HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-07-14 CCMP
NOTICE OF MEETING
City Council Meeting
Tuesday, October 7, 2014 7:00 P.M.
City of Lake Elmo | 3800 Laverne Avenue North
AGENDA
A. Call to Order
B. Pledge of Allegiance
C. Roll Call
D. Order of Business
E. Approval of Agenda
F. Accept Minutes
1. Accept September 16, 2014 City Council Meeting Minutes
G. Council Reports
• Mayor
• Council
H. Presentations/Public Comments/Inquiries
2. Recognition of Dave Moore’s service to City
3. EDA Appointments – Linda Larson & Mark Gaertner
4. Rural Development Report and Update
I. Finance Consent Agenda
5. Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll
6. 2014 Stormwater Assessments; Resolution No. 2014-78
7. Production Well No. 4 – Pay Request No. 8
J. Other Consent Agenda
8. Encroachment Agreement – 5388 Marquess Trail
9. Volleyball Courts at Pebble Park
10. Ball Field Fencing at VFW and Reid Parks
11. Call for Public Hearing for Redevelopment Plan Proposed by the EDA; Resolution No. 2014-79
K. Regular Agenda
12. Massage Therapy License; Public Hearing
13. 2015 Street and Utility Improvements – Approve Feasibility Report and Order Public Hearing; Resolution No. 2014-80
14. Hammes Estates Final Plat; Resolution No. 2014-81
15. Hammes Estates Developer’s Agreement; Resolution No. 2014-82
16. Hunter’s Crossing Developer’s Agreement; Resolution No. 2014-83
17. Savona 1st and 2nd Addition Assessment Reallocation
L. New Business
18. Sanctuary Park Equipment Installation
M. Staff Reports and Announcements
• City Administrator
• City Attorney
• Planning Director
• City Engineer
• Finance Director
• City Clerk N. Adjourn
Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible
Manner While Preserving the City’s Open Space Character
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Council Members Wally Nelson, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer, and Mike Reeves.
Staff present: City Administrator Zuleger, City Attorney Snyder, Community Development Director Klatt,
City Engineer Griffin, Finance Director Bendel, and City Clerk Bell.
PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Council Member Bloyer pulled Item 13 for discussion. Council Member Smith pulled Items 9 and 12 for discussion.
MOTION: Council Member Bloyer moved TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AS AMENDED. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 1: ACCEPT MINUTES
THE SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES WERE APPROVED AS PRESENTED BY CONSENSUS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
COUNCIL REPORTS:
Mayor Pearson: attended meeting with residents of the Hamlet neighborhood regarding sewer hook-up; met with Commissioner Kriesel and County Staff on a few matters, attended Gateway Corridor meeting and
library event. Reported making headway on the library JPA with the county; attended groundbreaking for Family Means youth center. It was a great event with a great group.
Council Member Smith: attended finance committee meeting; noted that some Planning Commissioners
she has spoken with want the planning packets to be in a consistent format and more time to review; called for an action item list to determine the status of development conditions being met; read statement regarding
moments of silence. A moment of silence was held for staff members Cathy Bendel and Joan Ziertman who recently lost their father and for resident Kacee Tollefsbol and her sister Ashlee Steele, who were recently killed.
Council Member Bloyer: attended finance committee meeting, groundbreaking for Family Means, and library event to meet the new director.
Council Member Reeves: met the new library director; met with Commissioner Kriesel and Wayne
Sandberg.
Council Member Nelson: attended Hamlet neighborhood meeting, library event to meet the new director,
and Parks Commission meeting on September 15th; HR Committee will be meeting soon to finalize performance management process; attended Gateway Corridor meeting and library event.
PRESENTATION: 36TH & 37TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS
City Administrator Zuleger read the resident submitted letter. The letter called for postponing the street
improvements. Mayor Pearson noted that the city is considering the question of how to deal with urban and
rural roads.
PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES
Steve DeLapp, 8468 Lake Jane Trl., spoke about city densities. He called for a moratorium on development.
Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd St. N., requested the current city debt amount. She spoke about pausing growth instead of using the term moratorium. She called for a city-wide open meeting for all residents. City
Administrator Zuleger stated the debt amount was $18,500,000.00
Page 1 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
Ben Roth, 10819 3rd St. Pl., accused the City of violating the open meeting law. He wanted a more specific description of the April 15 closed meeting that had been reported during a previous meeting.
Ed Klein, St. Paul, is currently Council Member Smith’s Realtor license broker. He spoke about how he would have handled complaints.
Jay Johnson, 12153 Marquess Ln. N., Anne Smith’s husband spoke alleged that the council, attorney, and
staff have gone too far in restricting her. He criticized the city for not following the civility rules.
Kofi Bruce, 11671 56th St. N., spoke about the Sanctuary Park playground. He did not understand the
process that took place to delay installing the park. He wants the park installed.
Ben Backberg, 5693 Linden Ave. N. spoke about not receiving proper notice about Parks Commission meeting that took place on 9/15/2014 that discussed the Sanctuary Park playground according to the city
code. He wants the park installed.
Mayor Pearson and Council Member Reeves responded to some of the public comments regarding the park and the council-staff relations. The park approval process was further explained. Also, due to privacy rules,
there are restrictions on what can be disclosed publicly regarding the personnel matter. Council Member Bloyer asked that the park be placed back on the agenda. City Administrator Zuleger responded that the item
will be on the first meeting in October. Council Member Nelson also wants the park back on the agenda.
Teresa Silvernale, 11751 58th St. N., spoke about her involvement in having the park built. She asserted that Council Member Smith was the party responsible for stopping the park being installed. Ms. Smith responded
that she did not stop the park, but asked that it be held for two weeks to make sure the process had been properly followed.
ITEM 2: PROCLAMATION – CONSTITUTION WEEK
Mayor Pearson read the proclamation recognizing the week of September 15th 2014 as Constitution Week.
PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES (Cont’d)
Deb Krueger, 4452 Lake Elmo Ave. N., spoke about the Wildflower development. She claimed to not be
notified as she believed she was entitled.
Todd Ptacek, 812 Julep Ave. N., spoke about being concerned about the impact of the previously approved
Kwik Trip station. Community Development Director Kyle explained that there has been no change as the parcel has always been guided for commercial.
Curtis Monteith, 331 Julep Ave. N., spoke about the Stonegate Park and the surrounding development. He
asked that the City consider increasing the green space/lung space of Stonegate Park.
ITEM 3: PROCLAMATION – VOLKSMARCH
Council Member Bloyer read the proclamation recognizing Sunday, October 11, 2014 as the first Annual
Volksmarch.
FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA
4. Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll
5. Accept Financial Report dated August 31, 2014 6. Accept Building Report dated August 31, 2014
7. Accept City Assessor Report dated August 31, 2014 8. Pumphouse No. 4 Improvements – Pay Request No. 4 9. Lake Elmo Avenue Watermain Improvements – Pay Request No. 2
10. 2014 Street Improvements – Pay Request No. 2 11. Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements – Call for Final Assessment Hearing; Res. No. 2014-
68
12. Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements – Call for Final Assessment Hearing; Res. No. 2014-69
13. Special Assessment Abatement Request – MN DNR Land; Res. No. 2014-70 MOTION: Council Member Nelson moved TO APPROVE THE FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA AS
AMENDED. Council Member Bloyer seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
OTHER CONSENT AGENDA
Page 2 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
14. Authorize John Schiltz to dispense Beer and Wine Coolers at the Volksmarch Event on 10/11/2014. MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO APPROVE THE OTHER CONSENT AGENDA AS
PRESENTED. Council Member Reeves seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 9: Lake Elmo Avenue Watermain Improvements – Pay Request No. 2 Council Member Smith explained her reasoning for not supporting this item. She does not approve the
watermain improvement project and wants to be consistent.
MOTION: Council Member Nelson moved TO APPROVE PAY REQUEST NO. 2 TO GM CONTRACTING INC IN THE AMOUNT OF $395,509.31, FOR THE LAKE ELMO AVENUE
TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. Council Member Reeves seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (SMITH – NAY).
ITEM 12: LAKE ELMO AVENUE TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS – CALL FOR FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING; RES. NO. 2014-69
Council Member Smith explained her reasoning for not supporting this item. She again does not support the
watermain project. She wants to be consistent. Council Member Reeves asked what the financial impact would be if the project was stopped at this point. Finance Director Bendel explained that as it is a water
project and is paid out of the water fund, the payments would have to come from somewhere. Ms. Smith
does not want to be forced to accept development simply to pay for it.
MOTION: Council Member Nelson moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2014-69; A
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED, ORDERING PREPARATION OF
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, AND CALLING FOR THE HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE LAKE ELMO AVENUE TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS.
Council Member Reeves seconded the motion.
It was noted that this item is about the assessments for those who will be benefiting from the water line.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (SMITH – NAY).
Anne Bucheck, 2361 Legion Ave. N., asked about the project.
ITEM 13: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ABATEMENT REQUEST – MN DNR LAND; RES. NO.
2014-70
Council Member Bloyer asked for clarification. The DNR objected on the grounds of being a sovereign government and therefore not assessable.
MOTION: Council Member Bloyer moved TO APPROVE ABATEMENT OF $270.00 BECAUSE THE MN DNR OBJECTS TO ASSESSMENT AS A SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENT. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
REGULAR AGENDA
ITEM 15: GATEWAY CORRIDOR LPA RESOLUTION; RES. NO. 2014-71
City Administrator Zuleger presented summary of the proposed Gateway Corridor Bus Rapid Transit line. He explained the proposed resolution. By supporting the resolution now, the city becomes eligible for transit funding.
Lake Elmo requests: 1) is to turn back the section of Hudson Blvd. to Washington County; 2) access plan for Hudson Blvd land owners; 3) locating an eastern Gateway station and dedicated planning resources for transit
oriented development; 4) no interchange at Lake Elmo Ave and I94; 5) security for area is addressed.
Commissioner Kriesel commended Mr. Zuleger’s overview of the project. He acknowledged that there are many unanswered questions. The county has them too. He noted that the resolution is non-binding support.
The County Transit Investment Board funding was also explained.
Page 3 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
Council Member Bloyer asked what benefit would be gained. Mr. Kriesel said that is what the study is for. The economic development is one claimed benefit. Commissioner Lisa Weik explained some of the other
benefits that the project will include and further explained some of the financial breakdown. Traffic lanes and other transportation options were discussed. Council Member Nelson asked about who is doing the study. County Senior Planner Andy Getzlaff explained who would be doing what in regards to the study.
Community Development Director Klatt read letter from business owners along corridor who support the public transportation benefits. Mr. Klatt also explained the Met Council does not see any increase in density
due to transit.
Mr. Nelson asked why all four alternatives are listed in the resolution. It was explained that the crossing location will be studied in depth. By leaving the other alternatives in the resolution it allows the most
flexibility for future stations. Council consensus was in favor of adding the E3 alternative language. It was clarified that light rail is no longer an option. City Attorney Snyder suggested now is the time that Council should add any language that they want.
MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2014-71, TRANSMITTING THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO’S SUPPORT OF THE LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE (LPA) TO
THE RAMSEY COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY, WASHINGTON COUNTY
REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY, AND THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. Council Member Reeves seconded the motion.
Mayor Pearson wants the E3 alternative language added. Mr. Getzlaff suggested adding city also supports an E3 alternative. “The City of Lake Elmo would also support an A-B-C-D2-E3 alignment and continued evaluation as part of the Draft EIS.”
Council member Reeves believes there is a benefit for Lake Elmo if the City’s requested conditions are met.
MOTION PASSED 5-0.
Council Member Bloyer requested a point of privilege at 8:59 pm. Meeting reconvened at 9:05 pm.
ITEM 16: INWOOD PUD CONCEPT PLAN; RES. NO. 2014-72
Community Development Director Klatt presented the PUD proposal by Inwood 10, LLC. Concept plan
includes a mixed-use planned development consisting of 157 Acres including 273 single family residential lots, 144 townhomes, 150 multi-family units, 120 senior townhouse units and approximately 68,814 sq. ft. of commercial/office uses. Mr. Klatt explained the Planning Commission conditions of approval updates.
Council discussed Condition #20 regarding the western placement of the trails, Condition #18 regarding prohibiting multifamily north of 5th street, and Condition #19 regarding sidewalks in cul-de-sacs. The Council
consensus is to have those conditions re-evaluated as to whether they are necessary.
Council Member Smith stated that she had not received this item in her packet. Mr. Klatt explained the number and type of units included in proposal. The density numbers were explained. It was noted that the
northwestern 150 multifamily units would be eliminated and revert back to commercial. Mr. Klatt also explained the PUD was being sought for more flexibility in design.
Pam Morreale, 785 Jasmine Ave. N., read letter from neighbor Tom Fitzgerald (877 Jasmine Ave. N.), who
could not attend meeting. He requested that the council deny the PUD based on the density. He also demanded that the city rewrite the comprehensive plan. Ms. Morreale read the petition that Stonegate
submitted to the Planning Commission.
John Rask from Hans Hagen Homes presented the proposed development.
Wayne Prowse, 697 Julep Ave. N., spoke about preserving the Lake Elmo heritage by denying development
that does not fit the character of the City.
Nancy Andert, 697 Julep Ave. N., spoke about the impact on the Stonegate neighborhood. Requested that council deny PUD.
Page 4 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
Michael Lancette, 832 Jasmine Ave. N., spoke in opposition to the PUD. He also identified specific issues he had with some of the conditions of approval.
Curt Montieth, 331 Julep Ave. N., asked if council had enough time to review the proposal. Council clarified that they had received the info along with the Planning Commission and Park Commission meetings.
City Administrator Zuleger explained staff’s efforts to work with Mr. Montieth on the park issue.
Planning Commissioner Tom Kreimer, 772 Jewel Ave. N. and Stonegate resident, asked council to deny the request.
Planning Commissioner Kathleen Haggard, 12154 Marquess Ln. N., spoke about how the whole
Stonegate neighborhood should have been notified.
Greg Milner, 9073 9th St. N., spoke about his concern about the density and the 100 foot buffer.
Planning Commissioner Jill Lundgren, 8282 Hidden Bay ct. N., took issue with the packet delivery. She does not believe the amount of time is not enough. Asked the council to deny proposal.
David Heinrichs, 781 Jewel Ave. N., asked the council to reconsider the pace of growth.
Council Member Bloyer noted that the city has to pay for the infrastructure in the ground.
Ann Bucheck, 2361 Legion Ave. N., agrees with the petition and urged Council to deny the PUD.
Fred Pomeroy, 687 Jewel Ave. N., opposed to PUD. He thinks that a builder will come back with a better
product if they were forced to.
Ben Roth, 10819 3rd St. Pl., asked that council send the developer back “to the drawing board”
MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2014-072, APPROVING THE INWOOD
PUD GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN. He withdrew his motion.
Council Member Smith presented the REC units previously mandated under the MOU and the new figures
now that the MOU is no longer in effect. She suggested that the city reevaluate the density numbers. Mr. Klatt explained the comp plan and density.
Council Member Reeves noted that the developments Lake Elmo has approved have all been at the lower
end of density figures. He and the mayor believe that it is important to have greater diversity in type of development. The current proposal is only 66% of the maximum density.
Mr. Zuleger explained staff efforts on managing the traffic issues on Inwood and 10th.
Mayor Pearson noted that the developer is following the approved land use plan. The Council clarified and discussed the proposed density. The overall density is 3.4 units per acre. Low density range is 2.5 to 4.0 units
per acre.
Mayor Pearson expressed his desire for further consideration of conditions #19(sidewalks) and #21(designer
lots). City Attorney Snyder explained the legal status of the proposal. It was further explained that the
preliminary plat may contain different final densities when submitted, but it will be within the approved range. Council consensus was to direct the Planning Commission give further consideration of conditions
#19 and #21.
Motion: Council Member Bloyer moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2014-072, APPROVING THE INWOOD PUD GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN, WITH ALL THE PROVISIONS DISCUSSED.
Council Member Reeves seconded the motion.
Page 5 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
Council Member Nelson acknowledged that the proposal is not perfect, but it is a great product and will be good for Lake Elmo. Council Member Smith wishes the numbers were lower but she likes Hans Hagen
product. Council Member Bloyer noted that the city needs to play by the rules that are in place. Council Member Reeves is happy this builder is in Lake Elmo and this development can be something special. Council discussed density ranges versus set density numbers. Mr. Bloyer asked for the last comp plan that was
approved when the city moved to ranges provided to council.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (SMITH – NAY)
Council Member Smith explained she is not against developer or project but wants the parties to work
together.
Meeting recessed at 11:29 pm. Meeting reconvened at 11:34 pm.
ITEM 17: BOULDER PONDS PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN; RES. NO. 2014-73
Community Development Director Klatt presented the Boulder Ponds PUD. The proposal consists of a 162-
unit planned residential development on a 58.3 acre parcel. There will be 98 residential lots in 2 phases. There will be future multi-family units. Mr. Klatt explained the reason for the PUD, which mainly includes a couple
of smaller lots and homes set closer together. Council Member Reeves noted that the proposal was at 61% of
the maximum density.
Deb Ridgeway of OP3 Boulder Ponds Excelsior Group was available for questions. There were none.
MOTION: Council Member Reeves moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-73, APPROVING THE BOULDER PONDS PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN SUBJECT TO 12 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Council Member Smith seconded the motion.
Some of the engineering department and fire department concerns were noted.
MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 18: VILLAGE PARK PRESERVE PRELIMINARY PLAT; RES. NO. 2014-74
Community Development Director Klatt described the proposed development by GSWA. The proposal consists of a 104-unit residential subdivision on a 63.6 acre parcel. Mr. Klatt explained the critical issues that
are still pending. Stormwater management is a large issue. The street light impact fee was noted. Stormwater and regional retention was discussed. The impact these developments will have on the village was discussed. The proposed developments will actually be part of the solution for stormwater management.
The park dedication was discussed. Mr. Klatt noted that because the developer has another project in the Village planning area they are looking to receive credit for one applied to other.
Dave Gonyea noted that the additional infiltration and screening will be an option if the southern 4 homes
on west side of the parkway are removed.
Planning Commissioner Kathleen Haggard, 12154 Marquess Ln. N., spoke in opposition to
development. She wants a grander entrance and additional landscaping. It was agreed that Gonyea could “dress up” the entrance a bit and possibly put an island back in the plans.
MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-74, APPROVING THE
VILLAGE PARK PRESERVE PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBJECT TO 13 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 19: HUNTERS CROSSING FINAL PLAT; RES. NO. 2014-75
Community Development Director Klatt presented an overview of the proposed development by the Ryland Group. The proposal consists of a 51-unit residential subdivision on a 23 acre parcel and includes 22 single
family lots. The phasing and design of 5th Street, access to the development, and landscaping was addressed. City Administrator Zuleger noted that the City has been working on this project for 14 months. What “half the road” means was further explained.
Page 6 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
Tracy Rust explained why the park dedication funds were proposed instead of land. Staff explained that the Regional trail on Manning will connect to the Jr. High.
Planning Commissioner Kathleen Haggard, 12154 Marquess Ln. N., spoke about her concern about the number of conditions attached. She would like the City to be able to check on plat condition completion after approval. She also does not believe that the school facilities are sufficient park facilities due to scheduling. Mr.
Klatt explained that the final plats are not released until all the conditions are met.
Council Member Nelson asked about the required timeline to meet the final conditions.
MOTION: Council Member Reeves moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-75, APPROVING THE
FINAL PLAT FOR HUNTERS CROSSING. Mayor Pearson seconded the motion.
Council Member Nelson noted that this development is also at the low range of density range.
MOTION PASSED 5-0.
Meeting recessed at 12:27 am. Meeting reconvened at 12:31 am.
ITEM 20: SAVONA 2ND ADDITION FINAL PLAT; RES. NO. 2014-76
Community Development Director Klatt summarized the Savona 2nd addition proposal. The second phase includes 45 additional lots. The timing of 5th Street construction was noted.
MOTION: Council Member Bloyer moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-76 APPROVING THE
FINAL PLAT FOR SAVONA 2ND ADDITION. Council Member Reeves seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 21: SAVONA 2ND ADDITION DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT; RES. NO. 2014-77
Community Development Director Klatt summarized the Savona 2nd addition developer agreement. Council Member Nelson asked about the typo in paragraph 33. Staff explained that when the final figures are entered,
it will be corrected.
Lennar representative who was present stated that they have exceeded expectations in the number of lots
being sold.
MOTION: Council Member Reeves moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-77, APPROVING THE DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT FOR SAVONA 2ND ADDITION. Council Member Nelson seconded the
motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 22: WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT; RES. NO. 2014-46
Community Development Director Klatt explained that the previously set conditions for the CPA have been met. Those conditions included the conservation easement agreements between the Fields of St Croix and the
City and Robert Engstrom Companies are completed, the developer makes a good faith effort to satisfy the
adjacent properties regarding screening. The conservancy maintenance was discussed. Robert Engstrom explained that the HOA will assume the maintenance.
