114 ats_ [)1cN.40044 l 3R#£55EPit1 •Nvt 494, 411 i 0044.4. 40011W 44.4.•a,1104Y[41Pt.P914 ...Of t.Al4 509191 4t:4C(x/4#Vi*0 t9ttasltitr?1t,4/1211UN(•AA1?1?'401ui1G4011 4 Y{AN?*911P9?l?41411444*A+4[St??11?tt K UN 9..11S 1P4,)ttu.#it45tgt SEy1_niUit<n4? t-1K1+41i 1a',PN+F [4414 01,1K uE i•..WO?00?.[ii31n1# t1110?.??? 0,4004114. 9311wee 44.4N. Ai{ laf4s.i4t 94.4.49 rt. 94AXf[, 44)111510t;;9T.G1. en 1.94111.U141,np ii if 112£t5 Ai 3Y04FA44f Tb,1' 90419 11f 1?N_+n5witl dE At'E [v1T115t0#}i54P'40,01 KRi[,9 ?1IE13111 4I€F 44.44.9.9.499991 )1 dF.913N11104F 1?WIFN41144144049 (0 1Nf S4+dv45549)1404 MN.. 494.1.9.1 +tiFF'1I6'04PS iN tih".1AtSY401 ?'4001040 P?MtinuiTRi414 httl e# FRFdaf3Pi i ?16: 0%011P M1 O.h,t,T#A 4N[ x€ +P(004 04 #A1.[1aM%0R1 [ntt,; P 4? OF 41 N(4Htg0 10 AIL Nhwt k10110055£ta41 ...UM 1t * 1949.101[[4Nt11PHUfi?PO4:JN9141.rt. e1419K 1431614A41w{141....4.941 MR4taewMIto 4919f/.4414 v*I?i 14.xG#,110uv.1).11v1.41.?W+4P1409.1€1.11.4.9X.444. iXNnnrIx Ji 44141.4111.9.14494.9.541491..k044f M114. i4 M14nr911tn:.410 4Rf,t1uf^a£ p[Rlwi1n45>144t1 R1ftiern,v.14Mt?w04140118+t Gs R1Nai1NG?:I4(11444,3f99+:0?i[f FAVT+4 P4Aas 10P'01 f4PAX}y Ptn4, 94*4N.•R€490 rbz4445 S+0.R 41 M1 4414419 r6.l to t44141tiF A5 Y1R1?.10? t,t:0RAM1a 41 wl2tPto,9V.141.95.919 PC.444.11944141.11.93141.1.4419491....9 411149:4499119t4104rtt 4'tnii4Y, ti1A7.7Y. O'AY£ditt. tt t NFCC P titt,uu9„[At"it+4C 094+9 Af4£0L<I4N'04154HSi4.49991 s1440110tt 941945 Ill 044 WMIW? Ate. is 4•A1:9 904,,41F44,40 ION 14E[1it,4:,u14444014it*s 4Y4£949N154 AWo Ah'1i14t0Vrt441 P[R •491954C1t,',..a£[1,1* ,,l90I119 491hl0W444 k#! Rink✓44 9401 TO 4f<n5[ e• R[x:A 41UI,11 I/1" [-i1St)1,1;e tORTO Ft1Rle 111Yl1H 10.4. 90044104061148414?9049014)9O .. 114uw1411494 141144409 104111 kt44t44 19 u9 24[15 9104 W.. P. .. 9t4149i0 ut4£il[ .t' F944p Sa e01OG+O£Ukt9V1XXt 410?C11141I19 9.. (.A40 ?A.Pkf 1A04.110M0??011Nd4.N ON1,1401AI 49041949u.444..C1,t414 Ott (n,45twv,A#N Y.'S Ytw4t%.LLt .411 t 1#4) 499.9 '4 461ti3t999195C49Y!CN404K,T094h1001*8Nt£tt441m41at149t54999 01199t9444.49Mta+[ 44.4)41 911.719.49.. Sat ft81i1114t *0(010t9 Uit 111.119444ri[e4[K 94491ttin14c;s41N.110A(K2ir N€ t? }VW [iiik(Cb04NP. N0RVNK b6 G4*HNt124t19141.1114trvs11t40 !wilt V 49014 )91N1 AitttitiOH t)f hrt t0ht4S4"144 9{(e14410 P11199 tb Pe440 ttkpr1N0[ .41.1911415.1)9114, 19 994991119.1.4 9ili9allPMftn54urz€[?411414?#C;4/Pe 44419134 CI0uKE.9111 i1Xxf14 M, 4(4004 4ANb 9.1991'%?94i451t945 a9 i91'11049114i 454 14.91di4 ti}k4Jw;0Mu.44449RH141N949? Gi'%4 944141x41>040P€€€,u1?49xt1.9 (nan. Nalco Otw++, u[iviroz E. 04414000?.vA'vMtl+:cs1:u194u49rt44.1111l11044X11,9RW.ra 414000N15 at ELPTA4µ,Fi4 W £ 94 Yet( 9£9901.&91059 Of 10# i{1n4RAtT1Ns 44.941144..59 01)uW E 14d 0+t014991A9,49.94f49411i094ii 1AO{.1eM1,NCEt101t%., 0Ui Kg n#f0E5.i401Y 4.4190 FO, 1 tuir,..[t RutiFA;1<k+.iM1111.4..YE 51 CGkP&VL 93 t 44)111RA(1UA3tlstt LS,f#1404? NEw Pi.V4 ail RExdt £90,41,4i1 WT 1'40004a0R 49EAR 14#k4t4Y 91A£t..941Nt#M1C4[Pi T )) WIR1194I41941t#+i£1141)4,Y*N.:9t49.9.04r4411,_41441A11AWS 9.0 x+1 4.09lu,t9 H4 i#u 44.4AHMO 94419 1iltwuPNIM 1.4459.114.44944,1 44110 040.0 uP A1t A41l41 ieixtf 4.4 414(10Cro ttf nt,tu£4140 O'4t1A40,49Arx1 vif lxrPain'tATFO, iM n[149.11f9to c 99944rc, PKk. 9SSM€iEkxa OM W,a du PA1NtY.9.1v9iPo.P 194?Y??440?f' llf910931.49. M .ta* 110F41494(4a 41.44 AND IVO PI 490 MTt1,114? xtit PNtFC.14, 4011 R1iiv#94 41S4111 4£ 0100?H''K;1R".Er.94Ait1 x('t19,911P[Px.4Nntli:4491 5449?00 19 t. Fut t<.01)11 JttS P4ANilu: eMt 40 44? #Au,# m:001? 14-Ut'1t,9[& i.vrn [A4} t014014100t1904WG skint lilt YIRSF i&i�iT 21n[it 11 Wt.�,A£4 f4M 191??11014#HEStnnf1FH pps 409..19.911€O MY .4n01.941,1914. AP •4191.9 11 fn 4s'k;[t'k. dY 1#H 14 1914,9t 419494914194 1 u»134_9949,.[994%V14430ta?F 9.9111 ?,411904 991959.41104.19.11.......19 ,t1Ff.1P.,NS.4R} 90141'i14[ii ;Ule,W 941Pk09Y04991Wi1U A£n1£YA91NM41111M 4.14.009Si[C HALCYON 50 50th 5t. N. ke Elmo, MN 55042 14k'yoo c#1letery.soln G,LCI Pfuyxmes, I1;c. Lrr R{twlev O UCKS.:.t.;: ASS©CIA tuwx.49 k b1'li/t0 LANDSCAPING DETAILS L2-1 14530 h��K��yJMU�� '°'�'"'��'"~�'"^^~�'"' Dote: July 8.ZU15 ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Gehomn,P.E. Jack Griffin,PE. Ryan Stempski,P[. Chad hakson,P.[. 651.300.4261 651300.4264 651.300.4267 651.]00.428] To: Nick Johnson, City Planner Re: Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plan Review [c: Kyle K|att, Planning Director From: lack Griffin, P.E,Gty Engineer An engineering review has been completed forthe Halcyon Cemetery Prelim ina ry-Final Plat, and Construction Plans. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Loucks Associates, dated January 5, 2015: � Site Plan and Preliminary Plat dated June 17,2O1S. * Construction Plans for Parking, Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and Utilities dated June 17' 2015, * Tree Preservation P|andand Landscape Plan dated June l7,2D15. ° StormwaterManagement Plan dated May 14,ZOlS. STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering has prepared the following review comments and conditions for Final Plat: PRELIMINARY / FIN ALPLAT ° The Final Plat must be revised hoinclude an additional 2Sfeet R/VValong CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) as required by Washington County (75feet from [SAH 17 centerline). • AnOOfoot R/VVwith lUfoot utility easements immediately outside ofthe R/VVis the recommended minimum corridor plan for 50mStreet as a Municipal State Aid major collector roadway. � The Final Plat most include an additional 5feet R/VValong 5OmStreet sothat the 50" Street R/VV isatotal ofD0feet. The proposed plat of35feet must berevised to4Ofeet. �- The Final Plat must include al0foot utility easement along the full length ofthe south property line, located just outside ofthe 5[Y^Street K/VV. * The Final Plat must include additional R/VV at the intersection of[5AH 17 and SOmStreet to accommodate asight line triangle similar tothe sight triangle atthe southeast corner ofthis intersection. * The Final Plat must be contingent upon the applicant providing written documentation demonstrating adequate wastewater management facilities for the proposed land use, Minimum documentation must include: � If the existing system is to continue in use, submit tuthe City a compliance inspection report that has been reviewed and approved byWashington County. >~ Provide water use data used to size the current and secondary ISTS systems for the property. Provide percolation testing indicating that the proposed locations are suitable for the proposed use. � Provide to the City a copy of Washington County's ISTS system approvals, including conditions. PAGE lof2 The storm water ponds, infiltration basins and all storm sewer are to be privately owned and maintained by the property owner with this responsibility recorded to run with the property ownership. These facilities have not been designed to meet City design standards for storm sewer or storm water management facilities. The Final Plat must be conditioned upon the applicant executing an agreement to own, operate and maintain the storm sewer and storm water facilities proposed on the site and recording this agreement with the property. CONSTRUCTION PLANS: The following engineering review comments must be addressed prior to any construction work onthe property, * Provide plan notes nnSheet [3-l'[3'2and [4'lcalling out measures toprotect both the existing and proposed d,ainfie|dsites throughout the construction process. • SheetC4'l, Utility Plan: Add note that all storm sewer pipe and storm water facilities are to be privately owned and maintained. ~ Sheet[4'1,Uti|ityP|an:UpdateoUP|anNctestobppertinontandconsistenteith1hepvoposedUd|hY Plan. Generic notes appear tobeinconsistent orirrelevant tothis project. • Replace all City Standard Details and Plan Notes with the updated Details and Plan Notes dated February 2015. • Sheet [8'1, [k/i| Details: Remove details 3003 and 301I The City Standard Detail No. 605 and 604 respectively must beused as shown onSheet [8'2. w The Construction Plans must be updated with field verified utility locations with the plans resubmitted for engineering review and approval prior to the start of construction. The applicant must complete a Gopher State One call and utility locate and field survey all utilities to finalize the construction p|anx. All notes referring to utility information being provided by others must be removed from the plans. • The Tree Protection detail on Sheet C1-1 and Sheet 1-1-0 must be replaced with the City standard detail 904. LANDSCAPE PLANS: This engineering review does not include a review of the proposed Landscape Plans, however the following comments are noted, • The landscape plan must be revised to provide maintenance access for the storm water pond adjacent to the entrance driveway. • The landscape plan must be revised to relocate trees planted directly over the proposed utilities. Revisions must be made to address these conflicts to maintain a minimum 5 foot separation. PAGE 2 of 2 Station #1 510 Laverne Ave. No. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 651-770-5006 LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT July 7, 2015 Review of the PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT — CEMETARY Station #2 4259 Jamaca Ave. No. Lake Elmo, MN. 55042 651-779-8882 Following a review of the packet provided, 1 have questions and concerns related to the following: Hydrant placement/spacing. This being a commercial property, we must adhere to the 350' spacing. I did not see any indication of hydrants on the drawings I had. o FD will also need to approve the placement of the FDC (Fire Department Connection) as it relates to the fire sprinkler suppression system. o Designation of "Fire Lanes" and possibly "No Parking" area to ensure proper access for emergency vehicles to all areas at all times. o Adequate overhead clearance of driveway canopy for ambulance and fire vehicles. Proper wining radius's at all corners to allow emergency vehicles to access all areas of the facility. Sincerely, "Proudly Serving Neighbors & Friends" Public Works Department Donald J. Theisen, P.E. Director Wayne*. Sandberg.p� Deputy Director/County Engineer July 7.2O15 Nick Johnson City Planner City of Lake Elmo 3000Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN55O42 RE: Washington County comments on the plans and plat for Halcyon Dear Mr, Johnson, Thank you for providing Washington County with the plans and plat for Halcyon. Based on review of the plans, we offer the following comments and recommendations to consider as you process this application through the City of Lake Elmo: The plans identify a retaining wall at the west edge of the parking lot along the future hght-of-wayline ofCSAH17/LaheElmo Avenue. |norder toconstruct the retaining wall, work from the county road right-of-way will be necessary. Also, the retaining wall must belocated outside the road right-of-way so it will be necessary to stake the property line to verify the location. A detailed construction plan set of the wall should be prepared and submitted with a Washington County Right'of-VVuyPermit application, The existing driveway access on Lake Elmo Avenue should be removed as a condition Ofapproval, The plan tVremove the driveway can beincluded inthe permit application noted above. The Plat of Halcyon is included in the application package, The final plat should include the additional 25 feet required for CSAH 17/Lak8 Elmo Avenue. CurnanUy, there is 100femt of right-of-way (50feet from the centerline). The Washington County Comprehensive Plan 2030. Right -of -Way requirement is 150feet (75 feet from the The developer or the city Must submit the drainage report and calculations to our office for review ofany downstream impacts hothe county drainage system. Along with the drainage calculations, wewill request written conclusions that the volume and rate of sh)/nnwate[ run-off into the county right of way will not increase an part of the project. A copy of the Valley Branch Watershed Permit shall be submitted to our office. 11000MyemnRoad North, Stillwater, Mionesota55002-S573 Phone: 651'430'4308 ^ Fax: 8514804350 ` TTY 651'430'6240 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action Halcyon July 7, 2015 Page 2 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this plan If you have any questions, please contact me at 651-430-4362 or anii.ounu-terwedo(d)co.washington,inii,us For permit applications, please contact Carol Hanson at Carol.hansonco.washinciton,inn,us. Sj9cereIy, Ann Pung-Terwedo Senior Planner C: Carol Hanson, Office Specialist R/Plat Reviews/City of Lake Elmo/Halcyon 7-7-2015 VALLEY BRANCH WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMIT APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETED BY VBWD: PERMIT NUMBER _ 2015-04 PERMIT FEE RECEIVED .1.,000 ($2,347 still DATE RECEIVED December 30, 2014 requi- Return application to John Hanson Barr Engineering Company Engineers for the Valley Branch Watershed District 4700 West 77'h Street Edina, MN 55435-4803 A permit fee shall accompany this permit, unless waived by the Board of Manayers. (Governmental Bodies are not required to pay a fee.) Project Information Name of Project: Purpose of Project: Akcyci Project Location (street address, if known; otherwise, major intersection): 0 4-0 601 City or Township: A #4 " 0 Legal Description (proof of ownership required): PID: Section: Township: Range; Project Timeline: Start Date: a - Authorized Agent Information Name: Business Name: Address: City, State, Zip: Phone: Phone; s e_ Fax: Fax: Email: Email; Once a Volley Branch Watersted District permit has been approved, the permit conditions will attached to the back of this form. By signing this permit application, the permit applicant, his/her agent, and owner (hereinafter "Permittee") shall abide by all the conditions set by the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). All work which violates the terms of the permit by reason of presenting a serious threat of soil erosion, sedimentation, or an adverse effect upon water quality or quantity, or violating any rule of the VBWD may result in the VBVVD issuing a Stop Work Order which shall immediately cause the work on the project related to the permit to cease and desist. All work on the project shall cease until the permit conditions are met and approved by the VBWD representatives. In the event Permittee contests the Stop Work Order issued by the VBWD, Permittee shall attend a VBWD Board of Managers meeting and discuss the project. Any attorney fees, costs, or other expenses incurred on behalf of the VBWD in enforcing the terms of the permit shall be the sole expense of the permit applicant. Costs shall be payable from the permit applicant's permit fee. If said fees exceed the permit amount, the Permittee shall have ten (10) days from the date of receipt of the invoice from the VBWD to pay for the cost incurred in enforcing the permit, by which to pay the VBWD for said costs. If costs are not paid within the ten (10) days, the VBWD will draw on the permit applicant's surety. The Permittee agrees to be bound by the terms of the final permit and conditions required by the VBWD for approval of the permit. The permit applicant further acknowledges that he/she has the authority to bind the owner of the property and/or any entity performing the work on the property pursuant to the terms of the VBWD permit, and shall be responsible for complying with the terms of the VBWD permit. Signatures (Required): Applicant Information Name: G 1.0 3" PRoPzerie-s Address: ego° Rice sr City, State, Zip: Sr P a Pr; ni Phone: 607 3 0 6. Fax: Email: /2-3o-o/4 ApplicantiDate Owner (if different than Applicant)/Da Owner's Authorized AgentiDate 9 c. Owner Information 01 different than Applicant) Name: Lea R. 0 S 0 611 Address: 44/44. R")E-R gi7 -S City, State, Zip: A -7-0 41 /7141 c1-0-4 LiNCC111 FITLICHE.FR • OAVD 5u1=1-1E-..K •0LD CN€iL. • itLE, EOR.A-r? • RAT' tuCifER \hlt.tEt' tiRANK:i.1`,1.iriTERSAID DiSTRiCT • PO E/:::,X s • LAKE NiC) 5•30,12-053 g 1. Plans shall be revised and/or calculations shall be updated to show the site will conform to VBWD stonnwater runoff -- rate control standards on the west side. 2. Specifications for the needed soil corrections at the proposed infiltration basin shall he provided for VBWD approval prior to construction. The biofiltration detail on Sheet C8-3 should not allow the use of native soil that is clayey in the planting medium. 3. The plans should be updated to include details of OSA, and the elevations should be consistent with the HydroCAD model for Pond 10P. 4, This permit is not valid until a maintenance agreement in the general format of Appendix B of the VBWD Rules is submitted to and approved by the VBWD Attorney. 