Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-06-12 CCMPCity of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 City Council Meeting March 6. 2012 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C. ATTENDANCE: Johnston Emmons Park Pearson Smith D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: (The approved agenda is the order in which the City Council will 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.) F. GROUND RULES: (These are the rules of behavior that the City Council adopted l'or doing its public business.) ACCEPT MINUTES: 1. Accept February. 21, 2012, City Council minutes PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES: in order to be sure that anyone wishing to speak to the City Council is treated the same way, 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 and Council • Administrator • City Attorney • City Engineer • Planning Director 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.) 2. Approve Payment- of Disbursements and Payroll 3. Authorize Signatures for Grant Fund and Savings Fund from LE Bank 4. 2012 Fee Schedule 5, Appointment of Finance Director 6, Reestablishing Precincts and Polling Places REGULAR AGENDA: 7. 1VInDNR Watercraft Inspection Grant 8. Lot Area (Size) and Width Variance — 5577 Lake Elmo Ave. N, 9. Fire Relief Association Raffle Drawing 10. Public Hearing: 'llemontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements and Authorization for Preparation of Plans and Specifications 11. Public Hearin: Keats Avenue North Street and Watennain Improvements and Authorization for Preparation of Plans and Specifications 12. Council — Staff Goal -Setting Retreat w/Don Salverda & Associates a. Set Date Adjourn LAKE ELMO COL CIL MINUTES DRAFT City of Lake Elmo City Council Minutes February 21, 2012 Mayor Johnston called the meetingorder at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Council Members Emmons, Park, Pearson, and Smith Also Present: City Administrator Zuleger, Attorney Snyder, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Klatt, and Interim City Clerk Luczak APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to approve the Fein -Italy 21„ 2012. City Council Agenda as amended, Council Member Pearson seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. ACCEPTED MINUTES: The February 8, 2012, City Council minutes were accepted as amended by consensus of the City Council. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES: Christian Le, 89 Cimarron, Stillwater High School student. introduced himself and that his Government class assignment was to report on a local government meeting. Sarah Quick, Lake Elmo Jaycees President, presented a check to the City in the amount of $7.500.00. Updates of the various scheduled events will continue to be communicated to the residents and City Council. The City Council thanked the Jaycees for all of their work in the community and looked forward to continuing their partnership with the City. Matt Moore. South Washington Watershed District, reported to the Council the 2012 planned activities and updates on the sub -watershed projects. including Afton and Denmark Township. SWWD now has three management groups utilizing storm water. Clean Water Grant to assist with water quality improvements, Colby Lake neighborhood. communication and education to residents Council discussed collective water quality improvements: better communication of storm water costs to homeowners. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 21, 2012 LAKE MO COUNCIL MINUTES DRAFT REPORTS: Council Member Emmons reported that the Village Committee are meeting and are in general agreement. and continue to work to finalize a map; attended the Gateway Commission meeting to discuss mass transit options. Council Member Smith thanked the Jaycees for donating their time, effort and work in the City. the new Christmas lights and Park Shelter at Carriage Station Park. She also recognized Fire Fighter Mr. VanDammelTraadt for his 18 years of service. Council Member Pearson reported he had attended the Fire Relief Association meeting. City Administrator Zuleger received a Council Member request for a Workshop on February 28, 2012, at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the Dernontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements and the Keats Ave. N. MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements Planning Director Klatt reported that a variance request was received from Steve Weber and will be discussed at the February 27, 2012, Plannim, Commission meeting; Village Workshops Open House is tentatively scheduled for mid -March: 1-94 Work Group continues to meet weekly. City Attorney Snyder reported two matters of interest that he will address in writin City Engineer Griffin informed the Council that the well chlorination was almost complete; test well drilled showed high capacity well and samples sent out and waiting for results. CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION: Council Member Ent/71077S moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Council Member Park seconded the 1720tiOn. The motion passed 5-0, Approved Disbursements and Payroll in the amount of $333.388.18 Authorized Signatures for Payment of Funds from Lake Elmo Bank Authorized dues paid for City Administrator to be a Rotary Member REGULAR AGENDA: Planning Commission: Second Alternate Appointment Administrator Zuleger informed the City Council about the current Planning Commission opening. and requested they consider appointing Justin Bloyer as Second Alternate to the Planning Commission. Council Members discussed their brief interview/discussion with Mr. Bloyer, stating that good discussion had occurred and different viewpoints welcome. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 21, 2012 LAKE ELMO COL 2IL MINUTES DRAFT MOTION: Council Member Pearson moved to appoint Justin Moyer as Second Alternate on the Planning C0171177iSSi017. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. Keats Avenue North: MSA Street Improvements — Resolution Reauestim; a Design Variance from State Aid Operations City Engineer Griffin request City Council approval of the Resolution requesting a design variance from State Aid Operations standards. The next quarterly State Aid Variance Committee meeting is March 1, 2012. and in order to have the City's request reviewed the completed application must be submitted by March 1, 2012. He would be attending the hearing on March 22, 2012. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to adopt Resolution No, 2012-00.5 Requesting a Design Variance.from Standards.for State Aid Operations fi9r Keats Avenue North MSA Street Improvements State Aid Project 206-105-002. Council Member Pearson seconded the motion, The motion passed 5-0. MnDNR Water Grant City Administrator Zuleger reported that the Tri-Lakes Association had applied for a DNR Watercraft Inspections Grant, and requested the City participate in a matching <zrant to funds pledged by the VBWD in the amount of S2,000.00. Justin Bloyer, 8881 Jane Rd.. updated the Council regarding the MnDNR deadline, the invasive species, the monitoring of boat launches and concerns since it is a public boat laun ch. Council discussed the City involvement, problems since it was a public boat launch. possible use of park dedication funds. Attorney Snyder requested the City provide a resolution to authorize funds advising direction of money after Park Commission approval. MOTION: Council Member Smith Moved to commit tofilnding of $2,00 .00 to the Lake Elmo Tri-Lakes Association for the MnDNR 2012 Grantfor Watercraft Inspection, with fimding to be defined, Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-1. with Council Member Pearson voting against. Council members applauded the efforts of Tri-Lakes residents, property owners responsibilities, community resources not used uniformly, and exploring other opportuniti es. Justin Blover. 8881 Jane Rd.. stated that current Tri-Lakes Association Members dues pay for weed and algae treatments. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 21, 2012 LAKE ,MO COUNCIL MINUTES DRAFT Steve DeLapp. 8468 Lake Jane Trl., commented that with watercraft inspections would reduce the odds of contaminating., the lakes. Pat Dean, stated it was an investment, quality of life issue, affects property values and lake habitat. MN may end up performing the inspections (CA and NV have inspection stations) and need a cooperative effort with the City. Roger Johnson, president of Olson/Demontreville, stated their Association will withdraw their application without financial support. MOTION; Council Member Emmons moved to amend the prior MOU077 to provide fir the City to match the SI 300 amount currently paid bi• the Association. Council Member Pearson seconded the motion. Motion failed 3-2 lYith Mayor Johnston, Council Members Smith and Park voting against. Property/Building for Lake Elmo City Administrator Zuleger requested that the City Council consider constructing an offer to purchase certain properties for the purpose of housing a community -sponsored library. He asked that the Council discuss funding and negotiating options for the purchase/lease of a building for use as a Municipal Library during the Closed session, and to focus on four policy issues: Practical affordability for both the Library Board and the City: Short and long-term effects on the City's financial position; the Selected Option Impact on the Library's Board operational functionality; and financial and asset management contingencies based on the success of the Library. Council Members discussed internal finance options, budget staffing time: lock -in price at time of siuling; pay as you go option; internal loan funding; control of asset. Sarah Linder, I 1108 12t1 St., reported that the Library Board has very detailed budget which includes general budget which included contingency funds and reserves. Andy Fields, Oak -Land Junior High School Principal. applauded the efforts of a library and informed the Council that the National Jr. High Society students are available to volunteer hours, stock shelves, and tutor programs. Steve DeLapp, 8468 Lake Jane Trl., apologized for not addressing the lease option for a library and informed Council that SAHS students are currently volunteering, Justin Bloyer, 8881 Jane Rd.. requested the Council to spend money wisely when considering purchasing a building. Kathy Haggard, 12154 Marquess Ln., thanked the Old Village and Planning Commission for their work but has reservations about purchasing; need to consider options to move to a new location as the Old Village t-,,rows: flexible if desire to move: no investment return. MOTION: Council Member E171171017S moved to move to Closed Session, Mayor Johnston seconded the 177011017. The motion passed 5-0. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 21, 2012 4 LAKE ELMO COL. CIL MINUTES DRAFT The City Council recessed the Open Meeting at 9:10 p.m. to a Closed Meeting to discuss real estate negotiations, per State Stat. 13D.05, subd. 3 (3) PRESENT: Mayor Joluiston, Council Members Ernmons, Park. Pearson and Smith. Also Present: Administrator Zuleger, Attorney Snyder, Library Consultant Cummings MOTION: Council Member E171171017S moved to end the Closed meeting at 10:00 p.771. Council Member Park seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. The Council meeting reconvened to Open session at 10:02 p.m. MOTION: Council Member Emmons moved to direct Sta/fr.o construct an offer to purchase 3357 Lake Elmo Avenue North (Clock building) for the pw-pose of housing the Lake Elmo Public Librw:v, Mayor Johnston seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-1: Council Member Smith voting against. The meeting was adjourned at 10:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Carole Luczak, Interim City Clerk Resolution 201.2-005: Approved a Design Variance from Standards for State Aid Operations for Keats Avenue North MSA Street Improvements State Aid Project 206-105-002 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 21. 2 OAYOR & cg UNCIL Comm(iNIc Qty AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: DATE: 3/6/2011 CONSENT ITEM #: MOTION as part of Consent Agenda Approve Disbursements in the Amount of $119,849.9"' Joe Rigdon. Interim Finance Director Dean Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Joan Ziertman, Finance Consultant SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED; As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $119,849.92. 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 he disbursed and paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures. Claim # ACH ACH ACH DD3823 — DD3837 38108-38110 38111-38167 1325-1352 Amount $ 6,239.44 S 1,197.71 S 4,279.25 $ 19,125.77 $ 556.33 $ 86.771.42 $ 1,680.00 TOTAL $ 119,849.92 Description PayrollTaxes to IRS 2/23/2012 PayrollTaxes to MN Dept. of Revenue 2/23/2012 Payroll Retirement to PERA 2/23/2012 Payroll Dated 2/23/2012 (Direct Deposit) Payroll Dated 2/23/2012 (Payroll Paper Checks) Accounts Payable Dated 3/6/2012 Accounts Payable Dated 3/6/2012 (Library Checks) City Council Meeting Approval of Disbursements March 6. 2012 Consent Agenda Item #2 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 S119,849.92. 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 be: "Move to approve the March 6, 2012, Disbursements as Presented /and modified] herein." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Accounts Payable Dated 3/6/2012 SUGGESTED 0 ER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent Aeetida); Questions from Council to Staff.. ....... ...... ......... ............ Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........ ....... ............ ..... Mayor & City Council Discussion ......... ...... .................... ....... . .......... .................. Mayor & City Council Action on Motion ......................................... ..... ......... . ........ Mayor Facilitates page Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List 11scr roan z Printed: 03/01/2017 - 5:09 PM Batch: 002-03-2012 Invoice ft Inc Date ALFAAIR Alex Air Apparatus, Inc 21266 02/20/2012 I 01-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 21266 Total: A L EXA1R Total: Amount Quantity Pun Date Description Reference Task 565.00 0.00 (13/(16/2(112 Service Maim on Breathing air compress 565.00 565,00 Type l'O # Close POLine No 0000 AMDAHL Amdahl Chris 8746 02/07/2012 198.21 0.00 03/06/2012 Rekey Cabinets and change station No 0000 I 01 -420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg combo 8746 'foal: 198.21 AMDAHL Total: 198,21 AMF LAG American Flagpole & Flag Corp 98755 03/01/2012 53,33 0.00 03/06/2012 Replacement Flag at Station t` I No 0000 I (11-420-222(1-44(11(1 Repairs/Maint Bldg 98755 Total: 53,33 AM FLAG Total: 53.33 AM LEGAL AMerican Legal Publishing Corp 85536 03/01/2012 101-410-1910-44300 Miscellaneous 85536 Total: AM LEGA 1_ Total: ARAM Aramark, Inc. 629-7434498 03/01/2012 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 629-743449X Total: 629-74.39399 02/23'20 12 101-430-3100-44 Uniforms 629-7439399 Total: 350.00 0.00 03/06/2012 City Ordinance Internet Renewal 35(100 350.00 No 0000 0.0(1 03/06/2012 UnilOrms No 0000 22.9) 22.91 0.00 03/06/2012 Uniforms No 0000 22.91 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (03/01/12 - 5:09 PM) Page 1 Invoice 0 tit v Date Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type l'O # Close POLine ARAM Total: 45.82 ASP[/NMI Aspen NI ills, Inc. 118214 02/17/20 2 158.95 0.00 03/06/2012 Medic Jackets x 2 No 0000 101-42(1-222(1-44 I 70 Uniforms 118214 Total: 158.95 ASPENM1 Total: 158.95 BATTERY Batteries Plus - MPLD it3 I , Cor 32-745170 02/1512012 35.15 (1.00 03/06/2012 Shop - Misc. Batteries No 0000 101 -4311-3100-42150 Shop Materials 32-74517(1 Total: 35.15 BATTERY Total: 35,15 CARQUEST Car Quest Auto Parts 2055-2494(11 02116/2012 11.45 0.00 03/06/2012 Air Filter 04-2 101-430-31(.1(1-42210 Equipment Parts 2055-249401 Total: 1145 CARQUEST Total: 11.45 COVERALL Coverall of The Twin Cities 7070175694 03/01/2012 101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 7070175694 Total: COVERAI .1. Total: CUMMINGS Cummings Mary Jo 02/29/2012 02/29/2012 706-450-5300-43150 Contract Services 02/29/2012 Total: CUMM1NCiS Total: DAWSON Dawson Craig 02126/2012 02/26/2012 1(11-41(1-132(1-4.331(1 Mileage 02/26/2012 02/26/2012 1(11-410-1940-43210 Telephone 02/26/2012 Total: No 0000 321.38 0.00 03/06/2012 Cleaning City Hall & Annex No 0000 321.38 321.38 1,822.50 (1.00 03/06/2012 40.5 hours Library Consultation No 0000 1,822.50 1,822.50 6.66 0.00 03/06/2012 Mileage 40.00 0.00 03/06/2012 Rcimb cell phone 46.66 No 0000 No 0000 AP - lo Be Ps" Proof (13/(11/12 - 5:09 PM) Page 2 invvice Inv Date Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # egg DAWSON Total: 46,66 DELTA Delta Dental Or Minnesota 4794069 03/0112012 971.85 OM 03/0612012 March 2012 DentalDcn(al Cuverage No 0000 101 -000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance 4794069 Total: 971.85 DELTA Total: 971.85 DITCH WIT Ditch Witch of Mn, P20228 07115/2012 91.22 0.00 03/0612012 Vac Exc Oil No 0000 101-430-3120-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids P20228 Total: 91.22 D1TCHW IT Total: 91.22 FMERGENC Emergency Services Marketing 5181 02/07/2012 101-420-2220-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 5181 Total: EMERGENC Total: EQUINOX Equinox Soltware 2797 03/01/2012 206-450-5300-42000 Office Supplies 2797 -Iota]: 2305 03/0 I i2012 206-450-5300-42000 Office Supplies 28(15 Total: EQUINOX Total: FASTENAL Fastenal N1NOAK1104 0211712012 101-430-3100-47150 Shop Materials M NOAK (11)4 Total: FASTENA "rota,: 49,11 0.00 03/0612012 Annual charge for IAM RESPONDING No 0000 49.11 49.11 3.100.00 0,00 03/0612012 Library - Koh a Software No 00110 3,100,00 70.00 0.00 03;06/2012 Library - Koha Software No 0000 70.00 3,170.00 33.48 0.00 03/0612012 Lock Out Tag Out Plugs 33.48 33.48 FERGUSON Ferguson Waterworks, Inc. 801349808.001 02/14/2012 537.94 01-494-9400-42300 Water Meters & Supplies SO1349808.001 Total: .537.94 0.00 03,06/20 I 2 Cradle for Scanners No 00e No 0000 AP - To Be Paid Proof Li( (03/01/12 - 5:09 PM) Page 3 Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pnit Dale Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine FERGUSON Total: 537.94 FIOR1 LLO Fiorillo Megan 0114;12 02/14/2012 27.51) 0.00 03/06/2012 CC Workshop 2/14/12 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations 02114/12 Total: 77.50 FIORILLO Total: 27.50 FOCUS Focus Engineering.. Inc. 142 & 143 01/0219201 6,483.11 0.00 03/06/2012 General Engineering I 01-410-1930-4303(1 Engineering Services 142 & 143 Total: 6,483.11 144 01/02/9201 450.00 0.00 03/06/2012 General Engineering 101-410-193(1-43113(1 Engineering Services 144 0 I /02/9201 1,092,50 0.00 03/06/2012 General Engineering/V RA 101-420-2400-43030 Engineering 144 01/02/9201 1,867.50 0,00 03/06/2012 General EngineeringiV RA I 01-410-1910-43030 Engineering Services 144 01/02/9201 416.00 0,00 03/06/2012 General Engineering/V RA 404-480-8000-431)30 Engineering Services 144 01/02/9201 202.50 0,00 03/06/2012 General Engineering/V RA 101-430-3100-43030 Engineering Services 144 01/(12/92(11 632.87 0.00 03/0612012 General Engineering/V R A 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 144 01/02/9201 579,00 0.00 03/06/2012 General lingineering/V RA 602-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services 144 01/02/9201 1,264.00 0.00 03/06/2012 General Engineering/V RA 603-496-9500-43030 Engineering Services 144 Total: 6,504,37 145 01/02/9201 3,018,71 0,00 03/06/2012 Demontreville Highlands Feasibility 419-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 145 01/02/9201 489.82 0,00 03/06/20 12 Transportation & Traffic Systems 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 145 01/02/9201 1,342.50 0.00 03/06/20 12 Street Maint 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 145 01/02/920 I 3,353.00 0.00 03/06/2012Municipal Aid 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 145 01102.1920 I 202,50 0,00 03/06/2012 Capitol Improvement Planning 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 145 01/02/920 I 559.98 0,00 03/06/2012 2012 Seal Coat Project 409-480-8000-4303(1 Engineering Services 145 0 I /02;9201 I 12.50 0.00 03/0612012 Wash Cry Demo Trail Reclamation 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services 145 Total: 9,079.01 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No ONO No 000' No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No WOO No 0000 AP - To Be Proof List 013/0111 2 - 5:09 PM) Page 4 !mince # Inv Date 147 01:07/9201 413-480-8000-43030 Engineering Service 147 Total: 148 01102/9201 607-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services 148 Total'. 149 0 1 /02/9201 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 149 Total: 150 01/02/9201 001-494-9400-431130 Engineering Services 150 Total: 151 01/02:9201 60 I-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 15 I Total: 152 (I I/01/970 I 203-490-9070-43030 Engineering Services 152 Total: 153 I r'07/9701 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 153 Total: F()C1.1S Total: FXL FXL, Inc. Feb 12 03/01;201/ 101-410-1320-43100 Assessing Services Feb 12 Total: FXL Total: HAWK Ilawk Labeling Systems 186232 03/01001/ 101-430-3100-42000 Office Supplies I 86232 Total: EA WK Total: IIOLIDAYC Holiday Credit Mice 02/15/2012 02/15/2012 101-420-2220-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids 02/15/2012 otal: HOLIDAYC Total: Amount Quantity Pm( Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # 1,712.64 (400 03106:2012 Village Area Engineering Support No 0000 1,212.64 590,14 0,00 03/06;20 I 2 1(1 Street Infrastructure Planning No 0000 590.14 206.50 0_00 03/06/2(112 Supply Well & Pumphouse 4 No 0000 206.50 1.687.82 0.00 03/06/2012 3 rvl Litigation No 0000 1,687.82 461.44 0.00 03/06/2012 LE Water System Chlorination No 0000 461.44 770,00 0.00 03/06/2012 Sanctuary No OOP' 270.1)0 5,714.79 0.00 03/06/2012 Keats Ave NASA Street & Trunk No (10(1(1 5,714.79 32,209.82 2,000.00 0,00 03/06/2(112 February 2012 No 0000 2,000.00 2,000.00 53.12 0.00 03/06/2012 Labels - No 0000 53,12 53.17 136.00 0.00 03106/2012 Fuel No 0000 136,00 136.00 AP -hi Be Paid Proof' List (03r01/12 - 5:09 PNI1 Page 5 Invoice tt Inv Date INTElkSTA Interstate All Battery Ctr 44931 (12/22/2(112 101-420-2220-42080 EMS Supplies 44931 Total: INTER STA lotal: Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # 155.50 0.00 03/06/2012 Replacement Battery for ALL) No 0000 155.50 155.50 JOHNSON& Johnson & Turner Attorneys Jan 11 02/08/2012 7.288.50 0.00 03/06/2012 Legal Services - Civil No 0000 101-410-1320-43040 Legal Services Jan 11 02/08/2012 812.5(1 0.00 03/06/2012 Legal Services - Development No 001, 203-490-9070-43040 Legal Services Jan II 02/08/2012 4,750.00 0.00 03/0612012 Legal Services - Prosecution No 0000 101-420-2150-43045 Attorney Criminal Jan 11 02/08/2012 130.00 0.00 03/06/2012 Legal Services - Library No 0000 206-450-5300-44300 Miscellaneous Jan 1 I Total: 12,481.00 JOHNSON& Total: 12,481.00 LEA(;MN League of MN Cities 07!I 9/2012 02/13/2012 40.00 0.00 03/06/2012 2011 Regional Meetings No 0000 101-410-132(1-4437(1 Conferences & Training 02/10/2012 Total: 40.00 LEACiMN Total: 40.00 LEIN N Lake Elmo hin 12/3112011 03/01/2012 159,59 0,00 03/06/2012 Administrator Interviews No 00("" I 01-410-1320-44300 Miscellaneous 12/31/2011 03/01/2012 150.49 0.00 113/06/2012 Administrator Interviews No 0000 I 01-410-132(1-4430(.1 Miscellaneous 12/31/2011 03/01/2012 77,58 0.00 03/06/2012 CC Meeting to hire Administrator No 0000 101-410-1320-44300 NI iscellaneous 12/31/2011 Total; 382.66 LEINN 'tooth 382.66 MCCARTHY McCarthy Well Company 24305 02/17/2012 390.110 0.00 03/06/2012 Well 1 & II pump No 0000 601-494-9400-42270 Utility System Maintenance performance/inspections 24305 02/17/2012 200.00 0.00 03/06/2012 Re -pack & Test Well 11 Gland Seal - No 0000 601-494-9400-42270 Utility System Maintenance 24305 Total: 590,00 Al - To Be Pl'" Proof 1 ist 013/01/12 - 5:1)9 PM) Page 6 Invoice it Inv Date :kinount Quantity Pritt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # N1CCARTIIV Total: .590.00 MENARDSC't klenards - Oakdale 58169 03/01;2012 101-110-1940-42230 Building Repair Supplies 58169 Total: 59918 01/15/7012 I 01-410-1940-421 I 0 Cleaning Supplies 59918 Total: 65419 03/0 1./2012 101-430-3125-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 65419 Total: 65663 03/01/2(112 101-430-3100-42150 Shop Materials 65663 Total: 67203 031)1/2012 101-410-194(.1-4223(1 Building Repair Supplies 67203 Total: Credit 03/01/2012 101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg Credit 03/01/2012 101-430-3100-44300 Miscellaneous Credit Total: MENARI)S0 Total: N4 EN ARDST klenards - Stillwater 53422 03/0112012 101-420-2220-440 10 Repairs/Maint Bldg 53422 Total: 54419 09/0212011 101-420-2220-44010 RepairsiMaint Bldg 54419 Total: M EN ARDST Total: 12,46 0.00 03106/2012 Flush Handle Kit No 0000 12,46 I 0.13 0.00 03/06/2012 Trash Bags No 0000 10.13 69.38 0.00 03/06/2012 Plow Paint & Brushes No 0000 69.38 32.70 0,00 03/06/2012 Misc Shop Supplies No 0000 37.70 224.98 0.00 03/06/2(112 City Hall - Furnace Filters 00 224,98 -145.65 0.00 03/06/2012 Credit Memo No 0000 -139,79 0,00 03'06./2012 Credit Memo No MOO -285.44 6421 5.85 0,00 03706/2012 Main( Station # I No 0000 5.85 466.65 ((.00 03/0612012 Upgrades to office Area Station 1 No 0000 466.65 477.5(1 MFRA McCombs Frank Roos Assoc Inc. 7(1041)13 07/7977017 408.96 0.00 03/06/2(112 Correct payment amount 101-410-1910-43150 Contract Services 70040B Total: 408,96 MFRA Total: 408,96 No ONO AP - To Be Paid Proof List (03101;1 2 - 5:09 PM) Page 7 Invoice # Inv Date MND011 MN Department of Health 07/29/7012 02129/2012 00 I -494-9400-43820 Water Utility 02/29/2012 Total: MNDOH 'Fotal: MNFIRECH MN State Fire Chiefs Assn 02/13/2012 02/13/2012 101 -420-2220-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 02/13/2012 Total: MNF1RECH Total: MNLABOR DEPT of LABOR & INDUSTRY 2/17/21)12 02/17(2012 101-420-2400-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 211712012 Total: MNLABOR 'Total: NCPERS 566200-NCPERS MINNESOTA 5662217 02/23/21)12 I 01-000-0000-2 I 708 Other Benefits 5662212 Total: NCPERS Total: Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type l'O # Close POLine # 1,508.00 0.00 03/06/2012 I st Qtr Water Supply connection Fee 1,508,00 1,508.00 No 0000 335,00 0.00 03/06/2012 MSFCA annual Membership for 7 No 0000 Officers 335.00 335.00 90.00 0,00 03/06/201 2 Certification Renewal 90.00 90.00 48,00 0.00 03/06/2012 February 2012 Deductions 48.00 48,00 NEXTEL Nextel Communications 03/01/2012 03/01/2012 212,02 0.00 03106/2012 Cell Phone - Adunin 101-410-1940-43210 Telephone 03/01/2012 03/01/2012 79.71 0.00 03/06/2012 Cell Phone - Fire Dept 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 03/01/2012 03/01/2012 17.83 0.00 03/06/2012 Cell Phone - Build Dept 101-420-2400-4321(1 Telephone (.13/01/2(112 03/01/2012 35.45 0.00 03/06/2012 Cell Phone - PW 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 03/01/2012 03/01/2012 103.38 0.00 03/06/2(112 Cell Phone - Parks Dept HI I -450-5200-432 I Telephone 03/01/2012 Total: 448.39 NEXTEL "fowl: 448.39 NORTI ITOO HSBC Business Solutions 561031627 02/15/2012 I 01-430-3 I 00-42400 Small Tools & Minor Equipment 26.77 0,00 03/06/2012 Admit] - Amber Vehicle Light No 0000 No 0000 No01 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 Al' - To Be P-.1 Proof List 013101;12 - 5:09 PM Page 8 #.nvoice # Inv Date Amount i)uantity Pint Date Description Reference Task TYPe PO # Close POLine II — _ 561031697 'Foto]: 26.77 NOWFTIFOO Total: 26.77 PETTYFIR Petty Cash 02/28i/2012 02/28/201 2 101.95 0,00 03/0612012 Mise Supplies No 0000 101-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous 02.128//2012 1 otal: 101.95 P ETIN F I R Total: 11)1 PITN EYRE Reserve Account Pitney Bowes 02/2912011 0.3/01/2012 500.00 0.00 03/06/2012 Postage No 0000 101-410-1320-43220 Postage 010900 P 03/01/2012 500.00 OM 03/06/2012 Postage No 0000 601-494-9400-43220 Postage (2/29/2012 Total: 1,000.00 PITNEYRE Total: 1,000.00 P1TNEYSU Pitney Bowes Supplies 784996 03/01/2012 131.10 0.00 03/06'2012 Postage Machine Supplies I 01-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 784996 'Total: 131.10 P11 NE\'SI. Fotal 131.10 I'LANT11 PLANT HEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC B176-12 03/0112012 101-A30-3250-43150 Contract Services 1076-12 Total: P1ANIII'Fotal: No 0000 512.50 0,00 03/0612012 Forester Services Jan & Feb 2012 No 1)000 512.50 512.50 POMPS Ponip's Tire Service, Inc. 155807 02/14/2012 816.84 0.00 03/0612012 2 Tires, I Wheel 00-1 1(11-43(1-3123-44(14(1 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 155807 Total: 816.84 POMPS Total 816.84 PR ESSA Anastasia Press 02121/012 02/2)/2012 101-410-1450-43620 Cahlc Operations 02121/2012 Total: 55.00 0.00 03/06/2012 CC Meeting 2/21112 55.00 No 00' No 0000 AP - Fo Be Paid Proof Lis) (113101112 - 5:09 PM) Page 9 Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # 07/78/7012 07/ )8/7017 101-410-1450-43620 Cahle Operations (12/28/20 I 2 Total: PRESSA Total: PROSTAFF PROSTAFF 107-847539 03/01/2012 101-410-1320-41010 Full-time Salaries 102-847539 Total: 102-848291 03/0112012 101-410-1320-41010 Full-time Salaries 102-848291 Total: PROSTAFF Total: 27.50 0.00 03/0612012 Workshop 2/28/12 27.50 82.50 No 00(1(1 585.13 0.00 (13/(16/2(112 Temp Svs WE 2/12/12 No 0000 585.13 581,25 0.00 03/06/2012 Temp Sys WE 2/19/12 58125 1,166.38 No OM_ REGIONS Regions Hospital 769349 02/16/2012 2,434.00 0.00 03/06/2012 EMS Training Contract Renewal, year No (WOO 11)1-420-2220-44370 Conferences & Training 769349 Total: 2,434.00 REGIONS Total: 2,434,00 RELIANC Reliance Standard Life 03/0112012 03/01/2012 119.82 0,00 03/06/2012 Life Insurance No 0000 101-000-(1000-21706 Medical Insurance 03/0 1 /2012 03/01/2012 16,18 0.00 03/06/2012 AD & D Insurance No 0000 101-000-0000-2 I 708 Other Benefits 03/(11/2012 03/01/2012 148.48 0.00 03/06/2012 LTD Insurance No 00("' I (11-000-000)1-21708 Other Benefits 03/(11/2(112 03/0 I/2012 213.33 0.00 03/06/2012 STD Insurance No 0000 101-000-0000-21708 Other Benefits 03/0 I/2012 Total: 497.81 RELIANC Total: 497.81 ROGERS Rogers Printing Services, Corp 18465 02/13/2012 39.54 (1.00 03/06/2012 Business Cards No 0000 101-4 I 0-1320-42000 Office Supplies 18465 Total: 39.54 ROGERS 'Total: 39,54 S&T S&T Office Products, Inc. 01 PA5345 03/01/2012 10 1 -410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 175,75 0.00 03/06/2012 Office Supplies No 0000 Al' - To Be I'p;.1 Proof List (03/)1/12 - 5:09 PM f Page 10 Invoice Inv Date () ) PA5345 Total: 01pa5809 03101/7012 101-410-132042000 Office Supplies Olpa5809 Total: 010A8241 02/15/2(112 11)1-41(1-1320-42000 Office Supplies 01 lA8241 Total: ()IP A9490 03/01/7012 I 0 I -410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 01P119490 Total: 01P B2057 03/01/2012 101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies ()I PB2057 Ch,1011)A6844 03/01/2012 101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies CMOIPA6844 Total: S&T Total: SH I SH I International B00536723 02/15/2012 I 01 -410-1520-43 I 90 Software Programs B00536723 rota!: S HI 'total: Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference 175.75 Task Type PO # Close POLine 100.78 0.00 03/0612012 Office Supplies 100,78 15,99 0.00 03/06/201 2 Office Stipplics 15.99 86.76 0,00 03/06/2012 Office Supplies 86.76 77.34 0.00 03/0612012 Office Supplies 22.34 -56.47 0,00 03/06/2012 Office Supplies -56.42 345.