Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
02-08-12 CCMP
City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 City Council 1Vieeting February 8.7)012 7:00 p.m. CALL IO ORDER: B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C. ATTENDANCE: Jol-mston Emmons Park Pearson Smith D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: (The approved agenda is the order in which the City Council \OE do its business. E. ORDER. OF BUSINESS: (This is the way that the City Council runs its meetings so everyone attending the meeting or watching the meeting understands how the City Council conducts its public business.) GROUND RULES: ("These are the rules of behavior t a'd e City Council adopted for doing its public business.) G. ACCEPT MINUTES: I. Accept January 17. 2012. City Council minutes PUBLIC COMNIENTS/INQUIRIES: In order to be sure that anyone wishing to speak to the City Council is treated the same ‘vay, meeting attendees wishing to address the City Council on any items NOT on the regular agenda may speak for up to three minutes.) REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: (These are verbal updates and do not have to be formally added to the agenda.) Mayor Administrator City Attorney C i \ Engineer Planning Director .1. CONSENT AGENDA: (Items placed on the Consent Agenda by City Staff and the Mayor because they are not anticipated to generate discussion. Items may be removed at City Council's request.) 3. Approve payment of disbursements and payroll LI„Agreement for Services between City of Oakdale and City of Lake F.lmo 5. Consider Authorization to Apply for MnDOT Community Roadside Landscaping Partnership Program and Authorize Primary Contact Person REGULAR AGENDA: 6. Public Comments regardingPossibility of Purchasing Property for the Lake Elmo Library 7. Demontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements Feasibility Report - Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing Keats Ave. N.: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements Feasibility Report- Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing 9. Continue Discussion: Variance (Septic) Request at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue 0. Consider Planning Commission Request to Updating Lighting Ordinance Adjourn LAKE ELMO COU..CIL MINUTES D FT City of Lake Elmo City Council Minutes January 17, 2012 Mayor Johnston called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Johnston and Council Members Emmons, Park, Pearson, and Smith Also Present: Interim Administrator Dawson, Attorney Snyder, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Klatt, Interim City Clerk Luczak APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: Council Member Park moved to approve the January 17. 2012, City Council .4g,encia. Council Member Pearson seconded the. 11701i017. The motion passed 5-0, MOTION: Council Member Pearson to amend the Agenda to allow Chief Malmquist to ,finish the Fire issues presentation from the immediately preceding Council Workshop, and to add Item No, 1 1 to discuss the consideration of the purchase of a buildinglbr the Librarv. Council Member Park seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. ACCEPTED MINUTES: The January 10. 2012. City Council minutes were accepted by consensus of the City Council, The January 3. 2012, City Council minutes were accepted by consensus of the City Council, REPORTS: Chief Malmquist recapped the Fire Dept, Study presentation and requested the Council to provide direction to the Fire Dept. The Chief stated that Fire CIP issues need to be made in the context of the City's Comprehensive C1P, and funding sources needed to be recognized for implementation. Council members discussed lire services as a good expenditure, that several studies had been done in the past and no action was taken, and public safety and welfare is why people pay taxes. The Council directed Staff to review the CIP and begin the process for the 2012-17 CIP in a few months, LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2012 LAKE MO COUNCIL MINUTES DRAFT AIOTTON.- Council Member Park moved to direct the Fire Chief and his Staff present to the City C01111Cil 0 report with costs fir a potential CIP at a Council Workshop fir Public Safety Council Member Smith seconded the M011017. The motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Justin Bloyer. 8881 Jane Rd., commented about transparency and integrity of the City Council regarding the recent Closed meetings focused on a possible Library building. City Council Reports: Mayor Johnston reported that he attended the regional Council of Mayors meeting where the connection of the land use and transportation corridors was featured. He also reported that the Fiscal Disparities program is to be reviewed by State Legislature. The Mayor also reported that he attended the Gateway Corridor meeting, which had an analysis of alternatives regarding light rail location and park -and -ride sites; he encouraged Council to attend the future meetings regarding the Gateway Corridor. Interim City Administrator Dawson reported that the new City Administrator Dean Zuleger's contract was executed and his start date will be Monday, January 30, 2011. City Attorney Snyder informed the Council that the land detachment item would be discussed in the Closed session. City Engineer Griffin updated the Council about the chlorination of Well No. 2, and the feasibility reports on Demontreville and Keats Avenue, CONSENT AGENDA: /110TI0N: Council Member Smith im»,ed to approve the Consent Agenda. Council Member Et11177017S seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0 . • Approved disbursements in the amount of $197,071.60 RFQ Request for Professional Engineering Services Consultant Pool REGULAR AGENDA: Aroeal of Ruling reuardine Detachment of Land from City of Lake Elmo interim City Administrator Dawson updated the City Council regarding the concerns expressed by residents and individual Council members about the ruling regarding detachment of land from the City of Lake Elmo, City Attorney Snyder had received the ruling and had requested the Judge to amend the findings. He contacted the LMC and general counsel, who at first glance perceived it to LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2012 2 LAKE ELMO COUi ,aL MINUTES DRAFT be an incorrect ruling but that LN1C1T is currently evalua i Snyder stated the City has 30 days to appeal the decision, o join. Attorney Pam Chicken. 5711 Linden Ave. N.. supports the City in appealing the land detachment and requested the residents be kept apprised of the situation. Several of the residents of the St. Croix's Sanctuary development do not support the detachment. The City Council discussed the alternatives and said the City has a decent chance if they appeal the ruling. MOT/ON: Council Member Pearson moved to 11#11'117 the action o/Stailand authorif.e proceeding with the Appeal process 017 the ruling to detach land )(ram the corporate /11)7115 ql the City ()flake Elmo. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. Planning Commission Annual Report 2 011n Planning, Director Matt presented to the City Council the annual report summarizing the Planning Commission and Department in 2011. The report focused on the larger activities and projects undertaken during the year, and included statistical information pertaining to the City's planning activities. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to accept the 2011 Planning CO/17177W/ 011 and Planning Department Annual Report. Council Member Pearson seconded the motion. The 117.01i017 passed 5-0. Planning Commission 2012 Work Plan Planning Director Klatt requested the Council to review and accept the Planning Commission's annual work plan that the Commission prepared for 2012. He stated that the work plan prioritized the various projects, the internal planning related activities and projects that will he undertaken by Staff in 2012. The Old Village, 1-94 Corridor and Comp. Plan updates will play a major role in completing their 2012 goals. The Council reviewed the plan and provided its comments and suggestions. The City Council discussed the sign ordinance restrictions and outdoor lighting. Council asked about any potential analysis on Lake Elmo Avenue regarding routing bus traffic or light rail. and directed the Planning Commission to report on how the Gateway Study and its alternatives will affect the City. MOTION: Council Member Smith moi'ed to accept the 2012 Planning C01171111,5*S1-017 TVork Plan. Council Member Pearson seconded the 11101i017. The motion passed 5-0. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2012 LAKE 0 COUNCIL MINUTES DRAFT 2012-20] 6 Infrastructure Capital improvement Plan (CIP) Adopt Plan City Engineer Griffin requested the City Council to consider adopting. the 2012-2016 Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan. As part of the annual budget process, the City prepares a five-year CIP for Council approval which was presented to the Council at the December 6. 2011, meeting. City Engineer Griffin stressed that the first year of the plan is an indication to Staff to initiate the project implementation process. The Council retains the ability to postpone or terminate these projects at several points along the way. The remaining four years are to show infrastructure needs and costs, and are used for planning purposes. They can be changed each year to respond to the various project drivers. In particular, the water and sewer projects are needed to respond to projected future development so they will occur when the development occurs. He recommended that a Council Workshop be scheduled in mid -summer to take a closer look at the CIP needs for 2013 and 2014. Council Members discussed the storm water utility fund and the annual rain garden program costs, along with the benefits of rain gardens and long-term maintenance responsibilities. Interim Finance Director Rigdon discussed the status of the surface water utility revenue and the funding, of the annual Rain Garden Program. With the VBWD Community matching Grants, the rain garden program accounts for roughly 20% of surface water utility funds. City Engineer Griffin stated that if the Rain Garden Program were discontinued, the City would not realize 100% of the cost savings since there would continue to be Stormwater related project costs to satisfy VBWD permitting requirements. MOTION: Council Member Smith1110Ved to adopt the 2012-2016 Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan (OP). Council tVlember Pearson seconded the 171011017. The motion passed 5-0. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to adopt the 2012-2016 infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan (C'IP). Council Member Pearson seconded the t11011017. The 17701 1017 passed 5-0, Water Supply Well No. 4 — Award Test Well Contract City Engineer Griffin reported to the City Council that project plans and specifications have been completed and vere sent out to six qualified well drilling, contractors. Five quotes were received. The lowest responsible bid was received by Kimmes Bauer Well Drilling. Inc. in the amount of S32,765.00. The completion date is February 24, 2012. RIOT Council Member Pearson moved to approve the award of a contract to A.'immes &Mel trCil 11 117g, Inc., 117 the amount' of S32,765.00.1br the C017,117'11C1 1017 Of Test U.CII No. 4. Council Member S1711117 seconded the 17101 1 017. The motion passed 5-0. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2012 4 LAKE ELMO COL,.:21L MINUTES DRAFT Council Meeting Date Change Interim City Administrator Dawson stated that when the 2012 Calendar was presented and approved. the fact that Caucuses are on the regular Council meeting of February 7, 2012, was overlooked. MOTION: Council Member Pearson moved to approve moving the February 7, 2012, Council meeting to Wednesday. February 8, 2012, due to Caucuses, Council Member Emmons seconded the motion. The 1170a017 passed 5-0. Library Possible Purchase of Library Building Council Member Smith requested the Council to continue discussion about the possible library site to the February 8, 2012, Council meeting so residents have an opportunity to provide their input at that time. Attorney Snyder stated all discussions regarding price would be conducted at a Closed meeting, Sarah Linder. 11108 12'1' St.. Library Board 'Member stated the Library Board takes its financial responsibility seriously. and is planning to provide more services and hours. The Library Board unanimously approved the request for a larger space/building, Justin Bloyer. 8881 Jane Rd., requested the Council offer the opportunity to let the residents speak prior to a final decision. The City Council was aware that the Library Board had requested it pursue the purchasing of a building, discussed the Lee building. wished to act in a timely manner and be responsible to the residents. and noted that all discussion of a potential offer would be conducted in a Closed meeting. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to cow:lime the possible librcuiv pw-chase discussion to the February 8, 2012, Council meeting to allow public' CO171177071 at that lime. Council ,,Alember Pearson seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0, The Open meeting recessed at10:25 The Closed meeting opened at 10:37 p.m, PRESENT: Mayor Johnston and Council Members Emmons, Park. Pearson. and Smith Also Present: Interim Administrator Dawson, Attorney Snyder, Interim Finance Director Rigdon, and City Engineer Griffin, The City Council discussed real estate negotiations and the pending litigation. LAKE ELMO CITI1 COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2012 LAKE _,MO COUNCIL MINUTES DRAFT The Closed meeting recessed at 11:08 p.m. The Open meeting reconvened at 11:08 p.m. City Attorney Snyder summarized the Council's determinations pending litigation and the time frame for further action. MOTION.- Mayor Johnston moved to engage the services of Welsh Colliers Companies Jill- acquisition ofpropertyfbr the library. Council Member Pearson seconded the 17701i017. Motion passed 4-1. with Council Member Smith voting against. The meeting adjourned at 11:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Carole Luczak, Interim Ciiy Clerk LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2012 6 \ Member Cities Amended 2011 Data Sources: MN DNR Data Deli, SWWD I I I i ANOKA i-----r J r 1, V N7N J _I HENN IN ' 7 z I ii—.., '''' ''....i I CARVER I ,, „-S VItshinglon I , 2 ....„7, 1SC017 ..._,[DAKOTA I 7 ..i. OEV0,4)ti:'. :HY C0.375 1.5 2.25 3 he soMUes AS1 A DENMA2IK ToMH ° ap 7.1: Stormwater tfllty Fee anagement Units WI/VD Juristictional Boundary Management Units East Mississippi Lower St. Croix South Washington Overflow Project Financing ,/// 25 PERCENTAREA S.,,Y> 75 PERCENT AREA 7 4' GIL C ,MUNiCA DATE: 2/8/2012 CONSENT ITEM #: 3 MOTION as part of Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the Amount of $141,695.79 SUBMITTED BY: Joe Rigdon. Interim Finance Director THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Joan Ziertman, Finance Consultant SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda. the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $141,695.79. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda, BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has fiduciary authority and responsibility to conduct normal business operation. Below is a summary of current claims to be disbursed and paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures. Claim # ACH ACH ACH DD3772 — DD3785 37996-37998 37999-38007 1150-1284 Amount $ 5,609.71 $ 1,075.00 $ 3.728.29 $ 17,181.51 $ 730.26 $105,271.02 $ 8.100.00 TOTAL S 141,695.79 Pa Pa Pa Description oll Taxes to IRS 1/26/7017 oll Taxes to MN Dept. of Revenue 1/26/2012 oll Retirement to PERA 1/26/2017 Payroll Dated 1/26/2012 (Direct Deposit) Payroll Dated 1/26/2012 (Payroll Paper Checks) Accounts Payable Dated 2/8/2012 Accounts Payable Dated 2/8//2012 (Library Checks) paQe 1 -- City Council Meeting Approval of Disbursements February S, 2012 Consent Agenda Item #3 STAFF REPORT: City staff has complied and reviewed the attached set of claims. All appears to be in order and consistent with City budgetary and fiscal policies and Council direction RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve as part of the Consent Agenda proposed disbursements in the amount of S141,695.79. Alternatively. the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda or a particular claim from this item and further discuss and deliberate prior to taking action. If done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would he: "Move to approve the February 8, 2012, Disbursements as Presented [and modified] herein." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Accounts Payable Dated 2/8/2012 SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the ConsentAgenda: Questions from Council to Staff ...... ......... .................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ...... ................................. ......... ..... Mayor & City Council - Discussion .......... ....... ..... ..... . ...... ............ ........... . ........ Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion.... ...... ..... ........................... ..... . ...... ..... Mayor Facilitates Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: jean Printed: 021(11/2017 - 17:01 P10 Bmeh: 039-17-2011 Inv Pate AM1,FGAL American Legal Publishing Corp 83741 1012412011 101-410-1320-44300 !Miscellaneous 83741 Total: AM LI7CiAL Total: Amount Qnantity Pint Date Description Reference Task 789.95 0.00 02M8/2012 Code of Ordinance - Published 2011 789.95 789.95 ANINIAL1-11,1 Animal Humane Society 605 01/73121112 1,071.94 0.00 02108/2012 Animal Impound Fees I 01-420-2700-43 15(1 Contract Services 605 Total: 1,071.94 ANIMALFIU Total: 1,071.94 AR VIG Arvig 2011 -04A 1213172011 101 -000-0000-32250 Utility Permits 2011-04A Total: ARV Ki Total: IVIES Municipal Emergency Services 0(1)88278-SNV 01716/2012 703-420-7220-45800 Other Equipment 00288278-SNV Total: MES Total: 1,020,00 0.00 02/08/2012 Refund Duplicate Payment 2011-04A 1,020.00 ,020,00 7,781.00 0.00 02/08/2012 22 Pair of Firefighting Boots 7,781.00 7,781,00 MN CORP Minnesota Corporate Medi Inc. 13523 1000/2011 798.46 0.00 02/08/2012 Repair HVAC Unit I 01 -410-1940-440411 Repairs/Mann Contractual Eqpt 13523 Total: 798.46 MN CORP Total: 798,46 -0_ Type PO # Close 110Line N o 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 - To Re Paid Proof List (02/02/1 2 - (2:01 PM) Page 1 Invoice tt Inv Date Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine SE1I Short Elliott Ilendrickson, Inc NW6262 01/1112012 2,431.82 0.00 02/08/2012 Design Services for Test Well 04 No 0000 601 -494-9400-43030 Engineering Services NW6262 Total: 2,431.82 SEH Total: 2,431.82 Tl< DA TKDA, Inc. 2011003889 02/10/2012 6(11-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 2011003889 Total: TKDA Total: 133,01 0,0(1 02/08/2012 General Engineering Svs - Water No 0000 System 133,01 133.01 WASHCONS Washington Conservation Dist, 2292 12731/2011 535,50 0.00 02/08/2012 4th Quarter Shared Educator Program No 0000 603-496-9500-44370 Conferences & Training 2292 Total: 535.50 WASHCONS Total: 53.550 WASHTA X W'ashington County 71484 02123/2012 101-410-1520-44300 Miscellaneous 71484 Total: WASHTAX Total: 736.11 0.00 02/08/2012 2012 Truth in Taxation Notice No 0000 736,11 736,11 Report Total: 15..297.79 Al' - 3-() Be Pa1 Proof List (02/02 I 2 - 12:111 PM) Page 2 Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List 1 )scr: Joan z Printed: 02102/2012 - 12:08 1,1\4 Batch: 00 I -02-2012 Invoice ti Inv Date ABDO Abdo Fick & Meyers, LIP 287984 01/20/2012 101-410-1520-43010 Audit Services 287984 Total: ABDO Total: ARAM Aramark, Inc. 629-7409658 01/1212012 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 629-7409658 Total: 629-7414592 02,41112012 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 629-7414592 Total: 629-7416408 01724/2(112 1(11-420-2220-44010 Repairs/1\4MM Bldg 629-741641.18 Total: 629-7416409 01/24/2012 101-410-1940-440 I Repairs/Mai nt Contractual Bldg 629-7416409 Total: (129-7416410 01/2412012 101-420-222(1-44010 RepairsiNtaint Bldg 629-7416410 Total: 629-7421436 01/340012 1(11-411)-194(1-44(1)Repairs/A4aint Contractual Bldg 629-7421436 'rota!: ARAM Total: BECKER Becker Fire and Safety. LTC 358 01117/2012 101-410-1320-44300 Miscellaneous 358 Total: 359 01/1712012 101-430-3100-44010 R epairs/M aint Bldg Amount Quantity Prot Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine 4,000.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Progress Billing for 12/31/11 Audit 4,000.00 4,000.00 No MOO 72.86 0,00 02/08/7012 UnitOrms No 0000 22.86 22,86 0.00 02/08/2012 Uniforms No 0000 22.86 113.61 0.00 02/08/2012 Monthly Rug Service Station $12 No (11)00 113.61 154.10 0.00 02/08/2012 Linen City Hall No 0000 154,10 112.59 0.00 02/08/2012 Monthly Rug Service Station )11 Nu 0000 112.59 78.32 0.00 02/08/2012 Linen City Hall No 000' 78.32 504.34 31,63 0,00 02108/2012 Fire Extinguisher inspections City Hall - No 0000 3 1,63 308.3? 