Neil Krueger, 4452 Lake Elmo Ave. N., urged the Council to eliminate the twelve lots in the northwest section of the proposal to preserve the viewshed.
MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-46, APPROVING A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF TWO AREAS WITHIN THE WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO
DEVELOPMENT FROM RAD AND OP TO V-LDR AND V-MDR. Council Member Reeves seconded the
motion.
Council Member Smith wants to expand the notification radius. Council Member Reeves asked if the 12
homes could be relocated. Mr. Engstrom said that it is possible. His opinion is that the proposal will be special.
Page 7 of 8
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 2014
MOTION TO AMEND: Mayor Pearson moved TO AMEND THE MOTION BY ADDING THE LANGUAGE “CONTINGENT UPON THE CITY’S APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY AND
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO PUD THAT
CONFORMS SUBSTANTIALLY WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN WITH THE CONVEYANCE AND/OR PROTECTION OF THE PLANNED OPEN SPACE AREAS OF THE CITY AND
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AS STATED THEREIN.” Council Member Reeves seconded the motion to amend. MOTION TO AMEND PASSED 5-0.
ORIGINAL MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 23: 39TH STREET NORTH: STREET AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS – CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
City Engineer Griffin explained the reason for the change order. Engineering conducted some water system analysis and determined that by increasing the size of a section of the 39th Street watermain project from 12 inch to 16 inch, the City can eliminate the need for a water tower. The change order amount is $118,975.00.
The cost of the otherwise needed water tower is $2.1 Million. Finance Director Bendel confirmed that the City could pay for this and then the shortfall would be added to 2015 bonding.
MOTION: Council Member Smith moved TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR THE 39TH
STREET NORTH: STREET AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $118,975.00. Council Member Bloyer seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 24: DISCOVER CROSSING REPAIRS – TA SCHIFSKY QUOTE – $21.9K City Administrator Zuleger provided overview of the item. This has been an ongoing issue for 6 years. The issue includes stormwater problems that have resulted because there is no curb on the island. It was explained
that the funds will be taken out of the stormwater fund. Staff suggested that the amount be increased to $24,000.
MOTION: Council Member Smith moved TO APPROVE AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $24,000 TO
DO THE REPAIRS NEEDED AT THE DISCOVER CROSSING CIRCLE. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Administrator Zuleger: On 10/14/2014 City will be holding a downtown summit/workshop.
City Attorney Snyder: no report.
Community Development Director Klatt: no report.
City Engineer: 39th street construction is underway.
Finance Director Bendel: working on cash flows, enterprise budget, and assessments.
Mayor Pearson adjourned meeting at 1:27 am.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
ATTEST: ______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
_______________________________
Adam R. Bell, City Clerk
Page 8 of 8
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
PRESENTATION
ITEM # 3
AGENDA ITEM: EDA Appointments
SUBMITTED BY: Mike Pearson, Mayor
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Beckie Gumatz, Deputy Clerk
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: Staff/ Lake Elmo EDA
FISCAL IMPACT: NA
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Council is respectfully requested to affirm the following appointments to the City of Lake Elmo Economic Development Authority by taking the following action:
“Move to appoint Linda Larson and Mark Gaertner to the Lake Elmo Economic Development
Authority for six year terms.” LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: In 2013, the City Council authorized the creation of a local
Economic Development Authority (EDA). Per MN State Statutes, the Mayor of a municipality
has the authority and responsibility to appoint members of the local EDA. The appointment must
be affirmed by the members of the City Council. Members Tony Yocum and Jeff Caswell have resigned; therefore, there are two alternate vacancies on the Lake Elmo EDA. Appointing Ms. Larson and Mr. Gaertner will fill out the EDA roster.
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Presentation Item 3]
October 7, 2014
RECOMMENDATION: Council is respectfully requested to affirm the following
appointments to the City of Lake Elmo Economic Development Authority by taking the
following action:
“Move to appoint Linda Larson and Mark Gaertner to the Lake Elmo Economic Development Authority for six year terms.”
AUTHORITY:
2013 Minnesota Statutes: §469.095 COMMISSIONERS; APPOINTMENT, TERMS, VACANCIES, PAY,
REMOVAL.
Subd. 2. Appointment, terms; vacancies. …
(c) Seven-member authority: the commissioners constituting a seven-member authority, two of
whom must be members of the city council, shall be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the city council. Those initially appointed shall be appointed for terms of one, two, three, four, and five years respectively and two members for six years. Thereafter all commissioners shall be
appointed for six-year terms. …
(f) A vacancy is created in the membership of an authority when a city council member of the authority ends council membership. A vacancy for this or other reason must be filled for the
balance of the unexpired term, in the manner in which the original appointment was made. The
city council may set the term of the commissioners who are members of the city council to
coincide with their terms of office as members of the city council.
-- page 2 --
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM #5 MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the amount of $305,718.29
SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
REVIEWED BY: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
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: $305,718.29 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council
is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $305,718.29. 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 Item 5]
October 7, 2014
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 $ 11,212.44 Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept of Revenue 10/2/14
ACH $ 5,961.88 Payroll Retirement to PERA 10/2/14
DD5788-DD5810 $ 29,296.03 Payroll Dated (Direct Deposits) 10/2/14
41875-41881 $ 9,948.27 Accounts Payable 9/29/14
41882-41937 $ 248,699.67 Accounts Payable 10/7/14
2486-2495 $ 600.00 Library Card Reimbursement 10/7/14
TOTAL $ 305,718.29
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
$305,718.29.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Accounts Payable – check registers
-- page 2 --
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM #6 MOTION Resolution 2014-78
AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Certification to Washington County Auditor for the Unpaid
Surface Water Utility Bills
SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
REVIEWED BY: Adam Bell, Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk
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 $22,201.65 in cash flow to the storm water fund in 2015
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 Consent Agenda.
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 10th 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 6]
October 7, 2014
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, 2014.
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 2014-78 2. Exhibit A
-- page 2 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2014-78
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:
1. 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. 3. 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 7th day of October, 2014.
By: __________________________
Mike Pearson
Mayor ATTEST:
________________________________ Adam Bell City Clerk
Resolution 2014-78 1
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM # 7
AGENDA ITEM: Production Well No. 4 – Pay Request No. 8
SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer
THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Mike Bouthilet, Public Works
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS if removed from the Consent Agenda):
- Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates
- Public Input, if Appropriate………………………………….Mayor Facilitates
- Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 8 for the Production Well No. 4 project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion
for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve Pay Request No. 8 to Keys Well Drilling Company in the amount of $29,787.25, for the Production Well No. 4 Project”.
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 7]
October 7, 2014
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Keys Well Drilling Co., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 8
in the amount of $29,787.25. 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 $15,154.38.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 8 for the Production Well No. 4 project. If removed from the consent agenda,
the recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve Pay Request No. 8 to Keys Well Drilling Company in the amount of $29,787.25, for the Production Well No. 4 Project”. ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 8.
-- page 2 --
PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 8
PRODUCTION WELL NO. 4
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
PROJECT NO. 2013.125
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
1 MOBILIZATION / SITE WORK LS 1 $26,000.00 $26,000.00 0.10 $2,600.00 1.00 $26,000.00
2SILT FENCE LF 550 $5.00 $2,750.00 ‐$0.00 275.00 $1,375.00
324‐INCH STEEL CASING LF 95 $200.00 $19,000.00 ‐$0.00 89.00 $17,800.00
424‐INCH OPEN HOLE LF 110 $125.00 $13,750.00 ‐$0.00 122.00 $15,250.00
518‐INCH STEEL CASING LF 210 $80.00 $16,800.00 ‐$0.00 211.00 $16,880.00
618‐INCH OPEN HOLE LF 85 $60.00 $5,100.00 ‐$0.00 81.00 $4,860.00
7GROUT CY 50 $410.00 $20,500.00 ‐$0.00 29.00 $11,890.00
8 EXPLOSIVES LB 400 $28.00 $11,200.00 ‐$0.00 410.00 $11,480.00
9REMOVAL OF ROCK CY 750 $70.00 $52,500.00 ‐$0.00 1071.00 $74,970.00
10 AIR SURGING MOBILIZATION LS 1 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 ‐$0.00 2.00 $9,000.00
11 AIR SURGING DEVELOPMENT HRS 125 $210.00 $26,250.00 ‐$0.00 121.50 $25,515.00
12 TELEVISION SURVEY LS 1 $1,400.00 $1,400.00 ‐$0.00 1.00 $1,400.00
13 TEST PUMP MOBILIZATION & INSTALL.LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 ‐$0.00 2.00 $10,000.00
14 TEST PUMPING HRS 80 $140.00 $11,200.00 ‐$0.00 63.50 $8,890.00
15 TEST PUMPING DISCHARGE PIPE LF 2,500 $5.50 $13,750.00 ‐$0.00 2425.00 $13,337.50
16 SAND CONTENT TESTS EA 5 $50.00 $250.00 ‐$0.00 3.00 $150.00
17 CHEM. ANALYSIS & BACT. TEST LS 1 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 ‐$0.00 1.00 $4,500.00
18 SOUNDS BARRIER CONSTRUCTION SF 1,600 $8.00 $12,800.00 ‐$0.00 ‐$0.00
19 GAMMA LOG EA 1 $800.00 $800.00 ‐$0.00 1.00 $800.00
20 RESTORATION LS 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 ‐$0.00 ‐$0.00
21 WELL PUMP LS 1 $53,250.00 $53,250.00 0.54 $28,755.00 0.92 $48,990.00
TOTALS ‐ BASE CONTRACT $304,800.00 $31,355.00 $303,087.50
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM # 8
AGENDA ITEM: Easement Encroachment Agreement – 5388 Marquess Trail N
SUBMITTED BY: Joan Ziertman, Planning Program Assistant
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Rick Chase, Building Official Adam Bell, City Clerk
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS(if removed from consent agenda):
- Introduction of Item ..................................................................................... Staff
- Report/Presentation………………………................................................Staff
- Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates
- Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the
encroachment agreement for Jesse W. Caskey and Meridith S. Caskey at 5388 Marquess Trail
North as part of tonight’s consent agenda. FISCAL IMPACT: None
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to
authorize as part of tonight’s consent agenda, the execution of an easement encroachment agreement. The City has received a request to install a fence within a drainage and utility easement area at 5388 Marquess Trail North from Jesse Cakey and Meridith Caskey. Approval
of the requested improvement within the City’s drainage and utility easements would allow the
property owners to construct the requested improvement within the City’s drainage and utility
easements located on their private property.
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the easement encroachment agreement as
part of the Consent Agenda. If the City Council removes the item from the Consent Agenda, the
recommended action can be completed through the following motion:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 8]
October 7, 2014
“Move to approve the easement encroachment agreement for Jesse & Meridith Caskey, 5388
Marquess Trail N to install a fence within the City’s drainage and utility easement.”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: The City holds easements of different sizes and for different
purposes on many residential and commercial properties throughout the City. When a resident is
interested in putting a structure within an easement, the city has requested the property owner
provide a site plan showing where the improvement is proposed to be located, a detail of what the improvement will look like and how it will function. After that information is received, staff
reviews the proposed improvement and the use of the easement to determine if the proposed
improvement will impede the functionality of the easement. If staff determines that the
improvement will not negatively impact the functionality of the easement, an approved building
permit showing the requested work and an Easement Encroachment Agreement is needed before the work may commence.
The Easement Encroachment Agreement that has been submitted for Council consideration is for
a fence and has been reviewed by planning staff. The proposed fence meets all city code
requirements and Staff would have otherwise authorized construction of the fence if it did not encroach into a drainage and utility easement.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
Strengths: The easement encroachment agreement is a legal document that has been signed by all property owners seeking to install improvements within an easement. The
document, among other things, indemnifies the city from responsibility if damage occurs
to the improvement or if it needs to be removed at some point in the future.
Weaknesses: None
Opportunities: None
Threats: None
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the aforementioned, Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the easement
encroachment agreement as part of the Consent Agenda. If the City Council removes the item from the Consent Agenda, the recommended action can be completed through the following motion:
“Move to approve the easement encroachment agreement for Jesse & Meridith Caskey to
install a fence line within the City’s drainage and utility easement.”
-- page 2 --
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM# 9
AGENDA ITEM: Pebble Park Volleyball Court
SUBMITTED BY: Alyssa MacLeod, Taxpayer Relations & Communications Coordinator
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Park Commission
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: Park Commission
FISCAL IMPACT: Not to exceed $28,509.31 in parkland dedication funds SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to authorize the expenditure of parkland
dedication funds, not to exceed $28,509.31, to purchase materials and construct a volleyball
court in Pebble Park. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as follows:
“Move to approve the expenditure of no more than $28,509.31 in parkland dedication funds
for the purchase and construction of a volleyball court in Pebble Park.”
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The construction of a volleyball court in Pebble Park was brought to council at the August 5,
2014 meeting. In response to council’s request for more information before approving the
proposal, the park commission would like to present the following facts supporting the selection
of Pebble Park for the location, and the need/demand for a double court in this area. Facts supporting the selection of Pebble Park as the location:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 9]
October 7, 2014 1. The preferred location would be to construct the court in the downtown area, near the
original court in Lions Park. Upon evaluation, the location was deemed unfeasible, due to
drainage issues, and lack of space near the existing court.
2. Reid Park was considered for placement, and it was determined that a court would not fit within the land currently available in the park. 3. Pebble is already equipped with water and additional site needs
Facts supporting need/demand:
1. During the summer months, the existing volleyball court in Lions Park is used at least twice per week. 2. Grassroots interest in volleyball is increasing nationwide. Sand/beach volleyball is one of
only a few team sports that is showing positive growth over the last five years per the
2013 Sports & Fitness Industry Association's Topline Report. Five-year growth rates of
2.5% among core participants and 4.9% among casual participants are eclipsed only by Lacrosse. 3. Double volleyball courts (as opposed to single courts) are needed for team practices, and
tend to draw more users, as there is a better likelihood that playing space will be
available.
4. There is an economy of scale and cost savings building a double court vs. a single court. 5. There are currently only three volleyball courts located in the East Metro between Lake Elmo and Lake Phalen in St. Paul.
The Lake Elmo Park Commission is recommending the construction of a double sand volleyball
court at Pebble Park. The commission had considered adding the court as a second phase of improvements to the park (first phase improvements including play structures, shelter approved at the July 1, 2014 council meeting). Considering construction time and additional monies being
added to the parkland funds with ongoing development, the commission is proposing that the
volleyball court be added in 2014 as part of the first phase improvements.
The park commission initially recommended a not-to-exceed amount of $20,000, based on generic cost speculation. As itemized costs were obtained, it was realized that $20,000 would not
be adequate, with the initial bid totaling $28,509.31 (see attachment 1 & 2). Staff, with support
from the park commission, is recommending that the not-to-exceed amount be increased to
$28,509.31 with the understanding that staff will look for opportunities to reduce costs by completing some of the site prep in-house.
Approval would allow for the site prep to be completed in fall 2014
RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council authorizes the expenditure of parkland dedication funds, not to exceed $28,509.31, to purchase materials and construct a volleyball court in Pebble
Park. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as follows:
“Move to approve the expenditure of no more than $28,509.31 in parkland dedication funds for the purchase and construction of a volleyball court in Pebble Park.”
ATTACHMENT:
1. Cost estimate for site prep 2. Cost estimate for equipment
-- page 2 --
QUOTE
DATE
9/10/2014
QUOTE NO.
25072
NAME / ADDRESS
Alyssa Macleod
amacleod@lakeelmo.org
651-747-3908
55042
United Volleyball Supply, LLC.
14615 NE 91st St. Bldg. B
Redmond, WA 98052
PH: 425-576-8835
FX: 425-827-2230
REP
cr
TOTAL
Celebrating 20 Years in the Volleyball Industry
LOW PRICE GUARANTEE: No one beats our pricing and quality! Some companies try, just let
us know and we will explain the differences and save you money!
DESCRIPTION QTY COST TOTALITEM
POP- GALVANIZED- STEEL-
BAZOOKA
(2) 3-1/2" Schedule 40 Wall Super Strong
10-1/2' or 12' Galvanized Steel Poles
(2) Powder Coated Bazooka Tubes, with
Stainless Steel Set Screws
(1) POP-W Replacement Powder Coated
Winch Assembly,
(1) Pulley Assembly, with Stainless Steel
Nuts
(7) Stainless Steel Connector Bolts and
Nuts. 1/4''-20 x 2 1/4''
(2) Stainless Steel Palm Bolts With Allen
Wrench
(1) Cam-Buckle Tension Strap
2 754.00 1,508.00TPOP-GALV-...
Page 1
QUOTE
DATE
9/10/2014
QUOTE NO.
25072
NAME / ADDRESS
Alyssa Macleod
amacleod@lakeelmo.org
651-747-3908
55042
United Volleyball Supply, LLC.
14615 NE 91st St. Bldg. B
Redmond, WA 98052
PH: 425-576-8835
FX: 425-827-2230
REP
cr
TOTAL
Celebrating 20 Years in the Volleyball Industry
LOW PRICE GUARANTEE: No one beats our pricing and quality! Some companies try, just let
us know and we will explain the differences and save you money!
DESCRIPTION QTY COST TOTALITEM
PBN4: 4" Tape Pro Beach Volleyball Net:
(This is the same net used by professionals
but without logos.)
-32 feet x 39 inches.
-#42 knotted nylon outdoor netting.
-42' Steel Aircraft Cable top and bottom.
-1-1/8" Ash wooden dowels (Stronger than
Maple)
-Triple reinforced netting attachment to
side tapes for extra durability.
-22-oz. 4" UV and mildew resistant vinyl
tapes top, bottom & sides.
-UV and mildew resistant stitching for
prolonged outdoor use.
-Available in other widths for special court
needs. (30', 20', 15', etc...)
(Available in Red, Yellow, Blue, White)
2 210.00 420.00TPBN 4"
color -
1025 1/4" Rope Boundary, Bungee Stakes,
and Hand Winder
(Yellow, Orange)
2 25.00 50.00T1/4" Rope Li...
color -
Page 2
QUOTE
DATE
9/10/2014
QUOTE NO.
25072
NAME / ADDRESS
Alyssa Macleod
amacleod@lakeelmo.org
651-747-3908
55042
United Volleyball Supply, LLC.
14615 NE 91st St. Bldg. B
Redmond, WA 98052
PH: 425-576-8835
FX: 425-827-2230
REP
cr
TOTAL
Celebrating 20 Years in the Volleyball Industry
LOW PRICE GUARANTEE: No one beats our pricing and quality! Some companies try, just let
us know and we will explain the differences and save you money!
DESCRIPTION QTY COST TOTALITEM
VBSP Volleyball Standard Pad. Filled
with 2" polyfoam, 18oz. mildew and UV
resistant vinyl -all colors. Stitched together
with mildew and UV resistant threading.
Pad measures 3'3" x 6'6" and has 4 velcro
straps for attaching around volleyball pole.
(Available in 12 colors to coordinate court
colors)
4 135.00 540.00TVBSP-Pole P...
color -
Page 3
QUOTE
DATE
9/10/2014
QUOTE NO.
25072
NAME / ADDRESS
Alyssa Macleod
amacleod@lakeelmo.org
651-747-3908
55042
United Volleyball Supply, LLC.
14615 NE 91st St. Bldg. B
Redmond, WA 98052
PH: 425-576-8835
FX: 425-827-2230
REP
cr
TOTAL
Celebrating 20 Years in the Volleyball Industry
LOW PRICE GUARANTEE: No one beats our pricing and quality! Some companies try, just let
us know and we will explain the differences and save you money!
DESCRIPTION QTY COST TOTALITEM
VolleyballUSA Sand Court Edge Guard:
# Keep your grass from growing into your
sand!
# Impact resistant plastic helps prevent
injuries and allows you to maintain a clear
edge between your sand and grass.
# Made with UV resistant plastic for years
of outdoor exposure.
# Screws on top of 2 by 12 treated lumber
with 1 inch cushion gap for easy
installation.
# Pieces are overlapped every 8 feet for
quick set-up. No cutting needed.
# Constructed of High Density
Polyethelene Plastic (Same as milk jugs
thus, this product can be recycled!)
# We stock Edge Guard in Dark Green,
Blue, Black and Red
376 2.53 951.28TEdge-Guard
color
Shipping and Handling 460.03 460.03TFreight
Out-of-state sale, exempt from sales tax 0.00% 0.00
Page 4
$3,929.31
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM# 10
AGENDA ITEM: Ball Field Fencing at VFW and Reid Parks
SUBMITTED BY: Alyssa MacLeod, Taxpayer Relations & Communications Coordinator
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent
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: Park Commission
FISCAL IMPACT: $11,584 in parkland dedication funds
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to authorize the expenditure of $11,584 in parkland dedication funds to replace and improve the fencing and backstops at the VFW and
Reid Park ball fields. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this
action is as follows:
“Move to approve the expenditure of $11,584 in parkland dedication funds for ball field improvements at VFW Park and Reid Park”
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The replacement/improvement of ball field facilities is part of routine maintenance. Current condition of the parks includes disintegration of materials including the rusting, breaking, and curling of fencing.