5. The required surety and fees shall be submitted prior to construction. 61. This permit is not transferable. '1 • 7. This permit is subject to obtaining all other perntits required by governmental agencies having jurisdictioi(incuding an NPDES permit), 8. The VBWD Engineer and Inspector shall be notified at least 3 days prior to commencement of work. 9. Erosion controls shall be installed prior to the commencement of grading operations and must be maintained throughout the construction period until turf is established. Additional erosion controls may be required, as directed by the VBWD Inspector or VBWD Engineer. 10. The folloWing additional erosion controls shall be implemented on the site: a. All proposed slopes 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (3H:1 V) should be covered with erosion -control blanket. b. Silt fence should follow existing contours as closely as feasible to limit the potential for gully erosion along the edges. c. Any sediment that collects in storm sewers, ponds, or other water management features shall be removed. d. Street sweeping shall be performed if sediment collects on streets. I I To prevent soil compaction, the proposed infiltration areas shall be staked off and marked during construction to prevent heavy equipment and traffic from traveling over it. If infiltration facilities are in place during construction activities, sediment and runoff shall be kept away from the facility, using practices such as diversion berms and vegetation around the facility's perimeter. Infiltration facilities shall not be excavated to final grade until the contributing drainage area has been constructed and fully stabilized. The final phase of excavation shall remove all accumulated sediment and be done by light, tracked equipment to avoid compaction of the basin floor. To provide a well -aerated, highly porous surface, the soils of the basin floor shall be loosened to a depth of at least 5 feet to a maximum compaction of 85% standard proctor density prior to planting. The upper 10 inches of soil shall be tilled prior to planting. 12. All disturbed areas shall be vegetated within 14 days of final grading. 13. The applicant is responsible for removal of all temporary erosion -control measures, including silt fence, upon establishment of permanent vegetation at the project site as determined by the VBWD Engineer and/or Inspector. 14. Valley Branch Watershed District shall be granted drainage easements which cover land adjacent to stormwater management facilities, wetlands, and lowlands up to their 100-year flood elevations and all ditches, storm sewers, and maintenance access to the stormwater management facilities, 15. The required drainage easements and access easements shall be recorded with the Washington County Recorder's Office, 16. Return or allowed expiration of any remaining surety and permit closeout is dependent on the permit holder providing proof that all required documents have been recorded (including but not limited to easements) and providing as -built drawings that show that the project was constructed as approved by the Managers and in conformance with the VBWD Rules and Regulations. ApproN ed: June 25, 2015 Siptuyire Valley Branch Watershed District Title Note: The grant of this permit in no way purports to permit acts, which may be prohibited by other governmental agencies, "... Orant 7500 37 .SpringS, 12700 ". ' . " • „"", ,„ 0 40 5500 7200 • 3090 FIGURE 3: EXISTING AADT 10 1300 Transportation Plan 2030 Comprehensive Plan City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Map date: April 2009 Prepared by: rscI rf,E;gs - ARC 11ITEC,TS g PLANNERS. „ Stittwater„:„„;„: ' 210 0 750 0 770 500 5070 0 020 0 0 ilk Park ' Hoights Twp. 1150 510 • - • LaktAand Twp, 5500 , 9300 ! nnnnginn,","" 55000 77000, 0 77000 WOO Afton J-1) LEGEND City Boundary - Roadways E Parcels '" Lakes IUTAV )NOFtgAink Inis :documents, not a loyaho�&0dn, nnnno to in ""nid g"anno rr"P and Ingarinnon Ignin varlegis xonni,and cagy elf"1.4 and oingig undum EXISTING AADT < 5,000 5,000 - 9,999 10,000 - 24,999 25,000 -49,999 50,000 - 99,999 100000 OR > Pne i„Oakdalo ;., P „Pp PPP PP4 ° 3 4200 p4, , 44, ..,„ 34,40 13000 /420003- 4 PP ciPPPP — PPP3P33? CP,P4-4 P‘P4 j ',474trt: Grant §" 0. .,. i04000 rr 4,4 ° 4 4"494" 110330 P P 9200 .'4,434.33444.3.3 3P;14300: -3000 FIGURE 8: 2030 PROJECTED VOLUMES IMPROVED SCENARIO Transportation Plan 2030 Comprehensive Plan Citv of Lake Elmo, Minnesota 0400 P, 7 Asoo „Pi fitoo ; 44.4413334, 90 0eppl3;;;„3,.,PP 144000 P43.4.43443-44,,,„4,11- 121000 03 12 000 . 3., 04 ; 4 4 , 9 4 4 4 4444444.44„4444 ,4 469''',9 • „ 1— i WOOdbUrit . , . Map date: April 2009 Prepared by: ENGiNEER5• ARC; ilTECTS PLM0E9S Lima Arf 0000009141144 Vda aardanortn nat hanatlynadat.d Map nnrann and ta tdat t00rf15 t00 mod 444 ono TS94,9 94499 94 a 4444991.04 94440440 and ann.-m.1,nm Inan +oda,. &lane antady gad c44 4,1144,444,4 4,994 4449994 4944444 LEGEND Stillwater „ 00°47,, Oak Park Heights aytown Two. Irakeland TwtL 9400 „,44 n„44.444,49-9,44—.„„ Afton City Boundary --- Roadways Parcels Lakes 2030 PROJECTED VOLUMES IMPROVED SCENARIO < 5,000 5,000 - 9,999 10,000 - 24,999 2 ,000 - 49,999 50,000 - 99,999 100,000 OR > 944,6 494449444 tined tantodont 14444,4443044, not 4494444 in 449446 Cernetery proximity mid single-family house price. - Free Online Library '2O T��~»�! ...�^� za/wn,6aoarticles and bomxn *Periodicals {]Literature | � *Keyword [)Title OAuthor OTopio Cemetery ' '�w /� ' | �� '| �, ' ��~'�� O��^ �� /��-/m��/� //�]�� c�� ' � proximity single-family price. Lvxvp n^uonvenient 00 ABSTRACT LIhs Shano <10m| |nthis article, the potential impact of cemeteries on value is addressed empihcally using regression analysis on data from 575 transactions of single-family houses in the vicinity of four cemeteries. Consistent with the limited previous research on this topic, when all observations are analyzed simultaneously no price effect is discovered, However, when each cemetery is investigated separately, the results vary. In two cases, cemetery view is not significantly related to price. In a third case. cemetery view is associated with higher phoao (equal to 8.8% of mean house price), and in a fourth case, cemetery view is associated with lower prices (equal to 101 % of mean house price), The real estate literature is replete with papers reporting the influence of externalities on residential property values, Studies appearing in The Appraisal Journal, for example, observe positive price effects given a house's proximity to a golf course, (1) or an ocean, (2) and negative effects for proximity to freight rail lines, (3) a cell phone tower, (4) a ruptured oil pipeline, (5) highway noise barriers, (6) and the residence of a registered sex offender. (7) It is intuitive that price premiums should apply when an externality adds to an owner's enjoyment of his or her property and that discounts should apply when aproperty iolocated close hoanexternality that poses either a nuisance or potential danger, Not all market participants, however, immediately adopt this view, aaindicated by Hansen, Benson, and Hagen report significant price discounts for houses located close 0oamajor fuel pipeline after, but not before, it exploded. tuU'|eXlunU| unweitorarym000mwurnais,a oo The impact of open space property uses on nearby residential property values has been subject to some empirical investigation, The results, in general, are not surprising. Golf courses, parks, and green spaces tend to be positive externalities for surrounding properties, and landfills tend to be negative externalities. Of the various types of open space property uses, cemeteries have been the least studied. A search of the literature reveals only two published studies on this topic and both of these examine the same Portland, Oregon, database to report an insignificant price difference between houses located close to a cemetery and those located farther away. (8) hKp://"/ww.dhefi-ecUbrnry.00no/Cconctery+proxinoityfund+sio u nusc+ icc,a02— 1/12/2015 Cemetery proximity and single-family house price. ' Free Online Library Page 2nf2O The purpose of the current study, therefore, is to direct some additional attention to this little -examined subject. In this study, regression analysis is applied to transaction data from 575 single-family houses located in relatively close proximity hofour cemeteries in Greene County, Ohio. Grouping cemeteries for analysis, oewas done in previous analyses, may mask the impact of a cemetery on the transaction price of nearby houses. Because some of the advantages and disadvantages associated with close cemetery proximity depend upon whether or not the cemetery is within sight of the subject property, the present study also improves upon the previous research by simultaneously investigating the price effect resulting from both the distance from, and view of, a cemetery, This article describes the characteristics of cemeteries that may impact the value of nearby properties, reviews the pertinent literature, and explains the data and methodology used in the research. The results of the analysis are then presented. Cemetery Characteristics That May Influence Value The effect of proximity to a cemetery on nearby residential property value is uncertain. On the positive side, cemeteries offer place to walk, jog, exerciue, or otherwise enjoy the outdoors safe from speeding traffic, In effect, some people may view acemetery asopark, and the tombstones anincidental. Aview ofarelatively open vista that includes some tombstones may bopreferable toone that islimited 0othe back of the neighbor's garage or house. Further, a person who wishes to regularly visit the final resting place of a loved one may value a house located conveniently close to the loved one's grave. To the extent that any of these advantages apply, purchasers may be willing to pay a premium for a house located in close proximity to a cemetery, and the premium may be enhanced to the degree that market participants believe the future use of the cemetery will notohangw. First Home Buyer Programs [� Very Low Rates and Fees Guaranteed, Free Quotes, m^SSm.wu noxummn. Historically, there has been considerable reluctance, especially in rural areas, to disturb land used as a cemetery, Therefore, owners of houses in close proximity to such cemeteries can be fairly certain that their properties will not subsequently besqueezed inbyadditional houses orless desirable uses, Onthe other hand, there iano guarantee that the use of cemetery property is fixed. Cemeteries are occasionally relocated and the property put to an alternative use, which residential neighbors may find objectionable. Kay (10) observed that the probability of cemetery relocation may be positively related to the rate at which an area is becoming urbanized, There are also potential disadvantages associated with close proximity to a cemetery. Cemetery workers, visitors, or trespassers may create noise disturbances, The relatively pleasing vista previously mentioned may be compromised ifthe cemetery falls into disrepair orif trespassers vandalize it, Potential physical dangers to people residing in close proximity to a cemetery include poisoning and disease. Spongberg and Becks (11) reported that cemeteries may release hazardous chemicals and metals into surrounding soil and ground water, Possible contaminants include arsenic and mercury, which were used in past embalming practices, or formaldehyde used in current embalming practices; and varnishes, sealers, and preservatives used on wood coffins, orlead, zinc, and copper from metal coffins. Vezzani(12)asserts that mosquitoes are the most medically important insect vectors ofdisease. Healso concludes that cemeteries are highly suitable habitats for artificial container -breeding mosquitoes due to the great availability of the different resources that they need (i.e., sugar substances, shelter, and water -filled containers). Finally, there are psychological factors associated with cemeteries that may negatively impact some people. The sight ofagrave being dug nraninternment service can put adamper onaparty being held storesidence with a cemetery view. For some, the sight of a cemetery or of tombstones may be upsetting, and for others, knowing that the cemetery ioclose may badisconcerting, Each of these factors may influence potential purchasers who may lower their bids or refuse to make offers on properties with cemetery views. Larsen and Coleman (13)report moderate, but statistically significant selling price effects for residential properties that were classified as psychologically impacted for reasons other than the property's proximity 0omcemetery. Cemetery proximityand single-family house price. ' Free Online Library Page 3of2U VlUanovoUnk/,Online (> Advance Your Human Resources Skills uPrep for Certification, Get Info! O0 Casual examination nfcemeteries hnthe U.S.Midwest results inseveral observations that are consistent with the notion that cemeteries may negatively impact the value ofnearby single-family houses. First, cemeteries tend habe initially situated remotely from residential properties. Seoond, in recent years when naa\denda| development has occurred in close proximity to a cemetery, developers have shown a propensity, where possible, to leave a wooded buffer zone between the cemetery and the residential development, Finally, houses constructed in close proximity to an existing cemetery are rare|y, if ever, high -end properties. Even if the disadvantages enumerated are significant in the transaction process, their impactmay not beobservable in transaction prices as long as the search for a buyer routinely continues until a buyer is located who does not care about or is ignorant of the physical risks or is not psychologically impacted by the proximity of a cemetery to the subject property. It may, howaver, take more time to locate such purchaser and this would be revealed by o significantly longer time on market for houses located in close proximity to a cemetery. The fact that the only relevantdatabase previously studied did not contain time onmarket data may help explain why it yielded no significant market effects attributable to cemetery proximity. Also, there are other factors that may have contributed 0othe previous findings, Unfortuna0e|y, time on market is not available inthe present database. The addition of a time on market variable would be a valuable addition to any extensions of this research. Literature Review Bolitzer and Netusil (14) employ regression analysis to study how single-family house selling price is influenced by the proximity of the house to a variety of open space property uses, including cemeteries. They analyze transactions that occurred in 1990-1992 in Portland, Oregon. Selling prices of 662 houses located within 1,500 feet of one of fifteen cemeteries are compared to prices of 6,005 houses that are not located within 1,500 feet of any type of open space (e.g., cemetery, golf course, public park). No significant differences in prices attributable to cemetery proximity are discovered. Lutzenhiser and Netusil (15) analyze the same database and employ basically the same methodology as Bolitzer and Netusil. Again, selling price is found not to differ significantly between houses located on either side of the 1^5UO-footdemarcation. |noddition.avahab|ahoaouounth/rmematerysizeisindudedinthiompdel.andhouee prices are found tobeinsignificantly related hoit. These studies are noteworthy because they were pioneering efforts, but both suffer from problematic methodological issues. For instance, the 1,500-foot demarcation point appears a bit arbitrary; Bolitzer and Netusil state it "was selected after consulting with park specialists at Metro." (116) It is unclear what expertise metropolitan park specialists possessed concerning setting this kind of criteria. No tests were conducted to determine if price effects are present within 1,500 feet of each cemetery or whether 1,500 feet is an appropriate demarcation point- It is possible that in some cases local price effects do not occur, but for other cases the local price effects exist and are exhausted before 1,500 feet, while for still other properties, local price effects extend farther. The exact solution is unique to each situation and dependent upon factors such as topography, foliage, housing density, and cemetery Another methodological problem is that neither one cfthe studies compares properties with mcemetery view to those without a view to investigate whether view might represent a better demarcation point, Also, although the model employed in these studies includes binary variables to control for the area of the