0.00 (12708/2012 Fire Extinguishers Annual Inspections No 0000 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (024/2.'12 - 12:08 PM( Page 1 Invoice # Inv Date 359 Total: 360 01/17/2(112 10 I -420-222(1-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 360 Total: BECKER BERESTIM Beres Tim Ck Req 01130/2012 603-000-0000-3710(1 Surface Water Utility Sales Ck Req Total: BER EST1M Total: Amount Quantity Punt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # 308.32 325.06 325.06 665.01 50,00 50.00 50.00 BERKLEY INSURANCE. TRUST LEAGUE, OF MN CFFIE C0009458 01/2012012 500,0(1 101-410-)320-43610 Insurance C0009458 Total: 500.00 BERKLEY Total: 5(10,00 0.00 02/08/2012 Fire Extinguisher Inspections - Fire Dep 0.00 02/08/2012 Refund Overpayment on SW Account 0.00 02/08/2012 Insurance Deductible Water Damage No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 13 IFFS Ilift's Inc. W453679 01111/2012 61.29 0.00 02108/2012 Portahle Rcstrooms No 0000 101 -450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings W453679 Total: 61.29 BIFFS Total: 61,29 BOYER Boyer Trucks 601250 0112512012 263,62 0,00 02/08/2(112 00-1 Parts Public Works No 0(' 101-430-3 I 25-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 6(1125(1 Total: 263.62 BOYER Total: 263.62 C&J CONS C & J Consulting Services, LLP Jan 12 02/01/2012 101-410-1520-43150 Contract Services Jan 12 Total: C&J CONS Total: C,MIQUEST Car Quest Auto Parts 2055-247145 01/18/2012 101-430-312(1-42210 Equipment Parts 2(.155-247145 Total: 7,837.50 0.00 02/08/2)112 Monthly Acctg Svs - January 2012 7,837,50 7,837.50 80.93 0.00 02/08/2012 Misc Filters 80.93 No 0000 No (1000 AP - To Be Proof List 102/02/ I 2 - 12:08 PM) Page 2 Invoice # lnv Date Amount Onantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # 21/55-247550 01124/2012 21.96 1).00 02/0812012 Blower Switch 98-1 No 0000 1(.11-431)-3121)-4221i.) Equipment Parts 2/55-247550 Total: 21.96 6971-251(137 01/25/2012 8.65 0,0(1 02/08/2012 Wire and Copper Lugs No 0000 101-430-3120-42210 Equipment Parts 6971-251037 "Tota0: 8.65 CARQU EST Total: 111.54 CO LEM ER Colemer Jamie 0104/2012 01/24/2012 42.42 0.00 02708/2012 UM hums No 0000 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 01124/2012 Total: 42.42 COLEM ER Total: 42.42 CC/P[1. AND Copeland Trucking 24921.01 0111/2012 360.00 0.0(1 02/08/2012 Trucking Library Services No 11000 206-450-5300-42000 Office Supplies 24921.1)1 Total: 360.00 COPELAND 360.00 CUMNIINGS Cummings Mary Jo 02101/2012 02/0117017 21.16-450-5300-43150 C.`ontraet. Services 02101/2012 Total: CUNIMINGS Total: 7,430.00 0.00 02/0 2 2 54 !lours of Consulting Services 2,430.00 2.43(00 DAWSON Dawson Craig 02/0212012 02/02/2012 29.97 0.00 02/08/2012 Mileage 101-410-1320-43310 Mileage 02/02/2012 0)7(1)0(112 40.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Reimb Cell Phone 101-410-1940-4321(1 Telephone 02/1)2/2012 Total: 69.97 DAWSON Total: 69.97 DELTA Delta Dental 01-Minnesota 476830'7 01/15/2012 101-000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance 4768307 Total: DELTA Total: 777.15 0.00 02/08/2012 Feb 2012 Dental Coverage 777.15 777.15 No DON No ONO No ONO No 0000 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (02102/12 - 12:08 PM Page 3 invoice Inv Dale FM ERGAPP Emergency Apparatus Main). IN(' 59815 01/23/2012 101-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 59815 'rota': 59816 01/23/2012 1(11-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 59816 Total: 59817 (.11/23/2(112 101-420-2220-44040 Repairs./Maint Eqpt 59817 Total: 59818 0103/2012 101-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 59818 Total: 59819 01/23/2012 101-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 59819 Total: EMERGAPP Total: FERGUSON Ferguson Waterworks, Inc. 801347656.00 I 02102/2012 60 I -494-9400-42300 Water Meters & Supplies SO I 347656.001 Total: FERGUSON Total: FIOR ILL@ Fiorillo Megan 01/17/2012 01/17/2012 I 01-4 I 0-1450-43620 Cahle Operations 01/17/2(112 Total: HORI1,1,0 Total: FOCI IS Focus Engineering. Inc. 114, 115 01/29/2012 101-410-1930-43030 Engineering Services 114, 115 01/29/20 12 101-410-1910-43030 Engineering Services 114, 115 Total: 116 01/29/2012 101-420-2400-43030 Engineering I 16 ()I/29/2012 101-410-1910-43030 Engineering Services 116 01;29/2012 404-48(1-8000-43030 Engineering Services Al' - To I3c Paid Proof List (02/02/12 - 12:08 PNI) Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # 235.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Vehicle Safety Inspection, El 235.1111 0.00 02/08/2012 Vehicle Safety Inspection, E2 235.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Vehicle Safety Inspection, T I 235.00 235.00 235.00 608.49 608.49 235.00 235.00 1,548.49 0.00 02/08/2012 Vehicle Safety Inspection, Wake Repair 0.00 02/08/2012 Vehicle Safety Inspection, LI 444.16 0,00 02/08/2012 Repair Clamps 444.16 444.16 27,50 0,00 02/08/2012 Cabled Live - Workshop 1117/12 27.50 27 50 5,040,56 253.00 5,293.56 630.00 1,360,50 67.50 0.00 02/08/2012 General Engineering 0.00 02/08/20 12 General Engineering 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/08/2012 02/08/2012 02/08/2012 General Engineering - VRA General Engineering - VRA General Engineering - VRA No (MOO No 0000 No 0000 No 00k No 0000 No No No No No No No 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 Page 4 Invoice 14 Inv Date Anionnt Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type ro Close POI,ine # 116 0 4'29-'2012 45.00 0,00 02/0812012 General Engineering - VRA I 01-430-3 I 01)-43030 Engineering Services 116 01/2912012 267.01) 0.00 02/08/2017 General Engineering - V RA 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services I 16 01,09/7017 939,00 0.00 02(08/2012 General Engineering - V RA 602-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services I 16 01/70./2012 843,50 0.00 02/0812012 General Engineering - VRA 603-496-9500-43030 Engineering Services 116 Total; 4,157,50 117 01129/2012 348.5(1 0.00 02/08/2012 'Transportation & Traffic Systems 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 117 01090017 267.00 0.00 02MR/2012 Streel Mainenance 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 117 01.,29/2012 1,041.50 0.00 02108/2012 Municipal Aid 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 117 01/29/2012 o19.00 0,00 02/080012 Capital Improvement Planning 409-480-8000-4303)) Engineering Services 1 I 7 01/79.0012 45.00 0.00 07/0812012 21)12 Scal ('oat Project 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services I 17 01090017 59.00 0.00 02/0812012 Trunk Hwy 36 Corridor Planning 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services I 17 01/29/2012 67.50 0,00 02/08/2012 Wash Cty Demo rail Reclamation 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services Proj 117 0109/7012 840.00 0.00 02108/2012 Structural Due Diligence Project 101-4 10-1030-43030 Engineering Services I 17 "Foto!: 3,587.50 I 18 01/29/2012 164.50 0,00 02/08/2012 Development Whistling Valley III 203-490-90711-43030 Engineering Services 118 Total: 164.50 119 0E09/7012 1,069,50 0.00 02/08/2012 Lake Elmo Water System Chorination 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 119 Total: 1,069.50 120 01/2972012 267.00 0.00 02/08/2012 10th Street Infrastructure Planning 602-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services 120 Total: 267.01) 121 01;29/2012 1,872.64 0,00 02/0812012 Lake Elmo Water System 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 121 Total: 1,872.64 122 01/2912012 199.50 0.00 02/08/2012 3M Litigation 601 -494-94110-43030 Engineering Services 127 Total: 199.50 123 01/29/2012 383.50 0.00 02/08/2012 Library Assistance 206-45(1-5300-4303(1 Engineering Services 123 Total: 383.50 Strategies/Fin No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 000f No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 1)00 No 0000 No 0000 AP - To De Paid Proof List (1)2/02/12 - 12:08 PM) Page 5 nvouce # Inv Dale 124 ()I/29/2012 410-480-80011-43030 Engineering Services 124 Total'. 125 01/29/2012 601-4 94-9400-43030 Engineering Services 125 Total: FOCUS 'rota!: FXL FXL, lite. January 12 02/01/2012 1(11-410-1320-43100 Assessing Services January 12 Total; FXL Total: Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # ciovrrz NO Government Training Services 01/20/12 01/20/2012 101-410-1910-44371) Conferences & Training 0 I /20/12 Total: ciov-rR NG Total: I [LB II LB 'ravages Redpath Ltd 13012 01/30/2012 101-410-1520-44300 Miscellaneous 13012 Total: H LB 'rotor IAFC IAFC Membership 01/23/2012 01/23/21)12 101-420-2220-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 01/23/2012 Total: IAFC Total: KDV Kern DeWenter Viere Ltd I 40099 02/1)2/2012 101-410-1520-43150 Contract Services 140099 Total: KDV Total: 6,206.93 0,00 02/08/2012 Demontrevil le I lighlands Area Feasibility 6,206.93 5,419.61 0.00 02/08/2012 Keats Ave M SA Street & Trunk Mani 5,419.61 28,616.74 2,000.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Assessing Services - January 2012 2,0(10.00 2,000.00 255.00 0,00 02/08/2012 2012 MCFOA Annual Conference 255.00 255.00 515.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Flexible Benefit Plan Document 515.00 515.00 229.00 0.00 (12/1)8/2(112 Annual Membership 229.00 229.00 8,289.00 0.00 02/08/20 I 2 Financial Services - January 2012 8,289,00 8,289.00 No 0000 No 0000 No No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 AP -1 o Be Po;'' Proof List 102102/12 - (2:08 PM) Page 6 Invoice 6 IBate KETZNER Ketzner Beverly Ck Reg 02.4.11/2012 603-000-0000-37100 Surface Water Utility Sales Ck Rey Total: KETZNER Total: Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type l'O # Close POLine 6 135.00 0.00 02/08/2012 Refund Overpayment of SW Account 135,00 135.00 L_T1TAELS Falls Machine, Inc 48499 01/1212012 348.64 0.011 02/0812012 Spinner Motor 101-430-3125-44040 Itepairs/Maint Eqpt 48499 fotaf 348.64 LTI_TALLS Total: 348.64 ENARDSO Menards - Oakdale 56276, 58606 OH 1/2012 101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/M aim Bklg 56276, 58606 01111/2012 101-420-2220-44010 R cpairs/M atilt Bld2 56276, 58606 Total: 56681 01113/2012 101-450-5200-44010 RepairstM aint Bldg 56681 Total: 58146,50918 01/25/2012 101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 58146, 59918 Total: 58611 01119/2012 101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials 58611 Total: 60046 01/25/2012 101-420-2220-44010 Rcpairs/Maint Bldg 60046 Total: ENARDSO METRO FI Metro Fire Chiefs Assoc 01,10/12 01/30/2012 101-420-2220-44330 Dues & Subscriptions (11/30/12 Total: METRO FI Total: No 01)00 No 0000 165.06 0.00 02/08/2012 Station /II items No 0000 99, (6 0.00 02/08/2012 Station '1'1 items - No 0000 264.22 9,60 0.00 02/08/2012 Floor Soap - No 0000 9.60 17.60 0.00 02/0812012 City Hall Bldg Supplies - No 0000 17.60 13,86 0.00 02/08/2012 Street Crack Repair Materials No MOO 13.86 115.43 0.00 02108/2012 Station 41 Paint No 0000 115.43 420,71 100.00 0.00 02/08/201 2 Annual Membership 100.00 100.00 NCPERS 566200-NCPERS MINNESOTA 566221) 0 1 //3/2012 64.00 0.00 02/08/2012 January 2012 Deductions I 0 I -000-0000-2 I 708 Other Benefits 5662212 Total: 64.00 No 1)(10() No 0000 AP - Be Paid Proof List (02/02/12 - 12:08 PM) Page 7 Invoice # Inv I)ate NCPERS Total: NEXTEL Nextel Communications 11/18/2011 11/18/2011 I (11-410-1940-43210 lelephone 11/18/2011 11/18/2011 101-420-222(1-43210 Telephone 11/18/2011 11/1812011 101-420-2400-43210 Telephone 1111812011 11/18/2011 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone I 1/18/2011 11/1812011 101-450-5200-43210 Telephone 11/18/2011 Total: NEXTEL Total: NORTI ISEC Northland Securities, loc. 2797 01/10/2012 101-410-1520-44300 1V1 isccl lancous 2797 Total: NORTFISEC Total: ON EVA LE Gopher State One Call 30775 01/12/2012 101-430-3100-43150 Contract Services 30775 Total: 32945 02/02/2012 101-430-3100-43150 Contract Services 32945 Total: ON ECA LL Total: PARTNERE Partner Eng & Science, Inc. 01/1112012 01/11/2012 206-450-5300-43030 Engineering Services 01/11/2012 Total: PARTNERE Total: PELLERDA PeIler Dan Ck Reg 01/11/2012 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable Ck Req Total: Amount Quantity Pnit Date Description 64.00 17.94 82.84 17.62 48.24 115:90 782.54 282,54 1,00000 1,1)00,00 1,000,00 100.00 100.00 15.95 15.95 115.95 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 Reference 0.00 02/08/2012 Cell Phone Service - 0.00 02/08/2012 Cell Phone Service - 0.00 02/08/2012 Cell Phone Service - Task Adminsitration Fire Dept Building Dept 0,00 02l08/2012 Cell Phone Service - Public Works Dept 1,1.00 02/08/2012 Cell Phone Service - Parks Dept 0,00 02/08/2012 Continuing Disclosure Report 0,00 02/08.'2012 I „i ne Locates - January 2012 0.00 02/08/2012 1,inel.ocates - January 2012 0,00 02/08/201 2 Library Building Property Assessment 0,00 02/08/2012 Refund Escrow 11140 20th St 47356 Type l'O # Close POLine # No No No No No No No NO No No 0000 0000 0000 001 0000 0000 0000 00' 0000 0000 AP - To Be Po'-' Proof Lis) (02/02.'12 - 12:08 PM) Page 8 u'oice 1)ale Amount ,.:,11ttairttity Pint Date Description Reference PELLL,RDA Total: OR [SSA Anastasia Press 0E17/2012 01/17,'2012 10 1-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations 01/17/2012 Total: 0E23/12 01/13/2012 101-410- 450-43620 Cable Operations 0103/12 Total: PRESSA Total: IROSTAFF PROSTATE 102-843491 01/27/2012 101-410-1320-41010 Full-time Salaries 102-843491 Total: 102-844575 010912012 101-410-1320-41010 Full-time Salaries 102-844575 Total: 102-845394 07/050012 101-410-1320-41010 Full-time Salaries 102-845394 Total: PROSTAFF Total; REL1ANC Reliance Standard Life 02101/2012 02411/2012 10 I -000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance 02/01/2012 02/01/2012 101-000-0000-21 708 Other Benefits 02101/2012 (2/01/20 I 101-000-0000-21708 Other Benefits 02/0112012 02/01/2012 101-000-0000-21708 Oilier 13enelits 02/0E2(1)2 Total: REL1ANC Total: S&T Office Products. Inc. (11(12()148 0110912012 101-41(1-)320-42000 Office Supplies 01020148 Total: 01026124 01/19/2012 101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 01026124 Total: 3,000.00 Task 55,00 0,00 (12/(18/2(112 Cabled Live CC Mtg 1/17/12 55.0(1 55,00 55.0(1 110,00 0.00 02/08/2012 Cabled Live - Planning Conlin 1/23/12 488.25 0,00 02/08/2012 Office Clerk - Teinp I lelp Week End 1/8/12 488,25 569,63 0.00 02/08/2012 Office Clerk - Temp Week End I /15/12 569.63 496,00 496,00 1,553.88 0 00 02/08/2012 Of fice Clerk - Teinp Staff Week End 1/20 73,06 0.00 02/0812(112 Life Insurance 10.44 0,00 02/08/2012 Al) & D Insurance 87.27 0.00 02/08/2012 LTD Insurance 175,38 0.00 02/08/2012 STD Insurance 296,15 296.15 65,67 0.00 02/08/2012 Office Supplies 65.67 173.62 0.00 02/08/2012 Office Supplies 173.62 Type PO it Close POLine N(7 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No Nu No No No No 0000 0000 000(1 0000 0000 0000 AI' - To Be Paid Proof List (02/02/12 - 12:08 P1\11 Page 9 Invoice # Inv Date 01029032 01/26/20 12 101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 01029032 Total: S&T 'twat SACI-1SJIM James Sachs 01174/2012 01/24/2012 101-000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance 01/24/2012 Total: SACI ISJIN1 Total: Antonin Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type PO tt Close POLine 172.85 0.00 02/08/2012 Office Supplies No 0000 172.85 412.14 97. I l 0.00 (12/08/2012 Refund Premium withheld in error No 0000 97 I I 97.11 SAMSCLUB Sam's Club 01/19/2012 01119/2012 31.84 0.00 02/08/2012 Rehab Supplies 101-420-2220-44300 M i sc ellaneous 01119/2012 01/19/2012 26.76 0.00 02/08/2012 Towels for Station 101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 01/19/2012 Total: 58.60 SAMSCLUB 58,60 SOLI F1W IN Southwind Builders Ck Req 01/24;2012 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable Ck Req Total: SOUT1 1 WIN Total: No 0000 No 0000 5,1)00.00 0,00 02/08/2012 Refund Escrow 11544 58t1) Si 48016 No 0000 5,000 00 5,000,00 SPR1NGB Springbrook Software 18876 01/24/2012 4,646.61 0.00 02/08/2012 Annual Acctg Software Maint Fee No 000o I 01-410-1450-43180 Information Technology/Web 18876 Total: 4,646.61 SPRINGB Total: 4,646.6 I SW/WC SW/WC Service Cooperatives 3/1/12 01/26/2012 101-000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance 311112 Total: SW/WC Total: IDS TI)S METROCOM - 1 LC 02/01/2012 02/01/2012 101-420-2220-43210 'Telephone 7,590.00 0.00 02/08/2012 March 2012 Premiums 7,590.00 7,590.00 I 60.37 0.00 02/08/.7012 Analog - Fire No 0000 No 0000 AP - To Be Pail Proof List (02/02/12 - 12:118 PM) Page I 0 Iinoiie # Inv Date Amount Quantity Punt Date Description Reference Task Type 07;01/201 0210112012 158.31 0,00 02108/2012 Analog - Public Works 101-430-31(1(1-43210 Telephone 07/01/2012 07/01/2012 106.77 0.00 02/0812012 Analog - Lift Station Alarms R2-495-9450-43210 Telephone 02/012012 ' (1)311/2012 42.90 0,00 02/08/2012 Analog - Well House #2 601-494-9400-43210 Telephone 07/01/2012 Total: 468.35 ThS Total: 468.35 WASH-1i EC Washington County 71 537 02/27/20 940.00 0.00 02/08/2012 2012 Accuvote & Autmark Mut Fee 101-410-1410-44300 M iscellaueous 71537 Total: 940,00 WASH-REC Total: 940.00 YOCI I M Yocum Oil Company, Inc. 207257 01110/2012 1,775.13 0.00 02/(13/2012 Bulk Tanks Oil Fill 101-130-3 1 20-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids 207257 Total; 1,775.13 502870 01/17/2012 I 60.69 0.00 02108/2012 Bulk Oil Tanks I 01-430-310(1-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 502870 Total: 160,69 YOCUN1 Total: 1,935,82 Report Total: 89,973,23 PO # Close POLine # No 0000 No (1000 No 0000 No ()000 No 00011 No 0(100 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (02/02F1 2 12:1)8 PM( Page I MAYOR & COUNCIL CO u CATION DATE: 2/8/12 CONSENT ITEM #: 4 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Agreement for Services between the City of Oakdale and City of Lake Elmo SUBMITTED BY: Mike Bouthilet, Public Works & Parks Superintendent THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Dean A. Zuleger. Craig W. Dawson. and David Synder SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Enter into an -Af.treement for Services" with the City of Oakdale to provide maintenance and emergency services to the Lake Elmo waste water collection system. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: For the past ten years the Cities of Oakdale and N. Si. Paul have been providing maintenance and emergency services for the areas of Lake Elmo with sewer service. N. St. Paul has only responded to emergencies. while Oakdale has done routine maintenance and emergency work. STAFF REPORT: Maintenance of a waste water system involves ,jetting, flushing, and video of sewer mains, laterals and lift stations. This work requires a specialized truck commonly known as a "Jetter". Jester trucks are very expensive. over $200,000, and are limited in use to primarily waste water and storm water duties. The size of our current system does not warrant a purchase for the foreseeable future. Up until now neither Oakdale nor N. St. Paul has charged for their services. Work has been done under the "good neighbor principle". With the increasing amount and frequency of work required on our system, both Public Works Departments have concurred it is time for a more formal service agreement. If this agreement is completed. our intention is to have Oakdale and a private contractor do the same maintenance task and evaluate costs and performance. If the result is a private company can provide comparable service for less. we will continue with private contractors. However. the Oakdale agreement should be continued due to their location and ability to respond in a timely manner to emergencies. -- page City Council Meeting Agreemem for Sem'', Benceen Cities of Oakdale & Lake Elmo Februaii 8, 2012 Consent Item #4 Current cost for sewer maintenance with jetter truck and two personnel: Private $220/hour + approximately two hours back and forth travel. Oakdale $145/hour. No travel pay RECOMMENDATION: Enter into an Agreement for Services with the City of Oakdale to provide maintenance and emergency services to the City of Lake Elmo waste/stomi water collection systems. ATTACHMENTS: Agreement for Services SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ......... . ........ Ci Administrator Report/Presentation...,...................... ...... ...... City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff__ ...... Nlayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate ....... ..,....... ..... . ........ ........... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .... ....... Mayor & City Council Discussion ........ ..... .. .......... ....... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion........ .......... ............ Mayor Facilitates -- page AG E 1 NT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF OAKDALE AND THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO This Agreement, made and entered into this day of , 2012, by and between the City of Oakdale, ("The City of Oakdale"), a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and the City of Lake Elmo ("The City of Lake Elmo"), a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, in order to manage costs and the quality of maintenance of certain public utilities for the City of Lake Elmo, The City of Lake Elmo Public Works Department has requested the City of Oakdale assist with the repair and routine maintenance of the Lake Elmo public utilities; and WHEREAS, Lake Elmo has identified general utility maintenance as work that the City of Oakdale could perform for the City of Lake Elmo with regard to their public utilities; and WHEREAS, Both parties desire this AGREEMENT to be effective on the date the last signature necessary to execute this document is obtained; and NOW THEREFORE, In consideration of the mutual terms, covenants, warranties and conditions hereinafter set forth, the Parties hereto, intending to be legally bound hereby, mutually agree as follows: Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 1 ARTICLE I: SCOPE OF SERVICES SECTION 1.01.1 Scope of Services Pursuant to the terms and conditions herein, the City of Oakdale agrees to perform general utility maintenance work ("Work") on City of Lake Elmo public utilities, as Work is defined and pursuant to the provisions in ARTICLE III of this Agreement. ARTICLE TERM SECTION 2.01 Term The terms of the Agreement shall remain in effect until terminated, according to the provisions of Section 7.04 of this Agreement. ARTICLE III: RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY OF OAKDALE As a condition precedent to the City of Oakdale performing the Work, Oakdale agrees it shall accomplish the following tasks: 1) Evaluate and determine the urgency of the problem requiring Work. 2) Inspect utilities and keep accurate records of inspections and repairs. 3) Provide the City of Lake Elmo Public Works Department with information regarding the necessary repairs and/or maintenance requirements for each utility. 