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 10]
September 16, 2014
The VFW backstop, and first and third base line fences are more than 30 years old. The outfield
fencing at VFW was replaced and upgraded 8 years ago. The backstop at Reid is approximately
20 years old. Although the posts are sound and reusable, the fabric needs to be replaced, due to
deterioration.
Costs for proposed improvements will be defrayed by contributions from Lake Elmo Baseball
(See attachment for cost details).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council authorizes the expenditure of $11,584 in parkland
dedication funds to replace and improve the fencing and backstops at the VFW and Reid Park
ball fields. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as
follows:
“Move to approve the expenditure of $11,584 in parkland dedication funds for ball field improvements at VFW Park and Reid Park.”
ATTACHMENT: 1. Ball field improvement cost breakdown
-- page 2 --
VFW Field Costs Deductions
Backstop fabric $2,970 $120 (fabric removal)
Add midrail $365
6 guage on lower center $685
Side fencing and gate $11,410 $2,210 (old fence removal)
Optional maintenance strip $4,439
Batting cage fabric $2,415 $75 fabric removal
$10,000 LE Baseball contribution
$22,284 $12,405
VFW TOTAL $9,879
Reid Field Costs Deductions
Batting cage fabric $1,870 $165 (fabric removal)
Reid Total $1,705
Total Costs $24,154
Total Deductions $12,570
Total Cost after Deductions $11,584
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
CONSENT
ITEM # 11
AGENDA ITEM: Calling for a Public Hearing for the Redevelopment Plan Proposed by the
EDA
SUBMITTED BY: Beckie Gumatz, Deputy Clerk
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Adam Bell, City Clerk/Assistant City Administrator Tammy Omdal, Northland Securities
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: Lake Elmo EDA
FISCAL IMPACT: None SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to
approve Resolution No. 2014-79, calling a public hearing on the proposed adoption of the
Downtown Redevelopment Project and a Redevelopment Plan therefor proposed by the
Economic Development Authority of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. As part of its Consent Agenda, no formal motion is needed. If Council wishes to remove this item for discussion, the following motion for approval is recommended:
“Move to approve Resolution No. 2014-79, Calling Public Hearing on the Proposed Adoption
of the Downtown Redevelopment Project and a Redevelopment Plan Therefor Proposed by the Economic Development Authority of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota.”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: At its meeting on August 21, 2014, the Lake Elmo Economic
Development Authority (EDA) passed a Resolution recommending the City Council to call for a
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 11]
October 7, 2014
public hearing on the proposed adoption of the Downtown Redevelopment Project and a
Redevelopment Plan therefor proposed by the Economic Development Authority of the City of
Lake Elmo, Minnesota.
Following the City Council calling for a public hearing, the EDA will hold a meeting on October
16, 2014, at which it will call for a public hearing for an Economic Development District. It is
anticipated that the Planning Commission will discuss the proposed Redevelopment Plan at its
meeting on November 10, 2014. Following the Planning Commission discussion, it is anticipated
that Council will hold the public hearing and take up the proposed Redevelopment Plan at its meeting on November 18, 2014. The EDA will hold a meeting following adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan by Council at which point it will pass a resolution approving the
Redevelopment Plan. The EDA will also be holding a public hearing to adopt the Economic
Development District.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City Council and EDA have discussed the concept of the use of tax increment financing
(TIF) to assist with paying for project costs related to the redevelopment of the downtown area.
The TIF authority that exists in Minnesota Statutes 469.174 through 469.174 (the “TIF Act”) must be used in conjunction with the underlying development and redevelopment powers that
exist in the statues. When the City Council adopted the enabling resolution for establishing the
EDA, the Council granted the full complement of development powers that exist for an EDA.
These powers include the powers granted to housing and redevelopment authorities (HRAs). The
EDA’s development powers allow the EDA to pursue economic development objectives, such as the redevelopment of the downtown area.
To allow the EDA to exercise many of the powers of an HRA, it is recommended the City
Council and the EDA consider the establishment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 (pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes 469.001 to 469.047). To establish the Redevelopment Project, the City Council and the EDA will need to adopt a Redevelopment Plan which provides an outline for the
Redevelopment Area. A proposed Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 was
reviewed by the EDA at its meeting on August 21, 2014 and is attached.
Before adopting the Redevelopment Plan, the EDA shall request a written opinion of the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission shall submit its written opinion within 30
days of the request. The City Council must approve or disapprove the Redevelopment Plan
within 30 days after holding a public hearing on the Redevelopment Project.
Following approval of the Redevelopment Project, the EDA will hold a hearing on the establishment of an Economic Development District. The EDA must find that an Economic
Development District is proper and desirable to establish and develop within the City. No action
is required of the City Council for the establishment of the Economic Development District by
the EDA.
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 11]
October 7, 2014
RECOMMENDATION: As part of its Consent Agenda, no formal motion is needed. If
Council wishes to remove this item for discussion, the following motion for approval is
recommended:
“Move to approve Resolution No. 2014-79, Calling Public Hearing on the Proposed Adoption of the Downtown Redevelopment Project and a Redevelopment Plan Therefor Proposed by the Economic Development Authority of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2014-79
2. Notice of Public Hearing
3. Proposed “Redevelopment Plan for Downtown Redevelopment Project”
4. EDA Resolution No. 2014-002
-- page 3 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014-79
RESOLUTION CALLING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND A
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN THEREFOR PROPOSED BY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Public Hearing. This Council shall meet on November 18th, 2014, at approximately 7:00
p.m., to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Redevelopment Plan (the
“Redevelopment Plan”) for, and establishment of, the Downtown Redevelopment Project,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 469.001 to 469.047, as amended.
1. Notice of Hearing; Filing of Program and Plan. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to cause a notice of the hearing, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A,
to be published as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.003, Subdivision 2, and to place a
copy of the proposed Redevelopment Plan on file in the City Clerk’s Office at Lake Elmo City
Hall and to make such copies available for inspection by the public.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, this seventh day of October, 2014.
_______________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________ Adam R. Bell, City Clerk
1
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota (the “City”), will hold a public hearing on November, 18, 2014, at approximately 7:00
P.M. at the City Hall, 3800 Laverne Avenue North, Lake Elmo, Minnesota, relating to the
proposed adoption of a Redevelopment Plan (the “Redevelopment Plan”) for, and establishment
of, the Downtown Redevelopment Project, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 469.001 to 469.047,
as amended. The boundaries of the proposed Redevelopment Project are shown in the adjacent map.
The purpose of this proposed action is to facilitate redevelopment of the City’s downtown
area, in cooperation with the Economic Development Authority of the City of Lake Elmo,
Minnesota. A draft copy of the Redevelopment Plan will be available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk at City Hall during regular business hours until the public hearing.
All interested persons may appear at the hearing and present their views orally or prior to
the meeting in writing.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO,
MINNESOTA
/s/Adam Bell
City Clerk
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
(DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT)
DRAFT FOR PUBLIC HEARING
PUBLIC HEARING: _______________, 2014
PLAN APPROVED: ___________, 2014
Northland Securities, Inc.
45 South 7th Street, Suite 2000
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(800) 851-2920
Member NASD and SIPC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ȃ .........................................................1Section 1.01 Introduction ......................................................................................1Section 1.02 Defi nitions .........................................................................................1
Section 1.03 Plan Preparation...............................................................................2
ǧ ...........................3Section 2.01 Enabling Act; Statutory Authority.................................................3Section 2.02 Statement of Need and Finding of Public Purpose.....................3
Section 2.03 Boundaries of Project Area..............................................................4
ǧ ..........................................................................5Section 3.01 Statement of Objectives...................................................................5Section 3.02 Development Activities...................................................................6
Section 3.03 Payment of Public Costs..................................................................6
Section 3.04 Environmental Controls; Land Use Regulations.........................6
Section 3.05 Park and Open Space To Be Created.............................................6Section 3.06 Proposed Reuse of Property...........................................................6Section 3.07 Administration and Maintenance of Project Area.......................7
Section 3.08 Relocation..........................................................................................7
Section 3.09 Amendments.....................................................................................7
Section 3.10 Findings and Declaration................................................................7
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 1
ARTICLE I – INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS
SECTION 1.01 INTRODUCTION
The City of Lake Elmo is preparing plans for the redevelopment of the City’s Downtown Area.This document contains the Redevelopment Plan for achieving the objectives of RedevelopmentProject No. 1 through the future establishment of tax increment fi nancing plans and use of tax increment fi nancing districts.
The Redevelopment Plan will be updated and amended to incorporate tax increment fi nancing districts as proposed and established.
SECTION 1.02 DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of this document, the terms below have the meanings given in this section,unless the context in which they are used indicates a diff erent meaning:
The terms defi ned below, for purposes hereof, and for purposes of any Tax Increment Financing Districts and Plans which may be now or hereafter established and approvedwithin the Redevelopment Project, shall have the following respective meanings, unless thecontext specifi cally requires otherwise. As in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.058, the term “development” includes redevelopment, and the term “developing” includes redeveloping.:
1. “Authority” means Economic Development Authority of the City of Lake Elmo, establishedpursuant to the Enabling Act and City Resolution No. 2013-05.
2. “City” means the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota.
3. “City Council” means the City Council of the City.
4. “County” means Washington County, Minnesota.
5. “Developer” means a party undertaking construction or renovation in a Tax IncrementFinancing District.
6. “Economic Development District” means Project Area which the Authority has designatedas an Economic Development District, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090through 469.108, inclusive, as amended.
7. “Enabling Act” means (1) the Minnesota Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Actcodifi ed as Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, and (2) the Economic Development Authority Act codifi ed as Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.1082, including all powers provided or referenced therein, and as the same may be amended orsupplemented.
8. “Project Area” means the real property within the City constituting the RedevelopmentProject and the Economic Development District as currently depicted and described in theĴȱȱ ȱ ǯ
9. “Public Costs” means the public redevelopment costs of the Redevelopment Project.
10. “Redevelopment Plan” means the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project (thisdocument), as the same may, from time to time, be amended or supplemented.
11. “Redevelopment Project” means Redevelopment Project No. 1 of the Authority, as the samemay, from time to time, be amended or supplemented.
12. “School District” means Independent School District No. 834, Minnesota.
13. “State” means the State of Minnesota.
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 2
14. “TIF Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, both inclusive asamended.
15. “TIF District” means a Tax Increment Financing District within the Redevelopment Project,as may be proposed and established in the future, from time to time.
16.“TIF Plan” means a future tax increment fi nancing plan for a TIF District within the Redevelopment Project, as may be proposed and adopted in the future, from time to time.
SECTION 1.03 PLAN PREPARATION
This document was prepared for the City by Northland Securities, Inc. Project data wasprovided by City Staff .
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 3
ARTICLE II - STATEMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
SECTION 2.01 ENABLING ACT; STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Pursuant to the Enabling Act, the City was authorized to establish an economic developmentauthority that has the same powers as an economic development authority under MinnesotaStatutes, Section 469.090 to 469.1082, or other law, as well as the powers of a municipalhousing and redevelopment authority established under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001to 469.047, or other law. In addition the Enabling Act authorized the City, upon establishmentof such an economic development authority, to exercise all the powers relating to an economicdevelopment authority granted to a city by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108, orother law, and all the powers relating to a housing and redevelopment authority granted to acity by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047, or other law.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 2013-05 as adopted by the Council on February 5, 2013, the Citythereby established the Authority as the entity authorized by the Enabling Act.
It is the intention of the City, notwithstanding the enumeration of specifi c goals and objectives in the Redevelopment Plan, that the City and Authority shall have and enjoy with respect tothe Redevelopment Project the full range of powers and duties conferred upon the Authoritypursuant to the Enabling Act, the Tax Increment Act, and such other legal authority as theAuthority may have or enjoy from time to time.
Funding for the necessary activities and improvements within the Redevelopment Projectshall be accomplished through tax increment fi nancing in accordance with the TIF Act, and, if necessary and appropriate, the use of the City’s statutory ability to issue and sell generalobligation improvement bonds of the City.
SECTION 2.02 STATEMENT OF NEED AND FINDING OF PUBLIC PURPOSE
The City fi nds that there is a need for development within the City and the Redevelopment Project to provide employment opportunities, to improve the local tax base, and to improve thegeneral economy of the City and the State.
The City fi nds that there is a need for the City to take positive and aggressive steps for the future of its “Downtown Area”. Age of buildings, under utilized land area, and othersymptoms of a downtown in need of a strategy for redevelopment are evident. And, with theleadership of the Mayor and City Council members, the members of the Authority, as well ascity staff and local citizens, Lake Elmo has begun the diffi cult task of trying to fi t appropriate resources with redevelopment opportunities. In doing so, the Council has found that there areopportunities for the Downtown Area with such bold steps as using tax increment fi nancing, the vacation of streets, and open invitations to existing businesses and plans for invitations tothose from within the greater metropolitan region.
The City fi nds that in many cases such marginal property cannot be developed without public participation and assistance in forms including property acquisition and/or write down,proper planning, the fi nancing of land assembly in the work of clearance or development, and the making and/or fi nancing of various other public and private improvements necessary for development. In cases where the development of marginal and other property cannot bedone by private enterprise alone, the City believes it to be in the public interest to considerthe exercise of its powers, to advance and spend public money, and to provide the means andimpetus for such development.
The City fi nds that in certain cases property within the Project Area would or may not be available for development without the specifi c fi nancial aid to be sought, that the Redevelopment Plan will aff ord maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 4
City as a whole, for the development of the Project Area by private enterprise, and that theRedevelopment Plan conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole.
The City also fi nds that the welfare of the City and the State requires the active promotion, Ĵȱǰȱ ǰȱȱ ȱȱ ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱthrough governmental action for the purpose of preventing the emergence of blightedand marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment. It shall also be the policy of theAuthority to facilitate and encourage such action as may be necessary to prevent the economicdeterioration of such areas to the point where the process can be reversed only by totalredevelopment. Through the use of the powers conferred on the City pursuant to the EnablingAct, promoting economic development may prevent the occurrence of conditions requiringredevelopment and prevent the emergence of blight, marginal land, and substantial andpersistent unemployment.
The Redevelopment Plan shall also include the goals (1) of providing an impetus for residentialdevelopment desirable or necessary to accommodate increased population within theCity and (2) of helping to achieve aff ordable housing goals, including through payment or reimbursement of certain infrastructure or other costs of the housing developments.
SECTION 2.03 BOUNDARIES OF PROJECT AREA
The area within the Project Area is described in Figure 2-1. The Project Area shall also includeall adjacent roadways, rights-of-way and other areas wherein will be installed or upgraded thevarious public improvements necessary for and part of the overall project. The City fi nds that the Project Area, together with the objectives which the City seeks to accomplish or encouragewith respect to such property, constitutes a “redevelopment project” and a “redevelopmentplan” within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002, Subdivisions 14 and 16, andconstitutes an “economic development district” under Minnesota Statutes, 469.090 through469.108, inclusive, as amended.
FIGURE 2.1
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 MAP
[INSERT MAP HERE]
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 5
ARTICLE III - REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
SECTION 3.01 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
Redevelopment of the City’s Downtown Area involves innovation, understanding, andcommunication with all sectors of the City, working together toward common, and well defi ned goals and objectives. The City, through it’s planning eff orts has found that there is a need for redevelopment in the Downtown Area of the City, to encourage, ensure, and facilitate orderlydevelopment by the private sector of under-utilized, inappropriately utilized and unusedland within the Development District. In addition, the City, through the implementation ofthis Development Program, seeks to remove any environmental conditions that are or may bebarriers to any eff orts by the private sector to develop or redevelop within the Development District.
The establishment of the Project Area in the City pursuant to the Enabling Act is necessaryand in the best interests of the City and its residents and is necessary to give the City and theAuthority the ability to meet certain public purpose objectives that would not be obtainablein the foreseeable future without intervention by the Authority in the normal developmentprocess.
ȱ¢ȱǰȱȱȱ¡ ȱ Ĵȱȱ¢ȱ ǰȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱthrough the implementation of the Redevelopment Plan:
(a) Provide for the acquisition of land and construction and fi nancing of building(s), site improvements, and/or public utilities in the Project Area which are necessary for the orderlyand benefi cial development of the Project Area and adjacent areas of the City.
(b) Promote and secure the prompt and unifi ed development of certain property in the Project Area, which property is not now in productive use or in its highest and best use, with aminimum adverse impact on the environment, and thereby promote and secure the desirabledevelopment of other land in the City.
(c) Promote and secure additional employment opportunities within the Project Area andthe City for residents of the City and the surrounding area, thereby improving living standardsand reducing unemployment and the loss of skilled and unskilled labor and other humanresources in the City.
(d) Secure the increase of assessed values of property subject to taxation by the City,ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱȱ¡ ȱȱȱȱȱĴȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱgovernmental services and programs that they are required to provide.
(e) Promote the concentration of new unifi ed development consisting of desirable manufacturing, industrial, housing and other appropriate development in the Project Area so asto maintain the area in a manner compatible with its accessibility and prominence in the City.
(f) Encourage the expansion and improvement of local business, economic activity anddevelopment and housing development, whenever possible.
(g) Create a desirable and unique character within the Project Area through quality land usealternatives and design quality in new buildings.
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 6
SECTION 3.02 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
ȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ ǰȱȱȱ¡ ȱ Ĵȱȱ¢ȱ ǰȱȱȱactivities pursuant to the Enabling Act, the Tax Increment Act and other applicable state laws,and in doing so anticipates that the following may, but are not required, to be undertaken bythe Authority:
(a) The making of studies, planning, and other formal and informal activities relating to theRedevelopment Plan.
(b) The implementation and administration of the Redevelopment Plan.
(c) The rezoning of land within the Project Area.
(d) The acquisition of property, or interests in property, by purchase or condemnation,which acquisition is consistent with the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan,
(e) The preparation of property for use and development in accordance with applicableLand Use Regulations and the Development Agreement, including demolition of structures,clearance of sites, placement of fi ll and grading.
(f) The resale of property to private parties.
(g) The construction or reconstruction of improvements described in Section 4.7 hereof.
(h) The issuance of Tax Increment Bonds to fi nance the Public Costs of the Redevelopment Plan, and the use of Tax Increments or other funds available to the City and the Authority to payor fi nance the Public Costs of the Redevelopment Plan incurred or to be incurred by it.
(i) The use of Tax Increments to pay debt service on the Tax Increment Bonds or otherwisepay or reimburse with interest the Public Costs of the Redevelopment Plan.
SECTION 3.03 PAYMENT OF PUBLIC COSTS
It is anticipated that the Public Costs of the Redevelopment Plan will be paid primarily fromproceeds of Tax Increment Bonds or from Tax Increments. The Authority reserves the right toutilize other available sources of revenue, including but not limited to lease payments, specialassessments and user charges, which the Authority may apply to pay a portion of the PublicCosts.
SECTION 3.04 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS; LAND USE REGULATIONS
All municipal actions, public improvements and private development shall be carried outin a manner consistent with existing environmental controls and all applicable Land UseRegulations.
SECTION 3.05 PARK AND OPEN SPACE TO BE CREATED
Park and open space within the Project Area if created will be created in accordance with the£ȱȱĴȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǯ
SECTION 3.06 PROPOSED REUSE OF PROPERTY
The Redevelopment Plan contemplates that the Authority may acquire property and reconveythe same to another entity. Prior to formal consideration of the acquisition of any property,the Authority will require the execution of a binding development agreement with respectthereto and evidence that Tax Increments or other funds will be available to repay the PublicCosts associated with the proposed acquisition. It is the intent of the Authority to negotiate the
LAKE ELMO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 7
acquisition of property whenever possible. Appropriate restrictions regarding the reuse andredevelopment of property shall be incorporated into any Development Agreement to whichthe Authority is a party.
SECTION 3.07 ADMINISTRATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT AREA
Maintenance and operation of the Project Area will be the responsibility of the cityadministrator who shall serve as administrator of the Project Area. Each year the administratorwill submit to the Authority the maintenance and operation budget for the following year.
The administrator will administer the Project Area pursuant to the Enabling Act; provided,however, that such powers may only be exercised at the direction of the Authority. No actiontaken by the administrator pursuant to the above-mentioned powers shall be eff ective without authorization by the Authority.
SECTION 3.08 RELOCATION
Any person or business that is displaced as a result of the Redevelopment Plan will be relocatedin accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.50 to 117.56. The City and the Authorityaccepts its responsibility for providing for relocation assistance when applicable.