city in which a particular house is located, a number of factors not included in the model could compromise the validity of the comparison (eg..the extent towhich other externalities affect properties nnboth sides of the demarcation |ine).Further, the data for houses surrounding the fifteen cemeteries is incorporated into a single model, which may have exacerbated the issue if the variables that significantly influence nearby residential property values are not identical for all cemeteries. This possibility is demonstrated in the current study by first estimating a single model that includes all four study areas, and then comparing this result to results obtained by estimating separate models for each cemetery and restricting the analysis to houses located in the same neighborhood. This article analyzes transactions of 575 single-family houses in the vicinity of four cemeteries, all located in Greene http:l/vvww.dx:fi-ee|i6rurv.conilCcmncUrry+proxioni1y+und+oin,,|o'Dunik+11ouso+ 'ce,u02— 1/12/2015 Cernetery proxii-nity and single-farnily house price. - Free Online Library Noe 4 of 20 County, Ohio, Greene County, located in southwestern Ohio, was established at its present boundaries in 1819, Historically, Greene was an agricultural county, and today it remains predominantly rural. Only 4% of the county's 421 square miles consists of urban areas. Its total population is about 148.000 residents, After World War ||, parts of Greene County became a bedroom community for the city of Dayton in adjacent Montgomery County. In more recent years, the county has undergone substantial commercial development. According to the Greene County Auditor's office, 65 cemeteries are located in the county. Several are small family plots and most of the 65 are located remotely enough that measuring their effect on nearby houses is problematic because there are not many houses close by, This article focuses on four locations where residential development has extended toanactive (ie.. burials are still taking place) cemetery border: QeUbmoh. Fairborn, Beavemroek. and Xenia, All four study areas were personally inspected to determine whether each property currently has a cemetery view. A definition of variables used in studying the four locations can be found in Table 1, Bellbrook Area The first study location is situated on 16.9 acres in the northeastern corner of the city of Bellbrook (population 7,009). Residential development reached this cemetery in 1961, when the first of five houses that abut the cemetery was constructed. The last house to abut the cemetery was built in 1965, All houses in the sample were constructed in 1951-2003. There are 157 houses located to the east and southeast and within 1,513 feet of the well -maintained cemetery. The sample is limited to the 122 houses where an arm's-length transaction of an improved lot could be identified. Transactions inthis study area occurred in 1858'2008, There is no buffer zone between the Bellbrook cemetery and the residential development, buttrees, houses, and structures in the development block a cemetery view for most houses in the Bellbrook study area. However, 18 of the sample properties do have a full or partial view of this cemetery, It was assumed that the view from each property was the same agthe time of each transaction, Data limitations prevent determination of property quality and condition atthe time ofeach transaction, but at the time ofthe study, itwas observed that property quality and condition tended to improve with distance from the cemetery. The Bellbrook area is limited to 1,513 feet by default because the neighborhood ends atthat distance. Property characteristic and transaction information analyzed in this study were obtained from the office of the , Greene County Tax Assessor and the office of the Greene County Recorder. Table 2 shows descriptive statistics for houses in the Bellbrook study area. The mean transaction price (PRICE) for these houses is $97,012, The mean house age at the time of the transaction (AGE) is 27.4 years, The mean living space (SQFT) is 1,408 feet, and the mean parcel size (LOT)is13.427square feet. Fairborn Area The second cemetery in the study is situated on 22.3 acres near the eastern edge of Greene County's second largest city, Fairborn (population 51,390). The residential development is locatedunuthofthonemetery.Thefirst house inthe development, constructed onthe southern boundary ofthe development, sold in 1996. Development proceeded tothe north (toward the oemehery) with all the houses closest hothe south side ofthe cemetery being sold between 2003and 20UG, Transaction data could not beobtained for 28houses (these lots were purchased unimproved from the daveopor so the sample is restricted to the 244 observations that are arm's-length transactions of improved lots. The Fairborn area isthe newest development of the study areas, and the developer dedicated obuffer zone between the development and cemetery that is approximately 200-feet wide (187 feet at the narrowest point) and fairly heavily wooded, The deciduous trees in the buffer zone eliminate any view of the well -maintained cemetery from all but afew houses for approximately seven months of the year, but when the trees are bare, 46 houses have a full or partialview ofthe cemetery. There is no discernable difference in the house quality and condition in this study area; all are currently in above -average condition due, innosmall part, Votheir relatively young age. Table 3shows that PRICE hnthis area is the highest ofthe four study areas. More houses hnthis area, 85.9%.have a basement (BASE) than the other study areas and all houses in this development have central air conditioning Beavercreek Area Cemetery prnm}nniiyand single-family houne price. - Free Online Library Pmcyc5o[Z0 The third cemetery investigated is situated on 8.7 acres near the southern edge of Greene County's largest city, Reovernreek(population 40.U14).There are 1U3houses located tothe south and southwest and within 1.215feet of the cemetery. The study is restricted to the 77 houses for which an arm's-length transaction of an improved lot could be identified. The oldest house inthe sample was built in1SOO.All but three houses have been constructed since 185D.with the newest built in 2005, Residential development reached the western and southern border of this cemetery in 1956, when the first two of twelve houses that abut the cemetery were built, Transactions included in the sample occurred in1AG2-2UU8, There ianubuffer zone between thepesidenda|daveopmentandthiswe||'maintyinednametory.budon|y1Oofthe sample houses have a full or partial view of the cemetery. Similar to the Bellbrook study area, house quality and condition in this area tend to improve with distance from the cemetery. Table 4 shows that the mean lot size in the Beaverceekarea ixthe largest ofthe four study areas. Xenia Area The fourth cemetery issituated on8.Sacres inthe southwestern portion of Xenia, the county seat and themmnty's third -largest city (population 27,557). Two hundred houses, located north and east of the cemetery, are within 1,594 feet ofthe cemetery, The study isrestricted tothe 15i houses where enann'm'|engthtransaction ofthe improved lot could be identified, 28ofwhich have afull orpartial cemetery view. Similar to the Fairborn study area, there is little difference in house quality within this study area, Almost all the houses inthis sample are sing|e-stury. tract houses constructed in 1858'1958; none has ebasement, Although house quality and condition at the time sale could not be ascertained, almost all houses in this sample were rated average atthe time ofthe study. The oldest house was built in1851 and the newest in2OOO.Transactions ino|uded inthe sample occurred in 1967'2008. The maintenance condition of this cemetery can be generously described as moderate/average. There is no buffer zone between the residential development and this cemetery. The nominal transaction prices shown in Tables 2, 5, 4, and 5 are partially a function of the year in which the transactions occurred. Table 5 shows that the Xenia study area involves the lowest -valued houses ofthe four study areas. Correlation of Variables Table 6 contains the simple correlation of model variables for all four cemetery areas and shows thatmost ofthe explanatory variables are highly correlated with transaction price, There is high correlation among many of the independent variables (e.g,, square footage, bathrooms, bedrooms, and basement). What is surprising is the significant correlation between distance from a cemetery (DISTANCE) and every other variable, The correlations indicate that house size increases with distance from the cemetery. Houses located farther from the cemetery tend to have more garage space, bathrooms, and bedrooms, but lot size tends to decrease with distance from the cemetery, The correlations also indicate that the farther ahouse is located from mcemetery inthe sample, the greater the probability that the house has air conditioning and a basement, On the other hand, a significant simple correlation between whether a cemetery view is available from the house and the other explanatory variables does not exist. The appendix section of this article provides the correlation coefficients for the individual study areas, Methodology In studies of the impact of externalities on real property values, regression analysis is frequently referred to as hedonic regression. This well-known and often -used technique facilitates the effective unbundling of the implicit value attributable to the physical and location -specific characteristics of a property from the sale price. The methodology in this study has two basic parts. First, the data for all four study areas is combined and the following model is estimated to investigate whether housing prices are influenced by cemetery proximity: (17) [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1) lixn:/hN,vv*'1hcfiztUb,nrvzonnAConcLery+prnxinni ing|c'Dznii|v+houocfpricc.-u02— 1/12/2015 Ccnicte,y prmxiooiiyuud single-family house price. - Free Online Library Palge 6 nf2O where: PRICE = the transaction price [alpha] = the intercept [beta]=the estimators SALEYR=avariable equal tothe year inwhich the house sold e=the error term All the other independent variables are asdefined inTable 1. Based on the results of previous studies, (18) a positive sign is expected on the estimator for SQFT, LOT, GAR. BATH, BED, AIR, and BASE, and a negative sign is expected for AGE, The expected sign for GAS is positive because it was the most affordable form of heat in the area over the study period and should be capitalized in house Preliminary analysis reveals that three variables designed to detect seasonality in selling prices are highly insignificant and they were dropped from the model. The REG Procedure (19)wma used to estimate Equation 1 with the COLLIN option specified. The results of the COLLIN option indicate a moderate amount of mu Iticol linearity is present. (20) For the second part of the methodology in this article, Equation |isestimated separately for each cemetery, The estimate of the Fairborn data does not include AIR or GAS because each of the sample houses in this area has central air conditioning and gas heat. The estimate of the Xenia data does not include GAS or BASE because all houses inthis area have gas heat and none has abasement. (21) The results ofthe present study are similar to the two previous cemetery proximity studies when, anwas the case in the previous studies, all cemeteries are analyzed with a single estimate. Table 7 shows summarized estimation results ofthe full model; the data fits the model well, The F-va|ueishighly significant and the independent variables explain 92.29% of the variation in the dependent variable. Seven ofthe ten control variables are significant atthe SS% confidence level. Focusing onthe two variables of interest, the estimators for both VIEW and DISTANCE are highly insignificant, indicating that neither a cemetery view nor distance from a cemetery has a significant effect on nearby house price, To investigate the possibility that the results may vary by cemetery, this study estimates Equation 1 separately for each area. The results for the Fairborn cemetery area are consistent with the full model results. Table 8shows the summarized estimation results for the Fairborn cemetery area; the data fits the model well, the F-value is highly significant, The adjusted [R,sup,2] indicates that the model explains 78.14% of the variation in the dependent This figure is low compared to the [R.sup,2] reported for the full model, but recall that AIR and GAS have been dropped from this model because they are constants. Five of the eight control variables are significant at the 99% confidence level. Regarding the variables of interest, the estimators for both VIEW and DISTANCE are highly insignificant in this estimation, indicating that no price effect can be attributed to cemetery proximity. A different result occurs when the analysis islimited hothe Xenia cemetery area. Examination ofthe results, which are summarized inTable 8. shows that the data fits the model fairly well; the F' o|ue is highly significant, and the model explains 70.11 % of the variation in the dependent variable. This isthe lowest adjusted [9,sup,2]ofany ofthe estimates, but this estimate does not include BASE orGAS because each is constant. Only one of the oonhn| variables is significant at the 99% confidence level; two more are significant at the 90% level, and the sign of the estimator for each of these variables is in the anticipated direction. Recall that almost all the houses in this sample are nearly identical tract houses. It is interaobny, therefore, that the Ccnneteryproximity and xingle`fanni|yhmuxe price. ' Free Online Library Page 7o[20 house when the sale occurred, garage size, and whether the house has a cemetery view, The estimator for VIEW ianegative and significant at the AU%confidence level and indicates that houses with a cemetery view in this area sold, on average, at a discount of $6,291.89 compared to those without a cemetery view. For the mean -priced house inthis sample, this represents adiscount of10.1%(3O.2S1.88/$02581.3O).The variable DISTANCE is not significant inthis estimate. Table 10, where the estimation results for the Beavercreek cemetery area are presented, shows that the data fits the model well. The F-value is highly oignifican\, and the adjusted [R,nup.2] indicates that the model explains 80.71% of the variation in the dependent variable, Four of the ten control variables are significant at the 99% confidence level, and three are significant at the 95% level. Focusing on the variables of interest, VIEW is insignificant, indicating no price effect can be attributed to this variable, but DISTANCE is significant at the 90% level. The positive estimator for DISTANCE indicates that transaction price in this area increased by$2S.58.unaverage, for each additional foot the lot is removed from the cemetery. This result should occur if marketparticipants systematically deem the negative factors associated with close cemetery proximity to dominate the positive factors, but this may not bethe case here and there may beanalternative explanation. Recall that casual observation indicated that property quality and condition in this study area improved with distance from the cemetery, so DISTANCE may actually be serving as a proxy for quality and condition. If this explanation is correct, there is a cemetery proximity effect associated with distance, but it is occurring not because market participants judged the disadvantages of close proximity to the cemetery to outweigh the advantages; it occurred because the original homeowners and/ or developers/builders constructed better -quality houses farther from, rather than closer to, the cemetery, Table 11, where the estimation results of Equation 1 for the Bellbrook cemetery area are summarized, reveals that the data fits the model well. The F'va|ue of 124/4 is highly significant and the adjusted [R,sup.2] indicates that the model explains 82/45%ufthe variation inthe dependent variable. Four of the ten property characteristic variables are significant at the 99% confidence level and four are significant at the 95% level. The sign of each of the significant explanatory variables is in the expected direction, and each appears reasonable in amount. Both of the variables of interest are significant: VIEW at the 90% confidence level, and DISTANCE atthe 85%level. The results indicate that buyers inthis area value the park -like view, Acemetery view added $d.5214Gonaverage to the transaction price for