4) Review and determine the repairs and/or maintenance required to service the City of Lake Elmo Public Works Department public utilities, obtaining specific Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 2 instructions regarding whether Work should be commenced immediately (with possible overtime) or whether the Work may be, or should be, commenced and performed during regular work hours. In the event the City of Oakdale fails to properly notify the Lake Elmo Public Works Department of the determined urgency of the problem, the City of Lake Elmo may, at its sole option, deny the overtime request for Work. 5) Notifv proper authorities at the City of Lake Elmo of the necessary repairs and anticipated down time. 6) Perform work directed by the City in a reasonable and workmanlike fashion. ARTICLE IV: CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT SECTION 4.01 Consideration In consideration of the City of Oakdale's Work, the City of Lake Elmo shall compensate the City of Oakdale for any and all labor, materials, equipment, overhead and miscellaneous expenses and charges associated with the Work. Labor charges per hour shall be at the rates specified in the Union Labor Contract and will inc3.ude a 40%- additional cost for benefits. Charges for materials and miscellaneous charges shall be at the rates calculated by the City of Oakdale, and substantiated, when possible, with invoices from Vendors. Equipment rental hour rates shall be as identified in the City of Oakdale Equipment Rental Rates List. There shall be a one hour minimum charge with additional time charged in half hour increments. Call back overtime shall have a minimum two hour charge. Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 3 The City of Oakdale shall periodically provide the City of Lake Elmo with a copy of the union contracts showing the labor rates in effect. SECTION 4.02 Payment Upon receipt of the City of Oakdale's invoice and verification of the charges, the City of Lake Elmo agrees it shall make payment to the City of Oakdale within thirty (30) days of receipt. Payment shall be in the full amount of the invoice and shall be sent to the address indicated on the invoice. ARTICLE V: LIABILITY AND HOLD HARMLESS SECTION 5.01 Liability Each party agrees that it shall be responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts and omissions of the other party and the results thereof. Both Parties' liability shall be governed by and limited to the tort liability provisions found in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, as amended from time to time, and any other application law(s). This provision shall survive any termination of this Agreement. Each party shall be responsible for its own vehicle comprehensive, liability and collision insurance. SECTION 5.02 Hold Harmless Each party agrees that it shall indemnify and save harmless, protect and defend the other party, its employees and agents from any or all liability, suits or demands, including the legal defense thereof, for bodily injuries, including death, or property damages, including loss of use arising out of any activity by itself or its employees and agents under this Agreement. Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 4 ARTICLE VI: REPRESENTATION AND WARRANTIES SECTION 6.01 Authority, Binding Effect Both Parties represent and warrant that the individuals executing this Agreement on behalf of each of the Parties have the full power and authority to execute and perform this Agreement, and this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable in accordance with its terms. SECTION 6.02 Corporate Authorization Both Parties represent and warrant that the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of duties contemplated herein have been duly authorized by all necessary legislative or corporate action. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement shall not conflict with or result in the breach or violation of any term or provision of any of either party's municipal ordinances or state statutes, charter or constitution, any other state or federal law, or any other provision or authority. ARTICLE VII: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS SECTION 7.01 All terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and insure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective successors, heirs, executors and assigns. This Agreement and the rights and obligations of any party hereunder shall not be assignable except with the written consent of the other party hereto, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. SECTION 7.02 Notice Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 5 Any notice, request, demand, statement or consent required or permitted to be given hereunder except for notice of Work as provided for in SECTION 1.01 above, shall be in writing, shall be signed by or on behalf of the party giving notice, and shall be personally delivered or sent by express service, fax, or certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, to the other party to the respective address given herein below: If to Oakdale: City Administrator, City of Oakdale 1584 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, MN 55128 Office: 651-730-2705 FAX: 651-730-2718 If to Lake Elmo: City Administrator, City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Office: 651-777-5510 FAX: 651-777-9615 Any such notice given as aforesaid shall be conclusively deemed to have been given and received on the day on which such notice was delivered. Either party may, from time to time, furnish in writing to the other party such notice of a change in the address or individual to whom each notice(s) are to be given. SECTION 7.03 Severability This Agreement is intended to be performed in accordance with, and only to the extent permitted by, all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall, for any reasons and to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement and the application of such provision to other persons or AgreememforServices City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 6 circumstances shall not be affected thereby but rather shall be enforced to the extent permitted by law. SECTION 7.04 Termination Except for the provisions contained in Article V, which shall survive any termination of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part by writing by either party, provided that no termination may be effected unless: 1) The other party is given not less that ninety (90) calendar days written notice of intent to terminate, 2) The non -terminating party is afforded an opportunity to confer with the terminating party prior to termination. SECTION 7.05 Waivers and Amendments This Agreement may be amended or superseded, and its terms or covenants hereof may be waived, only by a written instrument executed by the parties hereto or in the case of a waiver, by the party waiving compliance. The failure of any party at any time or times to require performance of any provisions hereof shall in no manner affect its right at a later time to enforce the same. No waiver by an party of the breach of any term or covenant contained in this Agreement or in any other such instrument, whether by conduct or otherwise, in anyone or more instances, shali be deemed to be, or construed as, a further or continuing waiver of any breach, or a waiver of the breach of any other term or covenant contained herein. Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 7 SECTION 7.06 Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which may be deemed an original, but together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. SECTION 7.07 Force Majeure Neither party shall be held responsible for performance of this Agreement if the party's performance is prevented by acts or events beyond the party's reasonable control, including but not limited to: severe weather and storms, earthquake or other natural occurrences, strike and other labor unrest, power failures, electrical power surges or current fluctuations, nuclear or other civil military emergencies, or acts of legislative, judicial, executive or administrative authorities. SECTION 7.08 Entire Agreement It is understood and agreed that this entire Agreement contains, supersedes and replaces any and all agreements and negotiations, whether oral or written, between the parties relating to the subject matters herein. (the remainder Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 8 this page is left intntonai1y blank) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the dates listed below: THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO BY: Date: BY: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator Dean A. Johnston, Mayor Date: THE CITY OAKDALE BY: Date: BY: Craig Waldron, City Administrator Carmen Sarrack, Mayor Date: THE CITY OAKDALE: Approved as to form: BY: Date: Jim Thomson, City of Cakdale Attorney THE CITY LAKE ELMO: Approved as to form: BY: Date: David K. Snyder, City of Lake Elmo Attorney Agreement for Services City of Oakdale & City of Lake Elmo Page 9 t COUNCIL OMMU/VICA TiON DATE: 2/8/12 CONSENT ITEM #: 5 MOTION RESOLUTION 2012-xx AGENDA ITEM: Consider authorization to apply for the Mn/DOT Community Roadside Landscaping Partnership Program and authorizing the primary contact person. SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: Nick M. Johnson. Interim Planner Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator Kyle Klatt. Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider Resolution 2012-xx authorizing the submittal of an application to participate in the Mn/DOT Community Roadside Landscaping Partnership Program and to authorize Nick M. Johnson from the Planning Department to serve as the primary contact person for the application. This resolution is required by Mn/DOT as part elan official application. The Mn/DOT Community Landscaping Partnership Program provides a venue through which cities. residents. and the State work together on landscaping projects to beautify Highway rights - of -way. The State's funds reimburse for landscaping materials while the City Staff and community residents provide the manual labor. The proposed project is located in the Village Area of the city along State Highway 5. The finalized location of the plantings is yet to he determined. However. Mn/DOT and Staff are considering multiple locations between Lake Elmo Ave. N. and 39`11St. N. The recommended motion to act on this is as follows: "Move to approve Resolution 2012 — xx authorizing staff to apply for the Mn/DOT Roadside Landscape Grant and authorizing staff member Nick M. Johnson as the primary contact." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since 2007. the City has benefited from landscaping materials worth $34.670.45 being planted within the city limits through this grant. The landscaping materials are completely reimbursed by Mn/DOT and are planted primarily by -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting 41n/DOT Landscape Grant Program Februcdv S, 2012 Consent Agenda Item g 5 resident volunteers, The City Council has historically directed planning and public works staff to utilize time and equipment in managing the grant application and execution. STAFF REPORT: Staff is recommendingrecomrnending the City apply for this grant to continue beautifying Highway 5 in 2012. Recruitment of volunteers is being headed by Lake Elmo resident Sarah Hietpas and will progress over the course of the next months. In addition. Staff intends to reach out to property and business owners along Highway 5 to collect their input and support regarding plant selection and maintenance. Initial discussions with property and business owners have been positive and show support for the project. The proposed planting dates have not yet been set, but will occur in late spring of 2012. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council approve the resolution by undertaking the following action "Move to approve Resolution 2012 — xx authorizing staff to apply for the Mn/DOT Roadside Landscape Grant and authorizing staff member Nick M. Johnson as° the primary contact. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2012-xx 2. Location Map SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ..... ....... Dean A. Zuleger. City Administrator Report/Presentation. ..... ....................... ....... Kyle Klatt, Planning Director 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 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-xx A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPLICATION FOR THE MNDOT COMMUNITY ROADSIDE LANDSCAPING PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZATION OF A PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo will act as the sponsoring unit thr the landscaping project in the Village Area on the State Trunk Highway 5 to be conducted during the penod April through July of 2012. WHEREAS, Sarah Hietpas is hereby authorized to apply to the Minnesota Department of Transportation for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Lake Elmo. with Nick M. Johnson serving as the City's Authorized Representative. ADOPTED BY the Lake Elmo City Council on the 8th day of February. 2012. Dean A. Johnston, Mayor ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleger. City Administrator I certify that the above resolution was adopted or approved by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo on February 8th. 2012. Signed: s (tidc) datc't ca City of Lake Elmo 1/23/2012 Data Source: Washington County, MN Proposed Plantings} 0 *Plantings include trees, shrubs, and perennials. Design will be context sensitive as to not reduce visibility of signage and businesses. 75 150 300 Meters J � AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: ! I ; -"*""?(--, : I DATE: February 8, 2012 REGULAR ITEM #: Public comment; No action Public Comments regarding Possibility of Purchasing Property for the Lake Elmo Public Library Craig W. Dawson, interim City Administrator THROUGH/REVIEWED BY: Dean A. Zu]eger, City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: At its January 17 meeting, the City Council scheduled the February 8 meeting to listen to public comments regarding the potential purchase of property which could be used for the Lake Elmo Public Library. As it is expected that the full Council will not he present on February 8, it would be prudent to schedule action on whether to proceed with a purchase after the full Council has had an opportunity to read the record of comments and/or review the video of the Council meeting, and to be present for the vote on the matter. Consequently, the only action recommended for the Council tonight is to listen to residents' comments on the matter. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Library Board has requested that the City Council pursue the purchase of property at 3537 Lake Elmo Avenue North (aka the "Clock building") to house the Lake Elmo Public Library. It believes that, based on what is known about the probable range of costs to purchase the property and to renovate/remodel the building, it is within the feasible financially for the overall operations of the Library in terms offuture revenues fi-orn the Library levy. Further, over a period often to twenty years. it appears that the costs to own would he comparable to and potentially less than renting, space for the Library (particular(y if there were rental income from tenants in the space). The Library Board has declined to authorize execution of a lease at the former Washington County Rosalie E. Wahl Library at this time. Several questions have been raised along the way whether purchasing a property is wise, as owning property caiiies a financial risk due to the illiquidity of the asset, and the uncertainties of real estate prices and the long, --term viability of Lake Elmo's library. Some comments have been made that the Library should become established and successful in leased space before a decision is made to make a more permanent site available for it. Al the January 17 meeting, the Council authorized the engagement of services of a commercial real estate broker. should the Council decide at some later date that it wished to pursue negotiations to purchase a property. Since that meeting. an Exclusive Representation Agreement has been executed with Jay Chmielevvski of Weish-Colliers Company. -- page 1 -- SUGGESTED 0 ER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction & Report ........... ......... .......... ....... ............... City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff ....... ........ ........... ................... Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate ....... ....... Mayor Facilitates - Discussion .......... ......... . ........ ....... ........... ........... Mayor & Council Members - ........... . ..... ........... ....... . ............. . ............... Mayor Facilitates 10 Year 15 -ear 20 Year l'wject Funds $ 5011,000 $ 5110,000 $ 500,000 FirmucingOlsts 37,250 37, P5 36,875 Del./1 5ervice Reserve Fund 60,0011 51,733 44,255 Rounding, 2,750 4,142 3,870 1'ar Ammtmt (4- flonds $ 600,000 $ 595,000 $ 585,000, Total rrinciral Rqiiirated Averoge Interest Rate Ectimated ToLal Interest Eslimated Tmtal $600,000 $595,000 $585,000 2.47",(0 3,14",/,, 3.65T,, $91,875 $1711,040 $258,579 $691,875 9 765,040 $843,579 Tel 10 1.5 20 Est- Avg, A11011aillv1111, $69,188 $5I,003 $47,179 I)SI I,ii1id 1Z$1,472 $1,667 $1,590 Nel 1' $07,715 $49,336 $40,589 1- the 1.),SRF is used ((i woke the Iasi payment NI the bonds effectively reducilig the number el paynteills hy one year I co lit IM 5-:c4- Ili r!t; 1.111,1 1 Prepreil Mayor, City Council, and City staff, I encourage you to look seriously at the acquisition of "the Clock" building "as is." It seems a realistic solution to our immediate and future space needs. If the facts are presented truthfully and carefully, I think most Lake Elmo residents would see the value of the purchase. To have a viable library, we can all be proud of, we need space, not only for books, media and equipment, but for storytimes with craft projects, book dubs, author events, etc. | am sure you are aware of all our books, media, shelves (wooden and metal), furniture, and office equipment in storage. We are still receiving book donations daily and other offers of equipment. Residents and neighbors are rallying to the cause. We need a building to beseriously considered by the county and state library people for affiliation status. It is difficult to negotiate without one, We already have the other requirements met. We also need a building in place to start grant writing. There are many grant opportunities forchi|d/en's literacy programs, small rural libraries, etc. Aside from the library need for larger building, getting rid of one empty store front on our main street would speak volumes. I think it would encourage other businesses to renew their leases. I have heard some are considering moving on to greener pastures. I had a resident suggest the back parking lot of "The Clock" building would make a nice space for a farmers market. If we buy "The Clock" building, we would have exposure on both Lake Elmo Ave. N.and Laverne Ave. N, more siAnaQeopportunities. | hope the council will consider building signs large enough so they can be read when a person is driving down the street. I think Anne Smith had a good suggestion, quite a few Council meetings ago, when she asked if anyone had looked at all the empty buildings available on mainstreet. We have a good option now, Speaking for myself, the thought of moving many books, media, office equipment, storing left over things, installing Internet service, a router, hooking up the technical equipment and everything else that goes along with setting up library two times in a twelve month span of time seems counter productive. Don't rent space to see how things are going for a year and then think "The C|ock" building will he available. You know how fast time flies, We need to show our neighboring communities Lake Elmo residents are capable of working together for a better Lake Elmo. Thank you for your time. Rosemary Meier 65I'777'001 II2843Z""St. N, PD8II7 Lake Elmo, IVIN 55042 PS If you haven't toured the Art Center (also second floor), Lee building, "The Clock" building,Parks building and Maintenance building, / suggest you do. Lake Elmo City Council '~` m��'s�)l'1965c&",Z"Io�) ccoo CC: Carole Luczak, Interim City Clerk FROM, Liz Johnson, Resident 2945 Lake Elmo Ave N` Lake Bmu, MN DATE: February D.2012 3UBJ: PVBL/CCO1MMENTSOUGHT OWPOTENTIAL LAKE. ELM0LIBRARY LOCATIONS Residents are invited and encouraged to provide comment concerning the possible locations for the new Lake Elmo Public Library, The City Council will be receiving comment at a regular City Council meeting scheduled for 7:00 pm Wednesday, February O. Thank you for providing time frowwhich residents can weigh inonthe potential library location. Due »oapreviously scheduled appointment | may not brable ooattend this evening's council meeting inwhich togive myverbal comments. | request that this written document be shared and included as part of the comments the council receives in regards to this subject. | understand the passion that many have shared in regards to keeping m library in our community and while | understand that passion | don't necessarily agree with the steps taken by the council in disengaging from the Washington County Library system and creating our own local library, The world as it is today is changing and whether weagree urdisagree with where his headed wearen't going tobeable to stop it. Technology is the way the world is moving and people are now receiving most, and in many cases all, of the their reading materials through technology especially in light of the newer capabilities through iPhones, iPads, Kendall, and computers overall- While the ability totouch a book in the same light as many of us have experienced appears to moving inthe direction of becoming Wxmry, it is the tool that iochanging not the opportunity to need and learn. Using technology will accomplish the same goal