SECTION 3.09 AMENDMENTS
The Authority reserves the right to alter and amend the Redevelopment Plan and the TaxIncrement Financing Plan, subject to the provisions of state law regulating such action. TheCity and the Authority specifi cally reserves the right to enlarge or reduce the size of the Project Area and the Tax Increment District, the Redevelopment Plan and the Public Costs of theRedevelopment Plan and the amount of Tax Increment Bonds to be issued to fi nance such cost by following the procedures specifi ed in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4.
SECTION 3.10 FINDINGS AND DECLARATION
The Authority makes the following fi ndings:
(a) The land in the Project Area would not be made available for redevelopment without thefi nancial aid sought.
(b) The Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area in the City will aff ord maximum opportunity consistent with the needs of the locality as a whole, for the redevelopment of thearea by private enterprise.
(c) The Redevelopment Plan conforms to the general plan for development of the City as awhole.
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 12
AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Massage Therapy License
SUBMITTED BY: Beckie Gumatz, Deputy Clerk
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Adam Bell, City Clerk/Assistant City Administrator Washington County Sheriff’s Office
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: City Staff
FISCAL IMPACT: increase of $200 for first year license fee; $50 annual renewal fee
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City has received a new Massage Therapy License application, required fees, and insurance certificate. As the application is in order, and a
background check was approved by Washington County, it is respectfully requested that
following the public hearing, Council approve the application by taking the following action:
“Move to approve a Massage Therapy Premise License for Nirvana Massage and Spa, LLC, and a Massage Therapist License to Yuanfen Liu as presented.”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: The City of Lake Elmo instituted a city license structure in
December of 2012 in order to better regulate the practice of therapeutic massage in Lake Elmo. This past action has already produced positive results in several instances. A public hearing is required for the consideration of any new massage licenses issued by the City.
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 12]
October 7, 2014
The City is respectfully requested to consider granting a massage therapy license to the following
applicant:
Yuanfen Liu and Craig Zorn – Nirvana Massage and Spa, LLC, 11240 Stillwater Blvd N
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
Strengths Approval of this license aides the City in knowing who is
performing these and related services, what services are being provided, and where these services are being provided, which in turn helps protect the welfare of the residents, visitors and
local businesses. Aside from the minimal increase in license fees the City receives, the addition
of small-business commerce is a positive for the city and should be encouraged.
Weaknesses N/A
Opportunities Continue working with the local massage therapy community and county law enforcement on efforts to eliminate bad actors from the industry and community as a
whole and
Threats Unfortunately, the massage therapy industry does include bad
actors who take advantage of massage business fronts for illegal acts such as prostitution. The
City does not have any information that Nirvana will or would do this, but it would be ignoring the facts if the potential threat was not identified.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above information, City staff recommends that,
following the required public hearing, Council approve the application by taking the following
action:
“Move to approve a Massage Therapy Premise License for Nirvana Massage and Spa, LLC, and a Massage Therapist License to Yuanfen Liu as presented.”
-- page 2 --
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 13
AGENDA ITEM: 2015 Street, Drainage and Watermain Improvements – Resolution
Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling Hearing on Improvement
SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer
THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Adam Bell, City Clerk Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item ...................................................................... City Engineer
- Report/Presentation ....................................................................... City Engineer
- Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates
- Public Input, if Appropriate .................................................... Mayor Facilitates
- Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates
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. 2014-80
receiving the Feasibility Report and calling for a Public Improvement Hearing for the 2015 Street, Drainage and Watermain Improvements to be held on November 5, 2014. The recommended motion for this action is as follows:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 13]
October 7, 2014
“Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-80, receiving the Feasibility Report
and calling Hearing for the 2015 Street, Drainage and Watermain Improvements.”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The 2015 Street Improvements were identified in the City’s 5-Year Street Capital Improvement
Program. The City’s water supply system is located within or adjacent to all street improvement areas scheduled in 2015. Therefore, it was prudent to review watermain replacement and
extension along with the 2015 street improvements.
The feasibility report was authorized by the city council on July 1, 2014 in order to ready these
improvements for 2015 construction. The feasibility report is needed to meet state statutory requirements if any portion of the project is to be assessed to benefitting properties. The report
identifies the necessary improvements, 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 watermain improvements.
The improvements consist of the following:
• Reconstruction of the public streets within Bordner’s Gardner Farmettes, Kenridge
Addition, and Kelvin Avenue North, including the potential of converting a portion of the
private road north of Kelvin Court to a public street.
• The street reconstruction incorporates drainage improvements deemed necessary to
protect and adequately drain the new street pavements.
• The improvement includes a second alternative for the streets within the Kenridge Addition that excludes any use of curb and gutter for drainage.
• Additional subwatershed drainage improvements within the Bordner’s Garner Farmettes
neighborhood to divert and retain storm water runoff from the neighborhood.
• Extension of 8-inch and 12-inch diameter lateral and trunk watermain with service stubs to existing properties to provide owners with the opportunity to hook up to municipal
water.
The total estimated project cost is $2,899,000. The street and drainage improvement portion is
$1,843,000 and the watermain improvement is $1,056,000. 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. The City’s general tax
levy typically covers the bond payments for the remaining street improvements and street
oversize requirements. 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 Avenue. Assessments for street and drainage improvements are
levied over 10 years while assessments for watermain improvements area levied over 15 years.
The feasibility report findings and recommendations will be further presented at the meeting.
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 13]
October 7, 2014
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2014-80, receiving the
Feasibility Report and calling Hearing for the 2015 Street, Drainage and Watermain Improvements. The recommended motion for this action is as follows:
“Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-80, receiving the Feasibility Report
and calling Hearing for the 2015 Street, Drainage and Watermain Improvements.”
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution 2014-80, Receiving the Feasibility Report for the 2015 Street, Drainage and
Watermain Improvements.
2. Notice of Hearing on Improvement.
3. Location Map.
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. 2014-80
A RESOLUTION RECEIVING A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE
2015 STREET, DRAINAGE AND WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND
CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to city council authorization, adopted on July 1, 2014, a feasibility report
has been prepared by FOCUS Engineering, Inc. for the 2015 Street, Drainage and Watermain 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 at an estimated total project cost of $1,843,000 for
the street and drainage system improvements and an estimated total project cost of
$1,056,000 for the watermain improvements.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 5th day of November,
2014, 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 SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014.
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
By: __________________________ Mike Pearson
Mayor
(Seal) ATTEST:
________________________________
Adam Bell City Clerk
Resolution No. 2014-80 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
NOTICE OF HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT
2015 STREET, DRAINAGE AND WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Lake Elmo will meet in the council
chambers of the city hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, November
5, 2014, to consider the making of the following improvements, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111;
The improvements consist of the reconstruction of the existing streets, storm
sewer replacement, and drainage improvements within the Bordners Garner
Farmettes and Kenridge Addition neighborhoods, and along Kelvin Avenue from
TH 5 to the north cul-de-sac. The improvements may also include the extension of
municipal water service.
The area proposed to be assessed for these improvements include the properties directly
abutting and accessing the proposed street and watermain improvements along 38th
Street, 39th Street, Innsdale Avenue (Bordners Garner Farmettes); 36th Street, 37th Street,
Irwin Avenue (Kenridge Addition); and Kelvin Avenue. The estimated total cost of the street and drainage improvements is $1,843,000 and the estimated total cost of the
watermain improvements is $1,056,000. A reasonable estimate of the impact of the
assessment will be available at the hearing. Such persons as desiring to be heard with
reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting.
DATED: October 7, 2014
BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
Mike Pearson, Mayor
(Published in the Oakdale-Lake Elmo Review on October 15, 2014 and October 22, 2014)
N
.1%#6+10/#2
(+)74'01
6*6*6* 6*560
%+6;1(.#-''./1
241215'&564''6&4#+0#)'#0&9#6'4/#+0
.')'0&
56#6'*+)*9#;,#/#%##8'0+49+0#8'06*560
6*5606*560
6*560
+005&#'.#8'0+4+5#8'0+&'#.#8'0.#-',
#
0
'
6
4
.
0
56+..9#
6
'
4
$
.
8
&
0
%+6;1(
1#-&#.'
241,'%601
564''6&4#+0#)'#0&
9#6'4/#+0+/2418'/'065
+/2418'/'06.+/+65
N
241,'%601
.1%#6+10/#2
(+)74'01
-'.8+0#8'07'0146*
564''6&4#+0#)'#0&
%+6;1(.#-''./1
9#6'4/#+0+/2418'/'065
.')'0&
56#6'*+)*9#;-'.8+0#8'056+..9#
6
'
4
$
.
8
&
-'
.
8
+
0
%
6
0
,1037+.#8'0-+
0
&
4
'
&
9
#
;
0
241215'&564''6&4#+0#)'#0&9#6'4/#+0
+/2418'/'06.+/+65
PRELIMINARY PROJECT SCHEDULE
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
2015 STREET, DRAINAGE & WATERMAIN
PROJECT NO. 2014.136
FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261
Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264
Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267
Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283
SEPTEMBER 2014
July 1, 2014 Council authorizes Feasibility Report.
September 2, 2014 Presentation of Feasibility Report. Council accepts Report and Calls Hearing.
October 7, 2014
October 7, 2014 Public Improvement Hearing. Council orders Preparation of plans and specifications.
November 5, 2014
February 17, 2015 Council approves Plans and Specifications; Orders Advertisement for Bids.
March 24, 2015 Receive Contractor Bids.
April 7, 2015 Council accepts bids and awards Contract.
May 1, 2015 Conduct Pre-construction Meeting and Issue Notice to Proceed.
August 28, 2015 Substantial completion.
October 16, 2015 Final completion.
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 14
AGENDA ITEM: Hammes Estates Residential Subdivision - Final Plat (Phase 1)
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
Stephen Mastey, City’s Landscape Consultant
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .....................................Community 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: The Planning Commission is unanimously recommending that the City Council approve a final plat request from Hammes West, LLC for the first phase of a 163 unit residential development to be located on 78 acres of land west of Keats Avenue and
within the City’s I-94 Corridor Planning Area. The final plat will include 57 single-family lots,
all of which will be accessed off of Keats Avenue (CSAH 19).
FISCAL IMPACT: TBD – the City will be asked to review a developer’s agreement concerning the final plat at its October 7, 2014 meeting. The agreement will include a detailed accounting of any development costs that will be the responsibility of the City. The subdivision is included in
the Section 34 utility project area, and therefore the developer is being assessed for the costs of
the project to bring sewer and water to the site.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a request from Hammes West, LLC for approval of a final plat for the first phase of the Hammes Estates residential development. The final plat includes 57 single-family residential lots, and the
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 14]
October 7, 2014
related construction plans for the improvements necessary to serve these homes. The City
Council approved the Hammes Estates Preliminary Plat on July 1, 2014, which covered
approximately 78 acres of land within the I-94 Corridor planning area. There are 163 single
family residential lots planned within the entire subdivision, and the final plat covers only a portion of the overall total of units that will eventually be platted. The public improvements
associated with the site will be installed by The Ryland Group in conjunction with the applicant.
The Planning Commission considered this matter at its September 22, 2014 meeting and
unanimously recommended approval of the final plat subject to 16 conditions of approval.
The suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows:
“Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-81, approving the final plat for Hammes Estates”
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Attached are the original detailed Staff report that was provided to the Planning Commission
regarding the applicant’s request for a final plat, which 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.
In addition to the information provided in the Staff Report, it should be noted that the applicant is
requesting to amend Condition #13 related to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) approval letter of the remediation of the soil contamination event on the Hammes site. As demonstrated in the request letter in Attachment #3, the applicants are requesting that the
approval letter from the MPCA be provided prior to the issuance of building permit for affected
lots as opposed to prior to the release of the Final Plat. The reason for the request relates to the
closing of the property by The Ryland Group. If the Final Plat is delayed due to the MPCA approval process, which is estimated to take 30-60 days, the closing or purchase of a large portion of the property by the Ryland Group will also be delayed. After consulting with the Fire
Chief and MPCA on the request, staff determined that the request is reasonable and will not
create a negative or dangerous situation in the interim period while the review by MPCA is
completed. It should be noted that the applicants have submitted a Phase 1 Environmental Review for the site, as well as substantial information regarding the cleanup and disposal of the contaminated soil. The Fire Chief simply want to close the loop by requesting the applicant
enter the Voluntary Brownfield Program to ensure that the remediation work that was completed
has properly addressed the contamination. Staff recommends that condition #13 be amended per
the suggested language from the applicant (Attachment #3).
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT:
The Planning Commission reviewed the final plat application at its September 22, 2014 meeting.
During the meeting, the Planning Commission engaged in discussions regarding the design and locations of the trails, the stormwater facilities, the phasing of the proposed subdivision, and
other pertinent topics and questions. In reviewing the final plat, the Planning Commission
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 14]
October 7, 2014
recommended two additional conditions of approval: 1) that any trail segment designed as a
boardwalk must be able to safely accommodate bicycle traffic, and 2) that the developer must
inventory and replace trees that are removed on the City park land due to the installation of the
trail. The Planning Commission recommended that the trees be replaced at the schedule or rate required under the City’s tree preservation ordinance (§154.257). In addition to these added
conditions, the Planning Commission wanted to ensure that the MPCA approve the soil
remediation work prior to the City releasing final plat for recording. Further detail of the
Planning Commission discussion on the Hammes Estates Final Plat can be found in the 9/22/14
draft minutes.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the final plat as submitted with 16
conditions of approval. The vote to recommend approval of the Hammes Estates Final Plat was
unanimous (Vote: 7-0).
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The proposed final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat
subject to the conditions being recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission.
Weaknesses: Several conditions of approval must be met by the applicant, including
revisions to the final construction plans to address comments from the City Engineer.
Opportunities: Approval of the plat application allows the development plans for the
Hammes site to proceed as planned in the Comprehensive Plan. Moving forward with
sewered single family growth should allow the City to add additional users to the City’s
public sanitary sewer system, helping to finance the City’s investments in sanitary sewer. Threats: None
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and Staff are recommending that the City Council approve the Hammes Estates Final Plat subject to 16 conditions of approval
through the following motion:
“Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-81, approving the final plat for Hammes Estates”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2014-81
2. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, 9/22/14
3. Hammes West, LLC Request to Amend Condition #13 4. Application Form 5. Preliminary Plat Response Letter (Westwood Engineering)
6. Final Plat (3 sheets)
-- page 3 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 14]
October 7, 2014
7. Final Construction Plans (Sanitary Sewer, Water Main, Storm Sewer and Streets – 17
sheets)
8. Final Construction Plans (Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control – 14 sheets)
9. Final Landscape Plans (4 sheets) 10. Park Location Plan
11. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 9/18/14
12. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 9/18/14
13. Landscape Consultant Review Memorandum, dated 8/25/14 and 9/18/14
14. Valley Branch Watershed District Permit 15. MN DNR Permit to Restore Southern Shore of Goose Lake
16. Excerpt of Park Commission Minutes from 7/21/14 Meeting.
17. Goose Lake Park Area Sketch
18. Soil Contamination Remediation Report
-- page 4 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-81 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLAT FOR HAMMES ESTATES WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Hammes West, LLC, 36 Moonlight Bay, Stillwater, MN (Applicant) has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (City) for a Final Plat for Hammes Estates, a
copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elmo Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 12,
2014 to consider the Hammes Estates Preliminary Plat and continued discussion on the Preliminary Plat until its June 23, 2014 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and
recommendation concerning the Preliminary Plat as part of a memorandum to the City Council
for the July 1, 2014 City Council Meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending
approval of the Preliminary Plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Preliminary Plat request at its July 1, 2014 meeting and adopted Resolution No. 2014-55 approving the Preliminary Plat; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission met on September 22, 2014 to review
the Final Plat for Hammes Estates consisting of 57 single-family residential lots; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014 the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a
motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Final Plat for Hammes Estates with
conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the Final Plat for Hammes Estates at a meeting held on October 7, 2014; and
NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the
City Council makes the following:
FINDINGS
1) That the procedure for obtaining approval of said Final Plat is found in the Lake Elmo City
Code, Section 153.08.
1 Resolution 2014-81
2) That all the requirements of said City Code Section 153.08 related to the Final Plat have been
met by the Applicant.
3) That the proposed Final Plat for Hammes Estates consists of the creation of 57 single-family
residential lots.
4) That the Hammes Estates Final Plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plat and Plans as
approved by the City of Lake Elmo on July 1, 2014 and revised on August 25, 2014.
5) That the Hammes Estates Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan
and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
6) That the Hammes Estates Final Plat complies with the City’s Urban Low Density Residential zoning district.
7) That the Hammes Estates Final Plat complies with all other applicable zoning requirements,
including the City’s landscaping, storm water, sediment and erosion control and other
ordinances, except as noted in this report or attachment thereof.
8) That the Hammes Estates Final Plat complies with the City’s subdivision ordinance.
9) That the Hammes Estates Final Plat is consistent with the City’s engineering standards with
the exceptions noted by the City Engineer in his review comments to the City dated September 18, 2014.
CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve the Final Plat for Hammes Estates subject to the following conditions:
1) Final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, utility plans, sanitary and storm water
management plans, and street and utility construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the recording of the Final Plat. All changes and modifications to the plans requested by the City Engineer in a memo dated 9/18/14 shall be incorporated
into these documents before they are approved.
2) The developer shall provide evidence in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney that warrants
it has fee interest in area included in the Hammes Estates Final Plat.
3) Prior to the execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Developer shall enter into a Developer’s Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and approved by the City Council
that delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of the required
improvements with financial guarantees therefore.
2 Resolution 2014-81
4) All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be
documented on the Final Plat prior to the release of the Final Plat for recording.
5) A Common Interest Agreement concerning management of the common areas of Hammes
Estates and establishing a homeowner’s association shall be submitted in final form to the Community Development Director before a building permit may be issued for any structure
within this subdivision. Said agreement shall comply with Minnesota Statues 515B.3-103,
and specifically the provisions concerning the transfer of control to the future property
owners. The applicant shall also enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that
clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public park and open space on the Final Plat.
6) The applicant shall provide fees in lieu of land dedication for 2.1 acres of land to fulfill the
City’s parkland dedication requirements in a pro-rated amount for the Phase 1 Area or in an
amount addressing the total site.
7) The Final Landscape Plan shall be revised per the requested modifications of the City Landscape Consultant, documented in a memo dated 9/18/14. Final Landscape Plans shall be
approved prior to the release of Final Plat for recording.
8) The applicant shall provide evidence that all conditions attached to the Valley Branch
Watershed District permit for the Final Plat and associated grading work have been met prior
to the commencement of any final grading activity.
9) The applicant must provide written authorization to perform any work in the Electrical
Transmission easement areas prior to the release of the Final Plat for recording.
10) The applicant shall provide evidence that Washington County has approved final
construction plans for all required work within the Keats Avenue right-of-way as described
in a letter from the County dated May 6, 2013. Final Construction Plans provided to the City shall be updated to include the improvements approved by Washington County
11) The applicant shall abide by all conditions of the MN DNR Public Waters Work Permit dated
8/27/14.
12) The applicant must revise the Goose Lake Park Plan to provide greater separation between
the public use area and the lift station maintenance area. The applicant will be responsible for all necessary watershed district permitting requirements related to the Goose Lake Park
improvements.
13) Per the recommendation of the Fire Chief, the applicant must submit all documentation
related to the mitigation of the soil contamination to the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency’s Voluntary Brownfield Program for review and approval prior to the release of Final Plat for recording.
14) Prior to the acceptance of the public improvements for the 1st Phase of the Hammes Estates
subdivision, all wetland buffers shall be delineated and identified via staking or signage that
is acceptable to the City.
3 Resolution 2014-81
15) Any boardwalk trail segments included in the Hammes Estates subdivision must be designed
to accommodate bicycle traffic.
16) All trees impacted by the northern buffer trail must be inventoried and replaced at the
schedule or rate specified in the City’s tree preservation ordinance (§154.257).
Passed and duly adopted this 7th day of October 2014 by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
__________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Adam Bell, City Clerk
4 Resolution 2014-81
7
Ilumms Wpsr, LLC
36 Moom,rcut Blv
Sru,r,warrn, MN 55082
Septembdr 30,2014
Mr. NickJohnson
City of Lake Elmo
qi ohnson@l akeelmo. org
Re: City of Lake Etno Requirements
DearNick:
We are requesting that Condition No. 13 of the Plarning Commission recommendation be
amended to state the following:
o?er the recommendation of the Fire Chief, the applicant must submit all documentation
related to the mitigation of the soil contamination to ttre Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency's Voluntary Brownfield Program for review and approval pnor to the issuance of
building permits for lots affected by the soil contasrination, if any."
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Hem,msWnsr,LLC / t I /*#*'//*\-
Managing Member
a. Park Sign Update (Macleod)
Macleod shared that two signs were finished (Reid and Pebble) and picked up earlier that day. The rest of the
signs are anticipated to be completed by the first week of August, with Sunfish Lake Park being the next in line
for completion. An amenity panel for one of the signs was in the council chambers for the commission to view.
b. LERT Update (Weis)
Weis stated that city planner Johnson has continued to talk to Washington County and that they are working on
the west side access plan. Zuleger added that the LERT is currently on hold but the city has been talking with
the county about being incorporated into the master plan to be considered by the Met Council. Zuleger added
that Met Council Park and Open Space Chair, former Mayor Johnston, recently dropped off a copy of the
master plan, which has been serving as a guide for next steps.