-?0 505,63 0,00 03/06/201 2 Office Standard 2010 DZ & CK Computers 505,63 505.63 SI IORTELL Short Elliot Henderickson, Inc NW6262 03/16/2012 1,668.85 0.00 03/06/2012 Design Services for -Vest Well 114 601 -494-0400-43031) Engineering Services NW6262 Total: 1,668.85 SHORTELL 1,668.85 STILEGAZ Stillwater Gazette 02/16/2012 021 6/7012 101-410-1320-44330 Ducs & Subscriptions 02/16/2012 Total: STILLGA7, Total: STILLMED Stillwater Medical Group 7711 02/07/201 2 101-420-7220-43050 Physicals 2211 TWA 58.50 0,00 03/06/2012 6 IsvIontli Subscription Service 58.50 58,50 324.95 (1.00 03106/2012 Physicals and Vaccinations 324.95 No 0)00 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 00011 No 0000 No ONO No 0000 No 0000 AP - To Be )aid Proof List (0310 1 12 - 5:09 PM ) Page 1 I Invoice # Inv Date • Amount 'Quantity Pint Dale Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine STILLVIED Total: 324,95 SW/WC SW/WC Service Cooperatives 04/01/2012 04101/2(112 I 01-000-0000-2 I 706 Medical Insurance 04/01/2012 Total: Credit 04/01/2012 I 01 -000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance Credit Total: SW/WC Total: fregilgas Michael 02/2712012 02/2712012 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations 02/27/2012 Total: TREGILKIA Total: WAS I ITAX Washington County 71804 02/28/2012 I 01-410-1520-43010 Audit Services 71804 Total: WASHTAX Total: YOCUM Yocum Oil Company, Inc, 208142 02%23/2(112 101 -430-3 100-44010 Repairs/M unit Bldg 208142 Total: YOCUM Total: Report Total: 13,875.00 0,00 03/06/2012 April 2012 Premiums 13,875.00 -1,234.5(1 0,00 03106/2012 Credit K. Mat7ek Premium -1,234.50 12,641).5(1 55.00 0,00 03/06/2012 PZ Meeting 2/27/12 55.00 55.00 35.00 0,00 03/06/2012 Year End Reports for Auditor 35,0(1 35.00 160,69 (1.00 1)3/(16/2012 Bulk Oil Tanks 160.69 160.69 82.5I6A2 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0001, Al - To Be P-- ' Proof List (03/01/12 - 5:09 PM) Page 1 2 Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: joan z Printed: 02/27/2012 Ratch: 009-02-2012 !Invoice 2:44 PM InT Date SPRINGI_A Spring Lake Park FL), Inc. BC-0018 02/24001/ 101-420-2220-44370 Conferences & Training BC-001S 02//4/20 12 101-4/0-7220-44370 ConFerences & Training 13C-0018 02/24/201 2 101-420-2220-44370 Conferences & Training BC-0018 Total: SP R INGLA Total: Amount Otiantity Pnit Date Description Reference 460.00 460,00 460,00 0.00 02-'27/2012 Blue Card Practical & Ccrt S Rutkowski Task 1.380.00 1,380,00 Report 'Total: 1,380.00 0.00 02/27/2012 Blue Card Practical & Cert G. Malmquist 0.00 02/27/2012 Blue Card Practical & Cert B. Winkels MT(' PO # Close POLine # No ((00(1 No 000(1 No Wk. AP - To Be Paid Proof List (02/27/12 - 2:44 PM) !'age 1 Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: Joan z Printed: 02128/2012 - 2:44 PM Batch: 0 I 0-02-20 I 2 Invoice # Inv Date MNDNR MN DNR Eco Waters 1961,1031,201 I 02/28/201 2 601 -494-9400-44 300 Miscellaneous 1961,1031.2011 Total: MNDNR Total: Amount Quantity Punt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine 1,339.00 0.00 02128/2012 Annual Water DNR Permit 1,339.00 1,339.00 Report "Uotal: 1,339.00 No 0000 AP - al'o Be 0-' ' ProolList (02/28112 - 2:44 t'M 1 Page 1 Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: joan z Printed: 03:'0 1 /20 12 - 5:22 PM Batch: 041-12-201 I lnvoice Inv Date Antonia Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine RESCUPAX Resetipax 03/0 I /2012 I 01-420- )220-42400 Small Tools & Equipment 95 Total: RESCUPAX Total: 1.536.00 0,00 03/06/2012 Water -flee Rescue Equipment 1,536.00 1536,00 Report Total: 1,536.00 11' -Fn Re Paid Proof Li5t (03701/12 - 5:22 PM) No 0000 Page 1 MAYOR & UNCIL CO M V CA770 DATE: 3/6/12 CONSENT ITEM #: 3 MOTION: Resolution 2012-007 AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Signatures for the Grant Fund and Regular Savings Account from the Lake Elmo Bank SUBMITTED BY: Joe Rigdon, Interim Finance Director THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleo -r. City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Carole Luczak, Interim City Clerk SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda. the City Council is respectfully requested to approve Resolution 2012-007 authorizing, the Mayor. Acting Mayor, City Administrator and Finance Director as primary and secondary signatures for the Grant Fund and Regular Savings Account on deposit with the Lake Elmo Bank. BACKGROUND INFORMATION,: Current City policy requires two signatures on all Accounts from the Lake Elmo Bank. Please note that the City has no other Grant Fund and Savings Accounts at the Lake Elmo Bank. STAFF REPORT: The City has historically utilized two members from the City Council to authorize Grant Fund and Regular Savings drawn from the Lake Elmo Bank. Staff has reviewed this practice with the Auditor and League of Minnesota Cities Financial personnel and has determined that a policy of utilizing one signature from an elected official and one from an appointed Staff member creates an additional degree of fiduciary -checks and balances" for funds withdrawfrom the bank. RECOMMENDATION,: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2012-007 by undertaking the following action: "Move to approve Resolution No. 2OI2-OO74uIIiorizing the Mayor and City Administrator as Primary Signatures and Acting Mayor and Finance Director as secondary signatures for the Grant Fund and Regular Savings Account 011 deposit with the Lake Elmo Bank. City Council Meeting March 6, 2012 .4 uthori=e Sigma. for Paptlents from the Lake Elmo Bank Consent Agenda Item i46 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2012-007 SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ...... ....... ............ ......... ............ City Administrator Report/Presentation....................................... ........ City Administrator 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 -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-007 A Resolution Authorizing, Signatures for Grant Fund and RegularSavings from the Lake Elmo Bank WHEREAS, on March 6, 2012. the City designated the Lake Elmo Bank as one of the official depository for funds of the City of Lake Ebno; and NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves the following: 1. The Mayor and City Administrator shall be primary signatures on the Grant Fund and Regular Savings Account and order for payments and withdraw funds on deposit with the Lake Elmo Bank, 2. The Deputy Mayor and Finance Director shall be the secondary signatures on all savings and order for payments and withdraw funds on deposits with the Lake Elmo Bank, in the event absence of one of the primary signatures or an urgent special check is required. 3. Current Mayor Dean A. :Johnston, Acting Mayor Brett Emmons, and City Administrator Dean A. Zuleger will serve in these capacities. Facsimile signatures may be used to all sign all checks and orders for payment of money and withdraw funds on deposit with the Lake Elmo Bank. 4. This Resolution shall continue to be in effect until modified by the City Council and express written notice of its rescission or modification has been received and recorded by the Lake Elmo Bank. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elrno City Council this 6th day of March, 7012. Date: March 6, 2012 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston Mayor ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleger City Administrator Resolution No. 2012-007 CERTIFICATION I 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 the 6`h day of March, 2012, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Carole Luczak interim City Clerk (Seal) Resolution No. 20 l ")-007 ,;OLJ CO U C DATE: CONSENT ITEM 4: 4 MOTION / SS Fiscal Impact /ON AGENDA ITEM: 2012 Fee Schedule SUBMITTED BY: Dean A. Zuleger, City .Administrator THROUGH: Carole Luczak. interim City Clerk REVIEWED BY: Dean A. Zuleger. City Administrator 3/6,112 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is respectfully requested to adopt Ordinance No. 08-056, approving the 2012 Fee Schedule. "Move to adopt Ordinance No. 08-056 approving the 2012 Fee Schedule, as presented herein. The Council reserves the right to revisit at a late date certain fees, charges and rates associated with Municipal Enterprise Funds that mayinclude but are not limited to sewer, water, storm water, and related utility functions." FISCAL IMPACT: S196,986 (General Operating wenues) S773,100 (Enterprise Revenues — Water, Sewer, Surface Water) BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City Council annually adopts an Ordinance approving the fee schedule. The fee schedule represents charge for services and are based on the City's time and expenditures for providing designated services. The 2012 fee schedule has no material changes from the previous year and has therefore been placed on the Consent Agenda. However. City Staff, which includes a newly appointed City Administrator and soon to be appointed Finance Director, is still in the analysis phase of determining whether the City's current fee and rate structure is sufficient to provide cash flow to general operations and meet debt service obligations. RECOMMENDATION: it is recommended that the City Council affirmatively consider adopting Ordinance No. 08-056 approving the 2012 fee schedule. The suggested motion is as follows: "Move to adopt Ordinance No. 08-056 approving h 2012 Fee Schedule, as presented herein. The Council reserves the right to revisit at a late date certain fees, charges and rates associated with Municipal Enterprise Funds that may include but are not limited to sewer, water, storm water, and related utility functions." City Council Meeting lablishing Precincts and Palling Places illarch 6, 2012 Consent Item #4 .Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to further discuss. deliberate and amend the proposed schedule, prior to taking action. While tabling this action is not recommended unless the existirw, fee schedule is extended for the time being, if changes are made by the Council. the appropriate action following such changes would be: "Move to adopt Ordinance No. 08-056 approving the 2012 Fee Schedule, as presented (and modified) herein." ATTACHMENTS: 1, Ordinance No, 08-056 2, 2012 Fee Schedule SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS; Introduction of ltem ..... ..... ....... City Administrator Repoli/Presentation ....... ..... ................ ....... City Administrator - 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 ORDINANCE NO. 08-056 AN ORDINANCE SETTING MUNICIPAL FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2012 The Lake Elmo City Council hereby adopts the following fee schedule for calendar year 2012 and directs that it be added to the Lake Elmo Municipal Code as Appendix A. Appendix A — 2012 Fee Schedule ADOPTION DATE: Passed by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of March, 2012. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston Its: Mayor ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleger City Administrator EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall be effective the 6th day of March, 2012. PUBLICATION DATE: Published on the day of , 2012. Appendix A ...t`V 0 Development, Service, Building, Etc. :Accessory Bldg Forward of Primary Stniclure -Administrative / Fines Amateur Radio Antenna ]Appeal (to Board of Adjustment and Appeals) Assessment Search -Building Demolition Hog [(MI Square heet pch Addipomj hmo (ci,i ur Immo') IherhM Pernms Residential mmerciai llieeal burn :Comprehensive Plan Amendment -Conditional Use Permit (CLIP) or arnnoded> CONTRACTOR LICENSE _FEES kx-c,,kvaroT - I and Art = San) Solid \Vasil: 1 1 J011...V TreC COPY SERVICES ,lioAL; t-- (,onnts mitts Cunha> ,a..Mor) I X 11 Cie; NILi-- cob mad, Catt. Street Mato 3(11:,.. 4o GIS Engineering \laps 1.1saiw117 Mani Custom Per Hour raun Han Slam tulat)t Honer than 1 I 'X 17 Dan:doorman Standams Soreilicatum & 00t01! Seaton, 1. 2, 4, to 12, 14 ;eCtiort N.:0.1031S Alta11 tatiortrehemme Ptah Oshoancr ihwki Plat 'Culverts in Developments with Rural Section -Dog LiceMiC ',Service Dogs License tal:ntst wh tatwcant imannyw iassmt msloncluai tanh thsainhons, 1roiwal0C0 t:Ei/g grsi wormunti, lacensM doe foo mpaand, Car It -mound tin -A unnound: Sada:a:quern don„ vat normund Dunhcah !accost mr 'fah Drive‘vtay 11anatita Coronvima Easemem Encroachment lileetronic Fund Withdrawal 7 Bill Payment Excavating and Grading False Alarm 1 to 3 False alarms In excess of 3 up to and including 6 false alarms within a twelve (12) month period ,:den ii:;) (...1,11-111n.roal ake Elmo 20 2012 $80.00 50.01) $875.00 $150,00 523.00 Fee Schedule Escrow or Additional Charge S105.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) 511.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) $45.00 $80.00 $100.00 51,300.00 Nel‘ $1,050.00 Amended 5500.00 575.00 575.00 $75.00 $50.00 $120,00 $70.00 $0.35 $1.00 $0.50 $2.00 53.15 $20.00 $5.00 $70.00 $20.00 555.00 S160.00 512.00 552.00 527.00 $125_00 $12.00 $80.00 5160.00 $20.00 $5.00 560.00 542.00 S42.00 $85 00 $1 00 $70.00 $160,00 510:i0:1 I:e:: elr!Ii1sJ0l,rli i 5125.00 $110.00 $315.00 Wireless Communication Facilities Escrow $6,000.00 Flood Plain Ordinance Escrow $500.00 Sign Reinspection Fee 525.00 Provided electronically or paper Provided electronically or paper Renew on expiration of rabies vaccination Plus Boarding Fee-20.00/Day Plus Boarding Fce-20.00/Dav Plus Boarding Fee-20.00/Dav Plus Boarding Fee-20.00/Dav Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Staff & Recording Fec Erosion Control Bond, Escrow, or Later of Credit: $1500.00 per acre. Page 1 of 4 Appendix A City ofLakc _ 2012 Fee Schedule Development, Service, Building, Etc. In excess of xis false alarrns within a twelve (121 month period Res)dernid (, Fire DaVC;i1, ro Alarte Systum, Firc .,rannkicr vo oni 1$1,(1411011 :"‘Cnrinkie:' Syslern pclthlo -Flood Plain District Delineation Fuel Tauk Removal (Underground) Fuel Tank Install Heating New liy:sylential , (:urnmercmi ,Ncv, \JkilL14 191' =Interim Use Permit (11.3P) interim Use Permit (11JP)-1-tertewal Interim Use Permit (IUP) AG Sales Entertainment Lawn Sprinklers Liquor elot., Lin Nile oxic,ante OI Sol.i 110 ,XICaL11112 Nil- IlNI011[n)- 5)1-1101. 1110,XiCall01-! Orr SA], 111,oic.un :0CI t.111 Sa ie i nye:sr.:gallop. (..ite-Sale Non lito,,acroric C. in ool. Suit,rt, loto»icrung Tenlpor,tr, - WICK' 1,01 Line Adjustment -Manufactured Horne Parks 011 Nleve into 1 .11%, Minor Subdivision Riving !louse or Primary Structure into City Moving Accessory: Structure into City ,New Construction Plan RCN' ieW :Park Dedication (tip w 3 lots) Parking Lots New' Commercial Existing Commercial Pia ning Concept PUD or Ul1 Pr6irrunanr 11121 And licyciovinvm bina.1 Plat ittod Fired 111,111 Plumbing Noy 1Yesb3ential ft•Jailti,,11 „ t...orruncrctai N. Addluon Private Roads [permittLJ one, in V., ',one. ti.trictive Soils and Werh.ind Resturanon Protection and Preservation Permit 2012 Escrow or Additional Charge $185,00 $520.00 S60.00 $60,011 2', of VUILIC ofwurk $50.00 5500.00 $100,00 2'!“, uf value of work $150.00 $75.00 Minimum $175.00 or 11 of total job $1,050.00 5300.00 $250,00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (Sine Mandated) Plus 1% of Value Minimum $100.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Minimum $100.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus minimum 5.00 Surcharge 2011 Only $125,00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) 5100.00 per year $200.00 per year $150.00 per sear 51500.00 per year $750.00 per rear $350.00 $100,00 per year $200.0U per year 525.00 per event $300,00 per tear $310.00 $1,000.00 51,200.00 $100.00 $150,00 $500.00 5520.00 $305.UU Per 1997 UBC (631)1 53600.00 for each Plus 2500,00 Escrow Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated), Plus bond with 1111100114 TO be determined by Lin hireentnnientlanon from Building Official Plus Escrow to be detemthied by the 0, wireetrinmendaiion from I$uiIcbiig Official Four or more lots per Section 400 Formula $175.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) $101/.00 Plus 5.0U Surcharge (State Mandated) $1,250.00 $1,850.00 $1,250.00 Plus Admilirsirative Fee Development Agreement $150.00 Plus 5.011 Surcharge (State Mandated) ,, $75.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus minimum 5.00 Surcharge (State Alariated) 175 $15/.00 Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) $800.00 1501/.00 escrow' Page 2 of 4 Appendix A .tv of Lake Elmo 2012 Fec Schedule Development, Service, Building, Etc Right-of-Way Permits ."-tnnual Kveistr,tuon ;1415.05 I I-115.1 I I 1 .acii tench rev ;inert CUL ivcrticad Insirllair f ct \1', ins r \ 11 rtL.