mopaper. Statistics are showing that children are reading more through the use of technology than before— it is always there sutheir fingertips. The council made adecision and said that the city could run alibrary using the same financial resources that Lake Elmo citizens were paying mthe county aspart ofthe library tax. As|remember, the council said hwouldn't cost the citizens any more money than what wewere paying through our taxes, |amdeeply concerned that the council isgoing back nntheir word and leaving vawith asense ofbeing tricked. /*onalso deeply concerned that the council hsleaping ahead without substantiating information such as: ° Creating history that supports the ability of the city being able to manage and run its own library within the budget (3-5 year history) ° Creating history that demonstrates that the library is being used by multiple generations and meeting the needs of all, not just afew • The creation cf afeasibility study that states this will work —is hfeasible and Vsohow? The feasibility study includes history information on previous use versus actual costs and what would Lake Elmo do differently to meetneeds, Can the library beopen the same ifnot more hours than when the county managed it? ° The creation of a needs assessment that clearly defines the current and future needs of a library, What will a library provide that people would not be able to obtain through other means, especially through future technology? ° The creation ofafinancial stability plan. Can the city really manage slibrary for the same amount aacitizens would normally pay to the county through our taxes? For how long can you sustain that? The identification of when changes in resources might be needed. If the county couldn't make ends meet how can the city without raising additional funds? Our city budget is tight enough and it is important that o city library not use funds needed for other line items of the city budget. Would the cost per unit be reasonable? Can you ^hovse'the library and provide the necessary resources to make it successful? Resources such as o place to house the library, library materials, computers for both staff and citizen use, wireless access, staffing (whether hired or volunteer it all costs something) ° The on;ahun of a strategic plan that outlines goa|a, nbjectivom, uctividen, measurement of success, evaluation plan, and growth plan. How much of the budget has already been spent on contracting with an engineer to tell the council that the building currently being used for the Regional Arts Center would not support rows and rows of book shelves and books? ° Where isthe good stewardship of these dollars? Common sense thinking would naturally say toall ofuothat the building ioold, that multiple shelves nfbooks are extremely heavy, and that this building was built for the purpose ofa single family home and not for the purpose uypublic use such eaalibrary, Purchasing a building for library space is very premature and does not support the cuunoil's commitment in assuring that o library will not cost the citizens any more than what we currently pay in taxes for the county library, • We don't even know ifthe library will beasuccess. We have nohistory »osupport such aoadventure. ° Purchasing a building is creating a huge liability for the city and increases the overhead costs for a library that are not warranted ~ Renting space should Ue the first step and should provide adequate space iusupport our needs for years tocome. This will provide the time needed to ensure that the city can truly support an independent library. Our library doesn't need its own building at this point in time. Amacity we have bigger issues ahead ofuoand many inwhich don't have asolid financial plan to support them. Why would vm create another debt and liability for the city bypurchasing a building now? For library space when wereally don't know if the library overall will be sustainable? That doesn't make sense from a financial perspective. | encourage the city council to make sure mcna is a clear and feasible plan in which the library is self-sustaining on the name revenue the county would receive if we were still with the county library system, Let's not jump and put the horse before the cart as we don't even know what size cart ioneeded nor dnwe fully understand the size of the»orsc(o), ..financial resources,., to support the cart (library). Thank you for providing this opportunity for public comment, CITY OF "VOL DATE: REGULAR ITEM #: MOTION Resolution C14 2/08.2011 12-xxx AGENDA ITEM: DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements Feasibility Report — Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin. City Engineer THROUGH: Dean Zuleuer. City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Ryan Stempski„A.ssistam City Engine SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider adopting Resolution No. 2012-XXX accepting the Feasibility Report for the DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing to he held on March 6. 2012. STAFF REPORT: FOCUS Engineering. Inc. has completed the Feasibility Report for the DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements consisting, of the following street segments: highlands Trail North (from DeMontreville Trail to TH 36), Hytrail Avenue North. 59th Street North, Hidilands Court North. DeMontreville Trail Circle North, DeMontreville Trail Place North. and 53rd Street Noah (from DeMontreville Trail to end of cul-de-sac). As part of the feasibility study, a LLeotechnical investigation was completed. This investigation concluded that the project area streets can be improved through reclamation: a -Green Road process that recycles the existing in -place bituminous surface and aggregate base materials to restore pavement strength and durability This process. when it is feasible. allows the Cit to improve it's streets at a sinificantl reduced cost while gaining a reasonable service life for the street. Suhgrade corrections will be necessary in a few locations to address more distressed areas, The Report provides total project c0St estimates for t vo alternatives: 1) restoring the xvider streets to their current vvidths of 32 feet: and 2) narrowing most of those streets to 28 feet. The report also investigated the opporninit to incorporate raiardens within the public ridu-of-way to improve water quality as part of the overall projec.Nineteen 1.19 potential raiarden sites were identified. Should the council authorize the project. property owners will be contacted to determine if they want to participate in the rain garden program. The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWDi has indicated that a community urani would again be available for this year's project. Fhe DeMontreville iiidilands Area Streets were uencrallY constructed in 1980 at 32 feet in width using bituminous curb and placed within a 60 foot right-of-way. Highlands Trail North SerVeS as a Fai!e 1 -- City Council klee,tim2 Februar 8, 2012 DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements Feasibility Report — Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Hearing, Regular Agenda Item 47 minor collector roadway providing neighborhood access to Trunk Highway 36 to the north and DeMontreville Trail to the south. As a minor collector road. Highlands Trail North has been striped with 12-foot driving lanes and 4-foot shoulders. This road segment has an 80 foot right-of-way, As a minor collector roadway. a width reduction was not reviewed for Highlands Trail North. The four foot shoulders serve as bicycle/pedestrian routes for the neighborhood. DeMontreville Trail Circle North and DeMontreville Trail Place North were constructed with 24 foot widths and would remain at this width following the project. Estimated Total Project Costs for Reclamation of Neighborhood Streets to their current 32 feet in width is $1.000.000, Estimated Total Project Costs for Reclamation of Neighborhood Streets with some streets reduced to 28 feet in width is $1,046.000. The project cost details and associated assessment impacts are included in the Feasibility Report and will be presented at the council meeting. The estimated costs for nineteen rain gardens is $52.000 with an anticipation that 50%+ will be reimbursed to the City through the VBWD Community Grant Program. In past years the feasibility reports provided cost estimates for council consideration regarding curb replacement with concrete curb and guner and bituminous curb. However. at council direction last year the Street CIP was revised to reflect bituminous curb costs going forward. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above staff report. the City Council is respectfully requested to consider accepting the Report and calling for the Public Improvement Hearing to be held on March 6. 2012. The suggested motion to approve this action is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2012-XX Accepting the Feasibility Report for the DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing to he held on March 6, 2012." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2012-XXX 2. Notice of Public Hearing 3. DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements Feasibility Report (available for review at Citv Hall) SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item ................. - Report/Presentation of ltem .„ .. - Questions from Council to .......... ........ Mayor Facilitates - Call or Motion...........„ ..... .„... ............ ........... ....... .Mayor & City Council - Discussion/Comments ...... ......... Mayor Facilitates - Public input. if Appropriate ...... ...... _ ........ Mayor Facilitates - Action on Motion ...... ........ ....... ............ Facilitates ...... ..... .........._ ..... _City Administrator .... ........... ....... _ ....... Engineer -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO NOTICE OF HEARING DEMONTREVJLLE HIGHLANDS AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereby 1._..!iven 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 Tuesday. March 6. 2012, to consider the making of the following improvements. pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Sections 429.011 to 429. H 1 ; The improvement will consist of reclaiming the pavement surface and aggregate base the for DeMontreville Highlands Area street improvements consisting otHighlands Trail North (from DeMontreville Trail to TH 36), Hytrail Avenue North, 59th Street North, Highlands Court North, DeMontreville Trail Circle North, DeMontreville Trail Place North, and 53rd Street North (from DeMontreville Trail to end of cul-de-sac). The improvement will include the placement of a new bituminous surface in the current approximate location and grade. The area proposed to be assessed for these improvements include properties abutting the above referenced streets or properties that gain direct driveway access to their property from the above referenced streets. The estimated total cost of the street improvements is S1,046.000. A reasonable estimate of the impact of the assessment will he available at the hearing. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this mectinf,i. DATED: February 8. 2012 BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Dean A. Johnston, Mayor (Pun/ishc,i ii thc (,),A,161(e-Lake. Elmo Review On Fel-wra:u 15, 2012 cmci Februao' 22, 2012) CITY OF LAKE ELIN. WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-XXX A RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE DEMONTREVILLE HIGHLANDS AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, parSaant to City Council authorization, a feasibiiitv reporr has been prepared by FOCUS Engineering, Inc. ,for the DeMontreville Highlands Area street Improvements consisting of Highlands Trail North (from DeMontreville Trail to Trunk Highway 36), Hytrail .4venue North, 59th Street North Highlands Court North, DeMontreville Trail Circle North, DeMorareville Trail Place North, and 53rd Street North (from DeMontreville Trail to end ofcul-dc-sac), WHEREAS. the tcasibiiiry report provides infOrmation regarding whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost-eliective, and ,fe asible; whether it should best be made as proposed or in Connection with some other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvements uS recommended; and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments fa,' affected parcels. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, I. The City Council will consider the improvements in accordance with the report and the assessments of' the abutting properties.ifor all 07' a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Chapter 429 at an estimated total project cult of the improvements of $I,046,000. 2. A public hearing shall he held On such proposed improvements On the 6th day of Marc..17, 2012, in the council chambers of the City Hall at or approximatelyafter 7:00 P.M: and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of SUM hearing and impi'ovcmenl as required by law. Date: ATTEST: Dean A. ZuleLter City Administrator Resolution No, 2012-XXX . 2012 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston Mayor CERTIFICATION 1 hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of Lake Elmo at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on 8th day of February, 2012„ as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession, Carole Luczak Interim City Clerk (Scal) Resolution No. N.P C OMM UIVI CATION 2/08/2012 REGULAR ITEM #: 8 MOTION Resolution # 2012-tvx AGENDA ITEM: Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain 'Improvements Feasibility Report Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider adopting Resolution No. 2012-XXX accepting the Feasibility Report for the Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing to be held on March 6, 2012. STAFF REPORT: FOCUS Engineering_ Inc. has completed the Feasibility Report for the Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain improvements consisting of the proposed street reconstruction of Keats Avenue North, a Municipal State Aid route, from 47`11 Street North to Trunk Highway 36. and the installation of a trunk watermain line along Keats Avenue North from Julep Avenue North. easterly along 47th Street North, then north along Keats Avenue North to 59th Street North (Rock Point Church). Keats Avenue North is major north and south collector roadway and a designated Municipal State Aid route within the City of Lake Elmo. It is a rural section roadway with a 24 foot wide bituminous surface and four foot gravel shoulders. The current speed limit is 45 mph. With the pavement surface showing significant distresses indicating subgrade failures. Keats Avenue North has been in the city Street C1P programmed for improvement in 2012. in preparation of this improvement a gcotechnical investigation was ordered to obtain more detailed information in regards to the current pavement, base and subgrade condition for Keats Avenue North. The primary objective was to determine if a street reclamation process could be used for the roadway improvement project. a low cost pavement rehabilitation option. Unfortunatel). the report findings indicated that a complete reconstruction will be required. With this information it was determined that the proposed reconstruction of Keats Avenue North be completed concurrently with the Keats Avenue Trunk Watermain Extension project. This -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting February 8. 2012 Ls Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements Feasibility Report — Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Hearing Regular Agenda Item 48 watermain extension project was programmed for construction in 2011 in the city Water System CIF and will provide a critical watermain connection needed to solidify the backbone of the city's water distribution system. With the roadway needing to be reconstructed, the placement of the waten-nain line can be accomplished at a significant cost savings by combining the project restoration costs. The proposed improvements include the installation of a 16-inch diameter Trunk Watennain line to interconnect the water system from the Tapestry Development to Rock Point Church. The improvement includes approximately 8.400 feet of watermain. For the street reconstruction. it is recommended that Keats Avenue North be reconstructed as a 9 ton road using 11 foot driving lanes with four foot paved shoulders (30-foot wide paved surface). The four foot paved shoulders are needed to maintain adequate space to accommodate pedestrian/bicycle use. The reduced driving lane width will serve to keep the final lane/shoulder section within the current existing road foot print. Staying within the existing foot print will control the construction limits and impacts thereby reducing ditch restoration. driveway and culvert replacement work. In order to utilize Municipal State Aid Funding a variance request will need to be approved to reduce the lane widths from 12 feet. The recommended project improvements also include the replacement of all cross culverts and replacement of driveway culverts as deemed necessary. The Estimated Total Project Costs for the Reconstruction of Keats Avenue North meeting Municipal State Aid Standards and with a 30 foot paved surface is $1,142,000. Estimated Total Project Costs for the Trunk Watermain Extension is $1.028.000. The project cost details and associated assessment impacts are included in the Feasibility Report and will be presented at the council meeting, RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above staff report, the City Council is respectfully requested to consider accepting the Report and calling for the Public Improvement Hearing to be held on March 6. 2012. The suggested motion to approve this action is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2012-XX Accepting the Feasibility Report for the Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements and Calling for a Public Improvement Hearing to be held on March 6, 2012." ATTACHMENTS: . Resolution No. 2012-XXX 2. Notice of Public Hearing 3. Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements Feasibility Report (available for review at City Hall) SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ..... ..... ..... City Administrator Report/Presentation of item ........ .......... ....City Engineer estions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates pave 2 -- City Council Me February S. 201 Feats Avenue Noi.,,. MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements Feasibility Report ... Resolution Accepting the Report and Calling for a Hearing Regular Agenda Item S Call for N'lotion............................................................... Mayor & City Council Discussion!Comments .......................... Mayor Facilitates Public Input. it AppropriateMayor Facilitates Action on Motion.. ...... . ..... .................. ....... ...... Mavor Facilitates -- page CITY OF LAKE ELMO NOTICE OF HEARING KEATS AVENUE NORTH: MSA STREET AND TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Lake Elmo will meet in the council chambers of thc city hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday. March 6. 2012, to consider the makin,2, of the following improvements. pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429,111; The improvement will consist of the street reconstruction of Keats Avenue North, a Municipal State Aid route, from 47th Street North to Trunk Highway 36; and will concurrently include the construction of a Trunk Watermain connection from Julep Avenue North, easterly along 47th Street North, then north along Keats Avenue North to 59th Street North (Rock Point Church). The improvement will include the reconstruction of Keats Avenue North with the placement of a new bituminous surface in the current approximate location and grade. The area proposed to be assessed for these improvements include properties abutting the above referenced streets or properties that gain direct driveway access to their property from the above referenced streets. The estimated total cost of the street improvements is $1.142.000 and the estimated total cost of the trunk waterrnain improvements is S1.028.000. A reasonable estimate of the impact of the assessment will be available at the hearing. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will he heard at this meeting, DATED: February 08. 