Hietpas referenced the search corridor and stated that the LERT was not currently part of that plan. She
commented that regionally, there are a lot of trails going on in other areas, but hardly anything in Washington
County and she would like to see more priority placed on Lake Elmo trails at a county level. Weis commented
on other communities coming forward and that trail plan requests are becoming more prevalent in the county.
Ames asked what the next steps are. Zuleger responded that the city has been requesting that the search
corridor be included as a key corridor in the county's trail plan between Oakdale and Stillwater, connecting to a
regional park. The City is continuing to have conversations with the county about the best way to access the
Lake Elmo Park Reserve. Weis has offered to present the LERT presentation to the County to keep the ball
rolling. He emphasized that it is important to get included in the plan because it will open up a lot of funding
opportunities.
c. Hammes Park Space (Zuleger)
Zuleger stated that there was an item not on the agenda that needed to be addressed: The Hammes
subdivision park space. To recap, Zuleger shared that per previous discussion and in response to the
commission's request, the Hammes developers had placed the park in the northwest corner of the
development near Keats Avenue and Goose Lake. The proposed park space includes a fish ing pier, shelter,
grill, parking lot and is also where the lift station is located. Currently the plan does not include a play structure,
which was initially requested by the park commission as a condition of approval. The Hammes developers are
seeking input from the commission as to what type of play structure to include, and if they could receive credit
for parkland dedication if the structure was included. Zuleger continued to point out additional green/meeting
spaces within the development and the 100' buffer perimeter per the comp plan (including a trail).
Ames thought he remembered a small park internally in the neighborhood that would have a play structure. He
is not sure that a play structure near a 55 mph roadway is a good place for a play structure. Ames also
questioned where neighborhood children would play, as lot sizes looked small to consider private play sets.
Zuleger pointed out that the Lake Elmo Park Reserve was located a mile north of the development, with a
phenomenal play set. Ames stated that he didn't feel current playgrounds were within reasonable walking
distance for residents. Hietpas shared that she didn't feel that the green spaces included throughout the
development were large enough for community meeting spaces.
Zuleger pointed out the location of neighboring parks in Stonegate and Lennar neighborhoods.
The commission requested that a location central in the neighborhood be considered for play structure
placement. Zuleger said that he would forward their comments to the developers.
Meeting adjourned at 9:54 PM
Respectfully Submitted,
Alyssa Macleod, Recording Secretary
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 15
AGENDA ITEM: Hammes Estates Residential Subdivision – Developer’s Agreement
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Dave Snyder, City Attorney Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .....................................Community 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: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve a
developer’s agreement associated with the Hammes Estates residential development. The
agreement has been drafted based on a model agreement previously reviewed by the Council and the agreement that was executed for other residential subdivisions.
FISCAL IMPACT: Direct Payments to Developer – None: there are no City payments for
oversizing of utilities or for other reasons included in the agreement. Future financial impacts
include maintenance of streets, trails, sanitary sewer mains, watermains and other public
infrastructure, maintenance of storm water ponding areas (after three years), maintenance of the landscaping in public areas, monthly lease payments for street lights (estimated at $41.64 for 6 lights), future park land improvements, and other public financial responsibilities typically
associated with a new development.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to authorize
execution of a developer’s agreement related to the Hammes Estates final plat. The attached agreement has been previously reviewed by the City Attorney and City Engineer, and all recommend changes specific to the Hammes Estates project have been incorporated into the
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 15]
October 7, 2014
document as drafted. There are a few items in the list of construction cost estimates that need to
be verified by the City Engineer, which can occur prior to the execution of the agreement by City
officials. This agreement must be executed before any construction activity, outside of the
previously authorized grading work, may proceed on the site. The recommended motion to take action on the request is as follows:
“Move to adopt Resolution 2014-82, approving the developer’s agreement for Hammes Estates
1st Addition.”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/STAFF REPORT: One of the conditions included as part of the
Planning Commission recommendation to the Council concerning the Hammes Estates Final Plat
specifies that the developer enter into a Developer’s Agreement prior to the execution of the plat
by City officials. Staff has drafted such an agreement consistent with the City’s developer’s
agreement template, and this document is attached for consideration by the City Council. Please note that the document as drafted contains some modifications to the original template based on
some of the unique aspects of the Hammes Estates development. The key aspects of the
agreement include the following components:
• That all improvements to be completed by October 31, 2015.
• That the developer provide a letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the total cost of the
proposed improvements. While the cost estimates provided by the developer must be verified by the City Engineer, the estimates provided to date indicate that the letter of credit will be roughly $2,880,829.56 for the Hammes Estates 1st Addition project.
• That the developer provide a cash deposit of $501,478.68 for SAC and WAC charges, engineering administration, one year of street light operating costs, park land dedication
fee, and other City fees. It should be noted that the applicant is proposing substantial
improvements to Goose Lake Park, including a fishing pier, picnic shelter, parking area
and other improvements. Staff would recommend that the applicant receive a credit for these improvements from the submitted parkland dedication fee once the improvements are completed.
The proposed project does not include any specific City payments for utility oversizing or other
reasons. The City Engineer has not approved the final construction plans for the project, and no work will be allowed to commence on the site until these plans are approved by the City.
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The developer’s agreement has been drafted to guarantee that the improvements associated with Hammes Estates plans will installed in accordance with
City specifications. Execution of the developer’s agreement and compliance with all
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 15]
October 7, 2014
conditions in the agreement will allow the developer to record the Hammes Estates Final
Plat.
Weaknesses: The City will assume responsibility for future maintenance of the public
improvements.
Opportunities: The proposed improvements will extend the road system and public
utilities presently being constructed in the first phase of Savona.
Threats: The City will need to provide construction observation throughout the course of
the project (these costs will be covered under an Engineering Administration Escrow).
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above Staff Report, Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the
Developer’s Agreement for Hammes Estates and that the Council direct the Mayor and Staff to
execute this document once the final construction cost estimates have been provided. The suggested motion to adopt the Staff recommendation is as follows:
“Move to adopt Resolution 2014-82, approving the developer’s agreement for the Hammes
Estates”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2014-82
2. Hammes Estates Developer’s Agreement – Final Draft
-- page 3 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-82 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT FOR HAMMES ESTATES 1ST ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, The Ryland Group, Inc., 7599 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie, MN
(“Applicant”) has previously submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (“City”) for a
Final Plat for Hammes Estates 1st Addition; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council considered and approved the Preliminary Plat
request for Hammes Estates at a meeting held on July 1, 2014; and
WHEREAS, The Lake Elmo City Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-82 on October
7, 2014 approving the Final Plat for Hammes Estates 1st Addition; and
WHEREAS, Condition (2) of said Resolution No. 2014-82 establishes that, prior to the
execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Applicant is to enter into a Developer’s
Agreement with the City; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant and City have agreed to enter into such a contract, and a copy
of the Developer’s Agreement was submitted to the City Council for consideration at its October
7, 2014 meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the information received, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo does hereby approve the Developer’s Agreement for Hammes Estates 1st Addition
and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the document.
Passed and duly adopted this 7th day of October 2014 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota.
__________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Adam Bell, City Clerk
1 Resolution 2014-82
(reserved for recording information)
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Public sewer and water) Hammes Estates 1st Addition
AGREEMENT dated , 2014, by and between the CITY OF LAKE
ELMO a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and The Ryland Group, Inc. a Maryland
Corporation (the “Developer”).
1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL. The Developer has asked the City to approve the
plat for Hammes Estates 1st Addition (referred to in this this Contract as the "plat"). The land is situated in
the County of Washington, State of Minnesota, and is legally described as:
That part of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 29 North, Range 21
West, Washington County, Minnesota, EXCEPT the East 60.00 feet of the North 967 feet of said
South Half of the Northeast Quarter thereof. AND EXCEPT Parcel 3 of Washington County Highway
Right of Way Plat 49-19B, recorded September 18, 1985 as Document Number 492530.
2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL. The City hereby approves the plat on condition
that the Developer enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat with the
County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within (180) days after the City Council approves the final plat.
1
3. RIGHT TO PROCEED. Unless separate written approval has been given by the City,
within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove
trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings
until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both
parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security has been received by the City, 3) the plat has
been recorded with the Washington County Recorder's Office, and 4) the City’s Community Development
Director has issued a letter that all conditions have been satisfied, a preconstruction conference has been
held, and that the Developer may proceed.
4. HOA DOCUMENTS. The required HOA documents shall be recorded with the Washington
County Recorder’s Office within thirty (30) days of the plat being recorded with the County.
5. PHASED DEVELOPMENT. This plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat, the
City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has breached this Contract
and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until
Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. Park charges and area charges for
sewer and water referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that are
designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges will be
calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks.
6. PRELIMINARY PLAT STATUS. The plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat,
the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless final platted into
lots and blocks, not outlots, within five (5) years after preliminary plat approval.
7. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract,
no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan or official controls shall apply to or affect the residential
use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved final plat unless required by
state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding
anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law, the City may require
compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication
2
requirements enacted after the date of this Contract.
8. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following
plans and at the Developer’s sole expense. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans
vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control. The plans are:
Plan A – Final Plat
Plan B – Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans
Plan C – Final Sanitary Sewer, Water Main, Storm Sewer, and Street Plans
Plan D – Final Landscape Plan 9. IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer shall install and pay for the following:
A. Streets
B. Sanitary Sewer
C. Watermain
D. Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds, rain gardens, etc.)
E. Grading and Erosion Control
F. Sidewalks/Trails
G. Street Lighting
H. Underground Utilities
I. Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs J. Landscaping and Street Trees K. Tree Preservation and Reforestation L. Wetland Mitigation and Buffers M. Monuments Required by Minnesota Statutes
The improvements shall be installed in accordance with the City subdivision ordinance and the City’s
Engineering Design and Construction Standards Manual and pursuant to the direction of the City Engineer.
The Developer shall submit plans and specifications which have been prepared by a competent registered
professional engineer to the City for approval by the City Engineer. The Developer shall instruct its
engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to
the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the
approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion
and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on
3
a full or part-time basis. The Developer's engineer shall provide for on-site project management. The
Developer's engineer is responsible for design changes and contract administration between the Developer
and the Developer's contractor. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting
at a mutually agreeable time at the City Hall with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the
program for the construction work.
All labor and work shall be done and performed in the best and most workmanlike manner and in
strict conformance with the approved plans and specifications. No deviations from the approved plans and
specifications will be permitted unless approved in writing by the City Engineer. The Developer agrees to
furnish to the City a list of contractors being considered for retention by the Developer for the performance
of the work required by the Contract. The Developer shall not do any work or furnish any materials not
covered by the plans and specifications and special conditions of this Contract, for which reimbursement is
expected from the City, unless such work is first ordered in writing by the City Engineer as provided in the
specifications.
10. CITY ENGINEERING ADMINISTRATION AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION. Prior to the commencement of any construction activity authorized under this agreement,
the Developer shall submit an escrow for City Engineering Administration and Construction Observation
in an amount provided under paragraph 36. Summary of Cash Requirements. Thereafter, the Developer
shall reimburse the City each month, within 30 days of receiving an invoice, for all engineering
administration and construction observation performed during the construction of the plat at normal City
rates for such Services. If the Developer fails to pay the invoiced amount within such 30-day period, and
such failure continues for an additional five (5) business days after written notice from the City of such
failure, the City may draw upon the escrow and stop the work on site until said escrow has been replenished
in its full amount. City engineering administration will include monitoring of construction progress and
construction observation, consultation with Developer and his engineer on status or problems regarding
the project, coordination for testing, final inspection and acceptance, project monitoring during the warranty
period, and processing of requests for reduction in security. Construction observation may be performed
by the City's in-house staff or consulting engineer. Construction observation shall include, at the discretion 4
of the city, part or full time inspection of proposed public utilities and street construction. Services will be
billed on an hourly basis at normal City rates therefore.
The direction and review provided through the inspection of the improvements should not be
considered a substitute for the Developer required management of the development. Developer will cause
the contractor(s) to furnish the City with a schedule of proposed operations at least five (5) days prior to the
commencement of construction of each type of Improvement. City shall inspect all Developer Installed
Improvements during and after construction for compliance with approved plans and specifications.
Developer will notify the City Engineer at such times during construction as the City Engineer requires for
inspection purposes. Such inspection is pursuant to the City’s governmental authority, and no agency or
joint venture relationship between the City and Developer is thereby created.
11. CONTRACTORS/SUBCONTRACTORS. City Council members, City employees, and
City Planning Commission members, and corporations, partnerships, and other entities in which such
individuals have greater than a 25% ownership interest or in which they are an officer or director may not
act as contractors or subcontractors for the public improvements identified in Paragraph 8 above.
12. PERMITS. The Developer shall obtain or require its contractors and subcontractors to
obtain all necessary permits, including but not limited to:
A. Right-of-Way Excavations and Obstructions:
• City of Lake Elmo, Right-of-Way Utility Installation(s)
• City of Lake Elmo, Right-of-Way Obstruction(s)
• Washington County, Utility Installations(s)
• Washington County, Street or Driveway Access(s)
• Minnesota Department of Transportation, Utility Installation
• Minnesota Department of Transportation, Right-of-Way Permit B. Watermain Extensions:
• Minnesota Department of Health
C. Sanitary Sewer Extensions:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
• Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
D. Stormwater Management:
• Valley Branch Watershed District Permit
E. Erosion, Sedimentation Control:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, General NPDES Stormwater Permit 5
• SWPPP (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan)
F. Wetland Mitigation:
• Board of Water and Soil Resources, WCA
G. Construction Dewatering:
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 13. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The Developer shall install all required public improvements
by October 31, 2015, with the exception of the final wear course of asphalt on streets. The Developer
shall have the option of installing the wearing course of streets within one (1) year following initial
commencement of work on the required basic improvements or installing it after the first course has
weathered a winter season, consistent with warranty requirements, however final acceptance of the
improvements will not be granted until all work is completed including the final wear course. The Developer
may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned
upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and amending this agreement
to reflect the extended completion date. Final wear course placement outside of this time frame must have
the written approval of the City Engineer.
14. LICENSE. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and
contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in
conjunction with plat development.
15. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS. Construction traffic access and egress for grading, public
utility construction, and street construction is restricted to access the subdivision via
the planned construction access off of Keats Avenue. No construction traffic is permitted on other
adjacent local streets.
16. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND COMPLIANCE. The City will require the
Developer to construct the improvements in a sequence which will allow progress and compliance points
to be measured and evaluated. The Developer and/or their representatives are required to supervise
and coordinate all construction activities for all improvements and must notify the City in writing stating
6
when the work is ready for the inspection at each of the measurable points defined in the following
paragraphs 16., 17. and 18. For the purpose of this paragraph, Electronic message (email) shall be
deemed an acceptable method of notification provided it is captioned “Notice pursuant to Development
Agreement”.
17. EROSION CONTROL. Prior to initiating site grading, the erosion control plan, Plan B,
shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. Erosion control practices
must comply with the approved plans and specifications for the plat, with all watershed district permits and
with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Best Management Practices. The City may impose additional
erosion control requirements as deemed necessary. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in
controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or
supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to
control erosion. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but
failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the
Developer does not reimburse the City for any cost the City incurred for such work within ten (10) days, the
City may draw down the security to pay any costs. No development, utility or street construction will be
allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the approved
erosion control plan.
If building permits are issued prior to the acceptance of public improvements, the Developer
assumes all responsibility for erosion control compliance throughout the plat and the City may take such
action as allowed by this agreement against the Developer for any noncompliant issue as stated above.
Erosion control plans for individual lots will be required in accordance with the City’s building permit
requirements, or as required by the City or City Engineer.
18. GRADING PLAN. The plat shall be graded in accordance with the approved grading
drainage and erosion control plan, Plan "B". The plan shall conform to Engineering Design and
Construction Standards Manual. All grading shall be completed within the Subdivision prior to the
preparation and submittal of the as-constructed grading plan.
7
Within thirty (30) days after completion of the grading, the Developer shall provide the City with a
"record" grading plan certified by a registered land surveyor or engineer that all trails, ponds, swales, and
ditches have been constructed on public easements or land owned by the City. The "record" plan shall
contain site grades and field verified elevations of the following: a) cross sections of ponds; b) location and
elevations along all swales, emergency overflows, wetlands, wetland mitigation areas if any, ditches,
locations and dimensions of borrow areas/stockpiles; c) lot corner elevations and house pads; and d) top
and bottom of retaining walls. The City will not issue any building permits until the approved certified record
grading plan is on file with the City.
18. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. All storm sewers, sanitary sewers, watermain,
and streets shall be installed in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications for Public
Improvements, Plan "C". The plan shall conform to the City’s Engineering Design and Construction
Standards Manual. Curb and gutter and the first lift of the bituminous streets, sidewalks, the boulevards
graded, street signs installed, and all restoration work on the site shall be completed in accordance with the
approved plans. Once the work is completed, the Developer or its representative shall submit a written
request to the City asking for an inspection of the initial improvements. The City will then schedule a walk-
through to create a punch list of outstanding items to be completed. Upon receipt of the written punch list
provided by the City, the punch list items must be completed by the Developer and the City notified to re-
inspect the improvements. The final bituminous wear course may be installed in accordance with paragraph
12. above.
19. STREET MAINTENANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION. The Developer shall be
responsible for all street maintenance until the streets are accepted by the City in writing. Warning signs
shall be placed when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on same and
to direct attention to detours. If and when streets become impassable, such streets shall be barricaded
and closed. In the event residences are occupied prior to completing streets, the Developer shall maintain
a smooth surface and provide proper surface drainage to insure that the streets are passable to traffic and
emergency vehicles. The Developer shall be responsible for keeping streets within and without the
8
subdivision clean of dirt and debris that may spill, track, or wash onto the street from Developer’s
operation. The Developer may request, in writing, that the City keep the streets open during the winter
months by plowing snow from the streets prior to final acceptance of said streets. The City shall not be
responsible for repairing the streets because of snow plowing operations. Providing snow plowing
service does not constitute final acceptance of the streets by the City. The Developer shall contract for
street cleaning within and immediately adjacent to the development. At a minimum, scraping and
sweeping shall take place on a weekly basis. A copy of this contract shall be approved by the City
before grading is started. The contract shall provide that the City may direct the contractor to clean the
streets and the contractor will bill the Developer.
20. OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS. Upon completion of the work and construction
required by this Contract, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property.
Prior to acceptance of the improvements by the City, the Developer must furnish the City with a complete
set of reproducible "record" plans, an electronic file of the "record" plans in accordance with the City’s
Engineering Design and Construction Standards Manual together with the following affidavits:
- Developer/Developer Engineer’s Certificate - Land Surveyor’s Certificate certifying that all construction has been completed in accordance with the terms of this Contract. All
necessary forms will be furnished by the City. Upon receipt of “record plans” and affidavits, and upon
review and verification by the City Engineer, the City Engineer will accept the completed public
improvements.
21. PARK DEDICATION. The Developer shall pay a cash contribution of $107,554 in
satisfaction of the City's park dedication requirements. This charge is based on the park dedication
requirement for all the areas to be platted within the Hammes Estates Preliminary Plat. No additional fees
in lieu of land dedication will be charged for future developments within the preliminary plat area. The
charge was calculated as follows: 2.1 acres (5.7 acres of park land provided subtracted from 7.8 acres of
park land required) at $51,216 per acre per the submitted appraisal for the property. The Developer shall
9
receive a credit from the cash amount due for the actual costs of the North East Park Plan Improvements
depicted in the Final Landscape Plans Dated September 22, 2014. These improvement shall include: 16-
feet by 24-feet shelter, picnic table, bike rack, grill station, retaining wall, fishing pier, canoe rack, concrete
hardsurface, woodland seed mix restoration, landscaping, and parking lot improvements. The Developer
shall deposit $107,554 with the City at time of final plat to be held by the City in escrow until such time as
park improvements have been installed. Upon installation of park improvements, the City shall release the
credited amount to the Developer.
22. SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILITY AVAILABILITY CHARGES (SAC
AND WAC). The Developer shall be responsible for the payment of all sewer availability charges (SAC)
and all water availability charges (WAC) with respect to the Improvements required by the City and any
state or metropolitan government agency.
The sewer availability charge (SAC) in the amount of $3,000.00 per REU shall be paid by the
Developer prior to the City recording the final plat. The total amount to be paid by the Developer is
$171,000.00.