houses with a cemetery view. For the mean priced house in this samp|e, this represents a premium of8.8Y4 ($8.521,46/$97.012,30). The estimator for DISTANCE indicates that residential property values increased by $810 for each footthe lot was removed from the cemetery. As was the case for the Beavercreek cemetery area, casual observation indicates that property quality and condition in this study area improve with distance from the cemetery� here again it is believed that DISTANCE is acting as a proxy for house quality and condition and the effect is occurring because the original homeowners and/or developersibuilders constructed better quality houses farther from rather than closer to the cemetery, Conclusion The characteristics of cemeteries that may influence value are presented in this article and suggest that the influence of a particular cemetery on nearby residential properties is uncertain. To empirically test this issue, data from 575 sale transactions of houses in relatively close proximity to one of four cemeteries is subjected to regression analysis. In five iterations, transaction price is regressed against a battery of property characteristic variables to control for price differences. Transaction price iaalso regressed against two variables ofinterest, DISTANCE, specified aathe shortest straight-line distance between the cemetery and the lot on which the subject house is located� and VIEW, specified aathe ability \oview the cemetery from the subject property. When all observations are tested in a single model, the results are consistent with the limited previous studies on this tupiu—nosignificant price effect attributable to cemetery proximity is discovered. When each cemetery is tested individually, however, the results vary. For two cemeteries, no price effect can be attributed to VIEW.For ethird cemetery, the estimator for VIEW is a negative $6,291.89, but for a fourth cemetery, the estimator for VIEW is a Cernetery proximity and single-family house price. - Free Online Library Page 8 of 20 positive $8,521.46, For the mean priced house in each sample, the former represents a 10.1% discount and the latter represents anB.8Y4premium. The sign of the estimator in each of these two instances is intuitively appealing because the positive estimator is associated with a well -maintained cemetery, and the negative estimator is associated with a less well -maintained cemetery. The fact that the results vary by cemetery suggest the possibility that previous studies might have arrived addifferent conclusions ifthey had not grouped all cemeteries into asingle model. The fact that VIEW issignifivant in two of the four samples investigated here suggests that previous models may have used the wrong criteria in testing for market effects due to cemetery proximity: VIEW may be more important than DISTANCE. DISTANCE isinsignificant hn two of the four study areas, In both of these cases, almost all sample houses are constructed within a relatively compact Lime frame and house quality and condition do not vary within the study area. In the other two samples, house construction took place over a protracted period of time and it is observed that property quality and condition tend to improve with distance from the cemetery. In these two cases, the estimator for DISTANCE is a positive $8.10 per foot in one case and $29.58 per footin the other. The interpretations of these findings is that DISTANCE is actually serving as a proxy for house quality and condition inthese two cases. This suggests that the effect occurred not because market participants judged the disadvantages of close proximity to outweigh the advantages, but because the original homeowners and/or developers/builders constructed better quality houses farther from rather than closer to the cemetery. Cemetery proximity should not be ignored by residential appraisers in arriving at value estimate. It in possible cemetery proximity will have no significant impact on nearby residential property values, but as the present study indicates, it may, It is recommended, therefore, that appraisers test their local area to determine if cemetery proximity market effects are present, Unfortunate|y, data restrictions prevented the testing for another important market effect --time on market, Time on market is more likely to be influenced by cemetery proximity than price. Extensions of this research, therefore, could examine not only whether the results reported here apply in other markets, but also whether cemetery proximity impacts time onmarket. PR,r� s�o .20,11: u1"s 3* .5 5 m1, S� 'n001 .ccsz 634 5 Cov ..oaI nxn1 .ons uupr .2161 'wx ��os �sou� ��s �1p� 0'0*3 `.a�"Ia <oonz oe� on 1 10:13 no* .1103 05*3 .urrz .za-'z 0229 .22a4 .3465 .oF"!r �a12w . 2343 uJ,�a .49»4 .uooz .no9u 'ni*r GAR wzoo*� EAT .3oo1; . 22 7 49 �.r(11»i �un_1_" U t� cu�� nz«n rxI C zos .471', qzs 2�4 5 �/�o4 ,zna .I " 9 ') 515 Little Canada Road, Little Ctinada, MN 55117-1600 (651) 766-4029 / FAX (651) 766-4048 www.ci.little-canada.mn.us July 13, 2015 Mayor & City Council City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 RE: Lee Rossow Dear Mayor Pearson and Members of the City Council: MAYOR John Keis COUNCIL Rick Montour Michael McGraw Tom Fischer Christian Torkelson ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Mr. Lee Rossow asked me to write a letter of reference for him relative to his pursuit of establishing a cemetery in your community. I have known Mr. Rossow for over 20 years in my capacity as Little Canada's City Administrator. He owns multiple industrial properties in our city and we have worked with him on a number of issues. He also owns Centerline Charter Corporation (formerly Comfort Bus Company) that was located in our community until he was able to construct a new facility in Maplewood. In my dealings with Mr. Rossow, I have found him to be a person of high integrity and very reasonable to deal with. He understands local government processes and appreciates the job elected officials face in balancing interests. Lee has been a person you can rely on. If he says he will do something, he will. He has been a leader in dealing with other property owners in one of your industrial areas. He has been instrumental in helping others to understand the City's position on certain matters. All in all, Lee Rossow is a person I have tremendous trust and confidence in and I can assure you he will be a business person your community will enjoy dealing with. Should you have further comments or questions regarding Mr. Rossow that you think I can assist you with, please feel free to give me a call at 651-766-4040. Sincerely, . Hanson Administrator KyleKlat% From: DaveUakken@»xeUdargozom Sent Tuesday, September 0lZDI5ll:l9AM To: Mike Pearson; Justin B|nyor,]uUe F|iUet;]iU Lundgren; ann bmith@msnzom; Kyle K|att; 337@|acbne1 Subject, Halcyon Approval Support To interested parties: I am writing in support of the Halcyon Cemetery project proposed by Lee Rossow. I have been aware of the project from its early days, I know the honorable motivations of the project owner and believe the cemetery would be very beneficial to your community and surrounding communities. | have also known the owner of this project for nearly thirty years and would attest to his integrity, Please consider taking actions would allow this project to move forward. David [Bakken Senior Vice President Wells Fargo Insurance Services USA, Inc. Direct952'Z4Z'3O95 Fax 877402'7485 davebokkpn@pweUsfargo.com � From: Ladies and gent|emcm Earl H.Cohen <E{ohen@hi|awfirmzom" Tuesday, September 08,JOISl0:15AM Mike Pearson; Justin 0oyer,]u|ie F|iOet;]iU Lundgren; ann ismith@msnzom; Kyle K|att 337@|ach.net HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT | have been involved with the subject property for many years, going back tothe previous owners and have watched how the surrounding area of your community has grown, having grown up in St. Paul with a family business on the east side ofthe community. I have reviewed the plans for the cemetery, it's buildings and grounds and cannot think of a better use in Lake Elmo. I visited several cemeteries this past weekend visiting family and friends who have departed. Several ofthese were in residential areas just like the area chosen for the Halcyon cemetery, |neach case, each nfthe cemeteries brought a sense ofpeace and tranquility tootherwise hectic areas. While not a resident of your community, I do urge its approval. Earl H.Cohen Attorney at Law Direct dial: (Q52)4OO'Q242 ecohan(@hi|uwMrm.00m yzcLMuTH^1oemSnw—,,.^^^.^. ^. `^` 8050 West mmStreet Edina, mw55439 wn, (952) 941-4005 —Privilece and Conlidentiality Nrlice... This electronic mail rnessago and any aftachcd Hes contain information intended for tl-ie exclusivc use of (ho specific individual a., entity to whom it is addressed arictf mwinformation /xw/is proprietary, privileejed,fiu /u/ and!ur exLrripto"ni:uuv 'ex you are not [lie intevueurecipient, you are "ereur"000cd /m,/a"v viewing, copying, disclosure ordistribu(ion of this itiforniation is prohibited and may be subject to legal re5tric;tion or sanction Please notify the oeouer�»' eply:/ectmnic mail or Leiephoric, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message and any attachments �Lhout making any copies: Ihank you ~_��le Matt From: Lvth Hartz <|hartz@mws enicesorg> Sent: Tuesday, September O8,2Ol5lS6PK4 To: Mike Pearson; Justin B|oyecJulie F|dUetJill Lundgren; ann 'smith@msnzom;Ky/eK|att Subject: HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT To whom it may concern, I am writing to support the approval of the Halcyon Cemetery project being proposed by Lee Rossow. I have worked with Mr. Rossow and his family for the past 20 years or so, as he and his family's bus Company provide quality bussing services to our clients who are adults with disabilities. | have always found Lee and his family \n be easy towork with over these many years. Lee and his family fix problems, they don't create them. Afew months ago, Mr, R000w shared with me and some of my leadership team his vision for the Halcyon Cemetery that heisplanning tocreate. I thought that the plan looked like it would be a lovely place to memorialize loved ones who have passed, It appears to me that Mr. Rossow has cleared the many hurdles that these kinds of developments need to pass and I believe that this development will be of benefit to the Lake Elmo area and to the eastern parts of the Twin Cities. it appears to be a lovely peaceful place from what I have seen in the drawings and in listening to Mr, Rossovvexplain his vision. Therefore, I want to show my support for this project. Sincerely, Lyth1Hartz, President Midwest Special Services, Inc. 9OOOcean Street Saint Paul, MN5SI06 (651) 793'4123 Direct wwW.mvu5ervices.on( WcSee Possibility. ' Confidentiality Notice This message and its attachments may contain confidential information which is legally protected. The infhouudoo inonly intended for the use ofthe oddccusun(o). If you are not the intended addreuncc(s), you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, disthbudonnf(heountootoof the message and its attachments by you is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, plcuoo destroy all originals and copies of the same and notify the sender immediately, From; To: Subject: William Hooper ^biUhooper2005@yahoozom> Tuesday, September D8,2Ul5Z14PM Mike Pearson; Justin B|oyecJu|ie F|if|ct;]iU Lundgren; ann bmith@msnzonn; Kyle K|att; 337@|ach.net HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT |amwriting bzexpress myfull support for the Halcyon Cemetery proposal. |tclearly fits the needs for our city and surrounding communities. Regards. Bill Hooper B82O27thStreet {tN Lake Elmo, yWN Kyle K|att � From: Sent: Dear City Council Members, Wagner, Jane «]ane!Wagner@/bkwur1dwidezmm> Tuesday, September 0l2OI52I3PK4 Mike Pearson; Justin 8|oyecJu|ie Fiif|et;]iU Lundgren; 'onn Jsmith@Vmsn'cono'; Kyle K|a�� '337@|acbnet' HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT A cemetery in Lake Elmo is a positive attribute to have in a small community, especially a suburb of St. Paul. |amwriting to support the Halcyon Cemetery and to encourage you to approve the last item to make this a reality for the town, Plat Approvall Keeping loved ones, who have passed, close by living relatives and friends is ideal. |tprovides the living opportunity to morn, visit frequently, and beclose tntheir home. This isagreat benefit for those who aren't able todrive ordrive long distances- youth and young at heart. (D Approving Halcyon would set precedent in communities like Lake Elmo. Thank you for your consideration! JxwsWAGmsR Team Lopoa, | Customer suppm^nnvxupm/soa*=Services axzuAsz1es* BlVYORL[)VV|DE Australia |Canada |cmna | /no/n |L*rAw| ux/ us www.o/xmmwiva.00m This o-i-najlmessage ixbeing sent solely for use hvthe intended recipient(s) and illay contain confidential [oforozuhox. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure ordistribution is prohibited. lfyou are not the io]omdcd recipient, please contact the sender byphone orreply hy e-mail, delete the original message and dcobny all copies. Thank you. K JeKa From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jessica Jagoe Tuesday, September 08, 2015 314 PM Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; 'annejsmith@msn.com'; Kyle Klatt 337@lach.net Halcyon Approval Support Mayor & City Council Members: I am sending this email as a reference for Mr. Lee Rossow as you consider the development of Halcyon Cemetery in your community. I have had the opportunity to work with Mr. Rossow for 15+ years while serving as the Code Enforcement Officer for the City of Little Canada. Mr. Rossow owns multiple properties in our industrial park area. This industrial park over the years has drawn a number of code enforcement concerns with rental tenants and outdoor storage. However, Mr. Rossow has been one owner that 1 have come to count on for keeping his property well maintained and frequently monitoring his tenants without the need for city staff involvement. If ever something has come up, Lee is quick to respond and resolve any concerns that staff may have. 1 have confidence that Mr. Rossow will uphold the same commitment to the upkeep of his property and values of your community as he does in ours. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Jessica Jagoe Code Enforcement Officer City of Little Canada Kyle 0Cla From: Sent: Kerry Hooper <hoopk2Ol2@yohoozom` Tuesday, September 08,2Ol53:27PM Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt: 337@|ach.net Halcyon Approval Support I support the Halcyon Cemetery proposal Kerry Hooper 8O2O27lhStreet CtN Lake Elmo resident of Lake Elmo for 33 years Kyle Klatt From: DarleneRossow <darlenerossow@comcastnet> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 3:34 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn,com; Kyle Klatt Cc: Lee Rossow Subject: Fwd: Halcyon Approval Support Members of Lake Elmo City Council, I am requesting your support and approval of the Halcyon Cemetery project for Lake Elmo. As you are aware the Planning Commission has approved it 6-0. The Valley Branch Watershed approved it unanimously. The City Staff has recommended it for approval. Please do the next required step, timely, which is Plat approval. The Halcyon Cemetery will be a beautiful positive addition to Lake Elmo. Thank you, Darlene Wagner Rossow K,Xle Klatt From To; Towhom itmay concern, Mike Klein <mike@isofnishing.com> Tuesday, September UD'2OlSS:2OPM Mike Pearson; Justin BloyecJu|ie RiHet]iU Lundgren; ann 'snnith@msnzom; Kyle K|att; 337@|achoet HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT | have known Lee Knssowprofessionally for over 10years. He's always been very detail oriented 'in every aspect of his personal life aswell and inhis business setting. I've worked with him ashewas the general contractor onhis own new buildings. Heismethodical, calculated and doesn't quit until things are perfect. His new project will undoubtedly carry the same passion for perfection as well as the added burden of paying tribute to those closest tohim. When completed, Halcyon will be a welcoming and tranquil setting for families from many of the surrounding communities. it will be an accessible alternative to many other cemeteries and it will truly be an enduring legacy, Sincerely, Mike Klein Mike Klein Operations Manager SOSouth Medina Street Loretto, MN 55357 P76I273.l8S2 [6ll.747.5452 F763,49I299O Toll Free 844.6237998 mikePisofinishincznm K le Klatt From: Dennis Conlin <dnr.conlin@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 7:27 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msmcom; Kyle Klatt; Lee Rossow Subject: Proposed Cemetery To Lake Elmo City Council — Cemeteries are a permitted use in RR, and unfortunately there is a public need for them. Lake Elmo Ave is built to handle the minimal increase in traffic resulting from funerals. And while there is neighborhood opposition, where was the opposition when current RR zoning uses were reviewed and public meetings held? 1 urge you to act responsibly and proceed with plat approval as there is no justifiable reason to deny or further delay the project. Rita Conlin (past resident and city council member) 10710 88th St. N. Stillwater, MN 55082 K le Matt From: Sent Greetings: Diane Wolf <dw07spp09@outlookzom, Wednesday, September 0l20lS7:6IAM Mike Pearson; Justin B(oyec]u|ie F|iMet]iU Lundgren; '; Kyle K/att; Lee Roomw Ha|cy|un Cemetery | was born and raised inthe Twin Cities area. | moved away but |o,nnow trying toreturn home and make plans for the inevitable. I have followed what is happening in Lake Elmo regarding the Halcylon Cemetery. Please consider approval ofthis project. Itappears tobeaprofessional, top notch project, | have been involved in my current City Council and can understand the pressures you encounter. That being said, this project will be something your community can be proud of. It will also help your community financially when family and friends use the services provided bvHa|cy|on Cemetery. Thank you for your consideration. Remember the "Not in my back yard" mentality, is not always true. D.G.Wolf Larry Anthony ^|canthonyl@gmai|zom` Wednesday, September O9'2Ol5V,I6AK; Mike Pearson; Justin B|oyer;]u|ie F(hDet;]i|| Lundgren; an jsmith@msn.00n; Kyle K|att; 337@|achoet HALCYON approval support lwould like kzprovide ozysupport for the Halcyon cemetery projectand urge approval by the Lake Elmo City Council. Development ofthis project xxou|dxupportrnooyuuomundingcororuooihosaud has the support ofthe planning commission and city staff I encourage you to support the approval of the Halycon project. Thank you Larry Anthony Kyle Klatt "'"" From: jaclmyer@hssetkliwi.us Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:21 AM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer, Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msrLcom; Kyle Klatt; 337@lachmet Please support the approval of the Halcyon Cemetery. It will help our community and our citizens. Thank you for your consideration. Language Arts & Drama Teacher Assistant Director Fall Play/Spring Musical Bay Port High School 920.662.7106 jaclbeat@hssd.1(12.wi.us CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any included attachments are intended only lot the addiiissec Ths mess -age may contain privileged c.cWidential, 01ritopribu7ity intprmairon Unauthorized lorwaiding printing, copying, distribution, CI use of such r-tIorn-iation is sit -Icily prohibited and may bc unlawful II yob have rece,ved thus message In error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mad, then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed coy CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message and any included attachments are intended only for the addressee. This message may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such inforniation is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. Barbara <beezohughes@hnnherzom` Wednesday, September 09,2OI5lO:54AM Mike Pearson; Justin 8|oyer;]u|ip Rif|et; Kyle K|att; 3]7@|ach.net]iU Lundgren Please support Please support the approval ofthe Halcyon Cemetery. |twill help the community and the citizens. Aaanon- denominational cemeteny,aUpeop|ewiUhaveanop¢ion. Thank you for your consideration. BHughes Sent from myiPad K le Klatt From: Sent: To: Subject: James Weiss <mijweiss@yahoo.com> Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1237 PM Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; 337@lach.net HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT Dear Council Members, Please approve the Halcyon Cemetery as I'm planning on being interred there. Thank you, J. Weiss tonxbun@sppsorg Thursday, September l[\Z0lSGi3OAK8 Mike Pearson; Justin B|myer;Julie F|iflat,-Jill Lundgren; vnn jsmith@msnzon;NWeK|a\t 337@|achoet HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT To Lake Elmo City Council, I believe the proposed Halcyon Cematerywou|dbeenaddedbenefit tnthe community ofLake Elmo, Mr. Romuow'aplan iswell thought out and developed. Thank you for your time. Tom Burr Transportation Director Saint Paul Public Schools (New Address) 261 Chester St St. Paul, MN 05107 051-744-8104Offino 012'270'0807CeU 851'255'0910Fax tom.burr@sppa.orO Kyle Klatt From: Jeff Roaow<jeffr 824@gmaiicom` Sent Thursday, September DlJ0lSlI1]lAKJ To: Mike Pearson; Justin 8|oyer; f|i|fet@|akee|rno.org; Jill Lundgren; ann 'smith@msnzonn; Kyle0att Subject: Halcyon Cemetery Dear Council Members, Please approve the Halcyon Cemetery as }'m planning on being interred there. Thank you, Jeff Ilosnovv From: Vicki VandeU<vickijvandeU@gnoai|zom^ Sent Thursday, September DlZOI5ll:lGAK4 To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer, Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; 337@|achoet Halcyon Cemetery Approval [)ear Lake Elmo City Council, |omwriting anote Voyou toshow support for the Halcyon Cemetery project. When | got the opportunity hzmeet Mr, Rossow, he told me about his wife's passing and how he is building this cemetery as a place of rest for her and his parents. Hninevery passionate person who would like hacomplete this project nuhecanUndpeace. This ksagreat project that will beagood addition iothe City. kisopermitted use and does not require zoning orvariance approval. The City and county have asked Mr. Rnsomatoplat the property, Hehas agreed and jumped through all ofthe hoops, fees, extensions, etc, that have been asked ofhim, | really hope that you can allow the cemetery project to move forward |natimely manner. Thank you, Vicki VanDell KyleKa From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: John Malmberg <john.maimberg@fa-bank.net> Thursday, September 10, 2015 5:02 PM Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt 337@lach.net Support for HALYCON I am a resident of Lake Elmo and fully support Lee Rossow's construction of a cemetery on land that he owns. I have spoken with Lee about the plans for the property and feel that it would be an attractive addition to the community and one which is needed as the current baby boom generation ages. I have also know Lee for fifteen years and know that if he is involved, it will be classy, be done right and will be maintained properly. I heartily endorse his project. John Malmberg John Malmberg Li() FIRST AMERICAN bAN: First American Bank N.A. 2-124 Monetary Blvd. - Suite 107 Hudson.. W I 54016 John:Malniberg@ fa-bank.net 715-3S1-83301Main 715-377-5310 Direct 715-377-53301Fax www.fa-bank.net SFICURITY NOTICE: Firm American Bank. N.A. ‘vill never zr,;k you to send non-public private information throunh email, such is your PIN. account number or Social Security number. Please do not respond to any email requestimi, this iype of information. CON! IDE NI AlIItY NOl ICE. I tti5 inforrnatit.,:t is intended only foruse by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain inforrna',!on that ts privileoed, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable lay., Any unaulhon7ed review, use. oistnburion. or copying is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error. please intorrn the sender immediately by replying to this message and destroying all ccpies of the original message Kyle att From: Rochelle D Jacobs <annemorelakehouse@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 10:11 AM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; Kyle Klatt Cc: annejsmith@msn.com Subject: I am writing to support the Halcyon Cemetery Dear City Council Members, I am writing to express my full support for the Halcyon Cemetery proposal. It clearly fits the needs for our city and surrounding communities, Almost a year ago was when I first learned about the proposed Cemetery at the corner of 50th and Lake Elmo ave. The project seems to be one of a kind and very impressive. Sadly, I can't visit my loved ones in their final resting places often due to the distance from my home and this would provide a local place for people to visit their loved ones regularly. I have lived in this area for all of my life (almost 40 years) and drive on Lake Elmo Ave daily. Most of the homes on that street are not of high value, with the exception of the Gonyea Development. 1 feel this would be a beautiful addition to Lake Elmo and that main thoroughfare. Being a 20 year Real Estate professional, I can tell you that a project like this will not only increase property values, but it will bring increased tax revenue to the area. The people visiting will shop and eat in town, they will visit regularly. It will be a huge benefit to the City of Lake Elmo and surrounding Areas. I have shown my support on the Facebook group page https://www.facebook.com/grouos/SUPPORTHALCYON/ along with many other people that have joined the page in support. This project has a lot of supporters and just because af opponents create some stir, does not mean they are not the majority! Please approve the Proposed Halcyon Cemetery. Thank you, Rochelle Jacobs 651-724-5381 LONG TME LOCAL RESIDENT! From: Deborah Malmberg Smith <deb.malmberg@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 11, 7015 4:13 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; 337@lacftnet Subject: Halcyon Cemetery approval support Greetings, I support the approval of the Halcyon Cemetery project. 1 believe Lee Rossow will ensure the project is completed to his high standards and that the property will be well -maintained. He is a good man and will be a good neighbor to the surrounding properties. Thank you, Deborah M Smith Kite Klatt From: John McNamara <johnrmcnamara1946@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 9:30 AM To: Kyle Klatt Subject: Halcyon Approval Support We would like to voice our support of Lee Rossow and his proposal. We have known Lee for over 50 years and know him to be a very successful businessman. Lee plans every aspect of his undertakings. He's informed, he takes his work seriously and does not get easily sidetracked. He is very good at solving problems and making things better. Wc are sure Lee did a thorough study of every aspect of this project before deciding to go through with it. Please decide in favor of the Halcyon proposal. Susan and Jack McNamara K le K From: Daniel Heffron <heffroncpi@mac.com> Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 9;36 AM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; 337@lach.net Subject: Halcyon Cemetery Dear Lake Elmo City Council Members: I am writing in support of the Halcyon Cemetery project and ask that you give it Plat approval. I feel this cemetery is a much desired addition to the city of Lake Elmo and the surrounding area. It gives families a place to lay their loved ones to rest in a place that is not only beautifully designed but in a location which is nearby, allowing them an opportunity to visit more frequently. I wish my family members where so close. I see all positives and no negitives to this addition to the city. Please give Halcyon Cemetery Plat approval. Thank you, Dan Heffron Kyle Klatt From: Tom Van Sloun <tom@hoglundbus.com> Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 2:28 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Moyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; 337@lach.net Subject: Halcyon Approval Support To all concerned citizens, I would like to offer you a few of my impressions on the Halcyon Cemetery proposal. Society has an ongoing need for new cemeteries. When considering future development, certainly among the top questions are; where would be the best places to locate them, and what is the proposed scope of the plans. There are always concerned neighbors who fear the unknown consequences of a new development, or just simply prefer the status quo and vote for no change. A reasonable concern for any neighbor is how will any new development affect my property values. I believe a well planned cemetery at this location on 50th street would not adversely affect any of the neighbors property values. The site at 50th and Co Rd 17 does not appear to present any new potential traffic problems. I have known Lee Rossow for 30 years and can tell you he is focused and driven to do all of his projects the right way. To help put some concerned citizens at ease, you could take the opportunity to view a couple of Lee's past projects by viewing the School bus facility and office which he has built on Rice St. in St. Paul, or view the major addition he made to his house on the St. Croix river. Both projects are extremely well done with great attention to many details. I feel Mr. Rossow's latest project is a benefit to society and a definite worthwhile cause. Sincerely, Tom Van Sloun 3590 Mississippi Dr. Coon Rapids, Mn 55433 Kyle K att From: Mark Busta <mark@goodoldboat.com> Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 5:56 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn,com; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; Rossow Lee & Geni Subject: HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT Categories: Red Category As a past member of the Parks Commission in Lake Elmo and a resident for 34 years and having been involved in trying to maintain the status -quo on development for all those years, the fact is we lost to the whims of the Metropolitan Council some time ago. We can now choose the kinds of development that make the most sense for the present and future of Lake Elmo. The Halcyon project would be an excellent fit for development that would have very little impact on a quiet neighborhood arid city services. It would also protect 10 acres as basically open space that could never be subdivided and developed as high density housing should zoning changes or more spurious direction from the Metropolitan Council occur in the future. Please vote YES on Halcyon, its a win -win. Mark Busta — Circulation / Merchandise Director GOOD OLD BOAT Magazine 8810 27th Street Ct N, Lake Elmo MN 55042 Office 701-952-9433 Fax 701-952-9434 Home Office 651-770-8810 mark(Qdoodoldboat.com www.doodoldboat.com facebook.com/goodoldboat Good old boats , 'ya gotta love 'em From: baMbbuga `barbbusta@aimzom> Sent: Sunday, September l3'2OI56DI PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin B|oyec]u|ie F|J|et Jill Lundgren; an^ jsmbh@msnzom; Kyle K|att 337qg|ach.net Subject: Halcyon Approval Support Please vote yes on Halcyon. It would be a great benefit for Lake Elmo. Kyle Klatt From: Sonja Muellerleile <smuellerleile@ci.hutchinsonsnmus> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 12:45 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; annejsmith@msn.com; Kyle Klatt; 337@lacl-Lnet Subject: HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT Importance: High Sonja X, Wuerferfeik Oak,fand Coneteiy Coordinalor City o .71a tcliinsou 1400 Adams St SE :hrutefiluson, 1W 55350 (Direct — 320-2.34-2583 E-wair — smitefferretleOcili tcliinson. MIL us Taki— 320-234-5564-1 'Web' — wtow,ciliut cfiinso 11.11171 as/anklet), From Lake Elmo City Council, ssnders725@auicnm Monday, September 14,ZOl5l:47PM Mike Pearson; Justin B|oyer,]u|ie Rif|et;/iU Lundgren�ann bmith@msn.com; Kyle K|att; 337@|achoet HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT |amsubmitting this email insupport ofthe proposed Halcyon project. I believe the Halcyon project will be beneficial to the Lake Elmo community for the following reasons-, 1, The project will preserve the history of Lake Elmo through its people and its families. 2. The project will preserve the rural character of Lake Elmo through its green and tranquil landscape. 3, The project provides a valuable community service as a place of dignity,peace and remembrance for the friends and families ofloved ones buried there, 4. The project is well planned and viable, It is privately financed,a permitted use, and meets all C|ty.Countyand Special District requirements with no variances. Thank you for your consideration. Bill and Jan Sanders Frorn: bdbcNnger«bdisch|ngeN@minnesVtacoaches.com> Sent: Monday, September 14,Z0I5IS7PM To: WyleK|att Cc bdischinger Subject: HALCYONCEMETERY PROJECT To Lake Elmo City Council members: I write an behalf and support of the Halcyon Cemetery that has been proposed (approved by the Planning Commission and the Valley Branch Watershed District, and recommended for approval by City Staff). Virtually any project requiring the approvals of all these bodies, with final approval by the Council, is going to have its supporters and detractors. And inall cases, the decision should be made based on what is best and for the good of the community as a whole. Moving ahead on this project is just suchapnjpct—itis good for the whole. Yes, all voices should beheard. However, if it is truly not good for the detractors, |tisprobably not good for the community. But, ifitistruly good for the community, the detractors opposition isprobably not truly valid — rather, the opposition islikely rooted inpersonal and/or individually vested interest, This is a project truly good for the whole community, including the extended neighboring communities. And )would encourage the Council toapprove itassoon asitispractical kzdoso. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Bruce H.Dischin8er Zl4lN.Avon St. Roseville, &1NS5Il3 John Van Va|kenbupg 'vaova|kanburg@gertenvanvzom^ Monday, September l4'2OI5 5:14PM Mike Pearson; Justin 8|oyer;]vUe FUf|et;]iU Lundgren; ann jsnnith@msnznm; Kyle K|att; 397@|ach.net John Van Va|kenburg HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT }amwriting insupport cfLee Rossow'sefforts tobuild acemetery inLake Elmo. | have worked with Mr. Rossow for a number of years and his businesses are of the highest caliber and quality. He dedicates the time and financial resources needed to organize and complete afint rate project. | believe this cemetery will bethe same. Mr. Nosnow has spent many years developing this concept for acemetery. | believe hisawell-planned cemetery and will beanasset tothe community and preserve green spaces. There isaneed for acemetery inWashington County which this project will fill. Except for an occasional burial I cannot imagine significant traffic in any way. There are many far more intrusive and dense building developments that would have significantly less appeal to the city and neighbors. This project will protect and enhance the rural nature cf the area. Halcyon is very personal to Mr. Rossow as he intends to bury his family here and I believe he is dedicated to its extraordinary quality and appeal. Please approve this project. Thank you. John P.Van Va|kenburg Gprten&VanVa|kenburgLaw Office 3O3E.Little Canada Rd. Little Canada, Mn. S5117 Phone. 851,484'7000 Fax: 651'484'6174 The information contained mthis e-mail is attorney privileged and confidential intended for the use of the individual mentity named above, xthe reader u,this message is not the intended recipient, or employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution orcopying of this communication ustrictly prohibited. nyou have received this e-mail inerror, Please immediately notify the sender b'return e-mail and delete the original c-maii xyou are not aclient of Gerten & Van Valkenburg, P.A. by virtue of having signed a retainer agreement with the firm,nothing contained mthis e- mail shaUuecom`idpredv,ue|eKa|vdmcewhich should kprelied upon by the reader orany other party and nnattorney-client relationship is intended, either expressed orimplied. HALCYON APPROVAL SUPPORT Dear Sir or Madam I am writing this in support of the Halcyon Cemetery proposal you have before you by Mr. Lee Rossow. I understand there is some hesitation within the community to implement this project and I just wanted to add my own vote for the following reasons to name a few: 1. The cemetery is promising to encompass services and provisions for people of all faith traditions. As a chaplain in a long term care facility, 1 know firsthand how important people feel about inclusiveness of their own spiritual practices and sensitivity to those needs. Even those without such a practice want that value to be appreciated. 2. Recognizing this endeavor is the first to be built in many years,it promises to include the most up to date and modern amenities. 3. I know Lee Rossow and his business sense - he will be most accommodating to work with and respectful of all the rules and regulations. I believe the majority of approvals have been given; this demonstrates it is a priority for him in meeting the goals of this space for the needs of others. As a society we have a tendency to ignore what people experience as mourners and grievers during a time that is most difficult, yet avoided because of its very nature. With programs such as palliative care and hospice that is now changing but we have to present to all people of society, a willingness to encompass all aspects of life's journey and that incluLes a final resting place. I hope you will vote affirmatively for this proposal. Sincerely, Trish Flannigan !yle Klatt r From: David Misukanis <djmisukanis@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 12;12 PM To: Mike Pearson; Justin Bloyer; Julie Fliflet; Jill Lundgren; Kyle Klatt; annejsmith@msn.com Cc: 337@lach.net Subject: Halcyon cemetery approval Dear Sir or Madam I am writing this in support of the Halcyon Cemetery proposal you have before you by Mr. Lee Rossow. I understand there may be community concerns regarding the project and would like to share my feedback in support of it. As an individual that has lived nearby and within the city of Lake Elmo over the last 25 years, I believe the Halcyon project is one that will proudly serve the needs of the community I do not believe there are any negative ramifications of the environment with this project such as pollution, noise, ground water. Its location will have little to no impact on the immediate community around it. The vast majority of any traffic would be occurring during normal business hours with very light traffic in the form of visitation before sunset. I have known Lee Rossow for many years. He always has been respectful of all rules, regulations and concerns with those impacted by projects and businesses he has managed. I am highly confident he would continue in those ways as he works with the community to establish the Halcyon Cemetery. Please include my recommendations to move forward with the project as you go through the approval process Sincerely, David Misukanis Larson asked about the need to include the discussion about the sidewalks within the loop roads. Williams noted a lack of support for this recommendation. M/S/P: Dodson/Larson, move to recommend approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan with the conditions outlined in the staff report and added by the Planning Commission based on the findings of fact as amended, Vote; 5-2, motion carried, with Haggard and Lundgren voting no. K4/S/P:Haggard/ und8ren,nnotionthat1heParkConnnnissionphnhtizeStoneKatePark, including the Inwood development portion, in light of the overall development plans for the area around this park. yote:7-O, Motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Dodson/Larson motion to recommend that when HOA's are established, before homeowners move into development, that the City makes sure that a bank account and accounting system is set up to ensure that HOA is viable. Vote: 7-0, Motion carried unanimously. Williams asked for a friendly amendment to clarify that developer's agreement include this provision. Business Item: Sketch Plan - Halcyon Cemetery Johnson presented an overview of a sketch plan review related to a proposed cemetery that would be located at Lake Elmo Avenue and SOmStreet. He noted that sketch plan has been submitted to the City because a cemetery must be processed as a plat. Staff reviewed the site for land use and zoning. Public utilities, private utilities, access, landscaping and tree preservation, screening and fencing, park dedication, and the subdivision review process, Johnson noted that the City has received a letter with questions from the property owner adjacent to the proposed cemetery. This letter was distributed to the Planning Williams asked why the application is coming forward as a plat since the boundaries are not changing. The applicant stated that they would address this question. Dodson questioned how the existing house would beused, Johnson stated that the applicant intends to convert the house into a caretakers residence. Lee Rossow, 11050 501h Street North, addressed the Commission and offered a response to the questions from the adjacent property owner, He noted that: there will be a Cate restricting access tothe site, there will be lights but they will adjust to |nvver levels at night, fencing will be used around the perimeter of the property, with wrought iron Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11-24-14 9 along Lake Elmo Avenue and 5OmStreet North and chain link around the other boundaries, once approved as a cemetery the site can never be used for any other use. There are no dangers for soil contamination since concrete vaults are now/ used for all Mr. Rossow explained the rationale for the creation of a new cemetery and noted that the cemetery would be catering to the needs for modern burials. Bill Sanders, Loukes Associates, Landscape Architect, explained that he has 25 years of experience with cemetery design. Hereviewed the proposed plans for the property, and discussed access to the site, parking, use of the building, and other site design considerations. Hestated that all bodies would be places in concrete vaults and would not pose any risk for soil contamination. Dodson asked for clarification for the ownership of each burial lot. Sanders indicated that the owner will be required tnfile a plat with the County, but any persons that wish to be buried on the site would purchase a right to be buried in the cemetery. State law requires that a portion of any burial fees be placed into a long -care perpetual maintenance fund for the cemetery. Henoted that the tax exempt status takes effect upon filing of final plat for the property. It was noted that the cemetery will be private and non -den omi national, and that Halcyon would not be providing any funeral home services. The overall plan includes space for approximately 1,208buria|s. Williams expressed concern with the access spacing for the proposed driveway and with the overall storm water management plans for the site. The Commission asked general questions concerning the function and operation of the Updates and Concerns Council Updates None Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. December Q,2Ol4 b. Z. Possible 6:30 meeting start time for next year. l Possible Planning Commission Retreat. Commission Concerns Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 11'24'I4 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 2, 2014 ITEM 16: HALCYON CEMETERY SKETCH. PLAN REVIEW Community Development Director Klatt presented overview of the cemetery proposal. Mayor Pearson asked about the park dedication fee, Staff would recommend 4% to be consistent with rural residential development. Council Member Reeves asked if non -denominational cemeteries are still eligible for non-profit status. It was clarified that they are, Lee Rossow, 11050 590 St., applicant, spoke about the proposal, Project Architect Bill Sanders described the proposal in detail. it was noted that there will be no soil contamination due to the type of vaults proposed. How it would be expanded in future was explored, It will be funded for 10 years and there is currently enough capacity to provide space for several hundred years. The cemetery will be governed as part of a trust. The Council discussed including a possible service fee and park dedication fees. Council Member Smith stated she finds the proposal intriguing. Council Members Smith and Bloyer left meeting at 10:20pm. Mayor Pearson called for the tnentioned issues to be addressed when the proposal comes back, Council Member Nelson suggested the City look at the zoning code vis-i-vis cemeteries for the future. Community Development Director Klatt agreed with the suggestion that this land use should be looked at. He said he would add it to the Planning Commission plan of work, NO FORMAL ACTION REQUESTED. THF, CITY OF City ofLake Elmo Planning Cnrnrnisslmn Meeting Minutes ofJuly 13,2O1S Chairman Dodson called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dodson, Dorschncr,VViU/ams Fields, Larson, and Kreinner C[/K4M|SS}C}NEB5ABSENT: Griffin and Haggard STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Johnson & Planning Program Assistant Ziertnnan Approve Agenda: The agenda was accepted as presented. Approve Minutes: June 22,2Q1S M/S/P: WiUimms/Khemer,mmve toapprove minutes as presented, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat and Final Plat — Cemetery Johnson started his presentation summarizing the final plat request for a cemetery at 11OSO5[ynStreet. The staff |srecommending approval subject to8conditions. The site issurrounded byother rural residential properties. This property iscurrently zoned rural residential and |sused asasingle family home. According tothe Lake Elmo Zoning Code, cemeteries are considered opermitted use inthe AG&RRzones. The Valley Branch reviewed this application and approved apermit. The access for the site would come inoff ofSOmstreet. This site would bpserved with City water, and a new septic system would need to be constructed. Asfar asthe platting goes, there will be an additional amount of road right of way of 25 feet needed onLake Elmo Avenue. A|ong5O1h street, anadditional 5feet ofright ofway will be required bythe City. The engineer comments include the required additional right of way for Wh Street. In addition, the private ntorrnxva1ermanagement system must beprivately owned and operated, and a maintenance agreement is required with the City. There were also some construction plan revisions identified by the Engineer. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15 2 Washington County comments include the additional right of way an Lake Elmo Ave. and the need for a county right of way permit to remove the existing driveway and conduct grading inthe right'of-=ay. The review comments ofthe Fire Chief include the need for aproposed hydrant location, fire suppression equipment, proper turning radii and emergency vehicle movements, and height of proposed entrance canopy on the structure to allow for emergency vehicles. Concerns that staff heard from surrounding property owners regarding the application are increased traffic, effect on property values and permanent care of the cemetery, Oonchnerasked what this lot could bedeveloped at. Johnson stated that it|salOacre minimum, so it is at the maximum residential use. Williams asked about the crematory. The Citv5definition includes the ability tohave a crcarnotory. Williams asked ifthat mean that atofuture date this use could beadded, Johnson stated that yes they could if the current definition of cemeteries did not change. Kriemer asked about the areas planned for future phases on the plan, specifically asking about setbacks, Johnson stated that beyond the Sfoot setback, there bnoother setbacks inplace. Kreimerasked ifthe fence was onthe property line. Johnson Stated fences can beput onthe property line. Dodson asked who enforces the private drainage. Johnson stated that the City falls under the IVIS4 program and the property owner is required to submit annual reports. Fields asked how much this property currently pays intaxes. Johnson stated that once this property becomes a cemetery, it becomes tax exempt. Lee Rossow, applicant, stated that there would be normal hours of operation, 7 days a week. Rossnvvstated itinalow impact use and takes along time toramp up. There |sa permanent trust fund for maintenance that |sstatutorily required. Williams asked if RoS50W would enter into an agreement not to build a crematorium on this site, Rossovvstated that putting one on the site would be almost impossible. He stated hewould bewilling tosign adocument saying hewould not doso. Dodson asked where the future Qravesiteswould stop. Rossowstated that hewould be surprised if they reached 1000 gravesites in 30 years, so they left that future site a little vague so it could be re-evaluated inthe future. Dodson asked how the transfer of ownership worked from generation togeneration. Rossovvstated that presently there is Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7'l3-l5 anassociation planned with 3committed members. After about Oyears, heplans toOo to a non-profit with a board of8, which should should sustain itself. Kreinnerosked about how many burials are shown right now, Rossovvstated that there is close toZ0ODshown and when iti5built out itisaround 4SOO. Public Hearing opened at7:4Sprn Jean Madrinich, 11420 5 Oth Street N, she stated that when the well house went in, they had a lot of problems with the floodp|ains and she is wondering how this will be addressed. Rossovvstated that the V8VVDstated that noone can beburied below the 1OUyear flood plain. K4adrinichisalso very concerned with the traffic onthe road and there isanother property that wants todoacommercial endeavor. She was also wondering about signage. Rossoestated that there would beanidentifying sign that will probably bemade out ofgranite. Deb Krieger, 4552 Lake Elmo Ave, she is wondering about the parkland dedication. She believes that if itisRRthere should bea4Y6park land dedication. Johnson noted that the subdivision ordinance calls for land dedication for residential subdivisions, whereas the proposed project isapub/ic/ckvicuseunderthe[itv5ZoninOCode.Sheisa|so wondering about the board and the trust fund. Rossmwstated that they will follow the state statute. Krieger asked if fence is required around a cemetery. Johnson stated that our code does not require itorexclude it. Krieger stated that she would like tosee no fencing. She isworried about the traffic, especially with afuneral procession, She is wondering about setbacks. 