2012 BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Dean A. Johnston, Mayor (PI/hi/shed the Oakdale-Lke Elmo Review on FebrucuT 15, 2012 and Februc:r 22, 2012) TY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-X A RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITYREPORT FOR KEATS AVENUE NORTH: MSA STREET AND TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to City Council authorization, a feasibility report' has been prepared by FOCUS Engineering. Inc, ,Ibr the reconstruction Of Keats Avenue North, a Municipal State Aid route, from 47th Street North to Trunk Highway 36; and to concurrently construct ci Trunk Watermain connection !rem Julep Avenue North, easterly along 4711' Street North, then north along Keats Avenue North to ...59th Street North (Rock Point (hurch), F17-1E,REAS, the leasibility report provides information regarding whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost-eljective, and feasible; whether it should best he made as proposed or C(11717eCl1017 With ,V0117C other improvement; the estimated cost of the 1177prOVell1C171S as recommended; and cl description of the inethoclolo,(4y used to calculate individual assessments N01,11 THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLIED, The City Council will consider the 1717prUVelnellIS 117 CleCord(117CC with the report and the assessments of the abutting propertiesibr all 01' a portion of the cost of the ill7prOVe117e171S pursuant to Ali1717eSOICI Statues, Chapter 429 at an estimated total project cost of the .113.4 ,Set Improvements of S1,142.000 and an estimated total project cost of the Trwik Watery/win hnprorenlentS o151,02N,000, A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements 017 the oth day of Marc!?, 2012, in 117C C01117c'il CilalllherS 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. Date: Dean A. Zuleiier City Administrator .2012 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston Mayor Resolution No, 2012--XXX CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoirig Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the Counci of the City of Lake Elmo at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on 8th day of February, 20 2, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my, possession. Carole Luczak Interim City Clerk :cal) Resolution No 2-XXX AGENDA ITEM: DATE: 2/8/12 REGULAR ITEM #: K-9 MOTION Resolution Continue discussion on a Variance Request to install a septic system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North that does not meet setback requirements from property lines. the ordinary high water level. and adjacent structures. SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt. Planning Director 0-4- THROUGH: Craig Dawson. Interim City Administrator Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission Nick Johnson, Interim City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider variance requests related to the installation of a subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North. The Council has previously considered this request, which included the installation of two holding tanks on the premises. at its August 23, 2011 meeting, and at that time directed the applicant to research additional alternatives to the holding tanks that had been requested. The applicants later attended a Council meeting with representatives from two firms that offered alternative solutions to holding tanks. and have since decided to move forward with one of these firms to install a subsurface treatment system on the site. A preferred plan is now being brought back for formal consideration and action by the City Council, and includes the following specific requests related to the proposed subsurface treatment system: Variances from the frontand side property line setbacks to allow the placement of a pressure bed 0 feet from a side property line and 3.5 feet from a front property line (ill- Lake Elmo Avenue right-of-N,vay line). The Washington County SSTS regulations require a minimum setback of 10 feet to property lines. A variance to allow the placement of a sewage treatment system within 44 feet of from the Ordinary High Water Elevation (OHW) of Lake Elmo. The Lake Elmo Shoreland Ordinance requires a minimum setback of 75 feet from the OHW. A variance to allow the installation of a septic tank five feet from an occupied building and a treatment and dispersal area within 15 feet of an occupied building. The Washington County SSTS regulations require a minimum setback of 10 feet between tanks and 20 feet between treatment areas and an occupied structure. City Council Meeting Variance at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N 2/8:12 Agenda item K-9 The original application included setbacks variances. but also requested a variance to allow holding tanks to he used for more than a 12-month period of time. The proposed plan does not include the use of holding tanks. and instead would make use of a standard subsurface treatment system. Should the City Council wish to grant the variance request. the following motion would apply: "Move to approve Resolution 2012- (4) approving setback variances related to the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North with conditions outlined in the staff report." Alternatively, the Council may decide to deny the request with appropriate findinc,s, and in this case should consider the following motion: "Move to approve Resolution 2012- (B) denying setback variances related to the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment .system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North with conditions outlined in the staff report." Although the City is beyond the 120-day time period for review of this application. the applicant has granted extensions beyond the original time frame, with February 15th as the present deadline. The applicant will need to agree to another extension should the Council wish to delay taking action on this item any further. BACKGROUND INFO ATION: The City Council has previously received a report and recommendation from the Planning Commission to approve the original variance request. Since the major components of the variance application are very similar to the request considered by the Planning Commission, staff does not believe the application has changed substantially enough to warrant further review by the Commission. In addition. the applicant considered alternate proposals at the direction of the City Council as part of the continued review of the original variance application. In order to make sure that those notified of the original public. hearing were aware of any further discussion by the Council on this item, staff has sent out a new notice to the same property owners informing them of the upcoming Council action on this item. Since the Council reviewed detailed information concerning the applicant's site as part of its earlier reviews. the prior staff reports and meeting materials are not attached to the present report (but are available for review upon request). Instead, staff has attached only the new information that has been submitted by the applicant. which includes all of the details related to a proposed on -site treatment system. As part of the original application, a septic designer stated that there is no room on -site to provide a septic system, and therefore recommended two 1.500 gallon holding tanks with an alarm system. Washington County regulations specify that holding tanks at the capacities that were proposed can only he installed on a temporary basis. no longer than 12 months in this case. Given the very limited room on the applicant's property to install even holding tanks, the request included several variances related to setbacks from property lines. structures, and the lake. The Council expressed concerns regarding the long-term viability and potential impacts of holding City Council Meeting Variance at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N 2/8/12 Agenda Item K-0 tanks when presented with the Pluming Commission's recommendation for approval of the variance. which ultimately led to its decision to ask the applicant to investigate other options. As part of the research into other alternatives for sewage treatment for their property. the applicant considered the following: 1) Ojr-Site System on Private Property: The applicant asked the neighbors to identify in writing if they would be interested in working with him to place a drainfield off -site. The two property owners across the street (non-lakeshore property) stated that they would not be willing to work with Mr. Durand on that type of arrangement. Letters identifying their intent were previously provided to the Council. 2) A Third Holding Tank: Because the City Council expressed concern that the future property owner would have to frequently pump the holding tanks, the applicant explored the option of installing three holding tanks instead of the originally proposed two. The applicant's septic designer has stated that a third holding tank could be added if some of the existing concrete in the front yard is removed. Staff did not receive a site plan showing where this third holding tank could be added or if any additional variances would be needed under this plan. in addition, a representative from Washington County stated that a third tank may require a second pumper truck to visit the site when it is time to pump as a pumper truck's capacity may not he ableahe to handle three tanks worth of sewage. A second truck visit would require additional fees. Equarius System: The Equarius Corporation proposed a system that utilizes Biomatter Resequencing Converter Technology to solve onsite water conservation and pollution prevention toilet problems. This technology has been applied to develop advanced wastewater treatment systems. In 1999, they developed the Equaris Household Water Treatment and Wastewater Recycling System. Soil Investigation and Design, Inc.; Soil Investigation & Design, Inc. specializes in the design of sewage treatment systems for challenging sites such as those with high water tables, limited space, unusual soils or near wetlands, lakes or other sensitive areas. The company states that they track research and development of new sewage system technologies. Paul Brandt. representing this firm. submitted a letter identifying their interest in working with Mr. Durand and provided an example of a design they developed for a similar challenging site. After the applicant presented the above options to the Council. he elected to work with Soil investigation and Design. Inc. to design on on -site treatrnent system that avoids the need for any holding tanks. Mr. Brandt has since completed his work on the proposed design. which makes use of a more traditional septic tank and drainfield (pressure bed) system to accommodate the septic needs of the property. The details concerning this design are attached for consideration by the City Council, and part of this documentation includes a detailed site survey. Given the very limited amount of space on the site to accommodate a septic system, the proposed system would need a series of variances identified in the introductory section of this report and as referenced in the attached draft resolutions, These variances are similar to those that would have been necessary to install holding tanks. and specifically, are needed to build the system at a setback City Council Meeting Variance at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N 218/12 Agenda Item K-Q that is less than required from front and side property lines, the ordinance high water elevation of Lake Elmo, and the principal structure. Other background information that has previously been provided to the City Council concerning the original request is as follows: The applicants property is not guided for a future sewer connection in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. The City Engineer has stated that there is not capacity for Mr. Durand to connect to an existing- 201 system (a City -run community septic system). Washington County's Department of Public Health and Environment (the septic permitting agency) has recommended against the variance, as they state holding tanks are not a long-term solution and future owners, should the home be used year-round to it's full capacity, may need to be pumping every ten days. The Valley Branch Watershed District recommended that the elevation of the bottom of the proposed holding, tanks be no lower than 893 (2 feet above the 100-year flood level). The septic designer has stated that the bottom elevation that was planned is approximately 888 — 5 feet lower then recommended (not required) by VBWD. While the City has generally granted septic variance requests, it should be considered by the City wrhether this property, at just 5,908 square foot lot should continue to he used for year-round residential purposes. The City Attorney previously indicated that the City Council has the ability to deny the variance should it conclude it is necessary for public health. safety and welfare reasons. A representative from Washington County's Public Health Department will be attendingthe meeting to answer any questions the City Council may have regarding the technical aspect of the permit or his professional opinion. STAFF REPORT: Washington County Public Health and the City Engineer have reviewed the proposed septic design for 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North. and detailed conunents from both parties are attached to this report. The system should be able to comply with all applicable County and City requirements. with the exception of the setback variances noted earlier; however, the plans could be modified somewhat in order to better comply with these requirements. Specifically. the plans as presented show only one tank being used within the system: whereas. the County has suggested that a secondary septic tank could be installed as part of the system in accordance with the attached letter from Washington County. The installation of this secondary tank in addition to bringing the system into full compliance with County rules. would also alleviate some of the initial concerns expressed by the City Engineer concerning the overall life of the system. The County has pointed out that the applicant may need to obtain a construction easement from an adjacent property owner in order to construct the proposed drainfieid in the proposed location. In order to further address concerns regarding proper notification to this property owner. Staff is recommending that the applicant provide a written acknowledgement and consent from the City Council Meetin!2812 Variance at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N Agenda Item K-c) propert® Tier to the south in order to allow the drainfield to extend right to this property line. Staff will be asking the applicant to obtain this consent prior to the City Council meeting. Another potentiai concern that was identified hy Staff with the proposed design is the close proximity of the drainfield to the right-of-way of Lake Elmo Avenue, The initial design that was prepared for the site would have extended the drainfield immediately up to the right-of-way line: however, the septic designer has since revised the plan to show a minimal setback of 3.5 feet from this line. The shifting of the drainfield closer to the house does result in an additional variance being requested, but should give the City or County some additional room to work within the right-of-way without impact the proposed septic system. The Council should also be aware that the plans do call for the elimination of a larger oak tree in the extreme south eastern portion of the site. Although the drainfield could be put in around the. tree, the impact to the root system of the tree with any subsurface treatment system in this area would likely permanently harm this tree and created a potential safety hazard to the loss of a substantial portion of the tree's root system. Staff is recommending that, due to his property's location within a shoreland district. that the applicant be required to plant a replacement for any trees lost due to the installation of the septic system, tor variance applications. the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate why this situation is unique and necessitates flexibility to code requirements. To make this case. a variance can only he granted by the city when strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will he in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. The criteria that are included in the City Code for making such a decision include the following: Practical Difficulties. A variance to the provision of this chapter may be granted by the Board of Adjustment upon the application by the owner of the affected property where the strict enforcement of this chapter would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration arid then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. • Definition of practical difficulties. "Practical difficulties." as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Unique CirC11171SIal1CCS. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner Character of locality. The proposed variance will not alter ntial character of locality in which the property in question is located. fidiacent properties and traffic. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. City Council Meeting Variance at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N 218.11 2 Agenda hem K-Q In reviewing the request against the four variance criteria, the Planning Commission and staff determined that all of these criteria were met by the applicant arid are therefore recommending approval of the variance requests with conditions to address the concerns noted above regarding the proposed design. For the most part, the findings included in the original Planning Commission recommendation have been carried forward as part of the attached resolution of approval. Because the Council has not yet reviewed the preferred alternate design and given the looming deadline for City action, staff has &so included a resolution with draft findings for denial of the variance requests should the Council decide to take such action. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: At the August Sth Planning Commission meeting. the commission held a public hearing. took comments from the public and made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the variance requested. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report. it is recommended that the City Council approve the variance request by undertaking the following action; "Move to approve Resolution 2012- (A) approving setback variances related to the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North with conditions outlined in the staff report." Alternatively, the City Council may decide that it will not approve variances for the revised design, at which point it could: 1) approve the original request for two holding tanks, or 2) deny the request with appropriate findings of fact. or 3) consider another alternate that was considered previously. including limiting the occupancy of the house for seasonal use only. hi order to keep these options somewhat manageable. Staff has attached an optional resolution (but none of the other options presented) for denial with draft findings for such action. which could adopted by undertaking the following action: "Move to approve Resolution 2012- (B) denying setback variances related to the construction of a suhsurface sewage Treatment system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North with conditions outlined in the staff report." Should the Council take any other action. the first resolution (A) could be modified accordi ATTACHMENTS: 1, Resolution 2012- (A) "), Resolution 2012- (B) 3. Letter from Clyde Durand (1'912) 4. Excavating Proposal 5. Agreement to Extend Review Period 6. Certificate of Survey cyl -- page o City Council Meetin,,z 2/8:12 Proposed Design (Soil Investigation and Design, Inc.) a. Cover Letter b. Design Worksheets c. Site Location d. Sire .Aerial e. Topographic Map f. Detail Maps g. Design Maps S. Washington County Review 9. City Engineer Review Variance at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N Agenda Item K-c) SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of hem ......... ........ ......... City Administrator Report/Pr sentation......... ...... ..... ...... Director Questions from Council to Staff ....... ..... ........ . ......... ..... Mayor Facilitates Public Input. if Appropriate Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .............................. ...... Mayor R. City Council Discussion....... ...... ...... ...... ...................................... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion ................................................. ...... ........... Mayor Facilitates CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012- (A) A R_ESOLUTION APPROVING SETBACK VARIANCES RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SUBSURFACE SE YEA GE TREATMENT SYSTEM AT 2860 LAKE ELMO AVENUE NORTH WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Clyde Durand. 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue (the "Applicant") has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the "City") for variances to allow the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) that does not meet the required setback from property lines, the Ordinance High Water Elevation (OHW) of Lake Elmo and a principal structure at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North. a copy of which is on file with the City; and WHEREAS, notice has been published. mailed and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.017; and WHEREAS. the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on said matter on August 8, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation to the City Council as part of a Staff Memorandum dated August 23. 2011: and WHEREAS, the City Council considered said matter at its August 23, 2011 meeting and tabled the item: and WHEREAS, the City Council reconsidered said matter at its September 20. 2011 and February' 8. 2012 meetings. NOW, THEREFORE. based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the procedures for obtaining said Variances are found in the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance. Section 154.017. 2) That all the submission requirements of said 154.017 have been met by the Applicant. 3) That the proposed variances are to allow the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North. and specifically include the following components: a) Variances from the front and side property line setbacks to allow the placement of a pressure bed 0 feet from the southern property line and 3.5 feet from a front property line (the Lake Elmo Avenue right-of-IA:ay line). The Washington Countv SSTS regulations require a minimum setback of 10 feet to property lines. b) A variance to allow the placement of a sewage treatment system within 44 feet of from the Ordinary Hirsh Water Elevation (OHW) of Lake Elmo. The Lake Elmo Shoreland Ordinance requires a minimum setback of 75 feet from the OHW. c) .A variance to allow the installation of a septic tank five feet from an occupied building and a treatment and dispersal area within 15 feet of an occupied building. The Washington County SSTS regulations require a minimum setback of 10 feet between tanks and 20 feet between treatment areas and an occupied structure. 