The water availability charge (WAC) in the amount of $3,000.00 per REU shall be paid by the
Developer prior to the City recording the final plat. The total amount to be paid by the Developer is
$171,000.00. In addition, a sewer connection charge in the current amount of $1,000.00 per REU, a Met Council
sewer availability charge in the current amount of $2,435.00 per REU, and a water connection charge in
the current amount of $1,000.00 per REU will be collected by the City at the time the building permit is
issued for each lot. These amounts are charged at the time of building permit in accordance with the latest
city fee schedule.
23. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS. Traffic control signs shall be included as part of the
public street improvements, and the installation costs shall be included in the street construction
calculations.
24. STREET LIGHTS. The Developer is responsible for the installation of street lights
10
consistent with a street lighting plan approved by the City. The Developer shall coordinate the
installation of street lights with Xcel Energy in conjunction with the other improvements, and agrees to pay
Xcel Energy for all upfront costs associated with the street lighting system, including underground cables,
posts, lamps, ballasts, starters, photocells, and glassware. All street lights will be leased by the City upon
final acceptance of the system. The Developer shall also pay $499.68 in payment for the first year
operating costs for street lights.
25. WETLAND MITIGATION. The Developer shall complete wetland mitigation/restoration
in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications and in accordance with any applicable Watershed
or agency Permits. If the mitigation work is found to be incomplete or restoration is unsuccessful the City
may draw down the security at any time during the warranty period if the Developer fails to take corrective
measures to be used by the City to perform the work. Prior to the acceptance of the public improvements
for the Hammes Estates plat, all wetland buffers shall be delineated and identified via staking and signage
that is acceptable to the City.
26. BUILDING PERMITS/CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY.
A. Public sewer and water, curbing, and one lift of asphalt shall be installed on all
public and private streets prior to issuance of any building permits, except four model homes on lots
acceptable to the Community Development Director.
B. Prior to issuance of building permits, wetland buffer monuments shall be placed in
accordance with the City’s zoning ordinance. The monument design shall be approved by the Community
Development Department.
C. Written certification of the as-constructed grading must be on file at the City for the
block where the building is to be located.
D. Breach of the terms of this Contract by the Developer, including nonpayment of
billings from the City, shall be grounds for denial of building permits and/or withholding of other permits,
inspection or actions, including lots sold to third parties, and the halting of all work in the plat.
E. If building permits are issued prior to the acceptance of public improvements, the
11
Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and
damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, their contractors, subcontractors,
materialmen, employees, agents, or third parties.
F. No sewer and water connection permits may be issued until the streets needed for
access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities are tested and approved by the City
Engineer.
G. The City will not issue a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on
any lot or parcel in the Plat, including any model homes authorized under this agreement, until Public
sewer and water, curbing, and one lift of asphalt is installed on all public and private streets; all utilities
are tested and approved by the City Engineer; and the as- constructed grading must be on file at the
City for the block where the building is to be located.
27. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS.
A. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others that
work required by this Contract has been performed, the sums due them have not been paid, and the
laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment from the City, and in the future event that such
claims have not been resolved by the Developer within thirty (30) days after written notice
from the City, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant to
Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in an
amount up to 125 percent of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such
deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it
pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction
to determine payment of attorneys' fees pursuant to this Contract.
B. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it
or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to legal, planning,
engineering and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the plat, the
preparation of this Contract, review of construction plans and documents, and all costs and expenses
12
incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting development of the plat. All amounts incurred and due at
the time, must be fully paid prior to execution and release of the final plat for recording.
C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers, employees, and agents harmless
from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat
approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers, employees, and agents
for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims,
including attorneys' fees.
D. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this
Contract, including reasonable engineering and attorneys' fees.
E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations
incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall
be assessed a late fee per the City of Lake Elmo adopted Fee Schedule. Upon request, the City will
provide copies of detailed invoices of the work performed.
28. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. The following special provisions shall apply to plat
development:
A. Implementation of the recommendations listed in the September 18,
2014 Engineering memorandum.
B. Within thirty (30) days of the plat being recorded at the County, the Developer shall
convey Outlot A to the City by warranty deed, free and clear of any and all encumbrances.
C. The Developer shall install a temporary turnaround at the southern end of
June Avenue North until it is extended as part of future phases of the Hammes Estates development.
D. The Developer must obtain a sign permit from the City Building Official prior to
installation of any permanent subdivision identification signs.
F. The Developer shall provide for a minimum green belt/buffer of 100 feet around all of
the adjacent Stonegate subdivision. This buffer shall be secured by a covenant running in favor of the City.
G. All trails shall be located within the easements and dedicated to the City of Lake Elmo.
13
Title commitments shall be provided for all land so dedicated.
H. The Developer shall be responsible for the construction of all improvements within
the Keats Avenue (CSAH 19) right-of-way as required by Washington County and further described in the
review letter received from the County dated May 6, 2014. The required improvements shall include, but
not be limited to: modifications to the median crossing in this area, continuation of a bituminous trail through
the median, turn lanes, and other improvements as required by the County.
I. The Developer shall observe all other County requirements as specified in the
Washington County review letter dated May 6, 2014.
J. The Developer shall enter into a maintenance agreement with and satisfactory to the
City that clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land
dedicated as public park and open space on the final plat.
K. Any land under which public trails are located will be accepted as park land provided
the Developer constructs said trails within the dedicated areas as part of the public improvements for the
subdivision and easements are provided where required by the City.
L. No more than one hundred units depicted on the preliminary plat (100) may be
approved as part of a final plat until a second access is provided to the subdivision via a connection through
the property to the south of the Hammes Estates.
M. The Developer shall be responsible to monitor the restored southern shoreline of
Goose Lake for invasive species for a period of 5 years as specified in the MN DNR Public Waters Work
Permit.
N. The Developer shall submit all documentation of remediation activities related to a
recorded soil contamination on the site to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for review and approval. The
Developer shall submit the acknowledgment of approval from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to the
City prior to the issuance of building permits for all lots in the recorded plat affected by the soil contamination
event. The Developer must submit the acknowledgement of successful remediation from the MPCA prior to the
City’s consideration of subsequent phases of the Hammes Estates development.
14
29. MISCELLANEOUS. A. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the
City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the
Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it.
B. Retaining walls that require a building permit shall be constructed in accordance with
plans and specifications prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer licensed by the State of
Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design engineer shall be filed with the City
Engineer evidencing that the retaining wall was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications. All retaining walls identified on the development plans or by special conditions referred to in
this Contract shall be constructed before any other building permit is issued for a lot on which a retaining
wall is required to be built.
C. Appropriate legal documents regarding Homeowner Association documents,
covenants and restrictions relating to the plat approval and outlots and conveyances, as approved by the
City Attorney, shall be filed within thirty (30) days of the recording of the plat. No third- party beneficiary
status is hereby conferred. All outlots and common areas, including Outlots C and D, shall be maintained
in good order and repair by a homeowner’s association, and, if it does not do so, then the City may perform
the work and assess the costs against the individual lots within the plat of Hammes Estates and without
regard to the formalities or requirements of Minn. Stat. § 429.
D. Developer shall take out and maintain or cause to be taken out and maintained until
six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage
insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of
Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them.
Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each
occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $200,000 for each occurrence; or a
combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on
the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City
15
signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given thirty (30) days advance written
notice of the cancellation of the insurance.
E. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract.
F. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this
Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of
this Contract.
G. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the
provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties
and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to
enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release.
H. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the
property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the Developer has fee
title to the property being final platted and/or has obtained consents to this Contract, in the form attached
hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that there are no unrecorded interests in the
property being final platted; and that the Developer will indemnify and hold the City harmless for any
breach of the foregoing covenants.
I. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in
addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to
City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein
set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be
deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any
other right, power or remedy.
J. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all city, county,
metropolitan, state, and federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances,
zoning ordinances, and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the
City may, at its option, refuse to allow construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does
comply. Upon the City’s demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. 16
30. EVENTS OF DEFAULT. The following shall be "Events of Default" under this Agreement
and the term "Event of Default" shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement, any one or more of the
following events:
A. Subject to unavoidable delays, failure by Developers to commence and complete
construction of the Public Improvements pursuant to the terms, conditions and limitations of this Agreement
and the continuance of such failure for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof (provided, however,
that in the event of a bona fide emergency, the City shall only be required to give such notice as is practicable
under the circumstances).
B. Failure by Developers to substantially observe or perform any material covenant,
condition, obligation or agreement on their part to be observed or performed under this Agreement and the
continuance of such failure for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof (provided, however, that
in the event of a bona fide emergency, the City shall only be required to give such notice as is practicable under
the circumstances).
31. REMEDIES ON DEFAULT. Whenever any Event of Default occurs, the City, subject to
any rights of third parties agreed to by the City pursuant to this Agreement, or otherwise by written, executed
instrument of the City, may take any one or more of the following:
A. The City may suspend its performance under the Agreement until it receives
assurances from Developers, deemed adequate by the City, that Developers will cure their default and
continue their performance under the Agreement. Suspension of performance includes the right of the City
to withhold permits including, but not limited to, building permits.
B. The City may initiate such action, including legal or administrative action, as is
necessary for the City to secure performance of any provision of this agreement or recover any amounts
due under this Agreement from Developers, or immediately draw on the Letter of Credit, as set forth in this
Agreement. In the event of any uncorrected failure to maintain any common area or landscape areas, the City
may undertake to do the work and assess the costs to the individual lots within the plat without regard to the
formalities or requirements of Minn. Stat. § 429..
17
32. ENFORCEMENT BY CITY; DAMAGES. The Developer acknowledges the right of the
City to enforce the terms of this Agreement against the Developer, by action for specific performance or
damages, or both, or by any other legally authorized means. The Developer also acknowledges that its
failure to perform any or all of its obligations under this Agreement may result in substantial damages to the
City; that in the event of default by the Developer, the City may commence legal action to recover all
damages, losses and expenses sustained by the City; and that such expenses may include, but are not
limited to, the reasonable fees of legal counsel employed with respect to the enforcement of this Agreement.
33. WARRANTY. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it
pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit either
cash or a letter of credit for twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the original cost of the improvements.
A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor
installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance
of the work.
B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction, including
concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to one (1) year
from the date of final written acceptance, unless the wearing course is placed during the same construction
season as the bituminous base course. In those instances, the Developer shall guarantee all work,
including street construction, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, material and equipment for a
period of two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work.
C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is two growing seasons
following installation.
D. The required warranty for landscaping within storm water infiltration areas (Outlot A)
shall be three (3) years following installation. The Developer shall also enter into a funded maintenance
agreement with the City for a period of three (3) years prior to acceptance of the landscaping for within these
storm water infiltration areas. Said maintenance agreement shall include requirements for the proper care of
native plantings and the elimination of weeds and invasive species.
18
34. SUMMARY OF SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. To guarantee compliance with the
terms of this agreement, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements,
and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with an irrevocable letter of
credit, in the form attached hereto, from a bank, cash escrow or a combination cash escrow and Letter of
Credit ("security") for $2,880,829.56. The amount of the security was calculated as follows:
CONSTRUCTION COSTS:
Streets
$489,243.50
Sanitary Sewer $569,227.75
Watermain
$359,915.00
Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds, rain gardens, etc.)
$479,785.50
Grading $25,000.00
Erosion Control
$25,801.90
Sidewalks/Trails $117,684.00
Street Lighting
Xcel to Install, to be pre-paid directly by Developer
Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs $3,550.00
Landscaping
$222,656.00
Tree Preservation and Restoration
$3,600.00
Wetland Mitigation and Buffers
Separate letter of credit through Watershed District
Monuments
$5,700.00
Miscellaneous Facilities
N/A
Developer’s Record Drawings
$2,500.00
Construction Sub-Total $2,304,663.65 Total Project Securities (at 125% Construction Costs) $2,880,829.56
19
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The bank shall be
subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for
any violation of the terms of this Contract or if the security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the
required term. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the proceeds shall
be used to cure the default.
35. REDUCTION OF SECURITY. Upon written request by the Developer and upon receipt of
proof satisfactory to the City Engineer that work has been completed and financial obligations to the City
have been satisfied, with City Engineer approval the security may be reduced as follows:
A. Up to 50%, or $1,440,414.78 of the security provided in accordance with paragraph
32. above may be released when: (1) Developer’s obligations under this Agreement have been completed
and the Public Improvements have been found to be complete to the satisfaction of the City including all
corrective work for any identified punch list items, but not including the final wear course; and
(2) completion of the Improvements is done to the satisfaction of the City and evidence of such is provided
by the City in writing and satisfactory evidence of payment, such as lien waivers are provided.
B. Up to an additional 25%, or $720,207.39 of the security provided in accordance
with paragraph 32. above may be released when: (1) Developer’s obligations under this Agreement
have been completed and the Improvements have been found to be complete to the satisfaction of the City
including all corrective work for any identified punch list items and including the final wear course; and (2)
Improvements are accepted by the City in writing and satisfactory evidence of payment, such as lien
waivers, are provided.
C. Twenty percent (25%) of the amounts certified by the Developer's engineer shall be
retained as security until: (1) all improvements have been completed, (2) iron monuments for lot corners
have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied, (4) the required "record" plans have
been received and approved by the City, (5) a warranty security is provided, and (6) the public
improvements are accepted by the City.
36. SUMMARY OF CASH REQUIREMENTS. The following is a summary of the cash
20
requirements under this Contract which must be furnished to the City at the time of final plat approval:
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
$171,000.00
Water Availability Charge (WAC)
$171,000.00
Park Dedication
$107,554.00
Street Light Operating Fee
$499.68
City Base Map Upgrading
$1,425.00
City Engineering Administration Escrow
$50,000.00 (Based on two months of administration/observation)
Total Cash Requirements $501,478.68
37. NOTICES. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand
delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the
following address: 36 Moonlight Bay, Stillwater, MN 55082. Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall
be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City
Administrator at the following address: Lake Elmo City Hall, 3800 Laverne Avenue N. Lake Elmo, Minnesota
55042.
38. EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Developer shall furnish the City with evidence of its fee ownership
of the property being platted by way of an attorney’s title opinion or title insurance policy dated not earlier
than thirty (30) days prior to the execution of the plat.
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
(SEAL)
BY:
, Mayor
AND , City Clerk
21
DEVELOPER:
THE RYLAND GROUP, INC.
BY: Its
22
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2 , by and by , the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss. COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2 , by
the of .
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY: City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3901
23
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
, fee owners of all or part of
the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to
that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this day of , 2 .
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2 ,
by .
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY: City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3901
24
MORTGAGE CONSENT
TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
, which holds a mortgage on
the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage.
Dated this day of , 2 .
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss. COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of _,
2 , by .
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042
(651) 747-3901
25
EXHIBIT “A”
TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
Legal Description of Property Being Final Platted as Hammes Estates 1st Addition
That part of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 29 North,
Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, EXCEPT the East 60.00 feet of the North
967 feet of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter thereof. AND EXCEPT Parcel 3 of
Washington County Highway Right of Way Plat 49-19B, recorded September 18, 1985 as
Document Number 492530.
26
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT
No.
Date:
TO: City of Lake Elmo
Dear Sir or Madam:
We hereby issue, for the account of (Name of Developer) and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $_ , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank at its
offices in Minnesota.
The draft must:
a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. , dated , 2 , of (Name of Bank) ";
b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Administrator of the City of Lake Elmo. c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) , on or before 4:00 p.m. on November 30,
2_ _.
This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be November 30 of each year), the Bank delivers written
notice to the Lake Elmo City Administrator that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days
prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: City Administrator, City Hall, 3800 Laverne Ave. N. Lake Elmo Minnesota 55042 and is actually received by the City Administrator at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal
date.
This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be
made under this Letter of Credit.
This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored
upon presentation. BY:
Its
27
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 16
AGENDA ITEM: Hunters Crossing Developer’s Agreement
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Dave Synder, City Attorney Nick Johnson, City Planner
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .....................................Community 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: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve a
developer’s agreement associated with the Hunters Crossing residential development. The
agreement has been drafted based on a model agreement previously reviewed by the Council. FISCAL IMPACT: Direct Payments to Developer – None: there are no City payments for
oversizing of utilities or for other reasons included in the agreement. Future financial impacts
include maintenance of streets, trails, sanitary sewer mains, watermains and other public
infrastructure, maintenance of storm water ponding areas (after three years), monthly lease payments for street light, and other public financial responsibilities typically associated with a new development.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to authorize
execution of a developer’s agreement for the first phase of the Hunters Crossing residential development. The attached agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and City Engineer, and all recommend changes specific to the Savona project have been incorporated into
the document as drafted. This agreement must be executed before any construction activity,
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16]
October 7, 2014
outside of the previously authorized grading work, may proceed on the site. The recommended
motion to take action on the request is as follows:
“Move to adopt Resolution 2014-83 approving the developer’s agreement for Hunters Crossing”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/STAFF REPORT: One of the conditions attached to the
Council’s approval of the Hunters Crossing Final Plat specified that the developer enter into a
Developer’s Agreement prior to the execution of the plat by City officials. Staff has drafted such an agreement consistent with the City’s developer’s agreement template, and this document is attached for consideration by the City Council. Please note that the document as drafted contains
some modifications to the original template based on some of the unique aspects of the Savona
development. The key aspects of the agreement include the following components:
• That all improvements to be completed by October 31, 2015.
• That the developer provide a letter of credit in the amount of $$1,004,402 related to the cost of the proposed improvements. This amount may be adjusted higher based on a request from Staff to provide additional details in this section of the agreement and as
noted in the agreement.
• That the developer provide a cash deposit of $269,550 for SAC and WAC charges,
engineering administration, one year of street light operating costs, the required fee in
lieu of park land dedication, and other City fees, and. Staff still needs to determine the
appropriate park dedication fees (to be determined based on an appraisal of the property) and street light fees. These amounts will be incorporated into the agreement when they are provided and will raise the amount current listed in the agreement.
• Ryland has previously agreed to pay the water availability charge for the entire development up front as part of an agreement with the City concerning the Lake Elmo Avenue Water Main project.
The proposed project does not include any specific City payments for utility oversizing or other
reasons. Please note that Staff is still waiting to obtain an estimated fair market value related to the developer’s fee in lieu of park land dedication (for the equivalent of 2.31 acres). This amount will need to be included in the agreement and will increase the cash payments required
by the developer, and will be adjusted to take into account the dedication of public trails within
the development.
The City Engineer has not approved the final construction plans for the project, and no work will be allowed to commence on the site until these plans are approved by the City.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16]
October 7, 2014
Strengths: The developer’s agreement has been drafted to guarantee that the
improvements associated with Hunters Crossing plans will installed in accordance with
City specifications.
Execution of the developer’s agreement and compliance with all conditions in the agreement will allow the developer to record the Final Plat.
Weaknesses: The City will assume responsibility for future maintenance of the public
improvements.
Opportunities: The proposed improvements will provide for infrastructure connections
to adjacent properties.
Threats: The City will need to provide construction observation throughout the course
of the project (these costs will be covered under an Engineering Administration Escrow).
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above Staff report, Staff is recommending that the City
Council approve the Developer’s Agreement for Hunters Crossing and that the Council direct the
Mayor and Staff to execute this document. The suggested motion to adopt the Staff recommendation is as follows:
“Move to adopt Resolution 2014-83 approving the developer’s agreement for Hunters
Crossing”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2014-83
2. Hunters Crossing Developer’s Agreement – Final Draft
-- page 3 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014-83
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT FOR HUNTERS CROSSING WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, The Ryland Group, 7599 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie, MN (“Applicant”) has previously submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (“City”) for a Final Plat for
Hunters Crossing; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council considered and approved the Preliminary Plat request for Hunters Crossing at a meeting held on July 1, 2014; and
WHEREAS, The Lake Elmo City Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-053 on July 1,
2014 approving the Final Plat for Hunters Crossing; and
WHEREAS, Condition (3) of said Resolution No. 2014-053 establishes that, prior to the execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Applicant is to enter into a Developer’s
Agreement with the City; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant and City have agreed to enter into such a contract, and a copy of the Developer’s Agreement was submitted to the City Council for consideration at its October 7, 2014 meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the information received, the City Council of the City
of Lake Elmo does hereby approve the Developer’s Agreement for Hunters Crossing and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the document.
Passed and duly adopted this 7th day of October 2014 by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
__________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Adam Bell, City Clerk
Resolution No. 2014-83
(reserved for recording information)
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Public sewer and water)
Hunters Crossing 1st Addition
AGREEMENT dated _______________, 2014, by and between the CITY OF LAKE
ELMO a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and The Ryland Group, Inc., a Maryland
corporation, (the “Developer”).
1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL. The Developer has asked the City to
approve the plat for Hunters Crossing 1st Addition (referred to in this this Contract as the “plat”).
The land is situated in the County of Washington, State of Minnesota, and is legally described in
Exhibit “A”:
2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL. The City hereby approves the plat on
condition that the Developer enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record
the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within (180) days after the City Council
approves the final plat.