(e Ir. Fier mi 111..isirtictiarit Permit I ..xiensii I klay Penalty ticmaLti.: Disposal On -Site Septic Systems Net; 11 Jr Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) $5,730,00 Sewer 'etland Treatment i II • \ I C1.%.11.011 1:cp.1r -201 Off -Site INlainteriatice Fee Signs Permanent Signs Temporart Signs Temporary Renewal -Site Plan Review (Chapter 520) Special Event Permit -Street Cleaning Erosion Control Pruces-snw 'ree 'Surface Water isiiiii-1(esidoncial (collat.:fetal ay,., cm./ Tennis Courts Vacations (Streets or Easements) Easements Streets -Variance Video Reproduction "met 17.esiderimil ()Liallc:r1v Plus Rale Per 10110 Gallons Gallons 1 Gallon', 11,000 Gallons Gallons 2012 $100.00 $230.00 $40.00 .60 per liwt .60 per fuut $100.00 $100,00 $100.00 25.00 per day $4 311 inn LON galltmc $100.00 $75.00 75.00 per wait per uarter $180.011 575.00 $25.00 $980.00 $75,00 $5,000.00 $50.00 per hour $50.01) $50.01) Per 1997 UPC $515.00 S515.00 $750,01) $35.00 525,00 Utast! :2,14 $2.86 $3.77 $5.00 $6,63 - ()moll:tit rciii $25.011 Base 15,001 - 30,000 Gullinis -30,001 - 50/00 Gallons -50,001 - 80,000 Gallitn6 -80,001+ Gallo us Ari ,,,ontlection lftl.r Il111i1l1lr : Acorunu Disconnect Rcc<1111161 SvrvIc. :CcrvIc4:.11 55.16. St 111 5'I1,i.111, 31) Bulk Water from Hydram $3.11 $3.26 $3.77 $5.00 Escrow or Additional Charge Plus 5,00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) per SAC unit 1.7.30,00 Lu f/lin Council; 3500 to Cr Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State 1Vlanclaied) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) Add! Services $ 50.00/Hour Portal to Portal (-rum City Hall, Minimum: 1 hour 1051 of Contractor's Invoice to City $6.63 5140.00 $300.00 6",, per quarter $80,00 $80.00 515.00 per d.o $61.20 Cur first 3,110() .1 Utility Rare Factor per eode Plus 5.00 Surcharge (State Mandated) $500.00 Escrow $500.00 Escrow Plus 2.500 whichever it, greater, it cenified it, County for eat:cum-1 with taxes Plus 3.26 per additional 1000 Gals Page 3 of 4 Appendix A Development, Scrvici, Building, Etc. t1 1,C1-:11V Lid Water Availability Charge (WAC) 1..!;xm1ng St ructurcs id Old Vili.01( Nov iJCvd01,111C111 Wind Generator Wireless Communication Permit Zoning Amendment Text ur Map) City of Lake no 2012 Fee Schedule Escrowor Additional Charge 2012 $61.20 for first S,OVU gallons $100 it401.1.00 $3,900.1.1l1 $300 00 $1,2-15.00 Plus 3.26 per 1000 Gals & $15,00 per labor hour $2000.00 Escron $2000.00 Escrow Page 4 of 4 TIE cm, LAKE ELMO AGENDA ITEM: Appointment of Finance Director SUBMITTED BY: Dean Zuleger. City Administrator THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: City Council COMMUNiCATION DATE: March 6, 2012 CONSENT ITEM #: 5 MOTION TO AFF1RM SUMMARY AND ACTION tEOUESTED: As part of the Consent Agenda. the City Council is asked to approve the appointment of Cathy Bendel at the Finance Director for the City of Lake Elmo. FISCAL IMPACT $72,000 salary / S21,600 benefits $93,600 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Ms. Bendel was part of a candidate pool of 26 applicants and 5 finalists for the position of Finance Director. Candidates were screened and examined using nine specific rating. categories and one variable category that analyzed specific strengths and weaknesses. The specific categories were: Fund Accounting Experience. Municipal Experience. Practical day-to-day accowning experience (AP. AR, Payroll. et al). Financial Policies/ Debt Service, Financial .Analytical Skills, Budgeting, Audit & Internal Control, Advance Cost Accounting Skills, and Personnel Management. The final category revealed candidate strengths and weaknesses. Ms, Bendel ranked the highest in 5/ 10 categories and her relative strength was in the depth of knowledge in Lake Elmo financial issues and recommendations on garnering immediate savings and establishing discipline in the financial system. Iler overall score was 3 (4%) points higher than the next highest finalist with a range of 6 separating the highest to the lowest, Ms. Bendel has been serving the City of Lake Elmo as a contract consultant (C & 1 Consulting) since December 2010, She has over 26 years of accounting experience. \vih 21 of the years at the Finance Director / Controller level. STAFF REPORT: Ms. Bendel has been tentatively offered the position of Finance Director at a salan, of $70,000 with complimentary benefits offered to all City of Lake Elmo Full Time Equivalent employees. Pending the successful completion of one year of service with specific financial benchmark goals. her compensation will increase to $72.000. Ms, Bendel has been given the immediate tasks of: -- page 1 -- Cii Council MeetinL1j March O. 2012 Consent Ailenda Item 5 1, tmproving Council Financial Reporting 2. Restructuring Current Debt to Maximize Interest Savings 3, Develop Financial Policies in the areas of Investments. Purchase Order Control. Debt Service. and Utility Rates & Fees 4, Cost Analysis of the Storm Water Utility; 5. Cost reduction s efficiency in operations. including Dept. Head Training 6. Software applications & compatibility between the General Ledger & Utilities 7. Hiring an Accounting Assistant 8. Preparation of 2013 Budget and 2013-2017 Capital Improvement Plan in conjunction with the City Administrator The City of Lake Elmo has a contractual obligation with C & J Consulting that requires a 30 day notice of termination. This notice begins on March 18, 2012 which will be the first day of FTE employment for Ms. Bendel, During this time. Ms. Bendel will train for two weeks with Interim Finance Director Joe Rigdon on the higher management duties of the position including but not limited to bank reconciliations, investment management. audit preparation. and debt service management. At this time. Mr. Rigdon's services will no longer be required. Ms. Bendel will also be responsible for the hiring of an accounting assistant to replace Joan Ziertman services (no later April 18. 2012 in response to the City :Administrator's nepotism policy. Ms. Ziertman is the sister of Ms. Bendel and partner in C & .1 Consulting, Until Ms. Ziertman's departure, she will be directly report to the City Administrator. An employment contract will be drafted by the City Attorney pending Council affirmation. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council by tmdertaking, the following action "Move to affirm the appointment of Cathy Bendel as Finance Director of the City of Lake Elmo at an annual salary of S70,000 subject to six-month and twelve month reviews, e • which time an increase to a $72,000 annual salary may be exercise" SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ...... ...... _ ......... ........... City Administrator - Report/Presentation_ ........ _._.....City Administrator 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 — page 2 4AYOR &COUNCIL COVICAT/ON DATE: CONSENT ITEM #: 6 MOTION Resolution AGENDA ITEM,: Reestablishing Precincts and Polling Places SUBMITTED BY: Carole Luczak. interim City Clerk THROUGH: Carole Luczak, interim City C]erk REVIEWED BY: Dean A. Zuleger. City Administrator 3/6/12 2-008 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is respectfully requested to adopt Resolution No. 2012-008. approving Reestablishing Precincts and Polling Places. "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2012-008 approving Reestablishing Precincts and Polling Places." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City Council is required by Minnesota Statutes 204B,14 subdivision 5 to provide a map of precinct boundary changes to the Secretary ofStates Office Elections Division, Precinct boundaries have not changed in the City of Lake Elmo, RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council affirmatively consider adopting Resolution No. 2012-008. approving Reestablishing Precincts and Polling Places. The suggested motion is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2012-008 approving Reestablishing Precincts and Pollinp, Places." ATTACHMENTS; 1, Resolution No. 2012-008 2. Precinct Map SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .................. ...... .............. City Administrator Report/Presentation ...... .......... ....... City Administrator - uestions 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 pac,e 1 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-008 REESTABLISHING PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of Minnesota has been redistricted; and WHEREAS. Minnesota Statute section 204B.1=1, subd, 3 (d) requires that precinct boundaries must be reestablished within 60 days of when the legislature has been redistricted or at least 19 weeks before the state primary election, whichever comes first: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City' Council of the City of Lake Elmo, County of Washington. State of Minnesota. hereby reestablishes the boundaries of the voting precincts and polling places as follows: Precinct 1 (Fire Station 1, 3510 Laverne Avenue North) That part of the City lying South of County Road 51 Precinct 2 (City Hall, 3800 Laverne Avenue North) That part of the City lying North of County Road 5) Attached to this resolution. for illustrative purposes, is a map showing said precincts and the location of each polling place. ADOPTED. by the Lake Elmo City Council this 6th day of March, 2012. Date: March 6, 2017' CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleger City Administrator Resolution No. 2012-008 Dean A. o s on Mayor x`r, z rein g as��r a 12TH LEGEND School Districts MAHTOMEDI AREA N ST PAUL - MAPLEWOOD - OAKDALE STILLWATER AREA Precinct Boundaries Precinct Boundaries THE CITYTh LAKE ELMO M A - AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: c DATE: March 6, 2012 REGULAR ITEM #: #7 RESOLUTION PASSAGE MNDNR Watercraft Inspection Grant Dean Zuleger. City Administrator Dean Zuleger. City Administrator Dean Zuleger, City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: At the February 21. 2012 The City Council voted 4-1 to expend funds as a matchincl, grant for a MNDNR Watercraft inspection to prevent the spread of invasive aquatic species to lakes within the confines of the City of Lake Elmo's boundaries. Lake Elmo's matching grant obligation is $2,000 distributed from the City's undesignated fund balance and will be matched by the Valley Branch Watershed District. The Tri-Lakes improvement Association will contribute S650. The action requested: **Adopt Resolution No. 2012-009 to expend S2,000 from the City's undesignated fund balance as a matching grant to secure a MNDNR Watercraft Inspection Grant to prevent the spread of invasive aquatic species in Lake Elmo lakes. FISCAL IMPACT: S2,000 Fund Disbursement from the undesignated fund balance. BACKGROUND INFORMATION,: The MNDNR Watershed Grant is for a total of $9650 with a cost share breakdown as follows: MNDNR - $5,000: Valley Branch Watershed - $2.000; City of Lake Elmo - $2.000. and the Tri-Lakes improvement District - $650. The rani funds 200 hours of boat landing inspections at Lake Elmo. Lake DeMontre-ville, Lake Olson, and Lake Jane durinLt the summer of 2012. STAFF REPORT: Al the February 21. 2102 City Council meeting staff was directed to determine the appropriate fundinQ, mechanism to execute the grant. The City Administrator spoke with the Park Commission and it the consensus of the whole that Parkland Dedication Funds were not appropriate for this use as they are meant for capital purchases, land acquisition and parkland trail development. After review of the 2012 budget and historical review of similar expenditures. it was determined that the City's Undesignated Fund Balance is the most suitable funding mechanism, The legislative intent and decision -making rationale is contained in the body of the corresponding resolution. page 1 -- City Council Meeting Hurd? 62012 Retzular AE.tenda Item 07 RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report. it is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No, 2012-009 to expend $2,000 as a matching grant for MNDNR Watercraft Inspections to prevent the spread of invasive aquatic species allocated from the LIndesignated Fund Balance of the City ofLake Elmo, See Attached Resolution SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ..... ...... City Administrator ....... ..... City Administrator uestions from Council to Staff ...... ..... ....... Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ...... ....... ........ ........ Ivlayor & City Council Discussion ........ ...... ...... .......... Mayor & City Council Action on 1Vlotion................... ............ ..... Mayor Facilitates -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-009 A RESOLUTION DISPERSING PUBLIC FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING SURFACE WATERS WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO FROM CERTAIN AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES WHEREAS, surface water quality protection contributes to the value of homes located on Lake DeMontreville, Lake Jane, Lake Olson and Lake Elmo and subsequently the cumulative tax base of the City of Lake Elmo: WHEREAS, the same surface waters, via public access, are frequented by resident and non-resident recreational boaters and sportsmen who may not reside on Lake DeMontreville, Lake Jane, Lake Olson and Lake Elmo; WHEREAS, these recreational boaters and sportsmen may inadvertently- and unintentionally transport certain aquatic invasive species, such as zebra mussles, Eurasion milfoil and spiny waterflea. that have attached to their watercraft or reside in bilge water: WHEREAS. the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) has an active Watercraft Inspections Grant program designed to mitigate the spread of aquatic invasive species to inland, freshwater surface waters: WHEREAS, the -Fri-Lakes Improvement Association ta homeowners group made up of residents of lake DeMontreville. Lake Jane and Lake Olson) have applied for a MNDNR Watercraft Inspection Grant totaling $9650/$5,000 MNDNR for the purposes of preventing aquatic invasive species from entering the surface waters within the confines of the City of Lake Elmo via 200 hours of watercraft inspections duringthe summer of 2012: WHEREAS, the MNDNR Li -ant is predicated on the acquisition of matching funds from stakeholder groups such as the 'Fri -Lakes Improvement Association, watershed districts and local municipalities: WHEREAS. the Tri-Lakes Improvement Association has received a commitment for funds equaling $2000 from the Valley Branch Watershed District, as well as a commitment from their own homeowners of $650 to meet the requirements of the MNDNR Watercraft Inspection Grant; WHEREAS. the City of Lake Elmo has a material economic interest in the protection of surface water quality within confines of its statutory boundaries and, has been requested to he matching grant partner for the MNDNR Watercraft inspection Grant in the amount of $2.000. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Lake Elmo grant $2.000 from the undesignated fund balance to be used for the purposes of 200 hours of watercraft inspection at public boat landings located at Lake DeMontreville, Lake Jane. Lake Olson, and Lake Elmo to mitigate the spread of aquatic invasive species: and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of Lake Elmo grant these funds as a partnering match of alre adv pledged funds from the Valley Branch Watershed District ($2000) and the Tri-Lakes Improvement Association ($650): and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED. that the City of Lake Elmo receive a final inspection report from the MNDNR and the Tri-Lakes Improvement Association no later than October 16. 2012 to determine the effectiveness tax dollar use for the prevention of the spreading of aquatic invasive species in Lake Elmo surface water. Date: .2012 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston Mayor ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleger City Administrator CERTIFICATION I. 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 thereto held on the 6'1' day of March. 