4) That the Variances will be located on property legally described as PT GOV LOT 1 BEING THAT PT OF FOLL DESC LYING WLY OF C/L OF WASH CO HWY#17; ALL THAT PT LOT 1 DESC AS FOLLOWS: COMM AT PT ON N LINE OF SD SEC 993.5FT W FROM NE CORN OF SD LOT THN S1DEG5TE 823.IFT TO AN IRON MONUMENT WHICH IS 495.375FT FROM SO LINE OF SD LOT THN RETURN NLY ALG SD LAST DESC COURSE 120FT TO PT OF BEG FROM SD PT OF BEG SO1DEG57'E 120FT TO LAST MENTIONED IRON MONUMENT THN WLY PAR WITH THE S LINE OF SD LOT THE BEARING THEREOF BEING S8SDEG17'Nk7 447.9FT TO AN IRON MONUMENT THN NLY AT RT ANG 60FT THN WLY PAR WITH SD S LINE OF SD LOT TO SHORE OF LAKE ELMO THN NLY ALG SD SHORE 60FT M/L TO A LINE DRAWN THRU SD PT OF BEG PAR WITH SD SO LINE OF SD LOT THN ELY TO PT OF BEG TOG WITH ALL RIPARIAN & OTHER RTS TITLE INTER EST IN & TO THE WATERS BED & SHORE OF THAT PT OF SD LK ELMO BORDERING UPON & APPURTENANT TO .ABOVE DESC TRACT & LYING WITHIN THE NLY & SLY BOUNDARIES OF SD TRACT AS EXTEND TO & INTO SD LAKE SUBJ TO SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE EASEMENT Section 24 Township 029 Range 021. Commonly known as 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue. 5) That the strict enforcement ofZoning Ordinance would cause practical difficulties and that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Specific findings: a) The requested variances allow the continued use of the propertyfor residential purposes. A continuation of a residential use is reasonable as the property is in a residential neighborhood, has been usedfor residential purposes or decades and is guided in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan . or residential purposes. It is reasonable to continue to use this property fOr residential purposes. b) No other alternative waste management system has been found for this property outside of the proposed septic system with setback variances. A method of waste management is necesswy for the property to continue to be used for residential purposes. c) The inability to continue to use this property for residential purposes would drastically reduce the value of the applicant's property. d) The applicant is interested in selling the property and is thus required to bring the septic system into conzpliance. 6) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Specific findings: a) The applicant's property is just 0.14 acres in size where 1.5 acres is required. b) The property has been in use for residential purposes since at least 1968. though no building permit has been found on record. c) The small residential property is on Lake Elmo, the water body, and is there f�re also subject to lakeshore requirements-. d) It is believed that this is the second smallest residential property used for single fantily detached dwelling purposes within the City limits. e) The property does not have access to other methods of waste management. .4 City -run 201 system (community collector) does not have capacity fOr this home to connect. The Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan does not guide this property Or figure sewer connection. The applicant has stated that a septic system off - site is not an option for this property. f) A portion of the 5,908 squarefeet is paved and utilized for County Road 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue North). 7) That the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. Specific findings: a) The requested variances allow the continued use ofthepropertyJor residential purposes. .4 continuation of a residential use is reasonable as the property is in a residential neighborhood, has been used for residential purposes for decades and is guided in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan for residential purposes. It is reasonable to continue to use this property for residential purposes. 8) That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Specific findings: a) The requested variances would he to utilize a method of underground management for waste. This would allow the continued use of the home for residential purposes which would not change the existing 'mpact to the neighborhood. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing. the Applicants' application for a -Variance is granted with the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall provide a written acknowledgement and consent from the property owner to the south regarding the construction of the drainfield at a zero setback from their property line. 1) The proposed septic. design shall incorporate a second tank in accordance with the review comments from Pete Ganzel of Washinzon County dated February 3, 2012. The final desiini shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to construction of any portion the treatment system. 3) The applicant shall plant a replacement tree on the premises to account for the large oak tree that will be removed due to the installation of the treatment system. The type oftre and replacement location shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Passed and duly adopted this Elmo. Minnesota. ATTEST: d Dean A. Zules4er, City Administrator February 2012 by the City Council of the City of Lake Dean A. Johnston. Mayor CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA SOLUTION NO. 2012- (B) A RESOLUTION DENYING SETBACK rARIANCES RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SUBSURFACE SE14'.4 GE TREATMENT SYSTEM AT 2860 LAKE ELMO A T-ENUE NORTH WHEREAS. the City ofLake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Clvde Durand, 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue (the "Applicant") has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the "City") for variances to allow the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) that does not meet the required setback from property lines, the Ordinance High Water Elevation (OHW) of Lake Elmo and a principal structure at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North, a copy of which is on file with the City; and WHEREAS, notice has been published. mailed and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance. Section 154.017; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on said matter on August 8. 2011; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation to the City Council as part of a Staff Memorandum dated August : and WHEREAS. the City Council considered said matter at its August 23 2011 meeting and tabled the item: and WHEREAS, the City Council reconsidered said matter at its September 20. 2011 and February 8. 2012 meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the procedures for ohtaining said Variances are found in the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.017, 2) That all the submission requirements of said 154.017 have been met by the .Applicant. 3) That the proposed variances are to allow the construction of a subsurface sewage treatment system at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North, and specifically include the following components: a) Variances from the front and side property line setbacks to allow the placement of a pressure bed 0 feet from the southern property line and 3.5 feet from a front property line (the Lake Elmo Avenue right-of-way line). The Washington County SSTS regulations require a minimum setback of 10 feet to property lines. b) A variance to allow the placement of a sewage treatment system within 44 feet of from the Ordinary High Water Elevation (OHW) of Lake Elmo. The Lake Elmo Shoreland Ordinance requires a minimum setback of 75 feet from the OHW. c) A variance to allow the installation of a septic tank five feet from an occupied building and a treatment and dispersal area within 15 feet of an occupied building. The Washington County SSTS regulations require a minimum setback of 10 feet between tanks and 20 feet between treatment areas and an occupied structure. 4) That the Variances will be located on property legally described as PT GOV LOT 1 BEING THAT PT OF FOLL DESC LYING WLY OF C/L OF WASH CO HWY#17; ALL THAT PT LOT 1 DESC AS FOLLOWS: COMM AT PT ON NI LINE OF SD SEC 993.SFT W FROM NE CORN OF SD LOT THN S1DEG571E 823.1FT TO AN IRON MONUMENT WHICH IS 495.375FT FROM SO LINE OF SD LOT THN RETURN NLY ALG SD LAST DESC COURSE 120FT TO PT OF BEG FROM SD PT OF BEG SO1DEG571E 120FT TO LAST MENTIONED IRON MONUMENT THN WLY PAR WITH THE S LINE OF SD LOT THE BEARING THEREOF BEING S88DEG17'W 447.9FT TO AN IRON MONUMENT THN NLY AT RT ANG 60FT THN WLY PAR WITH SD S LINE OF SD LOT TO SHORE OF LAKE ELMO THN NLY ALG SD SHORE 60FT M/L TO A LINE DRAWN THRU SD PT OF BEG PAR WITH SD SO LINE OF SD LOT THN ELY TO PT OF BEG TOG WITH ALL RIPARIAN & OTHER RTS TITLE INTER EST IN Ss: TO THE WATERS BED & SHORE OF THAT PT OF SD LK ELMO BORDERING UPON & APPURTENANT TO ABOVE DESC TRACT 8.: LYING WITHIN THE NLY Sz. SLY BOUNDARIES OF SD TRACT AS EXTEND TO S.: INTO SD LAKE SUBJ TO SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE EASEMENT Section 24 Township 029 Range 02 I, Commonly known as 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue. .5) That the strict enforcement of Zoning, Ordinance would not cause practical difficulties and that the property owner does not proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Specific findings: --11thotigh no documents exist as to when the existing home was built, it appears as though it was built in the 1960 .9 t that time a dry well was constructed w manage the waste from the residential home. Since that time, dry vells are no longer an allowed waste management system. b) No other alternative waste management system has been .found for this property that would comply with all applicable requirements. c) The applicant is interested in selling the property and is thus required to bring the septic system into compliance. d) It was found bY a certified septic designer that a conforming sewage treatment system cannot be installed on the property without variances. e) Holding tanks are not a reasonable long-term solution for waste management at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue North given the estimated pumping needsfor a two bedroom home of once every ten days. f) The she is too small to install a conventional treatment system without creating negative impact on adjacent properties and Lake Elmo, and a system cannot be installed that will ensure the future viability of this site for residential purposes. ) Because a reasonable waste management system has not been .found for the property, the existing residential home can no longer be used for residential purposes. 6) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Specific findings: a) The applicant's property is just 0.14 acres in size where 1.5 acres is required for the R-1 district. b) The property has been in use fen. residential purposes since at least 1968, though no building permit has been found on record. c) The small residential property is on Lake Elmo, the water body, and is therefizre also subject to lakeshore requirements. d) It is believed that this is the second smallest residential property used *family detached dwelling purposes within the City limits. e) The property does not have access to other methods of waste management. A City -run 201 system (conzmunity collector) does not have capacity for this home to connect. The Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan does not guide this property for future sewer connection. The applicant has stated that a septic system off - site is not an option for this property. .1) A portion of the 5.908 square feet is paved and utilized for County Road 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue North). 7) That the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. Specific findings: a) The continued use of the halite for residential purposes would not alter the residential neighborhood. b) The proposed holding tanks would potentially require the pumping of sewage two to three times a month. This additional traffic may be noticeable to the adjoining residential neighborhood. 8 ) That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neiOEhborhood. Specific findings: a) The requested variances would be to utilize a method of' underground management liar waste. This would allow the continued use of the homefor residential purposes which would not change the existing impact to the neighborhood. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing.. the Applicants' application for a Variance is denied. Passed and duly adopted this 8111 day of February 2012 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo. Minnesota. Dean A. Johnston. Mayor TTEST: Dean A. Zueger. City Administrator Clyde J Durand 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N Lake Elmo, MN 55082 January 9, 2012 To: City of Lake Elmo and Council Members To whom it may concern, Regarding the variance we are requesting to upgrade the septic system for the property located at 2860 Lake Elmo Ave N. Our original proposal was to remove the existing septic tanks replace them with (2) new holding tanks. This was approved by the planning commission but the council expressed concerns that this was not a long term solution, and asked to see what other alternatives there might be. We have explored a number of different options, from holding tanks to fully self contained waste recycling systems. As you can imagine there is also a wide range of associated costs. We have found what we feel is a good a solution that will work well for the County, City, and future owners of the property. Since our last presentation to the council we have made a significant investment to resolve concerns and find a permanent solution to this problem. We first hired the survey company of Folz, Freeman & Erickson Inc. to verify and mark the property corners as well as provide a Certificate of Survey. We then hired Soil Investigations Inc., a company that specializes in designing waste treatment systems for properties where restricted space and wetlands are an issue. We are currently proposing Soil Investigations design Option #2 for the Council to consider. Please see Soil Investigations (Durand Design Options) for proposed option. We arrived at this point after hiring and working closely with Folz, Freeman & Erickson and Soil Investigations Inc. We believe this will be approved by the County as a viable solution to the properties unique needs Documents Included: Certificate of Survey Soil Investigations (Durand Design Options) GJ Smith Excavators Inc — Proposal Please feel free contact my son Paul Durand at (651) 429-2070 with any questions or concerns you may have. Sincerely Clyde J Durand (651) 770-4864 De al 11 09:06a Dale LE ndowski Nor Sow 7E3-856-23 F.1 SJar.ii-77 Er, TO F;MEET t STATE ami ?IP CODE AlrFCT PROPOSAL Pane No. Pages f-rrr;, G.1 SMITH EXCAVATORS, INC. - FOREST OAKS CONDOS, INC. 11160 190TH AVE. NW ELK RIVER, MN 55330 5'i OFFICE: (763) 441-8888 SHOP: (763) 6 FAX: (763) 441-8727 DATE, 00 PiArlS uV.LIUflL.M1.02.1,...1116....44.96.1.111111,141411.4kalu6611...1461.141.14+44.0.M.151,444.111.1,11 nereay SUbrIVI speaiiicationis and esitrnates (L,) va-t •1. T I; r • I, ...ie.-D.' rc pr;ONE .JOB NAME J09 LCCATtalt: r ;0. -4/ `re _17 •^L_ Lc.; :4 DATE JOB PHONE r-I-- r-- r c- ,^<-1-• 75 1 vite Propose hereby to furnish. material and labor — complete n accordance with aoove specifit.-.ations, for the sum oti (_7 6 Pasrrnent In be rnacIe as !allows V) Ce. 4.• cL Afl matertie0 cuaranleec Sc cc.as SColciNT. 0 %00. t:, be carnntelea 0 0 wailimartlee reneree ecogegog en stand.= prarlicvl: 41,.; aheraligr, (); neetnecr tem aeovc 5000 ince.vIrte extra AV, Will be exec...14A gni.; 1.1004. 04.1er0, Deccme aanwit dot estimate rki. agreements Conlingerc Sacs ac.ecenc, bevocc 4.111.44:41 C.J.A.fie" tC, ca-r ..re„ sittnisds 510 ethr n50CC41.4141,1130ranCe Oa* aoaerea bn titeitersaoa Lompensenan insurerics. dollars (5, 7-5— c c, AutnorizeJ Si gruatorc Nole fli rOpana I bc v.illtdrawn by us if nol acceptcci wank., Acceptance of Proposal 10r. abovc; rincesspe:;111:ation& ac conOitiom.; ate satisic.tory and ar0 bereoy ac::::::;tec; You 00- atitnerf;ed d i signatur as. saocilir0 i'ayrricrr will be mao, a: oLit,ineo aboo., Dale of mcceciarr...r- SIT lature. F • qnaraer ii.:22.5,6380 or nells.corn AGREEMENT TO EXTEND REVIEW PERIOD On September 15, 2011, the City informed Mr. Clyde Durand that an additional 60 days would he taken to review Mr. Durand's application for a septic variance to be located at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue. At the September 20111 City Council meeting, additional options were brought to the City Council from the applicant. At that meeting, the City Council asked the applicant for more detailed information on the options provided. The deadline for the City Council to make a determination on this application was November 17, 2011; however the applicant agreed to grant an extension until January 15, 2012 to complete the review. Mr. Clyde Durand has recently provided the City with a preferred option that will include revised variances. and in order to provide the City with sufficient time to review this new information, has agreed to extend the period of time for reviewing the application to February 15, 2012. Dated: CITY- OF LAKE ELMO By: l4, Kyle Klatt, City Planner CLYDE DURAND, PROPERTY OWNER OF 2860 LAKE ELMO AVENUE By: e DuraJJPropertv Owner CE TIHC. T SU 7E17 Site Plan Survey fa:LYEAR Itt1KJ2 1.50) aVtif OPDIVAla' EZEk - 4856 LEGit DESCRWOON: g 1,, f 1 Er GE g RE1,1,11,10E, phh hor-horrrr hr h.h.hro rrhhoh rorr r:rarh. : rrohrh 1E4 flrEh,f 1g, .. rgg grig Egg EN., ilrg, , ihh.a hr `frt., rhioht rp.op ,:aom • :+1- rGEG FE1E,111. foliG,Nnty 11 gg pi Pis, g 21E1fEENE Sf gggg igg Ng, , g GiNg, g Eggr.f gruG !Gig, iigggffe0 if g gg kg, ht or thq...h.rm Sm. Orr erhhhrhh hhh ''-hh,hrr hhrr roho r,hr, rhht :off ,,,g, Er1 1G,t. ggiig 1,1, g , fgg gi g1gigin eggs sk.,9 ggig1 S ,iv 1,, fq,, 'gig. 11 Eiegt igg g -0,1 e G1.-¢G.1 i i Z 6..5zfe se.9,513-"iiii i 4 33 5 - it,53'5.11" I i ! .1 1 -rtt. i,i i EX/571Q; .4t.W.SE r I ilr Sit,t-',i'L'tt` 1V/.6,45EAt,g;t1,r t tt !ti4 j LTG" .5t.0°_A( tt-tt I Ak la :4'.i i i A1 i4:41:4T4f;''' !i. SP7).'4 . ! - t 1 - -4- f i 621.-g $e.944,3:5,11( - 33125 ,' 5,57'9:3'5i7f i 1 i 1 1 1 I 1 . . NW ES PGER E crrCiiggE rap Efini 'NG FPG,1,1 Sign, Grigg.° ge. fi prig ff, 7451,"rgTffTf..;;1;1”..Egit1,1,,r Ei rig1 gEi gff LEGEND fEgfifB 1Rui1 gg, ,,gingrtigs , g rrrhrh, ”rohrror h.rhr rhy- Folz. Free -mat). Ericksc,t), lANI1 1"1._ANNINC • 5URVFYING •ENCINEERRAY 12444; 5"4, IDS, FREI'. t NORIAI LAKE Et NI(1, MINNESO rA i6511 I P-HU ife ,11.ie1N BOUNDARY IN()717. ffElifidGES E U$1,1 ,g1 WW1, 1,.,11 Fi101., giffEhgtr, LE it grit,. k GiU1 fvf, gg 4R11.11E ,1(101 F.1.5 7487 A.10 Ufligga E.11 147144 10,1.1.4,471 If. if)MIN!, ' 914414114 ,111 27.i9 rifE rturvorPt 141£G14.114 1.01,42,5 FiG0 GEM, NIG' .1 f "if GE, if 1.4 !I frrr-qm, EgiG,11E. SktRITY nr, DURArt, 2S+10 TAKT, AYY" hrrh .AKF 55a13 P,A7144, qm1 :h.! 1 11,G, .,{iii if., aii, sg, igi. PIG g' NG, u g1P,),,,,, iggi fki, beg, a GE 1,,,1,,i,,,,,, rrhkr rho irhrhtryhrho rthh ro Atrjhorrhs ooh" ......