3. RIGHT TO PROCEED. Unless separate written approval has been given by the
City, within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the
earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private
improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this
agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary
security has been received by the City, 3) the plat has been recorded with the Washington County
Recorder’s Office, and 4) the City’s Community Development Director has issued a letter that all
conditions have been satisfied, a preconstruction conference has been held, and that the
Developer may proceed.
4. The Required HOA documents shall be recorded with the Washington County
Recorder’s Office within 30 days of the plat being recorded with the County.
5. PHASED DEVELOPMENT. This plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary
plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has
breached this Contract and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent
phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City.
Area charges for sewer referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the
plat that are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks.
Such charges will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and
blocks.
6. PRELIMINARY PLAT STATUS. The plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary
plat, the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless
final platted into lots and blocks, not outlots, within five (5) years after preliminary plat approval.
7. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS. For two (2) years from the date of this
Contract, no amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan or official controls shall apply to or
affect the residential use development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved
final plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the
Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent
permitted by state law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City’s
2
Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date
of this Contract.
8. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the
following plans and at the Developer’s sole expense. The plans shall not be attached to this
Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control.
The plans are:
Plan A - Final Plat
Plan B - Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans
Plan C - Final Sanitary Sewer, Water Main, Storm Sewer, and Street Plans
Plan D - Final Landscape Plan
9. IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer shall install and pay for the following:
A. Streets
B. Sanitary Sewer
C. Watermain
D. Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds, rain gardens, etc.)
E. Grading and Erosion Control
F. Sidewalks/Trails
G. Street Lighting
H. Underground Utilities
I. Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs
J. Landscaping and Street Trees
K. Tree Preservation and Reforestation
L. Wetland Mitigation and Buffers
M. Monuments Required by Minnesota Statutes
The improvements shall be installed in accordance with the City subdivision ordinance and the
City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards Manual and pursuant to the direction of
3
the City Engineer. The Developer shall submit plans and specifications which have been
prepared by a competent registered professional engineer to the City for approval by the City
Engineer. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection
personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Developer’s
engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a
condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City’s discretion and at the
Developer’s expense, have one or more City inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a
full or part-time basis. The Developer’s engineer shall provide for on-site project management.
The Developer’s engineer is responsible for design changes and contract administration between
the Developer and the Developer’s contractor. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a
pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Hall with all parties concerned,
including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work.
All labor and work shall be done and performed in the best and most workmanlike manner
and in strict conformance with the approved plans and specifications. No deviations from the
approved plans and specifications will be permitted unless approved in writing by the City
Engineer. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City a list of contractors being considered for
retention by the Developer for the performance of the work required by the Contract. The
Developer shall not do any work or furnish any materials not covered by the plans and
specifications and special conditions of this Contract, for which reimbursement is expected from
the City, unless such work is first ordered in writing by the City Engineer as provided in the
specifications.
10. CITY ENGINEERING ADMINISTRATION AND CONSTRUCTION
OBSERVATION. Prior to the commencement of any construction activity authorized under this
agreement, the Developer shall submit an escrow for City Engineering Administration and
Construction Observation in an amount provided under paragraph 36. Summary of Cash
Requirements. Thereafter, the Developer shall reimburse the City each month, within 30 days of
4
receiving an invoice, for all engineering administration and construction observation performed
during the construction of the plat at normal City rates for such Services. If Developer fails to pay
the invoiced amount within such 30-day period, and such failure continues for an additional five
(5) business days after written notice from the City of such failure, the City may draw upon the
escrow and stop the work on site until said escrow has been replenished in its full amount. City
engineering administration will include monitoring of construction progress and construction
observation, consultation with Developer and his engineer on status or problems regarding the
project, coordination for testing, final inspection and acceptance, project monitoring during the
warranty period, and processing of requests for reduction in security. Construction observation
may be performed by the City’s in-house staff or consulting engineer. Construction observation
shall include, at the discretion of the city, part or full time inspection of proposed public utilities and
street construction. Services will be billed on an hourly basis at normal City rates therefore.
The direction and review provided through the inspection of the improvements should not
be considered a substitute for the Developer required management of the development.
Developer will cause the contractor(s) to furnish the City with a schedule of proposed operations
at least five (5) days prior to the commencement of construction of each type of Improvement.
City shall inspect all Developer Installed Improvements during and after construction for
compliance with approved plans and specifications. Developer will notify the City Engineer at
such times during construction as the City Engineer requires for inspection purposes. Such
inspection is pursuant to the City’s governmental authority, and no agency or joint venture
relationship between the City and Developer is thereby created.
11. CONTRACTORS/SUBCONTRACTORS. City Council members, City employees,
and City Planning Commission members, and corporations, partnerships, and other entities in
which such individuals have greater than a 25% ownership interest or in which they are an officer
or director may not act as contractors or subcontractors for the public improvements identified in
Paragraph 8 above.
5
12. PERMITS. The Developer shall obtain or require its contractors and
subcontractors to obtain all necessary permits, including but not limited to:
A. Right-of-Way Excavations and Obstructions:
• City of Lake Elmo, Right-of-Way Utility Installation(s)
• City of Lake Elmo, Right-of-Way Obstruction(s)
• Washington County, Utility Installations(s)
• Washington County, Street or Driveway Access(s)
• Minnesota Department of Transportation, Utility Installation
• Minnesota Department of Transportation, Right-of-Way Permit
B. Watermain Extensions:
• Minnesota Department of Health
C. Sanitary Sewer Extensions:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
• Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
D. Stormwater Management:
• Valley Branch, Brown’s Creek or South Washington Watershed
District Permit
E. Erosion, Sedimentation Control:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, General NPDES Stormwater
Permit
• SWPPP (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan)
F. Wetland Mitigation:
• Board of Water and Soil Resources, WCA
G. Construction Dewatering:
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
13. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The Developer shall install all required public
improvements by October 31, 2015, with the exception of the final wear course of asphalt on
streets. The Developer shall have the option of installing the wearing course of streets within one
(1) year following initial commencement of work on the required basic improvements or installing
it after the first course has weathered a winter season, consistent with warranty requirements,
however final acceptance of the improvements will not be granted until all work is completed
including the final wear course. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from
the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by
6
the Developer to reflect cost increases and amending this agreement to reflect the extended
completion date. Final wear course placement outside of this time frame must have the written
approval of the City Engineer.
14. LICENSE. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers
and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate
by the City in conjunction with plat development.
15. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS. Construction traffic access and egress for grading,
public utility construction, and street construction is restricted to access the
subdivision via the planned temporary access off of Lake Elmo Avenue. Once access to 5th Street
is opened all access to the site shall take place from 5th Street and the Lake Elmo Avenue
temporary access will be closed. No construction traffic is permitted on other adjacent local
streets.
16. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND COMPLIANCE. The City will require the
developer to construct the improvements in a sequence which will allow progress and compliance
points to be measured and evaluated. The Developer and/or their representatives are required to
supervise and coordinate all construction activities for all improvements and must notify the City in
writing stating when the work is ready for the inspection at each of the measurable points defined
in the following paragraphs 16., 17. and 18. For the purpose of this paragraph, Electronic
message (email) shall be deemed an acceptable method of notification provided it is captioned
“Notice pursuant to Development Agreement”.
17. EROSION CONTROL. Prior to initiating site grading, the erosion control plan,
Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. Erosion
control practices must comply with the approved plans and specifications for the plat, with all
watershed district permits and with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Best Management
Practices. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements as deemed necessary.
The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not
7
comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from
the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion. The City will
endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so
will not affect the Developer’s and City’s rights or obligations hereunder. If the Developer does
not reimburse the City for any cost the City incurred for such work within ten (10) days, the City
may draw down the security to pay any costs. No development, utility or street construction will
be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the
approved erosion control plan.
If building permits are issued prior to the acceptance of public improvements, the
developer assumes all responsibility for erosion control compliance throughout the plat and the
City may take such action as allowed by this agreement against the Developer for any
noncompliant issue as stated above. Erosion control plans for individual lots will be required in
accordance with the City’s building permit requirements, or as required by the City or City
Engineer.
18. GRADING PLAN. The plat shall be graded in accordance with the approved
grading drainage and erosion control plan, Plan “B”. The plan shall conform to Engineering
Design and Construction Standards Manual. All grading shall be completed within the
Subdivision prior to the preparation and submittal of the as-constructed grading plan.
Within thirty (30) days after completion of the grading, the Developer shall provide the City
with a “record” grading plan certified by a registered land surveyor or engineer that all trails,
ponds, swales, and ditches have been constructed on public easements or land owned by the
City. The “record” plan shall contain site grades and field verified elevations of the following: a)
cross sections of ponds; b) location and elevations along all swales, emergency overflows,
wetlands, wetland mitigation areas if any, ditches, locations and dimensions of borrow
areas/stockpiles; c) lot corner elevations and house pads; and d) top and bottom of retaining
8
walls. The City will not issue any building permits until the approved certified record grading plan
is on file with the City.
19. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. All storm sewers, sanitary sewers,
watermain, and streets shall be installed in accordance with the approved Plans and
Specifications for Public Improvements, Plan “D”. The plan shall conform to the City’s Engineering
Design and Construction Standards Manual. Curb and gutter and the first lift of the bituminous
streets, sidewalks, the boulevards graded, street signs installed, and all restoration work on the
site shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans. Once the work is completed, the
developer or its representative shall submit a written request to the City asking for an inspection of
the initial improvements. The City will then schedule a walk- through to create a punch list of
outstanding items to be completed. Upon receipt of the written punch list provided by the City, the
punch list items must be completed by the Developer and the City notified to re- inspect the
improvements. The final bituminous wear course may be installed in accordance with paragraph
12. above.
20. STREET MAINTENANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION. The Developer shall
be responsible for all street maintenance until the streets are accepted by the City in writing.
Warning signs shall be placed when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from
traveling on same and to direct attention to detours. If and when streets become impassable,
such streets shall be barricaded and closed. In the event residences are occupied prior to
completing streets, the Developer shall maintain a smooth surface and provide proper surface
drainage to insure that the streets are passable to traffic and emergency vehicles. The
Developer shall be responsible for keeping streets within and without the subdivision clean of dirt
and debris that may spill, track, or wash onto the street from Developer’s operation. The
Developer may request, in writing, that the City keep the streets open during the winter months by
plowing snow from the streets prior to final acceptance of said streets. The City shall not be
responsible for repairing the streets because of snow plowing operations. Providing snow
9
plowing service does not constitute final acceptance of the streets by the City. The Developer
shall contract for street cleaning within and immediately adjacent to the development. At a
minimum, scraping and sweeping shall take place on a weekly basis. A copy of this contract shall
be approved by the City before grading is started. The contract shall provide that the City may
direct the contractor to clean the streets and the contractor will bill the Developer.
21. OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS. Upon completion of the work and
construction required by this Contract, the improvements lying within public easements shall
become City property. Prior to acceptance of the improvements by the City, the Developer must
furnish the City with a complete set of reproducible “record” plans, an electronic file of the “record”
plans in accordance with the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards Manual
together with the following affidavits:
- Developer/Developer Engineer’s Certificate
- Land Surveyor’s Certificate
certifying that all construction has been completed in accordance with the terms of this Contract.
All necessary forms will be furnished by the City. Upon receipt of “record plans” and affidavits,
and upon review and verification by the City Engineer, the City Engineer will accept the completed
public improvements.
22. PARK DEDICATION. The Developer shall pay a cash contribution of
$__________ in satisfaction of the City’s park dedication requirements. This charge is based on
the park dedication requirement for all the areas to be platted within the Hunters Crossing Plat.
No additional fees in lieu of land dedication will be charged for future developments within the
preliminary plat area. The charge was calculated as follows: _______ acres (______ acres of
park land provided subtracted from _______ acres of park land required) at $__________ per
acre per the City’s appraisal for the property.
23. SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILITY AVAILABILITY CHARGES
(SAC AND WAC). The Developer shall be responsible for the payment of all sewer availability
10
charges (SAC) and all water availability charges (WAC) with respect to the Improvements
required by the City and any state or metropolitan government agency. Consistent with a
previous agreement with the City, the developer shall be responsible for paying the WAC fees for
the entire subdivision (including all future phases).
The sewer availability charge (SAC) in the amount of $3,000.00 per REU shall be paid by
the Developer prior to the City recording the final plat. The total amount to be paid by the
Developer is $66,000.
The water availability charge (WAC) in the amount of $3,000.00 per REU for the entire
subdivision area shall be paid by the Developer prior to the City recording the final plat. The total
amount to be paid by the Developer is $153,000.
In addition, a sewer connection charge in the current amount of $1,000.00 per REU, a Met
Council sewer availability charge in the current amount of $2,435.00 per REU, and a water
connection charge in the current amount of $1,000.00 per REU will be collected by the City at the
time the building permit is issued for each lot. These amounts are charged at the time of building
permit in accordance with the latest city fee schedule.
24. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS. Traffic control signs shall be included as part of the
public street improvements, and the installation costs shall be included in the street construction
calculations.
25. STREET LIGHTS. The Developer is responsible for the installation of street lights
consistent with a street lighting plan approved by the City. The Developer shall coordinate the
installation of street lights with Xcel Energy in conjunction with the other improvements, and
agrees to pay Xcel Energy for all upfront costs associated with the street lighting system,
including underground cables, posts, lamps, ballasts, starters, photocells, and glassware. All
street lights will be leased by the City upon final acceptance of the system. The Developer shall
also pay $_________ in payment for the first year operating costs for street lights (# of poles x
$6.94 x 12).
11
26. WETLAND MITIGATION. The Developer shall either (i) complete wetland
mitigation/restoration in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications and in
accordance with any applicable Watershed or agency Permits or (ii) purchase or otherwise obtain
applicable wetland credits in lieu of mitigation. If any mitigation work performed by Developer is
found to be incomplete or restoration is unsuccessful and if Developer fails to remedy such default
within fifteen (15) days after written notice from the City (provided, however, that in the event of a
bona fide emergency, the City shall only be required to give such notice as is practicable under
the circumstances) the City may draw down the security at any time during the warranty period if
the Developer fails to take corrective measures to be used by the City to perform the work.
27. BUILDING PERMITS/CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY.
A. Public sewer and water, curbing, and one lift of asphalt shall be installed on
all public and private streets prior to issuance of any building permits, except one model home on
a lot acceptable to the Community Development Director.
B. Prior to issuance of building permits, wetland buffer monuments shall be
placed in accordance with the City’s zoning ordinance if applicable. The monument design shall
be approved by the Community Development Department.
C. Written certification of the as-constructed grading must be on file at the City
for the block where the building is to be located.
D. Breach of the terms of this Contract by the Developer, including
nonpayment of billings from the City, shall be grounds for denial of building permits and/or
withholding of other permits, inspection or actions, including lots sold to third parties, and the
halting of all work in the plat.
E. If building permits are issued prior to the acceptance of public
improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of
public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, their
contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents, or third parties.
12
F. No sewer and water connection permits may be issued until the streets
needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities are tested and
approved by the City Engineer.
G. The City will not issue a certificate of occupancy for any building
constructed on any lot or parcel in the Plat, including any model homes authorized under this
agreement, until Public sewer and water, curbing, and one lift of asphalt is installed on all public
and private streets; all utilities are tested and approved by the City Engineer; and the
as- constructed grading must be on file at the City for the block where the building is to be located.
28. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS.
A. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others
that work required by this Contract has been performed, the sums due them have not been paid,
and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment from the City, and in the future
event that such claims have not been resolved by Developer within thirty (30) days after written
notice from the City, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader
action pursuant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw
upon the letters of credit in an amount up to 125 percent of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in
compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and
dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with
the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine payment of attorneys’
fees pursuant to this Contract.
B. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all costs
incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to
legal, planning, engineering and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and
acceptance of the plat, the preparation of this Contract, review of construction plans and
documents, and all costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting
13
development of the plat, all at normal City rates therefor. All amounts incurred and due at the
time, must be fully paid prior to execution and release of the final plat for recording.
C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers, employees, and agents
harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred
resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its
officers, employees, and agents for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or
incur in consequence of such claims, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.
D. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the
administration and enforcement of this Contract, including reasonable engineering and attorneys’
fees.
E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for
obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. Bills not paid within
thirty (30) days shall be assessed a late fee per the City of Lake Elmo adopted Fee Schedule.
Upon request, the City will provide copies of detailed invoices of the work performed.
29. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. The following special provisions shall apply to plat
development:
A. Implementation of the recommendations listed in the September 3, 2014
Engineering memorandum.
B. Within 30 days of the plat being recorded with Washington County, the
Developer shall convey Outlots A, B and E to the City by warranty deed, free and clear of any and
all encumbrances.
C. The Developer must obtain a sign permit from the City Building Official prior
to installation of any permanent subdivision identification signs.
D. The developer shall provide written authorization satisfactory to the City
from the property owner to the east of Hunters Crossing to allow the proposed drainage
14
improvements and discharge of storm water on to their property in addition to a utility easement
across the affected property for said improvements.
E. The Developer shall enter into a maintenance agreement with and
satisfactory to the City that clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping
installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public park and open space on the final plat.
F. Any land under which public trails are located will be accepted as park land
provided the Developer constructs said trails within the dedicated areas as part of the public
improvements for the subdivision and easements are provided where required by the City.
G. The City will not issue building permits for more than 25 lots within Hunter’s
Crossing until such time that the temporary access is closed and access to 5th Street is provided.
H. The final construction plans for any additional final plat within Hunter’s
Crossing shall include, at a minimum, the southern portion of 5th Street. At this time these plans
are prepared they shall include the construction of all improvements within the Lake Elmo Avenue
(CSAH 17) right-of-way as required by Washington County and further described in the review
letter received from the County dated September 2, 2014
30. MISCELLANEOUS.
A. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission
of the City Council. The Developer’s obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect
even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it.
B. Retaining walls that require a building permit shall be constructed in
accordance with plans and specifications prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer
licensed by the State of Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design
engineer shall be filed with the City Engineer evidencing that the retaining wall was constructed in
accordance with the approved plans and specifications. All retaining walls identified on the
development plans or by special conditions referred to in this Contract shall be constructed before
any other building permit is issued for a lot on which a retaining wall is required to be built.
15
C. Appropriate legal documents regarding Homeowner Association
documents, covenants and restrictions relating to the plat approval and outlots and conveyances,
as approved by the City Attorney, shall be filed within 30 days of the recording of the final plat with
the Washington County Recorder’s Office. No third- party beneficiary status is hereby conferred.
All outlots and common areas, including Outlots C and D shall be maintained in good order and
repair by a homeowner’s association, and if it does not do so, then the City may perform the work
and assess the costs against the individual lots within the plat of Hunters Crossing and without
regard to the formalities or requirements of Minn. Stat. § 429.
D. Developer shall take out and maintain or cause to be taken out and
maintained until six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability
and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property
damage which may arise out of Developer’s work or the work of its subcontractors or by one
directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less
than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; limits for property damage
shall be not less than $200,000 for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of
$1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the
Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat.
The certificate shall provide that the City must be given thirty (30) days advance written notice of
the cancellation of the insurance.
E. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract.
F. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase
of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion of this Contract.
G. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or
amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in
16
writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City’s
failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release.
H. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title
to the property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the
Developer has fee title to the property being final platted and/or has obtained consents to this
Contract, in the form attached hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that
there are no unrecorded interests in the property being final platted; and that the Developer will
indemnify and hold the City harmless for any breach of the foregoing covenants.
I. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative
and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising,
available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right,
power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as
often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the
right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy.
J. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all city,
county, metropolitan, state, and federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to:
subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances, and environmental regulations. If the City determines
that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow construction or
development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City’s demand, the
Developer shall cease work until there is compliance.
31. EVENTS OF DEFAULT. The following shall be “Events of Default” under this
Agreement and the term “Event of Default” shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement, any
one or more of the following events:
A. Subject to unavoidable delays, failure by Developers to commence and
complete construction of the Public Improvements pursuant to the terms, conditions and
limitations of this Agreement and the continuance of such failure for a period of thirty (30) days
17
after written notice thereof (provided, however, that in the event of a bona fide emergency, the
City shall only be required to give such notice as is practicable under the circumstances).
B. Failure by Developers to substantially observe or perform any material
covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on their part to be observed or performed under this
Agreement and the continuance of such failure for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice
thereof (provided, however, that in the event of a bona fide emergency, the City shall only be
required to give such notice as is practicable under the circumstances).
32. REMEDIES ON DEFAULT. Whenever any Event of Default occurs, the City,
subject to any rights of third parties agreed to by the City pursuant to this Agreement, or otherwise
by written, executed instrument of the City, may take any one or more of the following:
A. The City may suspend its performance under the Agreement until it
receives assurances from Developers, deemed adequate by the City, that Developers will cure
their default and continue their performance under the Agreement. Suspension of performance
includes the right of the City to withhold permits including, but not limited to, building permits.