2012 as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Carole Luczak City Clerk (seal) A YO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: COU CIL CO MUIVICAT 0 DATE: 3/6/12 REGULAR ITEM #: 8 MOTION LUTION 2012-010] Lot Area (Size) and Width Variances — 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator Planning Commission Nick Johnson, Interim City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a request from Steven Weber, 12729 22nd Street North, West Lakeland. MN to allow the subdivision of a 5.11-acre lot at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. One of the newly created lots would contain an existing home, while a new buildable lot would be created on the northerly portion of the site. A variance has been requested from the minimum lot size requirement of 10 acres in a RR — Rural Residential zoning district and the minimum width requirement of 300 feet for lots in this district (the proposed lot widths would be 195 and 95 feet respectfully). The applicant has previously requested a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment on the same property, but has withdrawn that request in favor of the current variance application. The public nearing on the variance application was opened at the February 13. 2012 Planning Commission meeting, and was continued until February 27, 2012 because the applicant was not able to attend on the prior meeting date. The Planting Commission recommended denial of the variance request based on the draft findings prepared by Staff The recommended motion to act on this on this request is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2012-010 denying a request br Steven Weber for variances to allow the subdivision of a 5.11-acre lot at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size" BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached Planning Commission report includes a detailed review of the application along with the original Staff recommendation to the Commission. Should the Council support the Planning Commission recommendation. the attached resolution reflects the findings that were adopted by the Commission. if the Council decides to approve the variance, it will need to work with staff to develop findings of fact that pag City Council MeetinE,, 3/6/12 Regular Agenda Item # 8 Lot Sipe and Kith Variances — 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue are supportive of this decision. Staff has suggested how such findings could be constructed under the alternate actions presented below. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The Planning Commission reviewed the variance requests at its February 13th and 27th meetings, and conducted a public hearing on this matter over the course of these two meetings. At the prior hearing, the Commission received public testimony from one neighboring property owner against the granting of the variance and noted receipt of a letter from another adjoining property owner opposed to the variance requests. At the latter meeting, the Commission heard testimony as follows: Eileen Bergman (5500 Lake Elmo Avenue) reviewed the history of the surrounding land. and restated her opposition to the proposed variances and lot split. She expressed concern over setting precedent for other rural property owners to subdivide their land. James DeLaplain, Attorney at Law, representing the applicant, indicted that all of the surrounding lots are consistent with the lots that would be created through the variance. He disagreed with the draft findings prepared by Staff, and expressed concern that the standards in the code had not properly been applied in this situation. noting: o That the shape of the lot is much more important to deter -nine unique circumstances than lot size. o That the proposed lots would not be any different than surrounding parcels, many of which are actually smaller. o That the "adjacent properties and traffic" finding in the staff report does not address the issue of congestion, which is the term referenced in City Code, Steven Weber discussed the history of his family's ownership of the parcel, and noted that the character of the surrounding land is not rural. 1-le discussed future plans for a frontage road in the area, and explained that he would look at other options for the driveway access if needed. The Commission generally discussed the proposed variances, and offered the following comments in support of the staff recommendation: Not being able to subdivide a lot further than allowed under the zoning regulations does not represent a practical difficulty. it was noted that the lot was created under a 5-acre minimum standard, and could have been subdivided into two 2.5-acre lots if that had been the requirement at the time. The lot was created by the landowner. and therefore any proposed hardship due to the shape of the lot would have been created by the property owner. The proposed variances would take an existing non -conforming lot and create two non- conforming lots. neither of which would come close to otherwise being considered a buildable lot under the Zoning Ordinance. page 2 -- City Council Meeting Lot Size and Width Variances — 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue 3/6/12 Regular Agenda Item # 8 The Commission recommended denial of the variance requests, and suggested that Staff revise the first finding to better reflect that the Planning Commission does not consider the creation of a new 2.5-acre parcel within a 10-acre zoning district to be a reasonable use of the property. It was noted that the configuration of the lot does not have any relationship to this first finding because the split of anv 5-acre lot in the Rural Residential District would be considered unreasonable. The Planning Commission vote on the recommendation was unanimous, with one abstention. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information. staff report and Planning Commission recommendation, it is recommended that the City Council deny the request from Steven Weber, 12729 22nd Street North, West Lakeland. MN to allow the subdivision of a 5.11-acre lot at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2,27 and 2.84 acres in size by undertaking the following action "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2012-010 denying a request by Steven Weber for variances to allow the subdivision of a 5.11-acre lot at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size" Alternatively. the City Council may consider the other actions that were suggested as part of the Planning Commission report, which includes the following: A. Recommend approval of the variance request, and developing appropriate findings of fact to support this action. These findings would need to address the following: That the inability to subdivide the property will cause practical difficulties for the property owner, and that the proposed subdivision is a reasonable use of the property. 7. That the plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to the property. and specifically that the odd shape of the lot and the disconnected area of the parcel make it difficult to use. 3. That the variance will not alter the essentially character of the locality, and that the surrounding properties are similar in size. shape, density, and usage. Furthermore. the surrounding land is comprised of smaller residential lots and commercial activity and is not rural in character. 4. That the proposed variance will not negatively impact the adjacent properties and traffic in the area. B. Table taking action on the variance in order to request additional information from either staff or the applicants. C. Direct Staff to consider the request as part of a broader Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Map amend-ment that would look at a change to the entire area, and in particular. the other non-conformine lots that were created in this area before the Citys1979 City Council Meeting Loi Size and Width Variances — 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue 3/6/12 Rear Agenda Item # 8 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. This action does not appear to be supported by the City Council based on its discussions concerning the applicant's previous request. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2012-010 2. Planning Commission Staff Report (2/27/12 Meeting) 3. Application Form 4. Legal Description 5. Application Narrative 6. Proposed Lot Split Drawing 7. Location Map 8. Septic Site Evaluation Report 9. Washington County Comments 10. Aerial Photograph 11, Lake Elmo Access Analysis Map 12. Letter from Mike and Mary Jo Neuman 13. City Engineer Review Letter 14. League of MN Cities Variance FAQ Sheet SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item............. ..... .............. ....... ............ ....City Administrator Report/Presentation ................ ..... ...... ........ .......... Planning Director Questions from Council to Staff... .............. Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate ....... ..... ..... Facilitates Call for Motion .......... .................... ..... ..Mayor & City Council Discussion ..... ..... ........ ...... ........ ......Mayor & City Council Action on Motion ....... ................... ...... .............,...... ..... .......Mayor Facilitates -- pa, CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-010 .4 RESOLUTION DENYING LOT AREA AND WIDTH fARLANCES TO ALLO W A MIWOR SUBDI VSIONAT 5577 LAKE ELMO AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Steven Weber, 12729 2.2nd Street North. West Lakeland. MN (the "Applicant") has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the "City") for variances to the minimum lot size and lot width requirements for a Rural Residential Zoning District to allow the subdivision of a 5.11-acre parcel at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size; 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 February 13, 2012 and continued this hearing until its February 27. 2012 meeting: and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation to the City Council as part of a Staff Memorandum dated March 6. 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered said matter at its March 6. 2012 meeting. NOW. THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received_ the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the procedures for obtaining said Variance 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. ) That the proposed variances are to allow the subdivision of property at 5577 Lake 'Elmo Avenue into two separate ]ots that do not meet the minimum requirements of the RR — Rural Residential zoning district, and include the following components: a) Variances from the minimum lot size requirement of 10 acres in a RR — Rural Residential zoning district in order to create two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. b) Variances from the minimum lot width requirement of 300 feet in a RR — Rural Residential zoning district in order to create two new lots that are 1.95 and 95 feet in width. 4) That the Variance will be located on property legally described as follows: All that part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1, Township 29 North. Range 21 West, Washington County. Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4; thence North 01 degrees 31 minutes 43 seconds West (recorded as N 00 degrees 00' 46" W) along the West line of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, a distance of 334.70 feet to the North line of the South 334.70 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4. and the point of beginning, of this description; thence continuing North 01 degrees 31 minutes 43 seconds West (recorded as N 00 degrees 00' 46" W) a distance of 494.71 feet: thence North 87 deees 32 minutes 27 seconds East (recorded as N 89 degrees 03' 24" E) a distance of 618.20 feet to the West line of the East 695.22 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4: thence South 01 degrees 19 minutes 29 second East, along said West line of the East 695.22 feet. a distance of 502.85 feet to the North line of the South 334.70 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1./4, thence South 88 deuees 17 minutes 37 seconds West, along said North line of the South 334.70 feet, a distance of 616.33 feet to the point of beginning, together with an easement for roadway purposes over and across the North 60.00 feet of the South 334.70 feet which lies West of the East 695.22 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, excepting therefrom the North 209.00 feet of the South 639.40 feet of the West 417.42 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest More commonly known as 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue. 5 That the strict enforcement of Zoning Ordinance would no cause practical difficulties and that the property owner does not propose to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Specific findings: a) That the subdivision of an existing 5-acre parcel into two smaller parcels in a zoning district that requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres is not a reasonable use of the property. b) That the proposed subdivision is not reasonable because the property as it exists can be used for a single family residential home. Reasonable use of the property already exists, and the variance is tiot needed in order to make use of the parcel under the Rural Residential zoning district requirements. The current configuration of the lot is not relevant to the establishment of reasonable use because the lot would not have been usable for a single family home without this additional area. 6) That the plight of the landowner is not due to circumstances unique to the property nd was created by the landowner. Specific findings: a) That the applicant's property is not unique because the property is able to support a single.family home, and because a large majority of parcels outside of Open Space Preservation developments in the Rural Residential zoning district are larger than the lot owned by the applicant. The ability to .find a suitable use for the areas outside of the immediate building location is not something that is unique to the applicant's site since the intent of the Rural Residential district is to promote the preservation of open space and rural character, and therefore, the uses and densities allowed in the district are intentionally limited b) That the proposed lot was created by the land owner and met the minimum lot size requirements when it was subdivided. The land owner was able to build on the lot and has been able to use the property as a single family residential lot for over .30 years. 7) That the proposed variance jjj willalter the essential character of the cality in which the property in question is located. Specific findings: a) That the applicant's property is located in a portion of the City that is guided for Rural Agricultural Density (RAD) development, which corresponds to the City's RR - Rural Residential Zoning District. This district requires a minimum lot size 0.10 acres, and the applicant's request to create two lots of under 2.5 acres in size represents a substantial departure from the district requirements. Although there are existing non -conforming lots in the vicinity of the applicant's property, the continued subdivision of lots less than 10 acres will continue to alter the character of the area and create a denser, more urban environment in an area that is not intended to be served by municipal water or sewer services. 