- - ... /1//6/2,'1./ Nme, a:sr/WIT:V..11rd 2809 78th Ave. N Brooklyn Park, MN 55444 Metro: 651-260-3783 pbrandt@soilinvestigations.us December 8, 2011 Mr. Clyde Durand 2860 Lake Elmo Ave Lake Elmo. MN 55042 Re: 2860 Lake Elmo Ave. N Septic System Dear Clyde and Carl, 16 South 5th Avenue East Melrose, MN 56352 320-260-8874 I have completed my field investigation of your property at the address stated above. The following information is the situation as it was observed on the site at the time of our investigation. Also, I have received the property survey and topographic drawings of your site indicating the available area(s) for septic systems. I will first discuss the site survey of your site. The survey indicates a few things that were not apparent a first glance with the site. Your property does not extend to the end of the concrete that was laid as a driving surface. As the survey drawing shows, the edge of the right of way is near the big Oak tree and runs north parallel to Lake Elmo Ave. This removes approximately 215 square feet of space that could have been used for the treatment area. Further, the drawing shows that the water and gas lines are located within the area (under the concrete 1 had hoped to use as part of the treatment bed (drainfield). The loss of property area because of the right of way limits along with the water and gas lines in conjunction with the cost of concrete removal, relocating the water and gas lines and the construction of the system in a disturbed area makes the use of the northern portion of the parking area infeasible. Therefore, the only area on the property to place a septic drainfield is in the southeast corner of your property. The area extends from the right of way line to within 20 feet of the house. This is a regulatory setback from the house. The southern boundary of the drainfield is approximately one () foot from the fence and it extends west to the brink of the hill that leads to the lake (please see the attached drawing As you can see on the attached drawing. the drainfield will need to he placed over some disturbed soil to maintain the setbacks from the house and right of way. This will cause the entire system to he classified as an "other type" system and require monitoring but most likely not an operating permit. However. with the variance we are requesting, annual permitting and monitoring would most likely be a requirement anyway so it is not a large change in this project. After reviewing the site diagram, 1 arn recommending(see drawing) that the tanks he placed between the drainfield and the house. That only a small area of the concrete to be cut to allow installation of the system, as a result the old sewer line from the house will be abandoned. A new line should be run inside the house then cut through the wall at a place to allow direct access to the tank. Since the area will he under concrete the top of the tank and new sewer line should he insulated with two to four inches of rigid foam insulation to prevent freezing. Now with respect to the soil. I have completed the required soil boring(s) at the site. The soil at the site is a medium grained sand. The soil suitable for treating septic system effluent extends from the surface to five (5) feet below the surface. What this means is that an in ground system can be installed at your site if enough room exists. A two (2) bedroom home requires a design load of 300 gallons per day of water use. A medium sand can treat one (1) gallon of septic effluent per square foot per day, therefore you need 300 square feet of space at least 20 feet from the house. The old cistern(s) need to be removed, from the property. The pressure bed will he placed in the area of these old structures and the excavation must he backfilled with washed sand. The old pipe should be disconnected and sealed as per appropriate code. The design criteria for this site allow for only one type of system at your site. That is a pressure bed. This bed should be time dosed with frequent small doses, with a high water override to allow larger flows to he handled without a backup intro the house. The system needs a high water alarm. a low water shut off and the controllers should be installed in the basement because of the location. With this type of system, the drainfield pipes are installed in one broad and shallow excavation. The piping is connected together so the entire pressure bed area is watered with the effluent at the same time. This type of system needs to have the water applied with a pressure pump and it needs to be timed dosed. This means that a small quantity of water is sprayed on the area many times over the day rather than one or two larger applications associated with a demand dosing system. The tanks should be located near the stairs leading to the lake without disturbing them. The concrete above should be removed and hauled off site like the old tanks. A new sewer line should he run directly into the basement. A new line in the basement should be installed to the old piping near the east wall of the basement. The outside line and top of the septic tank should he insulated adequate to protect it at the installed depth to prevent freezing. This will vary with depth, the insulation is due to the concrete surface that will be shoveled and kepi hare in the winter. The new tank must he kept 5 feet from the house to prevent loss of structural; integrity of the basement wall. The inlet to the tank should be in the side to allow direct discharge. The tank should be a 1.500 gallon two compartment vessel with the first chamber being 1.000 gallons and the second 500 gallons. The first chamber is the septic tank and must have an inlet haffie and an filter on the outlet to the dosing chamber. The tank must be constructed to current code. The tank should have manholes into both chambers as required by code. The pump alarms and floats should be installed in the second compartment (dosing chamber) to allow efficient operation. The inlet and outlet for the piping must have water tight seals too. The timer for the dosing should be selected by the installer and be programmable from a minimum of 5 doses to a maximum of not less than 24 doses per day. The timer and/or pump must be able to record the number of events to allow monitoring. Other items of concern include removal of the car port, and the 36 inch oak tree. The oak will have a lame portion of its roots cut and will be a safety hazard to Lake Elmo Avenue. lf the tree is lefi the roots will be a danger to the operation of the pressure bed. If during the installation rain occurs proper planning to prevent erosion materials from entering the lake must be completed. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 651-260-3783 and/or aq uo I I 1 0,iPliotrnail .coni Sincerely, Paul Brandt PSS Soil Investigation 8,-. Design, Inc. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Property owner/Dien:: 'Clyde Durand Site Address: 2860 Lake Elmo Ave. N 1. AVERAGE DESIGN FLOW: A. Design Flow; 300 B. Septic Tank capacity: c. A. a. OSTP Design u 1 1.s.2e eke Elmo, MN ns Per Day IGPD) 1500 Number of Septic Tanks nr Compartments: r Type or Soil Treatment and DspersaI Area' Gallons a r %sheet , TY OF MINNESOTA Note: The estimated design flow is considered o peak flow rate including a salary factor, For long term performance, the overage daffy flow is recommended to br 60% of this value. 2 Effluent Screen 6 Alarm: r Type or Dst ribut on" U Irenchi ®Eied 0 Mound 0 At -Grade 0 Gravity Distribution 0 plop D7str ,-11 J:, 0 r.o:at - liotirtq "t snl5 ©nil • Selection Required System Type Type i © Type II © Type III © Type tV © Type V SiTE EVALUATION; Depth to Limitr`nr Layer: Measured Percent Land Slope: C. Soli Texture: 60 Iinchcs 5.0 Medium Sand Soli Hydraulic Loading Rate: 3. DESIGN SUMMARY Absorption Area Total Lineal Feet Absorption Area Bed Width Absorption Area Absorption VJrdlh Upslope Berm Witln Total System Length Absorption Bed Width Absorption Bed Area 20 300 9.0 0.0 Percolation Rate: Yes C' Pressure teed 0 Pressure. Disbxxroc-Untevei Benchmark Elev _l 899.68 Benchmark Location: Type of Distribution Media: Rock Elevation of Limiting Layer: 16 1.00 #GPD/ft` E. Contour Loading Rate Trench Design Su Sidewalt Depth Number of Trenches n ft Fire Hydrant per Inch 8.0 Trench Widt 891 Gal/ft N.axrmum Trench Depth Designers Max Trench Depth d Design Summary Media Below Pipe Maximum Bed Depth Mound Design Sz Bed Length ft Clean Sand Lin Do'.vnstepe Berm Width ft Total System Width 24 12.0 in in Bed Length 15.0 ft in Designer's Max Bed Depth f 894 At -Grade Design Summary Absorption Bed Length Upstope Herm Width System Length Bed 1^lidth berm width (slope 0-1%) fit Encistope Berm Width System Height Dovmctope Ferro Wi System Width h lit ti Comments/Specia Minnesota Pollution Control Agency No, of Perforated Laterals Lateral Diameter Flow Ratc i 15 OS ii Design Su a ksheet Number of Holding Tanks High Level Alarm? ORGANIC LOADING 4 11.3.2E Pressure Distribution Summary Sparing Supply Pipe Diameter UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 3 tit Perforation Diameter Total Head I 14 Ift 1 to Minimum Dose Volume Maximum Dose Volume 1/4 Holding Tanks Only Total Volume of Holding Tanks pretreatment is being used gallons Organic Loading to Pre -Treatment Unit = Design Flow X Estimated B©© in mg: L in the effluent X 8.35 : 1,O00,O00 gpd X mrj/L X 8.35 : 1,000,000 = Calculate System Organic Loading : lbs. BODlday + Bottom Are© Ilbs/day _ Ili' r ign Considerations: lbs/day/ft` Ilbs/day/ft' lbs 8OD/day I hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and la •in t,7 75 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency It SYSTEM SIZING: STP Trench Et e esign orksheet 11.3.2E A. Design Flo (Design Sum. A):i C. Soil Loading Rate (Design 5um.2Dis 300 1.00 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA GPD B. Aiaximum Depth' : GPD/ft2 24 'inches *Depth to limiting condition(Design Sum.2A) - 3 ft 3 ft separation may be reduced for Tn. Levet A or B D. Required Bottom Area: Design F(ow (7.A) - Loading Rate (1.C) = Initial Required Bottom Area 300 GPO - E. Select Dispersal Media: F. Select Dstrthution Method : 1.00 GPDIft2= 300 ift2 0 Rock GI Other Approved Media O Pressure (required for rapidly permeable soils) 0 Gravity -Drop Box 0 Gravity -Other G. Select Dispersal Type: DTrench - Rock DTrench - Registered Product: 0 Bed - Rock 0 Bed - Registered Product: TRENCH CONFiGURATION: (ROCi:coieOuiaientMediaj"" A. Initial required trench bottom area Ift21: (from 1.D) 300 Sidewall Absorption (inches) 6 to 11 12 to 17 18 to 23 24 B. Select Sidevvall Height : C. Design Bottom Area (2.A): D. Select Trench Width Bottom Area Reduction Bottom Area Design trench Multiplier bottom area 0% 1 20% 0.8 34% 0.66 10% 0.6 inches inches 300 240 198 180 ft E. Total Designed Trench Length: Bottom Are (2.C) -:- Trench Width (2.0) Total Required Trench Length ft F. Select Trench Spacing ft. + 1ft (typically 5 - 12 ft from center to center) G. Calculate Lawn Area.: Trench Length (2.E) X Trench Spacing (Z.F) ft? lawn area ft ); ft H. Calculate Minimum lengtr, based on Contour Loading Rate: Design Flow(14) CLR flCi) P,Pd I 8.0 gall ). If using rock. select Depth Required to Cover Distribution Pipe: ft (0.33 for pressure, 0.5 for gravity) 2 lawn area ft Sinew:tit J. Calculate Media Volume , (Sidewali Heigh + Depth to Cover Pipe (2.1)) X Bottom Area (2. = cubic ft. ) X Divide ft3 by 27 ft3iyd3 to calculate cubic yards: ft3 27 K. If using a registered product, enter the Component Length yd' in. 12 L. Number of Components = Total Length Required i2.E) divided by Component Length (2.K) (Round up) 3. BED C NFIGURATION: A. Select size Multiplier: B, Req'd Bottom Area (1.0): Designed Bottom Area : C. Select Bed Width: Pan 6% slope) 1.0 = pressurized gravity (not allowed in rapidly permeable soils) Maximum width = 25 ft. (pressurized) Maximum width = 12 ft. (gravity) D. Calculate Bed Length: Designed Bottom Area (3.5) Bed Width (3.C) = Bed Length E. Select Sidewoll Absorption: 1.0 300 300 20 300 12.0 ft ft7 20.0 ft = 15 inches below the pipe = 1ft 1.0 F. Calculate Media Volume: (Media Depth (3.E) depth to cover pipe) X Designed Bottom Area (3.6) ft 1.00 0.33 ift) x 300.0 Calculate Volume in cubic yards: Media volume in cubic feet (3.F) 27 = cubic yards 399 27 = G. If using a registered product, enter the Component Length: If using a registered product, enter the Component Width 15 yd lin. 12 12 399.0 I Number of Components per Row = Bed Length (2.E) divided by Component Length (2.K) (Round up) 15 J. Number of Rows = Bed Width (2.E) divided by Component Width (2.K) (Round up) Adjust Bed Width (3.C) until this number is a whole number K. Total Number of Components Numbet of Components per Row X Number of Rows X 1.5 = ft3 ft. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 1, Select Number of Perforated Laterals in system/zone: (2 feet is minimum and 3 feet is maximum spacing) 2. Select Perforation Spacing: Select Perforation Diameter Size OSTP Pressure istribution Design sheet 3.0 Ift 1/4 inch UNI\VERSITY or MINNESOTA v 11.3,2E Felon un s'¢>rt: Y," to'r:" 4. Length of Laterals : Media Bed Length " 2 Feet. Perforation con not be closer then 1 foot from edge. 15 2ft 13 Determine the Number of Perforation Spaces , Divide the Length of Laterals (Line 4) by the Perforation Spacing (Line 2) and round down to the nearest whole number. Number of Perforation Spaces 6. Number of Perforations per Late Perforations Per Lateral = 4 13 It 3 'ft at to 1.0 plus the Number of Perforation Spaces Spaces a 1 5 4 'Spaces (Line 5). Perfs. Per Lateral Check table below to verify the number of perforations pet lateral guarantees less than a 10%discharge variation, The value is double if the a center manifold is used. Mar.mu•n N r elf �°ertc*ra Pe:v Lester incn F•er o:tittton: ... j 7:3:. In:h Perrtion. 7 Total Number of Perforations equals the Number of Perforations pf.Pr Lateral (Line 6) multiplied by the Number of Perforated Laterals (Line 1). 5 !Peri. Per Lateral 4 lNumber of Perf. Laterals Calculate the Square Feet per Perforation. Recommended value is 4.10 ft' per perforation. Does not apply to At -Grades Bed Area = Bed Width (ft) X Bed Length (ft) 20 ft X 15 ft 300 Square Foot per Perforation > Bed Areo divided by the Toto( Number of Perforations (Line 7). 300 9. Select Minimum Average Head : 20 Select Perforation Discharge (GPM) b perforations 1.0 frft sec) on Table 11): 15,0 ns 0.74 IGPM Der Perforation 20 ITotal Number of Peri. Pcrtex^strcn Y,-.:.nueC fern,=; t 2 C,42,I4^,,22yet Jot ttor,;an ^..':,. a-n:r Determine required Flow Rate by multiplying the Total Number of Perforation; (Line 7) by the Perforation Discharge (Line 10). 20 erforations X 0.74 GPM per Perforation 15 ' GPM Minnesota Pollution Control Agency STe essure Distribution esign orksheet 12. Select Type of Manifold Connection (End or Center): E End 2 Center 13. Select Lateral Diameter from Table I above: 14. Volume of Liquid Per Foot of Distribution Piping: .00 lin 0.045 15, Volume of Distribution Piping = = [Number of Perforated Laterals (Line 1) X Length of Laterals (Line 4) X (Volume of Liquid Per Foot of Distribution Piping (Line 14)) 4 x— 13 0,045 I al/ft 16. Minimum Dose Volume of Distribution Piping (Line 15) X 5 2.3 gals X 5 C1Q31"037,S - ts1,-)nif riirr• 11.7 'Gallons Alfrimmc location of oira fie:int stump hot from pump 0 2-3 (Gallons UNIVERSITY ov hilMNESOTA v 11.3.26 Table II Volume of Liquid in Pipe Pipe Liquid Diameter Per Foot (inches) (Gallons) 1 0.045 1.25 0.078 1.5 0.110 2 0.170 3 0.380 4 0.661 iranrolo pipc • alternate location oi pip from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency PUMP CAPACITY OSTP Pump Selection Design orksheet A. Pumping to Gravity or Pressure Distribution: 1. If pumping to gravity enter the gallon per minute of the pump: 2. Is the pump for the treatment system or the collection system: ® Treatment 5oen 0 Collection system Selection required 3. If pumping to a pressurized treatment system, what part or type ol system: Soil Treatment Unit. °Media Filter DOther 4. If pumping to a pressurized distribution system: Woo It of Pressure Distribr.ilion or- Lint 10 of tion-Le,c1 or enter ir Coliection Srdrrn) 2, HEAD REQUIREMENTS 3. Elevation Difference 3 between pump and point of discharge: NOTE: IF system /5 an individual subsurface sewage treatment system, complete steps 4 - 9. If system is a Collection System, skip steps 4. 5, 7 and 8 and go to Step 10. 4, Distribution Head Loss: 5, Additional Head Loss: I f t Ptfl CIP1 UNIVERSITY 1\11.!NNFSOT6, L:1;c• 15.0 Selection required GPM GPM lit (due to special equipment, et(.) Distribution Head Loss GrjvIty plstrUsistion..•=. or; 'Pressure. Distribution based on Minimum Average Head value on Pressure Distribution workstteet: Minimum Average Head I Distribution Head Loss 1f t 5f L 21 t JL 5ft 1Dft. 6. A. Supply Pipe Diameter: E. Supply Pipe Length: 1.0 25 in ft 7. Based on Friction Loss in Plastic Pipe per 100ft irom 1 able Friction Loss r 19.15 ift per 100ft of pipe Determine Equivalent Pipe Length from pump discharge to soft dispersal area discharge point. Estimate by adding 25% to supply pipe length for fitting, loss. Supply Pipe Length (6.B) X 1.25 Equivalent Pipe Length I 25 ft x 1.25 31.3 ft ..^;74 SYlarITI prar. ot CitCUrr 104 frAtovre -------- - - • - - • - hrPriction Loss in Plastic Pipe per 100 ft (CT-130) Hos-veinal Pipe Diameter Flaw1 i 1/4 tvi: 2 1.27 0.31 1 .72 0.44 2.35 0.58 3.03 0.75 0.10 8.14 .7..76 0.93 0.17 20 11.11 4.58 1.12 0.16 25 16.79 6.92 1.71 0.24 30 9.69 2.39 0.33 35 12.90 3.18 0.44 40 16.62 4.07 1 0.67 45 5.07 50 6.16 0.86 55 7.35 1.02 60 8.63 1.20 65 10.01 1.30 0.70 70 11.48 1.60 I 9, Calculate Supply Friction Loss by multiplying Friction Loss Per 100ft (Line 6) by the Equivalent Pipe Length (Line 7) and divide by 100, Supply Fnction Loss 19.18 per 100ft X 31.3 ft 100 6.0 hz Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 10. Equivalent length of pipe fittings. Section 10 is for Collection Systems ONLY and does NOT need to be completed for individual subsurface sewage treatment systems. Quantity X Equivalent Length Factor - Equivalent Length Fitting Type Gate Valve 90 Deli Elbow 45 Deg Elbow ITee - Flow Thru Tee • Branch Flow Swing Check Valve Angle Valve Globe Valve 'Butterfly Valve Valve 10 Valve 11 Quantity A. Sum of Equivalent Length due to pipe fittings: Equivalent Length Factor OSTP Pump Selection Design orksheet Equivalent Length Length (ft) E. Total Pipe Length Supply Ptpe Length (5,B) • Equivalent Pipe Length (9,A.) C. Hazen -Williams friction toss due to pipe fittings and supply pipe (h7): OM 4 Pipe Diameter4e7 I X Flow Rate Constantr. (10.5 ) u UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA v 11.32I1 " r r alent Lengt Fitting, Type Goze Valve 90 Deg Elbow as Deg Elbow Tee - Flow Thu it lcc Branch Flow Swing Check Valve Angie valve GIuL Valvie Butterfly Valve h Factor.. (ft.) for PVC Pipe Fitting* Pipe Diamet (in.) 1 2 3 1.07 1.38 2.04 4,03 5.17 7.67 2.15 2. /6 4,09 7.68 3.45 5.11 8,05 10.30 15.30 13.40 17.20 25.50 20.10 25.80 38.40 45.60 55.60 ee.90 7.75 11.50 NOTE: Equivalent length values for PVC plpe fittinp arc based on calculations using the Hazen -Williams Equation, See Advanced Designs for SSTS for equation. Other pipe material may require different equivalent length factors. Verify other equivalent length factors with pipe material manufacturer. NOTE.: System installer should contact system designer If the number of litLin3s vanes from the design ottte actual iitstallaticm h, Hazen -Williams Equation for h I 0.5 4.87 IQ in gpm L in feet D in inches C 130 X Total Pipe Length (10.B) gpm + 130)' t$ X 11, Total Head requirement is the sum of the Elevation Difference (Line 3), the Distribution Head Loss (Line 4), Additional Head Loss (Line 5), and either Supply Friction Los S (Line 9 ), or Friction Loss from the Supply Pipe and Pipe Fittings for collection systems (Line 10.C) NOTE: Supply Friction Loss (Line 8) need ONLY be used if NOT a collection system. NOTE; Friction Loss from the Supply Pipe and Pipe Fittings (Line 9.C) need ONLY be used if system is a collection system. 3.0 3. PUMP SELECTION 5.0 A pump must be seledted to deliver at teas Comments: tPurnP typ 15 GO!. (Line 1 or 4 6.0 If, - 14.0 ne 2) with at least 14 feet of total head. OSTP Pump Tank Sizing, Dosing, Float, and UNIVERSITY Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Timer Setting Design Worksheet NIINTA NESO DETERMINE AREA AND/OR GALLONS PER INCH Rectangle area Length (L) X Width (W) 1 7.0 ft X 1 4.6 Circle area = 3.141 {3,)4 X radius X radius) 3.14 X 2 ft C. Tank model and manufacturer topzionali: D. Get area from nianufacturer E. Get gallons per inch from manufacturer 2. Calculate Gallons Per Inch: ft 32.2 ft; rt ft' 'Gallons per inch Length Rad' There are 7.48 gallons per cubic foot. Therelore, multiply the area from 1.A, IX, or 1.0 by -C.48 to determine the gallons per foot the tank holds, Then divide that number by 12 to calculate the gallons per inch. (Area X 7.48 gallonstft1)/(12 in/ft) 32.2 tr X 7,48 gal/ft-' 12 in/ft 20.1 IGallons per inch TANK CAPACITY 3. Enter the Designed Pump Tank Capacity (minimum provided in the table be(ow): 500 }Gallons 4. Calculate Total Tank Volume A. Depth f lam bottom of inlet pipe to tank bottom: 32 lin E. Totol Tank Volume - Depth from bottom of inlet pipe (Line 4.A) X Gallonslinch (Line 2) 32 in X 20.1 lGUons Per Inch 642.3 5- Calculate Volume to Cover Pump (The inlet of the pump must be at least 4-inches from the bottom of the pump tank 4, 2 inch ts of water covering the pump is recommended) (Pump and block height - 2 Inches) X Gallons Per Inch (1D or 2) (I 13 DOSING VOLUME in 2 inches) X 20.1 'Gallons Per Inch n 301 }Gallons b. Minimum Pumpout Volume - 5 X Volume of Distribution Piping: - Line 17 of the Pressure Distribution or Line 11 of Non -level 7. Calculate Maximum Pumpout Volume (25% of Design Flow) Design Flow: 300 GPO X 0.25 8. Select a pumpout volume that meets both items above (Line 6 & 7): 9. Calculate Doses Per Day Desin Fiow Dosing, Volume 300 gpd 50 gal l 6.0 lDoses 10. Calculate r intiack: A. Diameter of Supply Pip' 1incher, b. Length of Supply Pipe 25 Ifeet C. Volume of Liquid Per Lineal Foot of Pipe 1 1.7 'Gallons 75 IGaUOr 50 IGaltons 0.045 onsift Druinback Length of Supply Pipc X Volume of Liquid Per Lineal Foot of Pipe 25 ft XI 0.045 Igal/ft = 1.1 Gallons 11. low/ Dosing Volume Dosing, Volume (Line 8) plus Droinback (Line 10.D) 50 ;at +1 1.1 - I 51.1 Gallons 12.. minnum Alarm Volume Depth of alarm (2 or 3 inches) X gallons per inch of tank (Line o: 2) 31n X I 20.071333 gal/in . I 60.214 Gallon> OSTI- rump Tank Sizing, Dosing, Float d Minnesota Pollution Control Agency TIMER or DEMAND FLOAT SETTINGS Select Timer or Demand Dosing: A. Timer Settings 13. Required Flow Rate: Timer Setting Design Worksheet UNIVERSITY OF MI NN F.SOTA -.. A. From Design (Line 11 of Pressure Distribution or Line 10 of Non -Level'): 15 GPM 8. Or calculated: GPM --- Change in Depth (in) x Gallons Per Inch (Line 1 or 2)f Time Interval in Minutes in X 20.1 Igal/in min 0 I GPM 14. Choose a Flow Rale from Line 13.A or 13.8 above. I 15 GPM 15. Calculate TIMER ON setting,: Total Dosing Volume (Line 11)/GPM(Line 14) 51.1 gal ÷ 15.0 I gpm 3.4 !Minutes ON 16. Calculate TIMER OFF setting: Minutes Per Day (1440)/Dases Per Day (Line 9) - Minutes On (Line 15) 1440 min ÷. I 6.0 Idoses/day 3.4 Imin = 236.59 IMlnu 17. Pump Otf Float • measuring from bottom of tank: Distance to set Pump Off Floal.Gallons to Cover Pump (Line 5) / Gallons Per Inch (Line 1 or 2): 301.07 I gal 20.1 qatfin = 15.0 'Inches 18. Atarm Float - Measuring from bottom of tank: Dijtance to set Alarm Float - Tank Depth(4A) Alarm Depth (Line 13) 32 lin • 3 lin = I 29 lin B. DEMAND DOSE FLOAT SETTINGS 18. Calculate Float Separation Distance using Dosing Volume, Tow! Dosing Volume (Line 12)/60110ns Per Inch (Line 2) 'Note: This value must be adjusted after field measurement & calculation. OFT Inches I gal al 19. Measurino from bottom of tank: A. Distance to set PumpOff Float. Pump Height -0- Block Height (Line 5) -t Alarm Depth (Line 13) I in + I = Inches 8. Distance to set Pump On Float -Distance to Set Pump -Off Float (Line 19.4) Float Separation Distance (Line 18) in + I I in = Inches C. Distance to set Alarm Float - Distance to sc Pump -On Float (19.8) Alarm Depth (2-3 in.thes) in + I I In = Inches FLOAT SETTINGS DE D DOSING /i.itiii i),..tptil Pump On Pump Off r-- Alarm Deotti 29 in 1 Pump Off 15 in TIMED DOSING 60 Gallons 51.125 Gallons 301.07 Gallons „IL, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA b 'v f o Client/ Address: Clyde Durand Legal Description/ GPS 2860 Lake Lelrno Ave. N, Lake Elmo, Mn 55042 Soil parent materials L7 Outwash Lacustrine © Loess (Check all that apply) ] Till 0 Alluvium 0 bedrock © Organic -'epth (in) Texture 0 to 11 11 to 21 21 to 42 42 to 60 60 to 72 Comments medium sand fine sand medium sand medium sand medium sand Coarse Frag. Matrix Color(s) >5 10 YR 3/3 >5 10 YR 4/4 >5 10 YR 5/4 >5 10YR4/4 >5 10YR4/4 I hereby cerffy that I have completed this work in accordan (Designer) v 11.3.28 Landscape Observation N/l.ocation: 0 Vegeta Soil survey map units NA Mottle Color(s) Redox Kind(s) NA NA NA NA 10 YR 4/6 Ex 3/6 Indicator(s) Concentrations, 51 depletions ith all applicable ordinances, rules and laws. Shape Date or. Side Yard Slope shape 10/11 /201 1 15:15 summit grass Stop e% 1.0 Linear, Linear° Structure----- -----I Grade Consistence Single grain 'Structureless Friable Single grain !Structureless Loose Single grain ;Structureless iLoose Single grain Structureless iLoose Single grain Structureless Firm (Date SP' Sol^t Obs-rva*ion OF MY0hJESOTA Client/ Address: Clyde Durand Legal Description/ GPS 2860 Lake LdmoAve. N' Lake Elmo, Mn 55O42 Soil parent materials 0OuLwash 0Lacusthne E)Luess (Check all that apply) E]TiK [] AUuvivm rj- Bedrock Depth (in) Texture Coarse v `1.3.2u Landscape position Vegetation Observation #/Location; Uaks 10/11/20.. line 14:50 summit Q/uo Side Yard Slope%/ 1.0 } Soil SUrvey map units N4 | 8opeshmpe linear Indicator(s) , mathx[nkor(s) 8mtde[olor(s) 8tn10 medium sand; ^5 10YR]/] 10tn 18 medium send ,5 10YR4/4 _ 18to39 medomsaod `5 10YR5/4 Redox Kind(s) Shape r----' -` / ' 61 Lo72 medium�Concentrations, sand ^5 1OYR4/4 |lQYR5/b 3/�depletions S1 ! | � Comments /-------- StrucLurw----------- | Grade � F Single grain StrUcLurete5s Friable /Singiegnain 5boctureea Loose � / Single grain StmcLureless /Loose Single grain 'Structureless Loose Single birain SLructuretess Firm | hereby omrt[ythat | have completed this work k)accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and W g (Licenne#) Textures: c,c(ay sic -silty clay sc'san yday c|'c(ay loam sid-d(Lyclay loan] sci-smdyclay loam d'dit oii'si(t|omm i'kmm d'sandy|nam b'(cemysaod 5-sand Soil Structure Massive' YVeak' Moderate' Subsoil |ndcmtnr(s)ofSaturation: 61. Distinct gray or red /edox features lZ. Depleted matrix (Value ^/=4and chnoma '/=Z) B. 5Ychnuma "/= ] S4. 