B. The City may initiate such action, including legal or administrative action,
as is necessary for the City to secure performance of any provision of this agreement or recover
any amounts due under this Agreement from Developers, or immediately draw on the Letter of
Credit, as set forth in this Agreement. In the event of any uncorrected failure to maintain any
common area or landscape areas, the City may undertake to do the work and assess the costs to
the individual lots within the plat without regard to the formalities or requirements of Minn. Stat. §
429..
33. ENFORCEMENT BY CITY; DAMAGES. The Developer acknowledges the right
of the City to enforce the terms of this Agreement against the Developer, by action for specific
performance or damages, or both, or by any other legally authorized means. The Developer also
acknowledges that its failure to perform any or all of its obligations under this Agreement may
result in substantial damages to the City; that in the event of default by the Developer, the City
18
may commence legal action to recover all damages, losses and expenses sustained by the City;
and that such expenses may include, but are not limited to, the reasonable fees of legal counsel
employed with respect to the enforcement of this Agreement.
34. WARRANTY. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be
constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The
Developer shall submit either a cash deposit or letter of credit for twenty-five percent (25%) of the
amount of the original cost of the improvements.
A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility
contractor installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final
written City acceptance of the work.
B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction,
including concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject
to one (1) year from the date of final written acceptance, unless the wearing course is placed
during the same construction season as the bituminous base course. In those instances, the
Developer shall guarantee all work, including street construction, concrete curb and gutter,
sidewalks and trails, material and equipment for a period of two (2) years from the date of final
written City acceptance of the work.
C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is two
growing seasons following installation.
D. The required warranty for landscaping within storm water infiltration areas
(Outlots A and E) shall be three (3) years following installation. The developer shall also enter into
a funded maintenance agreement with the City for a period of three (3) years prior to acceptance
of the landscaping for within these storm water infiltration areas. Said maintenance agreement
shall include requirements for the proper care of native plantings and the elimination of weeds and
invasive species.
19
35. SUMMARY OF SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. To guarantee compliance with the
terms of this agreement, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public
improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City
with an irrevocable letter of credit, in the form attached hereto, from a bank, cash escrow or a
combination cash escrow and Letter of Credit (“security”) for $ 1,004,402. The amount of the
security was calculated as follows:
CONSTRUCTION COSTS:
Streets $232,526
Sanitary Sewer $150,984
Watermain $175,893
Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds, rain
gardens, etc.)
$152,565
Grading $NA –With Grading Permit [Include
estimate, will replace grading permit]
Erosion Control $NA –With Grading Permit [Include estimate, will replace grading permit]
Sidewalks/Trails $Included in Streets [Breakout separately from streets]
Street Lighting Xcel to Install, to be pre-paid directly
by developer
Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs $2,400
Landscaping $36,900 [Update to include seeding,
sodding, mulch, and infiltration basin restoration]
Tree Preservation and Restoration $NA –With Grading Permit [Include
estimate, will replace grading permit]
Wetland Mitigation and Buffers Separate letter of credit through
Watershed District
Monuments $1,980
Pond Filtration $47,774
20
Developer’s Record Drawings $2,500
Construction Sub-Total $803,522
Total Project Securities (at 125% Construction Costs) $1,004,402
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The
bank shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The City may draw down the
security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this Contract or if the security is allowed to
lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the required public improvements are not completed
at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the
security is drawn down, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default.
36. REDUCTION OF SECURITY. Upon written request by the Developer and upon
receipt of proof satisfactory to the City Engineer that work has been completed and financial
obligations to the City have been satisfied, with City Engineer approval the security may be
reduced as follows:
A. Up to 50%, or $502,201of the security provided in accordance with
paragraph 32. above may be released when: (1) Developer’s obligations under this Agreement
have been completed and the Public Improvements have been found to be complete to the
satisfaction of the City including all corrective work for any identified punch list items, but not
including the final wear course; and (2) completion of the Improvements is done to the satisfaction
of the City and evidence of such is provided by the City in writing and satisfactory evidence of
payment, such as lien waivers are provided.
B. Up to an additional 25%, or $251,100 of the security provided in
accordance with paragraph 32. above may be released when: (1) Developer’s obligations under
this Agreement have been completed and the Improvements have been found to be complete to
the satisfaction of the City including all corrective work for any identified punch list items and
21
including the final wear course; and (2) Improvements are accepted by the City in writing and
satisfactory evidence of payment, such as lien waivers, are provided.
C. Twenty percent (25%) of the amounts certified by the Developer’s engineer
shall be retained as security until: (1) all improvements have been completed, (2) iron monuments
for lot corners have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied, (4) the required
“record” plans have been received and approved by the City, (5) a warranty security is provided,
and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City.
37. SUMMARY OF CASH REQUIREMENTS. The following is a summary of the cash
requirements under this Contract which must be furnished to the City at the time of final plat
approval:
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) $66,000
Water Availability Charge (WAC) $153,000
Park Dedication $________
Street Light Operating Fee $________
City Base Map Upgrading $550
City Engineering Administration Escrow $50,000 (Based on two months of
administration/observation)
Total Cash Requirements $________
38. NOTICES. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be
either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by
certified mail at the following address: 7599 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344. Notices to
the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to
the City by certified mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: Lake Elmo City
Hall, 3800 Laverne Avenue N. Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042.
22
39. EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Developer shall furnish the City with evidence of its fee
ownership of the property being platted by way of an attorney’s title opinion or title insurance
policy dated not earlier than thirty (30) days prior to the execution of the plat.
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
By:
, Mayor (SEAL)
AND
, City Clerk
DEVELOPER:
THE RYLAND GROUP, INC.
By:
Its:
23
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of __________, 2____,
by ____________________ and by ____________________, the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss. COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________, 2014, by The Ryland Group, Inc., a Maryland corporation, for and on behalf of the
corporation.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY: City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3901
24
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
________________________________________, fee owners of all or part of the subject
property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may
apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this ____ day of __________, 2____.
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________,
2____, by ______________________________.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY: City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3901
25
MORTGAGE CONSENT
TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
________________________________________, which holds a mortgage on the
subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on
its mortgage.
Dated this _____ day of __________, 2____.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of __________,
2___, by ______________________________.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY: City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3901
26
EXHIBIT “A”
TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
Legal Description of Property Being Final Platted as Hunters Crossing
______________________________
A-1
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT
No. ______________ Date: ____________
TO: City of Lake Elmo Dear Sir or Madam:
We hereby issue, for the account of (Name of Developer) and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $__________, available to you by your draft
drawn on sight on the undersigned bank at its offices in Minnesota.
The draft must:
a) Bear the clause, “Drawn under Letter of Credit No. __________, dated
__________, 2____, of (Name of Bank)“;
b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Administrator of the City of Lake Elmo.
c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank), on or before 4:00 p.m. on
November 30, 2____.
This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least sixty (60) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be
November 30 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Lake Elmo City Administrator that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written
notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail,
at least sixty (60) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: City Administrator, City Hall, 3800 Laverne Ave. N. Lake Elmo Minnesota 55042 and is actually
received by the City Administrator at least forty-five (45) days prior to the renewal date.
This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or
agreement, whether or not referred to herein.
This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit.
This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform
Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500.
We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation.
By:
Its:
9536738v<1><2
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: October 7, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 17
AGENDA ITEM: Savona First Addition/Section 34 Assessment Reallocation
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: David Snyder, City Attorney Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .....................................Community 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: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider a request
from Lennar Corporation and Dale Properties to reallocate the assessments that have been levied
against several properties within the Section 34 Sewer and Water improvement planning area.
The reallocation request has been requested in conjunction with the recording of the final plat for the Savona 1st Addition.
FISCAL IMPACT: None – the reallocation request does not alter the total amount due to the
City for the Section 34 project. By reallocating the assessment against individual lots as they are
platted, the assessments will be paid off as the lots are sold, which will likely accelerate the payoff for the assessments since the developer intents to build the subdivision out over a 5-6 year period of time (the assessments would otherwise be due or a 15 year term).
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a
request from Lennar Corporation and Dale Properties to reallocate the overall assessments against several properties within the Section 34 utility project area to the individual lots that have been platted or that are planned to be platted within the Savona residential subdivision. As part
of the request, the applicants have agreed to additional relocation of the assessments that that
have been levied to more accurately account for the number of future REC units planned
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
October 10, 2014
between property to be retained by Dale Properties and those to be developed as residential lots
by Lennar. City Council action is required to accomplish the reallocation because the property
owners are changing the amount originally assessed to the existing properties and spreading
them out more evenly across the parcels based on the preliminary plat for Savona.
Please note that the proposed assessment amounts as recommended by Staff are based on the
initial assessment amount as of December 2013, and do not take into account property tax
payments that were or will be collected in 2014. Staff is seeking Council authorization to
approve the overall allocations with a caveat that these numbers will be adjusted based on payments made to date. Staff will try to prepare the updated amounts for consideration at the
Council meeting.
Staff is recommending approval of the request to reallocate assessment across several properties
within the Section 34 utility project area as further described below. The suggested motion to adopt this recommendation is as follows:
“Move to approve the reallocation of assessments against certain lots within the Section 34
utility project area as further described in Exhibit “A” as attached to the Staff report”
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The sewer and water
assessments for the Section 34 utility project were certified by the City at the end of 2013, and
16 parcels that received a benefit from the project were assessed a total of $2,378,200 for the
improvements. Since the assessments were levied against the properties, Lennar Corporation has
received final plat approval for the first and second additions of its planned 309-unit Savona residential subdivision, and together with Dale Properties, is now seeking Council approval to
reallocate the their portion of the assessments across the entire Savona subdivision, and to
specifically split the assessments across all new lots to be created. The reallocation also
addresses the transfer of a portion of the assessments between Dale Properties and Lennar to
better align with the planned REC units between all of the parcels and to take into account a small lot line adjustment of land in the far western portion of the Savona subdivision that
facilitated the realignment of 5th Street in this portion of the site.
There are 6 existing properties that are impacted by the proposed reallocation (out of the 16 that
have been assessed), including two parcels that are currently owned by Lennar, two that Lennar will be acquiring from Dale Properties in the near future, and two that will be retained by Dale
Properties. These parcels, along with the existing and proposed assessment amounts for each
parcel, are described in the attached Exhibit “A” – Proposed Section 34 Assessment
Reallocation. In determining the reallocation, Staff is presenting the individual lot assessments
as proposed by Lennar, which takes in account the overall assessment that they will owe, and divides it amongst all single family and multi-family lots within their subdivision. Because the
City has not yet released the second addition plat for recording, Staff has grouped any individual
lot assessments for future project phases into the larger outlots or parcels that will be
resubdivided in the future. Based on the methodology proposed by Lennar, the per-unit amounts
will either be transferred to future individual lots, or will continue to be paid down over a period
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
October 10, 2014
of 15 years if these lots are not re-platted. The assessments as proposed will be relative easy to
divide in the future since these assessments will be split evenly across any newly created lots.
Given large number of parcels that are being platted in this area, the proposed relocation is somewhat complex, especially when taking into account adjustments between individual
properties. Ultimately, Staff has verified that the overall assessment amount to be paid by
Lennar and Dale Corporation does not change with the reallocation, and this action will greatly
facilitate the future collection of assessments in this area.
Staff will spend time at the Council meeting further reviewing the assessment allocation, and
will bring a map depicting the assessments to the Council meeting.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
Strengths • The proposed assessment reallocation has been prepared based
on an agreement between the two affected parties.
• The utility assessments for this area will be collected on an accelerated schedule with the reallocation since all assessments
must be paid prior to the sale on individual lots.
Weaknesses • Staff has to prepare the adjusted assessment roles for the County,
and has spent time refining the final numbers.
Opportunities • None
Threats • None – the overall amount collected each year by the City will
not change, this amount is only distributed between individual
platted lots.
RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above report and analysis, Staff is recommending
approval of the request to reallocate assessment across several properties within the Section 34
utility project area as further described below. The suggested motion to adopt this
recommendation is as follows:
“Move to approve the reallocation of assessments against certain lots within the Section 34
utility project area as further described in Exhibit “A” as attached to the Staff report”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibit “A” – Proposed Section 34 Assessment Reallocation
2. Letter of Request from Lenner
-- page 3 --
Exhibit "A" - Section 34 Assessment Reallocation
Lennar 1st Addition (includes 2nd Addition Area)
Current Parcels:Sewer Assessment Water Assessment
34.029.21.41.0004 $425,700.00 $95,000.00
34.029.21.42.0002 $85,505.00 $52,850.00
Adjustment from Dale $93,595.00 $5,050.00
Total Assessments $604,800.00 $152,900.00
Proposed Reallocation - Lennar 1st Addition
Legal Description Sewer Assessment Water Assessment
Outlot A $212,094.72 $58,240.64
Outlot F $255,468.00 $56,974.00
Block 1 Lot 1 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 2 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 3 $3,119.04 $856.48
Block 2 Lot 1 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 2 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 3 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 4 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 5 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 6 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 7 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 8 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 9 $3,119.04 $856.48
Block 3 Lot 1 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 2 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 3 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 4 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 5 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 6 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 7 $3,119.04 $856.48
Block 4 Lot 1 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 2 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 3 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 4 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 5 $3,119.04 $856.48
Block 5 Lot 1 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 2 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 3 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 4 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 5 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 6 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 7 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 8 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 9 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 10 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 11 $3,119.04 $856.48
Block 6 Lot 1 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 2 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 3 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 4 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 5 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 6 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 7 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 8 $3,119.04 $856.48
Lot 9 $3,119.04 $856.48
Total Assessments $604,800.48 $152,899.76
Dale Properties and Future Lennar
(To be replatted in the future)
Parcels:Curent Proposed
34.029.21.31.0004 $11,000.00 $11,000.00
34.029.21.31.0005 $21,428.75 $23,798.75
34.029.21.34.0005 $56,071.25 $53,701.25
34.029.21.43.0003 $158,795.00 $65,200.00
Total $247,295.00 $153,700.00
Parcels:Curent Proposed
34.029.21.31.0004 $15,700.00 $15,700.00
34.029.21.31.0005 $30,608.55 $33,993.55
34.029.21.34.0005 $80,091.45 $76,706.45
34.029.21.43.0003 $98,150.00 $93,100.00
Total $224,550.00 $219,500.00
Total Assessments:
Current $1,130,900.00
Proposed $1,130,900.24
Sewer Assessment
Water Assessment
1. Nice addition to the development
2. We would like the park installed as soon as possible so our children and others in the neighborhood can enjoy it.
3. Please move forward with putting the park in as soon as possible this year. There are more than 50 young kids in our
neighborhood who will greatly benefit from the park.
4. Our family would like the park installed as soon as possible this year so we can use it. We have emailed the city council
twice in support of this - please do the right thing and build the park for our neighborhood kids.
5. We are very neutral in determining whether the park goes in this year or next spring. We believe the park setting is
more appropriate further away from the residents property lines that are closest to the park!
6. Why is this questioned at this point. It has already been approved.
7. Our farm shares the property line of the park totally on the west side from north to south. We would like to
understand the park's fencing and control of visitors. Location of control barrier affect on existing natural tree line.
8. Not visible from street, no parking for visitors or city service vehicles doing maintenance. Will there be trash
receptacles back there? How often will they be attended to? What is approximate size of playground equipment? How
tall? What does the playset include? For what age range? We were given no details on equipment. Wait until everyone
is fully informed.
9. I would like the park to go in this fall
10. Since the park was already approved by the Council, we need to proceed as originally planned. One or two families
new to the development should not be able to override/reverse the approval. We have been promised the park for
years and look forward to a neighborhood gathering place for our families.
11. The location has been known and agreed upon through proper channels. We don't feel that we should wait for the
other neighborhood, but the design should consider the other neighborhood with a Phase 1 and Phase 2 plan. Phase 1
(the proposed Sanctuary Park) should move forward.
12. We want the park installed as soon as possible this year.
13. We feel that this park is a great opportunity for our neighborhood/community to thrive. The park will allow our
children to develop and strengthen relationships amongst their peers. Thank you for your time.
14. A. Wait for development to the south to go in and allow for better design and function of parking. Or B. move to
northern point of the 6 acre outlot and allow parking from current dead end. Concerns for current park location.
Concerns for current park designated location:
(A) Safety concern regarding the location of park and proximity of the underground gas and utilities
(B) Safety concern for the secluded location – private property to west and tree line. Not exposed enough and
may be inviting to predators.
(C) We had the understanding that the current walking/biking paths were designated for homeowners of the
development, not open to all – city and neighboring homeowners/traffic.
(D) Current path alongside lot is not sufficient to support traffic to/from a city park. No designated parking to
support traffic to/from city park.
(E) The name “Sanctuary” by definition means “safe haven – place of safety/”
(F) I will not feel safe with a city park that is open to all within city and neighboring communities with only access
(parking, traveling to/from) the city park via my side/back yard. The easement alongside the road is
designated to city for public works use – street maintenance /plowing and access to utilities. Not easement for
parking/foot traffic to access path to park.
(G) I will post “NO trespassing” signs and “private property” signs if this becomes a nuisance, which I suspect it
will.
(H) This directly impacts the families that are located in the SW corner of the development. These families should
have been kept abreast during the planning process, including all communications between the HOA and the
City of Lake Elmo.
(I) As a city owned/maintained park – I feel this location is not conducive to allow proper access/exposure to law
officials to “police” the park itself. I feel the homeowners within closes proximity and park access points will
feel the unwanted responsibility to “police” the park and watch for suspicious faces/behavior.
(J) I strongly feel a park should be in an open space with road access and designated parking for public and easy
access for all including the law enforcement, but also safety vehicles if the need arises.
15. Please install park as soon as possible.
16. With appropriate landscaping, this location would work well. Would like some benches near the play equipment.
There are numerous young children in this neighborhood that would use the park right away!
17. The location of the park has been clear since the birth of Sanctuary. The paths to the park area have been paved for
years.
18. We would prefer to have a larger park with space for children and families to gather and play games such as kickball,
football, etc. If the park waited for further development location and space change are more probable. To create a
short sighted park with the only available location and the same amenities as what most neighborhood yards already
have doesn't make sense other than following through on a promise.
19. 90% or greater of this neighborhood built their homes and everyone knew the park location when choosing lots. Also,
Teresa Silvernale did a detailed survey over a year ago looking at interest in the park and it was and is overwhelmingly
supported by all except those whom chose to live near it.
20. When we purchased our house in 2009, all paperwork clearly indicated the park would be in the location proposed.
The trails and roads are set up for development to the south and west.
21. The location of the proposed park is not ideal as it's not in a centrally located spot. Also, it is very bug infested back
there so I wouldn't want my children using it.
22. We are 100% in favor of a park here, but the location needs to be thought out with regard to the neighbors bordering
the proposed location. Other items to consider is parking - logistics to access the park.
23. We would like to see any large play equipment placed in the "lower park" area, and we would like the "upper park"
area used only for trails or low-visibility amenities such as horseshow pits, bocce courts, shuffleboard, etc. If street
parking becomes an issue, we would like to see plans made to provide parking near the "Lower park" when it is
developed. We would like to understand the city's plan to keep the park clean and safe.
24. We look forward to the proposed park being implemented in the Sanctuary development. We are 5 year residents
with children ages 6 years, 4 years. And 4 weeks. We have been anxiously waiting for this project to get traction, and
we hope the city will support an immediate install.
25. We indeed are in favor of the installation of the Sanctuary of Lake Elmo neighborhood park - and as soon as possible
this year. We have been here since 2007 and are looking forward to its completion.
26. We live in the home across the street from homes directly adjacent to the park (marked in red on map). We support
immediate installation of the park equipment as placed if there is use of mounded earth, trees, and bushes to buffer
the adjacent homes from the park as marked on the reverse side. We are likely to be impacted by parking along our
property for those using the park but do not have concerns about that although consideration of inclusion of parking
with future adjacent park development would be appreciated.
27. We want the park to go through as planned for construction still this year.
28. It has been brought to my attention that Sletten's removed trees from parkland. Before our tax dollars go toward
creating a tree buffer for them, this needs to be addressed by the city. They should pay to replace the trees that were
removed from city property behind their land.
29. We support the idea of a neighborhood park. Parks should build community and foster positive relations amongst our
children and adults. Processes should be inclusive and transparent. Great efforts were made toward this, but it sounds
like there is room for improvement. Better to do the park "right" than to do it right away. Grateful to have watched
the 9-15 park meeting online. Thank you.
30. We are wondering if a survey or discussion could take place to evaluate other locations. Feedback from neighbors and
other city representatives and employees have indicated that the center of Sanctuary and also the "down below"
location could be a possibility. If we waited until May 2015 we could evaluate the "down below" area and also see if
the other neighborhodd gets platted.
31. No - other than in favor of more trails put back there. Just no desire for a park.
32. We are in favor if the proposed location of park is where it was originally planned to be when neighborhood was
developed. Otherwise we say wait.