5O-O096ofdeaths are cremations and she iswondering where those will happen. She reiterated the need for apermanent care fun and following state statutes as they relate to cemeteries. Dodson asked Ro»som/how they handle winter burials. Rossovvstated that there b equipment that isused toprepare the ground. Hr-stated that the bodies would be stored in n mausoleum until the ground is thawed. Rossovvstated that afence is a must for security and twdeter vandalism. Janet Thompson, 11491 50th Street, stated that she believes this use to be a large commercial venue placed within their residential area. They purchased their property in arural area, not tnbeplaced next tomausoleums. Rebecca Tenpas, I1330501h Street, ask the Planning Commission tothink about the rural areas and what people think about for that type ofenvironment. She thinks this commercial venue does not fit inwith the rural character. She isconcerned about the ttraffic.50m street has become avery busy road. The surrounding uses around this are all single family homes and this should be a single family home as well. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15 4 w FUchDay, prope�yovvneronSO Street, iswondering ifthere isanenvironment impact statement with this request. The storm water from the Rossnxv property runs to his property to the south. Hewanted toensure that this project wou|dntincreasethe water flow to his property. Johnson noted that the Valley Branch Watershed District did review the proposed storm water facilities and found them to be in compliance with watershed rules. State requirement do not allow post development water volume and velocity toincrease from the existing condition. Johnson also stated that the proposed use would likely not meet the threshold for an environmental assessrnentwvn,ksheet, but the City has the discretion to require one. ]eff,eySaffe, 1I180 50* Street noted that they have an easement that nuns to the east of this property. Heisconcerned about the LED lights and would like assurance that this will conform tothe dark sky ordinance. Rossnvvstated that the only LED Lights would beinthe parking lot. Atnight they will godown toalmost off when the day isover and they will all have hoods nnthem. Saxe Roberts, 111555OmStreet, did research about property values and itisthe results are mixed or inconclusive as staff suggested. However, some people just don't like cemeteries. They put a significant investment into their property and feel that it will affect the value. Heisalso concerned about the traffic and especially with funeral processions. The City received no written or electronic correspondence. Public Hearing closed at8:2Spnn Williams heard 4 major concerns. Traffic, property values, commercial in residential and storm water. V8VVDisthe custodian ofstorm water. They are the experts, soifthey issued the permit, |tmust beontrack. Dorschner stated that usually the funeral processions are during business hours and not during rush orpeak travel hours. Kne|mermxou|d like to add a tree transplant warranty, he would like to see trees planted around the property line, add something regarding the crematorium and would like to stipulate that the trust fund be governed by the Minnesota cemetery association. Dodson feels that this should be split between preliminary plat and final plat with more detailed plans. Johnson stated that applications that proposed 10 proceed with preliminary and final plat concurrently are accepted when there is little to no public infrastructure. |naddition, the scope orsize ofthe plat also determines ifthe process can be expedited. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13'I5 5 Williams is wondering if a condition could be added that if any design changes occur to the main structure, that it complies with the Cities design standards. K4/S/P: Fie|ds/Doruchner, Move toadd a condition that development ofa crematorium isexcluded from use onthis property. Motion withdrawn M/S/P: Williams/Fields, move that any future expansion of the site, including plans to install a crematorium, must be reviewed and approved by the City, Vote/6'C\ motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Williams/Kreimer, move to add condition that the Cities dark sky ordinance will be followed, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, move that any alterations to existing building conform to the City's design standards. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, move that draft finding number 5 read "That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards, except where noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015 and the Fire Chiefs letter dated July 7, 2015. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. k4/S/P:VViIlia nns/Dorschner,move toadd draft finding number 6that the applicant has committed to o permanent trust fund according to state statute. Vote,6-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Kreimer/Larson, move that if trees that are transplanted die within two years, they will be replaced, Vote; 6-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Kreimer/Williams: Landscape plan shall be amended to add plantings along the Eastern and Northern property lines consistent with screening requirements specified in 154.258.F of the City Code, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously, M/S/P: Fields/Dodson Move that any annual financial reporting regarding the permanent care trust fund that is sent to state or federal authorities also be submitted tothe City. Withdrawn M/S/P: Dorschner/Williams, move that minutes from annual meetings, including the annual financial reporting, besubmitted tothe City. Vote: G-CLmotion carried M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, Move to recommend approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary & Final Plat with the conditions of approval as drafted by Staff and amended Lal<e Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15 6 by the Planning Commission and based on the findings of fact listed in the Staff Report Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES July 21, 2015 17. HALCYON CEMETERY PRELIMINARY A.ND FINAL PLAT Community Development Director Klatt reviewed the request for approval of a preliminary and final plat for a cemetery located at 11050 50th Street North and reported on the six conditions on the Planning Commission recommendation for approval. The applicant, Mr. Lee Rossow addressed the Council and provided background information on the project. Mr. Rossow explained the proposed site improvements and anticipated operations of the cemetery and conversion of the existing single family home to offices, caretaker living quarters, and a facility to hold gatherings and services. Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33'" Street N., asked when cemeteries were added to the Comp Man and stated they were not allowed under the old Ordinance. Dunn added that there was a pet crematorium in the City in the past and it vas a problem. Dunn also commented on the tax exempt status of cemeteries. Kristy Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., stated she purchased her home two and an half years ago because she wanted to be in a rural residential area with her six children and never imagined a commercial property across the street. Ms. Roberts expressed concern over property values if this application is approved. Saxe Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., stated that the rural residential intended use is for single family homes on a large lots and questioned how a cominercial parking lot is allowed in that zone. Mr. Roberts expressed concern over the operation of the cemetery and the lack of park dedication funds from this development. Rebecca Tenpas, 11330 50th Street N., stated her opposition to the application due to it being a commercial venue, noting that it may fit the rules but not thc neighborhood. James Tenpas, 11330 50th Street N., stated that the City needs to protect its rural residential residents and not allow this additional traffic on 50" Street. Mr. Tcnpas stressed that this is a permanent decision. Sadie Tenpas, 11330 50th Street N., voiced opposition to the project, stating that there are environmental and aesthetic consequences, hams to property values, and commercial use in rural residential zone. Ms. Tenpas also expressed concern over long term maintenance and upkeep of the property. Janet Thompson, 11491 50th Street N., stated that the zoning allows this type of use but it does not fit with the neighborhood. Ms. Thompson also stated she is opposed to a business like this that will attract vandals. Richard Hesse, 5235 Kirkwood Ave., read an email he sent to the Councilmembers and stated that no business should be allowed at this site and stated many concerns regarding the proposal. Deb Krueger, 4452 Lake Ehno Ave., questioned if the Planning Commissioners did their research or were familiar with City codes, Ms. Krueger expressed concern over the care hind at the State of Minnesota and asked the Council to table the request to allow for further research. Cotntnunity Development Director Klatt read an email frornJean Madrinich, 11240 50th Street, expressing opposition to the project. Councilmember Bloyer asked City Attorney Snyder and Community Development Director Klatt for guidance, as he felt the City Council vas not comfortable with the proposal. Councilmember Hiflet asked for further definition of "cemetery" and Councilmember Lundgren requested further definition of "funeral home." LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES July 21, 2015 Councilmember Sniith moved TO TABLE THE REQUEST FOR FURTHER CITY REVIEW. Councilmember Killer seconded the .motion. MOTION PASSED 5 O. KE ELMO AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION DATE: I 0/6/2015 REGULAR AGENDA ITEM #12 AGENDA ITEM: Plat Approval Process/Conditions of Approval SUBMITTED BY: Councilmember Fliflet THROUGH: Administration REVIEWED BY: Councilmember Fliflet SUGGESTED ()I2.1)1'..R. OF 1 USINESS: I nt roduct ion oF [ten ..... ..... ..... ..„ ......... Counci Imentber FIi net Report/Presentation _ ..... ('ounci [member 'Fl jilet Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates ('all I:Or Motion ..... ..... ............ ........ ............ Mayor & Oty Council Discussion .......... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion ...... ......... .......... ...... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Councilmember Fliflet FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: Council is being asked to discuss the process under which plats are brought forward for approval. Several areas of concern have been identified including: • Parks Commission concerns and recommendations not being brought forward with the Plat approval (this was brought up and identified as a problem at our joint council/parks conunission meeting) • Landscape architect concerns and recommendations not being brought forward with the Plat approval (this was brought forward as a concern by our landscape architect) • The number of conditions accompanying plat approvals • The follow up to ensure all conditions are met following plat approvals • The follow up to ensure landscape plans and other items are in compliance with approved plats • Developers granted permission for grading before tree preservation plans have been discussed and adopted • Release/reallocation of special assessments/liens with the county without City Council approval -- page 1 -- TI IL (Try or, jAIN 7E RN' 0 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION DATE: REGULAR ITEM October 6, 2015 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements — Resolution Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling Hearing on Improvement Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator Julie Johnson, City Clerk Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of kern ..... .... ..... City Engineer Report/Presentation.. ...... . ....... ....... City Engineer - Questions from Council to Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..... . ..... ..... Mayor & City Council ..... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion. ........ ................ ........... Mayor Facilitates 14 POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The Feasibility Report was previously authorized. Calling for and conducting the Public Improvement Hearing is included in the feasibility report scope of services. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider adopting Resolution No. 2015-XX receiving the Feasibility Report and calling for a Public Improvement Hearing for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements to be held on November 3, 2015. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [RegularAgenda Item A7 October 6, 2015 "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-79, receiving the Feasibility Report and calling !fearing for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements." LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2016 Street Improvements were identified in the City's 5-Year Street Capital Improvement Program. The City is also responding to petitions for municipal water along Kelvin Avenue North. The feasibility report was authorized by the city council on August 4, 2015 in order to ready these improvements for 2016 construction. A feasibility report must be prepared to meet state statutory requirements i any portion of the project is to be assessed to benefitting properties. The report identifies the necessary iinprovements, the estimated project costs, the assessment methodology and preliminary assessment amounts to be levied against properties adjacent to and benefitting from the street, drainage and utility improvements. The improvements consist of the following: • Reconstruction of Kirkwood Avenue North from 50th Street to the north cul-de-sac. The improvement includes a new bituminous surface along an existing gravel roadway. In 2011 the property owners petitioned the City to be scheduled within the Street CIP for a new paved roadway. • Reconstruction of Kelvin Avenue North from Old TH5 to the north cul-de-sac. The report considers improvements to convert a portion of a private drive serving 8 residential properties to a public street. The converted street would become an extension of Kelvin Avenue North. • Resurfacing the streets through a street reclaim within the Stonegate 1s1 Addition, including 9th Street North, Jasmine Avenue Place North, and Jasmine Avenue North from 10th Street to Julep Avenue North. • Based upon receipt of a property owner petition, extension of 6-inch, 8-inch and 12-inch diameter lateral and trunk watermain is considered along Kelvin Avenue North with service stubs to existing properties. Recommendation of associated watermain improvements is dependent upon support of the property owners to be 100% assessed. The total estimated project cost is $1,409,000. The street improvement portion is $1,195,000 and the watermain improvement is $214,000. The improvements would be partially assessed against the benefitting properties consistent with the City's Special Assessment Policy. Residential street improvements are typically assessed 30% of the total project costs while watermain improvements are assessed 100% to the benefitting properties. Kirkwood Avenue North property owners will be assessed 100% of the bituminous paving costs and 30% of the remaining base and shouldering improvements, since the bituminous surface is a new improvment. The City's general tax levy typically covers the bond payments for the remaining street improvements. The Water Enterprise Fund is used the cover the watermain oversize or trunk costs. A lateral benefit assessment would be levied against properties along the proposed trunk watermain on Kelvin page 2 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item XJ October 6, 2015 Avenue. Assessments for street improvements are levied over 10 years while assessments for watetmain improvements area levied over 15 years. The feasibility report findings and recommendations will be further presented at the meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2015-79, receiving the Feasibility Report and calling Hearing for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements. The recorrunended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-79, receiving the Feasibility Report and calling Hearing for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements." ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Resolution 2015-79 Receiving the Feasibility Report for the 2016 Street Improvements. 2. Notice of Hearing on Improvement. 3. Location Maps. 4. Project Schedule. 5. Feasibility Report (available for review at City Hall) -- page 3 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-79 A RESOLUTION RECEIVING A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to city council authorization, adopted on August 4, 2015, a feasibility report has been prepared by FOCUS Engineering, Inc. for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements; and WHEREAS, the feasibility report recommends that benefitting properties along the project route be assessed all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to the city's Special Assessment Policy and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429; and WHEREAS, the feasibility report provides information regarding whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvements as recommended; and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That the City Council will consider the improvements in accordance with the report and the assessments of the abutting properties for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Chapter 429 with an estimated total project cost of $1,195,000 for the street improvements and an estimated total project cost of $214,000 for the wateninain improvements. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 31'd day of November, 2015, in the council chambers of the City Hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2015. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk Resolution No. 2015-X.X LEGEND 2016 STREET IMPROVEMENTS THE CITY (,)I" AKE ELMO ENGINEERING 2016 STREET IMPROVEMENTS __ PROJECT NO. 2015.129 SEPTEMBER, 2015 CITY OF , LAKE ELMO LOCATION MAP KIRKWOOD AVENUE NORTH & KELVIN AVENUE NORTH LEGEND 2016 STREET IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING 2016 STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2(115.129 SEPTEMBER, 2015 10TH ST N CITY OF LAKE ELM() FIGURE NO. 2 LOCATION MAP STONEGATE 1ST ADDITION PRELIMINARY PROJECT SCHEDULE � CITY OFLAKE E |KH[l 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 20l5.129 4UGLST20I5 August 4,2Ol5 October 6'2U1S Council authorizes Feasibility Report. ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Gehmren,pE. Jack Griffin,pE. Ryan Stemp��P.[. Chad |sakson, P.E. 6s13O0/Q61 651.300.4264 651.300.4267 651300.4283 Presentation of Feasibility Report. Council accepts Report and calls Hearing. November 3, 2015 Public Improvement Hearing. Council orders preparation of Plans and Specifications. February l6,ZO16 Council approves Plans and Specifications and orders Advertisement for Bids. March 17, 2016 Receive Contractor Bids. April 5, 2016 Council accepts Bids and awards Contract. May Z,2Ol6 Conduct Pre -Construction Meeting and issue Notice toProceed. August 12,2O1O Substantial Completion. September ][\2O16 Final Completion. DATE: REGULAR ITEM # AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Water Booster Station Improvements — Review Buildi Options SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer THROUCH: REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator October 6, 2015 Architecture SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item City Engineer - Report/Presentation City Engineer Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates Public Input, i f Appropriate........... ....... . ............ ...............................Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ....... ..... ............. Mayor & City Council Discussion ............. ..... ..... Mayor & City Council Action on ...... ....... Mayor Facilitates 15 POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: To be determined. The purpose of this item is to introduce architectural design options and the associated costs for each option for the Inwood Water Booster Station along Inwood Avenue just south of 26th Street North. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to review architectural options presented at the meeting and to provide direction regarding architectural preferences and associated costs. The City Council may consider approving the building architecture for the Inwood Water Booster Station, The recommended motion for this action would be as follows: "Move to approve the building architecture fnr the Inwood I'Vater Rooster Station as directed by Council at the meeting." -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item Al October 6, 2015 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Inwood Booster Station project is needed to deliver City water service to support the growth and development in the 194 corridor, residing in the high water pressure zone. The City has recently completed the purchase of the water booster station site and is moving forward with the final design for the purpose of obtaining contractor bids in early 2016. Staff is looking for direction from the Council on the architectural look of the booster station in order to complete the final plans and specifications. The building structure will be approximately 40-feet by 28-feet to house pumps, discharge piping, electrical equipment, and chemical feed equipment. The building environment is huinid and corrosive due to chemicals, so the general building structure will be a slab on grade with masonry load bearing walls and a protective/water resistant coated ceiling. For the exterior architecture, the base plan (or low cost option) provides a decorative split face block with gable roof and asphalt shingles similar to the Pumphouse No. 4 building exterior recently constructed along 50' Street. At the request of the property owner, the design consultant has prepared additional options for review and consideration, essentially replacing the block with a stone veneer. Each option and associated construction cost will be presented at the meeting with the intent to have Council provide direction on the style, look, and budget of the building for final plan preparation purposes. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council review architectural options presented at the meeting to provide direction regarding architectural preferences and associated costs. The City Council may consider approving the building architecture for the Inwood Water Booster Station. The recommended motion for this action would be as follows: "Move to approve the building architecture Or the Inwood Water Booster Station as directed hy Council at the meeting." ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Site Location Map. -- page 2 -- 3/11/2014 Washington County Property \Amer NVi 41ingt .)prinxirnate Be,aster Station te Location Sign in http://maps.co,washing ton.mn.us/PropertyVieyver/ 1/1 H IF. crrY AKE ELMO AYO & COUNCIL CO DATE: REGULAR ITEM # UNICATION October 6, 2015 16 AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) — Approve Engineering Services Task Order for Design and Construction. SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer SUGC;ESTED 01(1)ER OF 'BUSINESS: Introduction of hem City Engineer Report/Presentation_ „ Engineer Questions front Council to ........ Mayor Facilitates Public input, if Appropriate... Facilitates Call for Motion ..... ...... Mayor &. C:ity Council ...... Mayor & City Council Action on ..... • ..... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER : Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $65,700 to complete the preliminary and final design including the preparation of plans and specifications and bidding services. Authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) commits the City to incur the engineering costs necessary to complete detailed design and receive contractor bids to ready the project for 2016/2017 construction. The council will be asked to award a contract for construction in March 2016 once contractor bids are received, at which time the City would commit to the remaining project costs. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to award a Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract to SEH for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project. The recommended motion for the action is as follows: City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item XJ October 6, 2015 "]Itove to approve a Pro essional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract with SEH for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project in an amount not to exceed S108,500." LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) Improvement is a $3.0 million project. The elevated storage tank will provide water supply and fire suppression storage for the City's high pressure zone in the southwest portion of the City. The facility will be constructed on a 1.5 acre site located along Inwood Avenue approximately half -way between 10'1' Street and 151' Street. The site was purchased by the City in 2015. The Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) will be partially funded using MN -DEED Grant funds and partially funded through the issuance of general obligation bonds with bond payments made from the water enterprise funds. The project need and location is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Water System Plan and was programmed in the Capital Improvement Plan for constniction in 2015/2016. The project has been delayed due to the delay in the City's MN -DEED grant receipt. Proceeding at this time will bring the water tower into operation in the summer/fall 2017. To complete the engineering design, the City Engineer prepared and sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Engineering Support Services that includes the preparation of plans and specifications; plan printing, distribution and bidding services; construction administration, and construction observation. FOCUS Engineering will provide council communication, project management, construction administration support, and will oversee the project design standards and documents to be incorporated with the project plans. The RFP was sent to five firms from the City's Engineering Consultant Pool, including AE2S, Bolton and Menk, MSA, SEH, and TKDA. The proposals were received on September 22, 2015. Upon a detailed review of the proposals it is the City Engineer's recommendation to enter into a services agreement with SEH for this project. Proposals were reviewed and ranked on the following basis: • Project Team Qualifications with a focus on a Project Manager and Team with specific elevated storage tank experience including composite elevated storage tanks. Demonstrated understanding and experience with the project and understanding of the critical success factors for the City of Lake Elmo. • Understanding the scope of work and roles and responsibilities of the Consultant. • Collaboration of skills and responsiveness demonstrated during the RFP submittal process. • Engineering Fees, with a detailed breakdown that is consistent with the Consultant's written work plan in the proposal. The attached table summarizes the fees proposed by each consultant, ranging from $108,500 to $198,690. Engineering Fees are subtotaled for each project phase including Plans and Specifications, Bidding, and Construction Services. The size and style of tower will be determined during the preliminary design phase of the improvements. The City Engineer is recommending a contract be awarded to SEH, Inc. SEH has assigned a qualified team appropriate for the level of work required for this project, they were engaged and responsive throughout the proposal preparation process, they have demonstrated a thorough understanding of the work to be performed by them, and they were the lowest cost both with observation and adjusted without observation taken into account. -- page 2 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item .V1 October 6, 2015 RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommendingthat the City Council award a Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract to SEH for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project. The recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve a Professional .Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract with SEH for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project in an amount not to exceed $108,500." ATTACH M ENT(S): 1 . Project location map. 2. Proposal. Fee Summary. -- page 3 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA INWOOD WATER TOWER (NO. 4) PROJECT NO. 2015.130 DATE RECEIVED: SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 PROPOSAL FEE SUMMARY - AS RECEIVED Total Project Preliminary Consulting Firm P&5 Bidding Construction Engineering Management Design AE25 $119,700 50 $15,500 $43,400 $4,500 $52,900 Bolton & Menk, Inc. $198,690 512,600 $11,685 $51,475 $6,090 $116,840 MSA Professional Services, Inc. $127,149 $8,100 $16,713 548,788 $7,514 $46,034 SEH, Inc. $108,500 SO $10,600 $35,600 $4,000 $58,300 TKDA, Inc. $122,900 $11,500 $23,400 $31,400 $6,300 $44,400 PROPOSAL FEE SUMMARY - STAFF ADJUSTED Total Project Preliminary Consulting Firm Engineering Management Design AE25 $119,700 Bolton & Menk, Inc. $198,690 MSA Professional Services, Inc. $127,149 SEH, Inc. $108,500 TKDA, Inc, $122,900 P&S Post Construction Construction Services Observation $3,400 Options SO $5,900 Bidding Construction Post Construction Construction Total W/O Services Observation Observation $3,300 514,760 $40,840 $4,500 $31,910 $6,640 $17,750 5101.959 $12,600 $11,685 $51,475 $6,090 $37,380 $4,820 $74,640 $124,050 $8,100 $16,713 $48,788 $7,514 $29,026 $8,208 $8,800 5118,349 $2,889 $10,130 $33,181 $4,000 $20,375 $1,889 $36,036 572,464 $11,500 $23,400 $31,400 $6,300 $27,136 $5,900 $17,264 5105,636 ory \KE ELM() AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION DATE: October 6, 2015 REGULAR ITEM 18 AGENDA ITEM: Time limit to City Council Meetings SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder Interim City Administrator THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Dave Snyder SUGGESTED OR . SINESS: - Introduction of Item ................ ...... Administrator - ..... . ....... - Questions from Council to Staff............. ....... ..... Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ...... . ..... Mayor & City Council - I)iscussion.......... ..... .............. ....... Mayor & City Council - Action on .......... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Clark Schroeder FISCAL IMPACT: none SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: Due to city council meetings running 5 to 6 hours in length, it is the recommendation of the Administrator that an ordinance be adopted that will limited how long meetings can run. The ordinance dictates that the meeting adjourn at 10prn unless 4/5ths of the council members present vote to extend the meeting for an additional 15 minutes. RECOMMENDATION: "Move to adopt ordinance 08-127" ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 08-127 -- page CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 08-127 AN ORDINANCE GOVERNING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Regular meetings of the city council shall be automatically adjourned at 10:00 p.m. unless 4/5ths of councilmembers present vote to extend the meeting for one additional 15 minutes. If the vote to extend the meeting does not garner a 4/5th majority, the meeting is adjourned. Any agenda items not completed or acted upon at the time of adjournment shall be carried forward to the next regular meeting of the city council, unless referred to an earlier called additional regular meeting or special meeting of the council. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. This Ordinance 08-127 was adopted on this day of October 2015, by a vote of Ayes and Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-127 was published on the day of , 2015.