8) That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply oflight and air to property adjacent to the property in question but will substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the nei2hborhood. Specific findings: a) That the proposed variance will have a negative effect on adjacent properties and traffic because the proposed driveway to serve the new home would not comply with the Cirr's access management policies and guidelines. In particular, new driveway accesses are discouraged along streets classified as Minor Arterials (such as Lake Elmo ,4 venue) at the traffic levels that are .forecast for this road. The proposed driveway would also fail to comply with the City's use ofbest management practices for spacing guidelines. which include: minimizing new access locations and reducing/consolidating existing access points, protecting and improving intersection ,functional and sight distance areas, and proper design of driveways and intersections. The creation ofa new driveway/lot will create a safety concern and add to congestion on Lake Elmo Avenue by adding an access point to Lake Elmo .9venue in a location that has reduced visibility dues to an incline in the roadway. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing. the Applicantsapplication for a Varianceis denied. Passed and duly adopted this 6th day of March 2012 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo. Minnesota. Dean A. Johnston, Mavor ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleter. City Administrator To: Fr0177: Meeting Date: Applicant: 011)71er Location: Zoning: City of Lake Elmo Planning Department Variance Review Planning Commission Kyle Klatt, Planning. Director 2/27/12 Steven Weber Steven Weber 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue RR — Rural Residential Introductory Information Application The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request by Steven Weber, Summary: 12729 22nd Street North, West Lakeland, for variances to allow the subdivision of a 5.11 acres lot at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. The applicant is seeking to create a new buildable lot while retaining the existing single family residence located at this address, The specific variances that have been requested are as follows: • A variance from the minimum lot size requirement of 10 acres in a RR — Rural Residential zoning. district. The proposed lots would be 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. • A variance from the minimum width requirement of 300 feet for lots in this district. The proposed lots would be 195 feet and 95 feet in width. which are 105 and 205 feet narrower than allowed in an RR zoning district. The applicant has previously requested a Zoning Map and Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would have allowed the proposed lot split without variances. but decided to withdraw this application after the Planning Commission had completed its review and forwarded its recommendation to the City Council. The review requirements for consideration of a variance are different than those for zoning amendments, and the Planning Commission should keep this in mind while considering the present application. Staff has included the relevant backuound information from the Commission's previous review in this report. but updated the analysis section to reflect the specific aspects of the variance request and subsequent findings that must be considered. Should the requested variances be approved for the subject property, the applicant would then be able to apply for a Minor Subdivision to officially split the property into two parcels. Property The applicant's property is located along Lake Elmo Avenue approximately one-third Information of a mile south of Highway 36. The property was split from an adjoining parcel to the and Site west owned by the Bergmann family in 1978, and at the time the City Zoning Background: regulations allowed for a minimum lot size of 5 acres. In looking back through the City records for this parcel, it appears that the request was intended to allow the subdivision of the portion of the property that was not suitable for agricultural purposes to be split off from a larger farm site to create a new residential lot. The current boundaries of the applicant's parcel were therefore the result of the original owner's intent to keep any tillable acreage as part of the larger farm operation. as well as to meet the minimum lot area requirement of 5 acres. The result was the "U" or "C" shaped parcel that is presently owned by Mr, Weber. who inherited the propeny from his father (who originally purchased the land when it was subdivided). As part of the City's approval of the subdivision. the Bergmann's were required to grant easements to the City over a 60-foot wide segrnent that is located immediately to the south of the applicant's property, and to further allow the newly subdivided parcel to use this strip ofland as its access to Lake Elmo Avenue. The easement agreement that is of record in the City files provides for an emergency vehicle access. installation and maintenance of public utilities, and the provision of public service, but does not otherwise appear to grant any rights of the public to use the property for access purposes. The agreement does provide for an option by the City to acquire this land if it is needed for a public street in the future, but otherwise only describes the potential for a private roadway to he built on this strip of land (not a public road), Shortly after the subdivision was approved, the applicant's father applied for a building permit and constructed the house that is on the site today. This house is located on the southern leg of the "C" shape, about 45 feet back from the Lake Elmo Avenue right-of-way, and centered in the middle of the 96-foot wide segment. The driveway providing access to the house does cross into the 60-foot wide segment still owned by the Bergmann's. Staff is not aware of any private easements that exist for such access, and would consider this a private matter between the two affected property owners. There are three other single family homes in close proximity to the applicant's property, and all of these are very close to one acre in size. In addition to the residential lots, there are two other parcels of one acre in size that do not have any buildings on them, one of which is owned by the neighboring property owner and the other of which was retained by the Bergmann family. All of these lots were split at a time then the City's (or township) zoning regulations allowed for the creation of these smaller lots. In 1977. the City of Lake Elmo adopted a zoning ordinance that closely followed the township zoning requirements, allowing, for 5-acre lots in rural areas. hut revised this code in 1979 in conjunction with the adoption of a Comprehensive Plan that changed the standards for rural development areas. The code after 1979 required a minimum lot size of 10 acres in rural areas, which is the standard that is still in place today. Applicable Section 150.017 Variances. Codes: (A-1) Variances. identifies procedures and requirements for the processing and review of a -variance application. Please note that this section was recently updated by the City to comply with revisions to Minnesota State Statutes, Section 154.036 RR — Rural Residential Outlines the general requirements for the RR Rural Residential Zoning District in Lake Elmo, and includes the following minimum requirements: Lot Size: Nominal 10 acres. A 10-acre parcel not reduced by more than 10% and/or a 10-acre parcel located on a comer or abutting a street on 2 sides not reduced by more than 15% due to road right-of-way and survey variations Lot Width: 300 feet Septic Drainfield Regulations: All lots must have at least 1 acre of land suitable for septic drainfields and area sufficient for 2 separate and distinct drainfield sites. Placement of the second required drainfield 'between the trenches of the first drainfield is prohibited. Findings & General Site Overview Site Data: Lot Si:c: I A cres Existing Uses: Single Family Residence Existing Zoning: RR — Rural Residential Future Land Use: RAD — Rural Agricultural Density ProperoIdentification Number (PID): 01-029-21-23-0001 Variance Review: rariance As part of the report concerning a previous zoning request on the applicants property. Analysis: Staff provided the Planning Commission with information concerning the future land use designation of this site. It was noted that this site is located in a portion of the City that is guided for RAD — Rural Agricultural Density. which represents the bulk of the rural development areas within the City. With the current application, Mr, Weber is not requesting any changes to either the future land use or the zoning classification for the property. and has instead requested a variance from the current zoning requirements for a RR — Rural Residential Zoning District. The RR — Rural Residential Zoning district specifies a minimum lot size of 10 acres and a minimum lot width of 300 feet, and the proposed variance would allow two lots to he created that fall well under both of these requirements. The existing lot is considered a legal non -conforming lot since it was created prior to the adoption of the current standards, and splitting it into two separate parcels would not be allowed without a variance. In this case. the resulting lots would be 7.73 and 7.16 acres smaller than required in the RR zoning district. Moreover, the resulting lot widths would also fall 105 and 205 feet shorter than required. The criteria for consideration of a variance is found in the Zoning Ordinance, which includes the following provision: A request for a variance from the literal provisions of this chapter may be granted in instances where their 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 be in keeping, with the spirit and intent of this chapter. All requests for variances shall be reviewed in accordance with the required findings listed [below . A more detailed analysis of the variance findings form Staff is included a little later in this report. The applicant has provided a narrative (attached) describing their request. which includes the following general corrunents: The proposed usage if the variance were granted would be consistent with the surrounding lot sizes. shapes. density, and usage. • The existing parcel is very odd in its shape. • The existing configuration of the parcel is inconsistent with the sun-ounding_ lot sizes. shapes. density. and usage. • The proposed densities would be consistent with the surrounding land use and would not alter the character of the locality. • The proposed land use and zoning would be in substantial conformity with the policies goals. and standards of the Comprehensive Plan. • The soil has been perk tested and the size of the proposed parcels and soil rvpe allow for a suitable septic system. • The proposed variance would have no impact on an adequate supply °flight and air to adjacent properties. • The proposed use under a variance would ot substantially increase the congestion of public streets. • The proposed use under the variance would do nothing to diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood All of the other information that has been submitted is either the same or substantially similar to the materials submitted as part of the previous request. Staff Review In reviewing the present request for a variance. Staff would like to note that most of Comments the general comments that were provided during the Commission's previous review are relevant as well. In particular Staff is concerned that the proposed variance would allow and augment a pattern of development that is contrary to the purpose and intent of the City's Rural Residential zoning requirements. In addition, the creation of smaller lots within rural areas presents numerous planning issues related to traffic. safety, provision of future services. and maintaining the character or rural areas, Staff has &so found that the proposed request also does not meet the four criteria that must be met in order for the City to grant a variance. In particular, the applicant's lot was created to meet the minimum district requirements at the time, and the inability to further subdivide the lot does not constitute "practical difficulties". It is not reasonable to allow a subdivision that would otherwise not be permitted on a piece of property that already is five acres smaller than allowed in the underlying zoning district. Staff also does not support the argument that the property is unusable and therefore the City must allow the property to be split. A person's definition of usability can vary substantially from one individual to another, and there are many properties in the City's rural developmentareas that are larger parcels with large areas that have limited use options (which can be seen as an intentional restriction to help preserve rural areas). The shape of the property clearly is unusual for Lake Elmo, but was created and eventually purchased in this configuration with the clear understanding that only one house could be built on the property. The City Engineer has submitted review comments for consideration by the Planning Commission, and has augmented his previous review by noting additional concerns regarding the location of the driveway and the current and future traffic levels along, Lake Elmo Avenue. Lake Elmo Avenue is classified as a Minor Aerial (A) roadway in the City's Comprehensive Plan. and this designation is defined as follows: "Minor arterials also emphasize mobility over property access and connect cities with adjacent communities and the metropolitan highway system. "A" minor arterials are roadways that are of regional importance because they relieve, expand. or complement the principal arterial system." This designation specifically notes that mobility be given emphasis over access along these streets, and in this case. the creation of an additional driveway access to Lake Elmo Avenue would not be consistent with the roadway classification. Please also note the existing and future traffic counts that are included in the Engineer's report. Traffic levels along Lake Elmo Avenue are forecast to increase nearly four times beyond the current amount, and the continued operation of individual driveway accesses along this road segment will present serious safety concerns in the future. Although the County has stated that it will issue a permit for the new driveway, if requested. the County does rely in local jurisdictions to regulate access in accordance with their respective plans since it does not have land use authority over a city like Lake Elmo. Other comments from Staff pertaining to the variance request, some of which were also applicable to the previous request. are as follows: The subdivision of lots less than 10 acres in size that are not otherwise part of an OP development is not consistent with the City's goal of preserving it rural character. The 10-acre minimum lot size in rural areas has been in place for over 30 years, with the RED zoning representing the only development allowed before the Open Space zoning regulations were adopted by the City in the mid 1990's. • Lots less than five acres in size are not as efficient to serve with public services as lots that are planned and developed as part of a broader subdivision. Some of the surrounding properties have been. developed as an OP subdivision. which included plans for providing water and sanitary sewer services. roads, and other utilities. • Adding another access to Lake Elmo Avenue is not recommended by the City Engineer, and could present problems for managing traffic in the future. Although the County would issue a new driveway permit for a lot along Lake Elmo Avenue, it is up to the City to plan for its future access needs and to ensure that the overall transportation network is planned in an efficient and safe manner. Considering current traffic levels. and with the increases projected in the Comprehensive Plan for Lake Elmo Avenue, individual driveways will not be a safe option for new homes. • The applicant is not losing any rights to use his property in the way it was initially approved by the City, and the lot is already much smaller than would be allowed for a single family home on a separate parcel in this portion ofthe City (except for OP development lots). • There have been no changes to the City since the applicant's lot was originally subdivided that would warrant a consideration of a request to further subdivide this lot. For example, the City has not implemented any transportation improvements near the applicant's property that would provide for more efficient and safe access to this portion of the City. The City Engineer has provided the Planning Commission with a recommendation to deny the applicant's request along with information to support this recommendation. • The proposed driveway to serve the new lot would be located along an incline along Lake Elmo Avenue, which would reduce the visibility for vehicles entering and exiting the site and for vehicles that would be stopped and waiting for turn into the property. • The City's access spacing standard for the distance between local streets on a Minor Arterial road is t4 mile. and as traffic increases on Lake Elmo Avenue in the future (once the counts exceed 7,500 average daily trips). no direct access for residential driveways is recommended. The attached access analysis map depicts all of the present driveway and road connections to Lake Elmo Avenue. which shows 12 existing (and the one proposed) road/driveway accesses over a distance that would support one such connection point under the City's guidelines. • Staff does not support the creation of any new access points along Lake Elmo Avenue unless some of the existinc, driveways could be consolidated into one new public roadway. For the reasons noted above. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the variance request. and is proposing findings to support this action in the section that follows. ariance Criteria: An applicant must establish and demonstrate compliance with the variance criteria set forth in Lake Elmo City Code Section 154.017 before an exception or modification to city code requirements can be Li -ranted. These criteria are listed below. along with comments from Staff regarding applicability of these criteria to the applicants request. Practical Difficulties% A variance to the provision ofthis chapter may he 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 wider consideration and 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 011,12Cr proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted byan official control. The language concerning "practical difficulties" is the first standard that must be met in order for the City to consider granting a variance. Under this standard. the Planning Commission would need to find that the subdivision of an existing non- conforming lot is a reasonable use of the property not otherwise permitted under the zoning ordinance. The appropriate findings for this standard would therefore need to note the subdivision is a reasonable request within a Rural Residential zoning district. Using this standard as a basis. Staff is suggesting that the Planning Commission consider the following: FINDINGS: That the proposed subdivision is not reasonable because the property as it exists can be used for a single family residential home. Reasonable use of the property already exists. and the variance is not needed in order to make use of the parcel under the Rural Residential zoning district requirements. The current configuration of the lot is not relevant to the establishment of reasonable use because the lot would not have been usable for a single family home without this additional area, 2. Unique Circumstances. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. In order to demonstrate compliance with this standard, the Planning Commission would need to note those aspects of the applicant's property that would not pertain to other properties within the same zoning classification. In this case, all Rural Residential property is subject to the same area and width requirements, and the cun-ent lot presently does not meet these standards. Again, Staff is suggesting some findings that could be considered by the Planning Commission as follows: FINDINGS: That the applicant's property is not unique because the property is able to support a single family home. and the vast majority of parcels in the Rural Residential zoning district are required to have a larger area than that owned by the applicant. The ability to find a suitable use for the areas outside of the immediate building location is not something that is unique to the applicant's site since the intent of the Rural Residential district is to promote the preservation of open space and rural character, and therefore, the uses and densities allowed in the district are intentionally limited. 3. Character of locality. The proposed variance yill not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. The subdivision of rural residential lots, by definition, changes the character of the City's rural areas by introducing higher densities into areas that have not been planned for more intensive uses. A more formal set of findings related to this standard is suggested as follows: FINDINGS: That the proposed variance ffl alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is iocated, The applicant's property is located in a portion of the City that is guided for Rural Agricultural Density (RAD) development, which corresponds to the City's Rural Residential Zoning District. This district requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres, and the applicant's request to create two lots of under 2.5 acres in size represents a substantial departure from the district requirements. Although there are existing non- conforming lots in the vicinity of the applicant's property, the continued subdivision of lots less than 10 acres will continue to alter the character of the area and create a denser, more urban environment in an area that is not intended to be served by municipal water, sewer services. 4. .44jacent properties and traffic. The proposed variance will 1701 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. A large part of the Staff report above is devoted to transportation and access issues, and based partially on comments from the City Engineer. Staff is suggesting the following findings pertaining to this criterion: FINDINGS: The proposed variance will have a negative effect on adjacent properties and traffic because the proposed driveway to serve the new home would not comply with the City's access management policies and guidelines. in particular. new driveway accesses are discouraged along streets classified as Minor Arterials (such as Lake Elmo Avenue) at the traffic levels that are forecast for this road, The proposed driveway would also fail to comply with the City's use of best management practices for spacing guidelines. which include: minimizing new access locations and reducing/consolidating, existing access points. protecting and improving intersection functional and sight distance areas, and proper design of driveways and intersections. The creation of a new driveway/lot will create a safety concern by adding an access point to Lake Elmo Avenue in a location that has reduced visibility dues to an incline in the roadway. Considering the potential findings of fact as suggested in the preceding section, Staff is recommending denial of the variance request based on the findings noted in items 1- 4 above. Conclusion: Based on the report and analysis provided above. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request by Steven Weber for va-riances to allow the subdivision of a 5.11 acres lot at 5577 'Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. Additional Valley Branch Watershed District did not submit any comments specific to the hzformatiozz: applicant's variance request, but did note that a Minor Subdivision would require a permit from the watershed district. The City Engineer's comments are included as part of the attached mernorand Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request by Steven Weber for variances to allow the subdivision of a 5.11 acres lot at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue into two new lots of 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. Commission The Planning Commission should consider the following options with this request: Options: A) Recommend approval of the variance request, and developing appropriate findings of fact to support this action. B) Table taking action on the variance in order to request additional information from either staff or the applicants. C) Direct Staff to consider the request as part of a broader Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Map amendment that would look at a change to the entire area, and in particular, the other non -conforming lots that were created in this area before the City' s1979 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. This action does not appear to be supported by the City Council based on its discussions concerning the applicant's previous request. cc: Steven Weber, 12729 22 Street North. West Lakeland, MN APPLICANT: TELEPHONES: FEE OWNER: TELEPHONES: City of Lake Elmo DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM 7 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning District Amendment Text Amendment I_ Flood Plain C.L;.P, Conditional Use Permit Tariance * (See below) Minor Subdivision 0 Lot Line Adjustment 0 Residential Subdivision Sketch/Concept Plan 0 Conditional Use Permit (C,LI.P.) 0 Site & Building Plan Review S-reataf,. Jo L., v. u1-ew, ra,72.9 ").4 5 r (Name) (Mailing Address) (651) 337— 05-41/ (?5" )171 W6, Z (a-) GI 9-6 (Home) (Work) (Mobile) SCt. Me o ct,(13 (Name) (Mailing Address) SCC, Prue ci-bov-e. (Home) (VVork) (Mobile) PROPERTY LOCATION (Address and Complete (Long) Legal Descripti Fee S 0 Residential Subdivision Preliminary/Final Plat 0 01 - )0 Lots 0 11 - 20 Lots 0 21 Lots or More 0 Excavating & Grading Perrin 0 Appeal 0 put) Li) ce 5+Le44Jpw 3-577 I (Zip) Z) 76 7— 3/s 73 (Fax) $5-7 Lct, Ed witr- A- tAe..n v•e_ I inci ©E .02-9, 2-1 . z.3 CIO e4 al ckAz7-.5G r ; p rA.." Lax-- A. DETAILED REASON FOR REQUEST: .5ee Sc3,tatA-e_ (Fax) (Zip) *VARIANCE REQUESTS: As outlined in Section 301,060 C. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. the Applicant must demonstrate a hardship before a variance can be granted. The hardship related to this application is as follows: 5-c-k1i In signingthis application. 1 hereby acknowledge that 1 have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. 1 further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in thc armlicatiopyirocedures and hereby agree to Day all statements received from the Citv pertaining to additional apnlicatkrr'e-xhensp,-) Signature of Applicant D te Sianature of Applicant Date l'21,-)01%4 Ciry of L.35::: Limo • 75(W Laverne Averorz North • Lai t• Elmo • 5.5042 • 651-777-5511. • Fax n51-777-Cin Schedule "A" Legal Description All that f the Southwst 1/A of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1, Township 2.9 North Ranoe 21 West, WashingtonCounty, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4; thence North 01 degrees :3] minutes 43 seconds West (recorded as N 00 degrees 00' 46" W) along the West line of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, a distance of 334.70 feet to the North line of the South 334.70 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, and the point of )eginnino of this description; thence continuing North 01 degrees 31 minutes 43 seconds West recorded as N 00 degrees 00W),, a distance of 494.71 feet; thence North 57 ...„,grees 37 minutes 27 seconds East (recorded as N 89 degrees 03' 24" E) a distance of 51E.20 feet to the West line of the Eat,695_22 feet of::,said Southwest 1/4 of the North- west 1/4; thence South 01 degrees 19 minutes 29 seconds East, along said West line of the East 695.22 feet, a distance of 502.85 feet to the North line of the South 334.70 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4; thence South 88 degrees 17 minutes 37 seconds West, along said North line of the South 334.70 feet, a distance of 616.33 feet tc, the point of beginning, together with an easement for roadway purposes over and across tne North 60.00 feet of the South 334.70 feet which lies West of the East 695.22 feEt o7: said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, excepting therefrom the North 209.00 feet of tne South 639.40 feet of the West 417.42 feet of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 SCHEDULE B Variance Request Application 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue PIN 01.029.21..23.0001 Owner: Steven Weber Detailed Reason for Request: Summar of Request. Applicant property owner requests a partition of the existing 5.11 acre parcel into two new parcels. 2.27 and 2.84 acres in size. with one single family residential unit allowed on each parcel. All existing and intended future use would conform to the zoning requirements of R-1. Practical Difficulties. The applicants submits that the strict enforcement of the city code zooming restrictions in regard to the affected property would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. The requested use would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the chapter. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official. control. Namely. the applicant wished to use the property in a way not inconsistent with the dwelling unit density allowed under the comprehensive plan. and with dwelling density in conformity with the majority of the surrounding parcels. in short, the proposed usage if the variance were granted would be consistent with the surrounding lot sizes, shapes. density. and usage. Unique Circumstances. The existing parcel is very odd in its shape, it is unknown to applicant why the parcel was configured as it is. One of the members of the family of the original seller of the property around 1978 reports that it was shaped as it is to comply with a then existing 5 acre code requirement. At any rate. the parcel as it exists is a little over 5 acres and, if a map is oriented to the North. is in the shape of a backwards C or a horseshoe. The two ends of the horseshoe front onto Lake Elmo Avenue. On the South prong of the horseshoe there is an existing single family home. with a drivewav crossing over a City easement allowing access to Lake Elmo Avenue. There is no other access, The north prong of the horseshoe is not developed. In the interior of the horseshoe shape there are rwo 1 acre parcels owned by a single property owner one home on two one acre parcels owned by the occupant of the home). If one were traveling north on Lake Elmo Avenue_ one would see the north portion of the parcel at issue, with a drivewav and a single family home. then a neighbors parcel. with a drivewav accessing two parcels, then the south portion of applicants parcel. without a driveway or access. The existing configuration of the parcel is inconsistent with the surrounding lot sizes. shapes, density, and usage. The majority of surrounding lots are 1 to 2 acres in size. each with one single family home. Applicant proposes a new boundary line between the north and south portions of the existing parcel. allowing the north parcel to be developed with a single family residential unit. rendering both the existing and new parcel consistent with the surrounding parcels and use. Character of the locality: The proposed densities of the site would be consistent with surrounding land use and would not alter the character of the locality. The existing density of the parcels surrounding applicants parcel is in the range of I residential unit per one or two acres. Additionally, directly on the other side of Lake Elmo Avenue. in Discover Crossing, the residential lot sizes appear to be .75 acres. The proposed partition would result in two new parcels. approximately 2.27 and 2.84 acres each, with each anticipated to contain one residential dwelling unit. The existing parcel makes contact with 8 other parcels (ignoringthe City Easement to the South), 7 of these 8 parcels are smaller than the two new proposed parcels. The two parcels surrounded on three sides by applicant's lot. the ones on the interior of the "horseshoe," are each one acre in size. (lots 01-029-21-23-0006 and 0007). The two parcels to immediate north are 2 acres (01-029-21-23-001 1) and 1 acre (01- 029-21-23-0002). The three parcels to the south are 1 acre (01-029-21-23-0014 1 acre (01-029- 21-23-0009) and 1.2 acres (01-029-21-23-0005) The proposed land use and zoning would be in substantial conformity with the policies goals and standards of the Comprehensive Plan Future land use map for the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. 