7.5 YR or redder faint redox concentrations or redox depletions /fyes Voone oythe above indicators then: Topsoil Indicator(s) of Saturation: T1. Wetland Vegetation T2. Depresdnna\Landscape T3. Organic texture or organic modifiers T4. N 2.5/ 0udnr T5. Redox features in topsoil T6' Hydraulic indicators ( . Consistence: Loose' Intact specimen not available Friable- Bight force between fingers Finn' Moderate force between fingers Extremely Moderate force between hands or slight firm' foot pressure Riqid' Foot pressure Slope Shape: Slope shape ixdescribed in two directions: up and down slope (perpendicular iothe contour>' and across slope (along the horizontal contour); e.8. Unear. Convex orLv' n^,:��I - ------ Noobservable aggregates, or noorderly arrangement of natural lines o/weakness Poorly kxmeU, indistinct peds, barely observable ill place VYeK [OnnpU' distinct ped5, moderately durable and evident, but not distinct ill Undisturbed soil DUrable peds that are quite evident in un-dispiaced soil, adhere weakly to one another,*iUhsLand displacement, and becorne separated when soil is disturbed No peds, sandy soft * ^ ' , Soil Structure Shape: Granular- The peds are approximately spherical or polyhedra[ and are commonly found in topsoil. These are the small, rounded ppds that hang onto roots when azi| is turned over. The Vedsare flat and plate like. They are oriented horizontally and are usually overlapping. Piatystructure iscommonly found in forested areas just below the leaf litter or shallow topsoil, fKqq�� The peds are block -like n,polL yhedr�and are bounded by hat or slightly rounded surface that are casting of the faces of surroundingppds. Blocky structure |scommonly found iothe lower topsoil and Subsoil. Prismatic'_ Flat or slightly rounded vertical faces bound the individua( peds. Peds are distinctly longer vertically, and faces are typically cast or molds of adjoining peds. P/iSmadcstructure bcommonly found in the lower subsoil. Single Grain -The structure found in a sandy soil. The individual particles are not held together. I 11.I'Rk \ t ', I 1 It!S ItElYPPA kk Pit_EPArd.t.) BY MI- •.st. 1,11'R'1$10^. AND 7: I AM..;IXI I Ill PRO;,.E.SS:ON 5(r1l fuisr1.'N;.);1 M. I. 01' ME. Ail UT. ;4IN`,VS0'; Paul Brandt 30007 fl , ',"eptic System Design, 2860 Lake Elmo Ave. N Pi 13 President PLAN SHEET Soil litvestivation 1/12/2012 2s4) Rick, \IN .•:;,k 114 121),Nro-NS:%Ilritc.11-cl' tirt1 •e. 1: Site Location F'i i.3 Sstem Desi z. 286() Lake Elmo Ave. N PLAN SHEET Soil investigation I:I s st Paul Brandt k" ;: f*LA.10 TNU Nolo 4 *44894 Ar 404.4 4 171 Irg t It 4 : 4 gb , 4 *4 Septic Svstem DeS19,Th 2860 LakeElmo Ave. N. PLAN SHEET Pill Li 2'21)12 Plesident Soil Investigation r 3: Site Topogniphic Map z Er' — El. 0 AVENUE NORTH 7;1 • I MAUI\ PLAN. S141-1("ItE"\10. ( '10 Septic )rstern Design200, v i.,ak.e Lirno Ave. N art WI AS HEE PARED Ill MI, I ?Ft 1.',NIX.AL DI RE( • I E:t pEt.tvlEtt ANit HAI' I ANI A 1.tt:CE KT:EN:WEAL. P N SHEET Soil Investigation sott„ E, tNE tta.LE.yvEE,Ett HEE E;; AIL 0; !dr.'EE ;4A t.IEEiEEE (15/2012 7$0, Pail] 13randt - • President ! 3:-.1QtE)-RE; lEtcElEe; Miane,rq, 30007 NEE Site Detail Map .TRIPLE I2'' BASSWOOD 6" SPRUCE 1)N11 (11ZOINANY 11,01(201( HAN - 83,5 Ot,"11/Att 1111.1 t49 I (Vt3W1)' LFE 889.16 EXISTING HOUSE TWO STORY W/BASEMEN" )RT CATCIIBASIN -/ RINI 896A CISTERN A A A CESS,55=5':A5?,5' rk (5) SEPTIC 130RING 2 SEPTIC" BORING I A ,t,t0 e 're.artis ist 1. Remove Car Port 2. Excavate olc Cistern 43, Remove 014 Cistern 4. DispOse of Offsite 5. Cut Rembve Concrete 6. Dispose ofioffsite 7. Remove catch Basin RekOcate as shown 9. ReCoonne!ct to existing outle 10.move 36" Oak 11. Dispos of offsite Cap or'emove old piping ox 13. Set up Traffic Control - _,& Safety measures 36",,,OAK 6" SPRUCE --" 1i2" 11' ILLS 7147. BENCI IMARK Top Nut Fire 1 lydraut ELEV. 899.68 CZ 2 1VATElt1 J',V. SA4 (-) DNI2 ilMINARY IIftI I I/04(201 I lit1 SS5 6 Ir 100-Yr•Sli 111V1. A.)1 ‘) tVti \VI» LIT 889.16 EXISTING HOUSE TWO STORY W/BASEMENT TRIPLE 12" BASSWOOD 6" SPRUCE 1'1 IN( SEWER I INE' )X, LA P0 -.n-CA1 C11 BASIN - RIM 896.4 CISTERN BORING I Acc8s, • MAILBOX SEPTIC' BORING 2 36"; OAK 6" Sl'ItliCE 112" II' _ ILLS 7.147 BENC[IMARK4-j)___ Top Nut Fire '1-- Hydrant ELEV.,- 899.68 atis ist 1. Remove Car Port 2. Excavate old Cistern 3. Remove Old Cistern 4. Dispose of olisite 5. Cut & Remove Concrete 6. Dispose of offsite 7. Remove Catch Basin 8. Relocate as shown 9. Recoonnect to existing outlet 10. Remove 36" Oak 11. Dispose of offsite 12. Cap or emove old piping 13. Set up Traffic Control & Safety- measures 14. Backfill Cistern area with clean washed Sand ert ,tt `ttf Nitt„tt,tett.aixt:Got,tit 2 to it lat.r.dk ft setback from ede ttabed ,33 3 Lnd Viot Native Soil Basement floor elevation Ground Surface 3,3 4 4' Ntliatilttiln rAtpt-toil Ct4tt.t.ti I 1110, 01.511)1,:t1101 Of St.t‘l ItA)Ck essure Bed Area 3 feet of Separation Elevation of redoximorpine, features Medium Sand I&iht of 'ay tr-44. "33 tz et= 173 ett., 3". ..3.3 31113‘333;3333,i :333! ..333 34-3 ;3L 333;3_33. \-',N FEK I'I MO u Dtik ()NDINARY II1G11 --„,, ,...-, I titt-ti2ot i Ft Ey t(ss (., r ' "--1 1) 0-yl-t,11( 'al S9I 0 (VIAVI)) LFE 889.16 Door EXISTING HOUSE TWO STORY W/BASEMENT Tank: 2 Compartment 1,500 gallon 1,000/500 split 5 ft setback c") Li(311 ,E,Eaaaa- - SEPTIC BORING I TRIPLE 12" = 13ASSW0(4) 6" SPRUCE 300 scv it Pressure Bed BORING 2 1;21114 744 7 st InstaII Septic Tank > with manholes to surface . Install New Pipeing from House 3. Reinstall Catch Basin (north by tank 4. Reconnect Catch Basin to existing pipe. 5. Install Pressure Bed 6. Install Inspection Pipes 7. Install Pump in Dosing Chamber 8. Install Filter in Septic Tank 9. backfill and re -seed 10. Replace Concrete " SPRUCE BENCHMARK) Top Nut Fire Hydrant ELEV. - 899.6S az E r . eL) „,„`2 *a: ENGINEERING, inc. ���H����80[�U�� '°'�'"'��'`'`'~^�^^'.' Cara Gehe��P.E Jack Griffin, p.s. Ryan Stempski, P.E. Date: February 7,2Ol2 651.30.4261 651.300.4264 651.300.4267 To: Kyle 0att Lake Elmo Planning Director Re: City ofLake Brno 28GOLake Elmo Avenue N Cc: Ryan Stennpski'P.E.,Assistant City Engineer Review ofVariance Request For Septic System Setbacks From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer A variance request was received from the above referenced address to install a septic system and drainfield within the required setbacks for the property at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue N. Four variances are required for the proposed design: l� Setback variance from a dnainfieid to a |o1 line. lOfeet required. Zeno feet proposed to side property line. 3.Sfeet proposed toCounty hght'of+mayline. 2. Setback variance from tank to building foundation. 10 feet required. 5 feet proposed. 3. Setback variance from dra\nfie|d to OHVVL of Lake Elmo. 75 feet required. 44feet proposed. 4� Design variance to allow only one septic tank prior to the pressurized drainfield. The following submittal items were received: * REVISED Sewage System design dated Deoamnber8, 2011, by Sail Investigation and Design Inc. and received onFebruary 2,2O12. • Application Cover Letter dated January 9'2OI2. • Certificate ofSurvey completed byFFEand dated November l6,2Ol1. • Septic System and Droinfidd preliminary design report by Soil investigation and Design, Inc., dated December 8,IOIl. • Installation Proposal from G] Smith Excavators, Inc. dated Decernber20, 20II. This application iscomplete. Review Comments: The proposed replacement sewage system for this property falls under the jurisdiction and review of Washington County. A review letter by the county was received, dated February 3, 2012. The County has completed a general review of the proposal and has determined that the design appears suitable for treatment of domestic strength waste from a 2-bedroom home. However, due to site constraints several code variances must be approved by the City asitemized above for the system to be approved for installation. It should also he noted that the proposed design requires the removal of an existing 35'inch Oak tree. PAGE I of 2 It is recommended that if approval is granted for the requested variances, the following conditions of approval beincorporated: * Conditions ofapproval: I. A permanent easement must be obtained for the zero lot line installation to facilitate both initial construction and on -going operation. I. All xve||s must be located to verify o nninirnurn SOfoot separation from the proposed sewage system ismaintained. S. Due to the tight site constraints, the installation must be field staked for construction to ensure that the installation iscompleted per plan. 4. The system must incorporate a redesign to include o second septic tank configuration in accordance with the County [ode. Avariance tmthis requirement should not be granted. Advanced treatment of the septic effluent prior to discharge to the pressure bed is recommended for the longevity of the system. The site cannot support a secondary drainfield. A second septic tank may satisfy the advanced treatment recommendation. S. The County has indicated that this system will require an annually renewed operating permit. 2/3/2012 Kyle Klatt City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Department of Public Health and Environment Lowell Johnson Director Sue Hedlund Deputy Director RE: Proposed SSTS Design, 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue (Durand Residence I have reviewed the proposed site plan, soil borings and design for a replacement sewage system for the residence at 2860 Lake Elmo Avenue, submitted by Paul Brandt. The design appears suitable for treatment of domestic strength waste from a 2 bedroom home. Because of lot constraints, a number of setback variances will be necessary for installation of the system. These include: 5' tank to foundation (10' required) 0' lot line to drainfield (10' required) 50' drainfield to OHWL ofLake Elmo (75' required). The zero lot line installation proposed may require a construction easement from the adjacent property owner. Current code requires a septic tank capacity of 1500 gallons partitioned or separate tanks (1000/500) for a 2 bedroom home. The design calls for a single partitioned tank with a septic tank capacity of 1000 gallons with a 500 gallon pump chamber. It appears that a partitioned 1000/500 gallon septic tank with a separate 750 gallon pump tank could be installed in the area available with a slight rearrangement of tank position. In a recent discussion with Ryan Stempski, the timed dosed pressure bed being proposed will work well, both in terms of longevity and pathogen removal, without a pretreatment device. Since excavation and sand filling places this design in the category of a Class III system, an annually renewed operating permit will be required. A monitoring and mitigation plan must be provided which will comprise the basis of the operating permit. Pete Ganzel Senior Environmental Specialist cc: Clyde Durand, Ryan Stempski Government Center • 14949 62nd Street North — P.O. Box 6, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 Phone: 651-430-6655 • Fax: 651-430-6730 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www,co.washinatommn.us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action A' OR ("0 CiL COMMUNICAT DATE: REGULAR ITEM #: MOTION 2/8/12 K-10 Resolution AGENDA ITEM: Consider Planning Commission Request to Updating ighting Ordinance SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director (1\-C' THROUGH: Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission Nick Johnson, Interim City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a recommendation from the Planning Commission to update the City's Lighting Ordinance (Section 150.035 — 150.038). This item has been on the Planning Commission's work plan over the past few years, and at this time. the Commission has expressed a desire to proceed with potential revisions to the ordinance. Prior to starting its work, the Commission did want to seek comments from the Council, and in particular would like to determine if the Council will support spending some time working on the ordinance. On a related note, any Council comments and concerns regarding the ordinance could be stated at this time and would be considered as part of the update process. Based on an initial discussion regarding this matter, the Commission has identified the following preliminary list of issues it would like to see addressed with an ordinance update: More specific requirements for when a lighting plan must be submitted to the City. and whether or not individual home owners should be required to prepare such plans. Clarification for when a photometric plan is required. and whether or not this should be based on project size or potential impacts or some other metric. Whether or not temporary lighting should be exempt from the ordinance. Whether or not the code should require lights that are not being used to be turned off at night (or at least scaled hack. The review and potential inclusion) of recent advances in technology as it pertains to City Council Meeting Lighting Ordinance Discussion 2/8/12 Agenda Item K-10 The Commission in general would like to see the code move more towards a performance system and to remove references to specific lighting types in the ordinance. A review of available fixtures and the creation of a document that would help residents and business find compliant fixtures. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission is seeking authorization from the City Council to proceed with an update to the City's lighting ordinance. If the Council decides to take such action. it should also provide any initial comments concerning the lighting ordinance for consideration by the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: I . Exterior LightingOrdinance SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Report/Presentation ............ ..... .• Questions from Council to Staff Public Input. if Appropriate ....... Call for Motion...... ..... ............ ... Discussion ................................ . Action on Motion .................... .. ............................. ..... ..........City Administrator ........................... ......... ......... Planning Director ...,........ ............. ..................... Mayor Facilitates ....... . ...... .,.................. ...... Mayor Facilitates ... ............................ ..... ..Mayor & City Council .....Mayor & City Council ...... ...... ............ ..... ......... . Mayor Facilitates page 2 -- Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances LiGEING, GLARE 0 AND EX DARDS § 150.035 PURPOSE. RiOR' The purpose of §§ 150.035 et secT is to regulate the spillover of light and glare on rural areas of the community, pedestrians, and land uses in the proximity of the light source to evaluate the impact oflight source on the safety of adjacent traffic. (1997 Code, § 1350,01) (Am. Ord. 97-17, passed 9-16-1997) § 150.036 EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN. (A) (1) At the time any exterior light is installed or modified for projects, an exterior lighting plan shall be submitted to the city in order to determine whether the purpose and requirements of §§ 150.035 et seq, have been met. (2) This plan will be prepared by a certified architect, landscape architect, or iighting designer. (B) (1) The applicant must provide a plan that identifies location, size. and type of luminaire. and show how the applicant intends to comply with § 150.035 et seq. (2) A photometric plan of the site and fixture data sheet must be submitted with a site plan for office, commercial. or any type of industrial project in order to determine the effect of the luminaire on surrounding properties. (3) proposals. The applicant shall provide the fixture data sheet for residential lighting (1997 Code. § 1350.03) (Am, Ord. 97-17. passed 9-16-1997) Penalty. see § 10.99 §15(.()37 PROHIBITED LIGHTING. (A) Public roc/divav or street. No lights shall be placed in view of any public roadway or street so that its beams or rays are directed at any portion of the roadway when light is of the brilliance and so positioned as to impair the vision of the driver of any motor vehicle, American Legal Publishing Corp. Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances (B) Luminaires. (1) Except for "full cutoff luminaries" as defined in § 150.035 et seq., no luminaires are allowed which do not meet the standards outlined in § 150.035 et seq. ) See illustration below. (C) Lighting in all zoning districts. No direct or sky -reflected glare. whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding. shall be directed into any adjoining properry. (D) Bare light bulbs. Bare light bulbs shall not be permitted in view of adjacent property or public right-of-way. (E) Light cast. No light or combination of lights. which cast iight on a public street. shall exceed 1 foot-candle. Meter reading as measured from the centerline of the street, nor shall any light or combination oflights, which cast light on residential property, exceed 4/10 foot-candles. (1997 Code, § 1350.04) (Am. Ord. 97-17. passed 9-16-1997) Penalty, see § 10.99 § 1.50.038 MINIMUM STANDARDS. (A) degrees. Mininutm standards for 1 11' a total euio/Tang/c ofgreaier than 90 (1) When a luminaire has a total cutoff of an angie greater than 90 degrees (see illustration be)ow), the maximum illumination and the maximum permitted luminaire height is designated below. This standard is designed to ensure that no light is emitted above a horizontal plane parallel to the ground. In order to achieve a total cutoff at 90 degrees. the luminaire will emit maximum (peak) candle power at an angle not exceeding 75 degrees. This angel is formed by the line at which maximum candlepower is emitted for the light source and a line perpendicular to the ground from the light source. Illumination may exceed the stated maximums for a radius of 20 feet measured from the center point of the light fixture. but shall not exceed those maximums beyond the exterior property line of the site upon which the fixture is located. (Am. Ord. 97-104. passed 3-19-2002) Use and District Maximum Permitted Illumination at a Maximunt Permitted Point 6 Feet Above the Ground (In Foot Height Candles) American Legal Publishing Corp. Use and District All Residential Districts All Non -Residential Districts Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances Maximum Permitted Illumination at a Point 6 Feet Above the Ground (In Foot Candles) Maximum Permitted Height 0.30 15 feet I .50 20 feet (B) AliniM11171 standards fi)i- lightinglvith a total cuto/f anglc ofless than 90 degrees. (1) When a luminaire has a total cutoff of li aht at an angle less than 90 degrees and is located so that the hare light bulb, lamp, or light source is completely shielded from the direct view of an observer 5 feet above the ground at the point where the cutoff angle intersects the around, the maximum permitted illumination and the maximum permitted -height is illustrated below. This type of in.tht fixture may he taller and provide greater illumination at the property line than the 1 specified above. because the design of this fixture ensures that its light source will not be directly visible off -site. (2) Illumination may exceed the stated maximums for a radius of 20 feet measured from the center point of the light fixture. but shall not exceed those maximums beyond the exterior property line of the she upon which the fixture is located. (Am. Ord. 97- I 04. passed 3- I 9-2002) Use and District All Residential Districts All Non -Residential Districts vimum Permitted Illumination at a I Maximum Permitted Point 6 Feet Above the Ground (In Foot Height Candles) 1.00 15 feet 3.00 30 feet (C) Minimum standards.far lighting on agricultural lands. When a permanent outdoor luminaire is placed on agricultural land. only Mercury lamps shall he permitted. (D) Attachments. Attachment entitled "Good Neighbor Outdoor Liahting" is on file in the Building Official's office. and can be found in Appendix A of this code. This is the guide to be used for residential lightina. (1997 Code. § 1350.05) (Am. Ord. 97-17. passed 9-16-1997) Penalty, see § 10.99 American Legal 'Publishing, Corp. 3