2005-2030. shows the area designated as RAD - 0.45 DlilAcre. Petitioner understands this to mean a maximum dwelling unit density of .45 per acre. The proposed use and development is consistent as the new south parcel would contain one residence on 2.27 acres (0.44) and the north parcel would contain one residence on 2.84 acres (0.35). The soil has been perk tested and the size of the proposed parcels and soil type allow for a suitable septic system. The proposed variance would have no impact on an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties. The proposed use under a variance would not substantially increase the congestion of public streets. The County will issue a permit for a new driveway for the proposed new north lot to access Lake Elmo Avenue. The County has not indicated any danger or hazard created by the new drive. The County suggested that if feasible a driveway across the City Easement currently running on the south side of the south parcel would be preferable. The logistics of this appear difficult. but applicant is open to that suggestion if the City requires* The proposed use under the variance would do nothing to diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Coun ngton 09 029-2E-12 0002 (00.03) prarc 10710,5 VEl'APTOEfft SUM-EVANI) A4,113(5APAGFAIE hl ifrf0,10,1 :4:719Ef ,,quAr PAN, ,11) al, A .,051/1.10 =115 Aos, 4, ( (CM") i) COYEP (r)di - - (0007) •- 1009) r'rr 005 2 • (0012 (o529)07 - (Yi (0021 06i ) 7 (0 ,„ (ori2,,;y 3 a 1011040 - -7orpo1 WED MUM' 0,19 AROTE1,,ED,IEF,A) - - VAR A,1111CCIED-NA 101,1,1. ANA 10IPA71401 (00'07) (0000) '44 ',(0025) (00(0) (0000) / (0nb9) , EA, • (004' (0024 'ER CROSSING (00'10 (0004) (onii !AA (0002) /\, C/ > NORTH AlF.- A.Alt -f-- I 029 21 22 0001 (0004) 01-029-21-32- 0005 (0000) (0002) 7 . , 151177 11,111141 1,1111.1 1 1 11 - 11i111 1 NE - *,..,-,-, 02',.",121-5-,,^ilf,,MI 1 unA, ArtAne s/AA Ktr Fll ,17.= tu grT)74 UR tE t.tt (0007) (0001) ( 000 1) - (66601 o 01-029 - 21 31- 1002 AWAkt.,q AhE 01 A riAMMAWAta 00711CDL7I'00 07.0 fleCCM'S 401171771777571000007150006A.Stcl,t UNIV0 71F5 WAVAAAVA, coa,,ra MT' PE)PO,F3PLC +Cq ANY INACCOWES 1771 ,A,VA ARA FM MAA,A,CE AAA, AMA Aor ,412, A0-0/,111SAUAN071 04710.11A,/ /An .1011./.-,/.1, OW:Cr, PPM nErflrrrfrr a, Pa g p,,F AAA70 pral,ar rwrirrlanrar, 11ara, . Undivided Parcel is _ )0 01 (Li t A tl - 04. v. 4. • 1) ,1 A Gera v4,1 ry EASEMENT PER DOC 384574 61§J2 , ;208:70 (W(14) ()H ). Proposed rik- iloundary line 0, A onrosOmat,, now North Parcel 123,063 sq It. (2.84 acres) I)oposei.1 new drive.\\.ity enterinii ll) . A Veli(ie Nu AllproX inlate 11)eaLlOil existinv eniratic(.. onto 1 ilc F.Inio \-entie North Ed Eidin Septic System Design & Inspection LLC 2303 County Road F East White Bear Lake, MN 55110 651.485.2300 November 7, 2011 Steven Weber 2526 E. 82rd St., Suite 10 Bloomington. MN 55425 Dear Steeni At your request, a site evaluation was performed at the property located at 5577 Lake El Av N., Lake Elmo, MN, Since you propose to divide the lot into twa parcels, I have established a sewage treatment area of at least 10.000 square feet on the north east part of the property. It appears that a trench Grainfield could be installed possible house site, area and there is plenty of area for a This is a preliminary evaluation of the lot, a sewage treatment design and specific house plans will be needed before a building permit can be issued, ne proposed septic area must not be excavated, compacted or filled and must remain as it is. This site evaluation must be reviewed and approved by Washington County Public Health, If you have any questons ar concerns, piease feel free to call me. I would be glad to help, Sincerely, Ed Eklin t,WCA License #3321/Cert.ii*icmion ttC326S SYSTEP.' PER(IDLA7i.C,Ai EST,5 Co!L SUE-DIVrSION PLANNiN 41-7..)47. Tit (TY FA 208:70 . t ; tf"s" ' ' ( fi ' " ••••,,‘ 0* 3457 v t4) cij - A-4.(cR..1 - r't .71 c• .."") ir‘ rl A C—C,„ E. (14 to • etlricit • 1., f"'s' . I (\if,`,/,‘',A • , , , e !Pc,' %.0.2.17E"- f 7 t,o<4 E-G;e),Apt l-s ice FPI 0 Ve-clf y -1-c far , 6 Moot^ cr. et.. Y ot21 Public Works Department Donald J,Theisen, p,E. Director Wayne x.Sandberg, p.s- November 10'2O11 JamesW, Delapsin The Lowry, Rose Building 2124 Dupont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55405 STEVENWEBER RESIDENTIAL ACCESS REQUEST TO COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY Y7(LAKE ELK8OAVENUE) CITY OFLAKE ELMO MINOR SUBDIVISION CONCEPT Dear Mr, DeJaplain: Washington County has reviewed the residential driveway location along Lake Elmo Avenue for a proposed new parcel of record based onaconcept plan for aminor subdivision ofa5acre parcel of property owned by Mr. Steven VVober, in the City rf Lake Elmo, Typically, the county process in cities within Washington County is to respond to formal applications submitted to the |ono| government since vve do not have land use authority. Also, when asubdivieion in proposed, it is common practice to seek alternative access locations to local streets within a municipality. If those alternatives are not feasibie, access to a county highway would be permitted. Alternatives in this case would be to consider a shared driveway and the feasibility of access to the 60 Ft wide City Utility Easement shown onthe plan that could beimproved toprovide local access, Fino/|y, as you are aware, Washington County requires driveway permits for access to county mad. In this ooae, once the property owner has gone through the appropriate review and approval process atthe local |ewa(, the minor subdivision has been recorded and a permit application is filed with our offiue' on access permit can beissued- Please fee|fpeatogivemeooallenyqueshonnatG51-43O-4318oremaUmesd c Joe Gustafson, Washington County Transportation Engineer Ann Pung-Tenwado, Washington County Senior Planner Kyle K�att - City of Lake Elmo Community Development Director 11600MyomnRoad North, 3tilkmmter, Minnewoto55O82-9573 Phons� 851-43S4300 ~ Fox 8514304350 ^ /'Y. 651430'8246 v=wm.cnxeshinV,on.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity /Affirmative Action Location Map - 5577 Lake Elmo Ave 0 200' Legend Existing Access Point Proposed Access Point Parcel Boundary Distance Between Access Points 0 150 300 City of Lake Elmo 2/23/2012 Data Source: Washington County, MN 600 Feet February 12, 2012 To: City of Lake Elmo Subject: Variance for 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue To whom it may concern: We are opposing the division/variance of the property at 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue North. Sincerely, Mike and Mary Jo Neuman 5685 Lake E mo Avenue Lake Elmo, MN 55042 M����/��&�JBU�� /�^�,r/��,v�v"n����x�/ Date: February 22LZOIZ ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Gehoe�P.E. Jack Griffin, P.E. Ryan StennpnkiP.E. 651.300.4261 651.300.4264 651.300.4267 To: Kyle K|att Lake Elmo Planning Director Re: City ofLake Brno S577Lake Elmo Avenue [c: Ryan Sternpski,P.E. Lot Split Variance From: Jack Griffin, P.E, [hv Engineer We have received the Variance Request Development Application for 5577 Lake Elmo Avenue North; PIN 0I.029.I1.23.0001. The following items were received: w Application with Schedule A [Legal Description] and Schedule B [Request Narrative]. • Plat Drawing; NTS. PIN 0I.029.2I.23.000I. • Sketch drawing showing proposed Lot Split. • Septic System preliminary site review letter by Ed Elkin Septic System Design, dated I2-07'201I. • Washington County Review Letter dated I1-lD'2OII. The engineering6eparhment continues to find that this Lot Split proposal and Variance Application remains inconsistent with the Citv/s Comprehensive Plan, including the Transportation Plan, and therefore is recommending denial of this request. Coordinated. Efficient Infrastructure: The Comprehensive Plan has guided the zoning (nthis area 10 allow development at I unit per 10 acres unless completed as part of a cluster type development with supporting infrastructure. When development is allowed to occur at higher densities, it is important to require the development to occur through a coordinated approach to allow for adequate and efficient supporting infrastructure. Adequate and efficient infrastructure will not occur if parcels are allowed lot splits, completed on an independent basis. For this application, the proposed infrastructure is not consistent with the requested higher density development (I unit per 2.5 acres). Surrounding development that allows higher density (i.e. Discover Crossing) was required to plan infrastructure differently to serve individual properties. The Transportation Situation: The Transportation issue relates to Access Management. Access management is the balance between corridor mobility and property access, Increased access results ina decrease in mobility and a decrease in safety. The City is responsible for creating and implementing Access Management policies as part ofits Transportation Plan. While both the State and County own or local authority to manage the proper access spacing along State and County roadways through its land use controls. In the vicinity of the proposed private driveway, there are currently IQ existing private driveways and two intersecting local roods. In accordance with the City Transportation Plan, private driveway access to Lake Elmo Avenue (A Minor Arterial Road) is to be prohibited. Lake Elmo Avenue is a County owned roadway that supports the City's transportation needs including mobility, safety, efficiency, and the local economy. This roadway is classified as an "A Minor Arterial" in the Cit/sTranspVrtatlon Plan. Minor Arterial roads are one step higher than collector roads in the Transportation hierarchy. They are intended to prioritize mobility, efficiency and safety over property access. Collector roads supplement the arterial roadway system by providing access between neighborhoods and to the arterial system, Local Streets have the primary purpose to provide direct access to local properties within neighborhoods. Therefore future development along this corridor needs to require a collector or local roadway to be constructed from Lake BrnP Avenue into the developed property. The local property access may then extend tothis new road, Astraffic increases along this corridor and other access points are needed, future corrective improvements may be required to actually remove the number ofprivate driveways inthis area. Access Spacing Guidelines from Transportation Plan: * Principal Arterials: No direct access to local properties. Access from Minor Arterials only. • Minor Arterials (i.e. Lake Elmo Avenue): No direct access to local properties. |4 Mile spacing between Collector Roadways. 1/8 Mile spacing between residential street intersections. • Collector Roadways No direct access to local properties. X Mile spacing between Collector Roadways. l/8Mile spacing between residential street intersections. Water and Sewer Treatment Systems: In a similar manner, the extension of municipal water service needs to be planned in an efficient and cost effective xvay. Typically vvaternnain is expanded along public roadway corridors to avoid easement acquisition costs. When higher density development is allowed without a planned supporting road network, the future expansion of other city services to the area results in significantly elevated costs. Future water system hookups become more costly and prohibitive for property owners due to easement acquisition costs and/or longer water services, Higher density development places greater pressure on the private infrastructure in a rural area, such as private xve||s and septic systems. With greater densities' the probability of failure for private vve||s and/or septic systems isincreased. When septic systems fail, the available land needed for replacement systems becomes limited. [AGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE l913 V ANCES Frequently Asked Questions (Reflects 2011 law change) What is a variance? A variance is a way that a city may allow an exception to part of a zoning ordinance. It is a permitted departure from strict enforcement of the ordinance as applied to a particular piece of property. A variance is generally for a dimensional standard (such as setbacks or height limits). A variance allows the landowner to break a dimensional zoning rule that would otherwise apply. Who grants a variance? Minnesota law provides that requests for variances are heard by a body called the board of adjustment and appeals: in many smaller communities, the planning commission or even the city council may serve that function. A variance decision is generally appealable to the city council. For more information. see vnrS la:. When can a variance be granted? A variance may be granted if enforcement of a zoning ordinance provision as applied to a particular piece of property would cause the landowner "practical difficulties.- For the variance to be granted. the applicant must satisfy the statutory three -factor test for practical difficulties, lithe applicant does not meet all three factors of the statutory test, then a variance should not be granted. Also, variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan. For more information. see kliniL What kind of authority is the city exercising? A city exercises so-called "quasi-judiciar authority when considering a variance application. This means that the city's role is limited to applying the legal standard of practical difficulties to the facts presented by the application. The ciry acts like a judge in evaluating the facts against the legal standard. If the applicant meets the standard, then the variance may be granted. In contrast. when the city writes the rules in zoning ordinance, the city is exercising " lative- authority arid has much broader discretion. What is practical difficulties? Practical difficulties is a legal standard set forth in law that cities must apply the when considering applications for variances. It is a three -factor test and applies to all requests for variances. To constitute practical difficulties, all three factors of the test must be satisfied. For more information, see This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST 14$ UNIVERSTC AVE, WEST PHONE(651 ') 281-1 200 FAX: (651? 281-1298 5T. PAUL, MN 55103-20.44 TOLL FREE: (800)925-1322 WELL WWWLMC.011,G What are the practical difficulties factors? The first factor is that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. This factor means that the landowner would like to use the property in a particular reasonable way but cannot do so under the rules of the ordinance. It does not mean that the land cannot be put to any reasonable use whatsoever without the variance. For example, if the variance application is for a building too close to a lot line, or does not meet the required setback, the focus of the first factor is whether the request to place a building there is reasonable. The second factor is that the landowner's problem is due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner. The uniqueness generally relates to the physical characteristics of the particular piece of property, that is. to the land, and not personal characteristics or preferences of the landowner. When considering the variance for a building to encroach or intrude into a setback, the focus of this factor is whether there is anything physically unique about the particular piece of property, such as sloping, topography or other natural features like wetlands or trees. The third factor is that the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Under this factor consider whether the resulting structure will be out of scale, out of place, or otherwise inconsistent with the surrounding area. For example, when thinking about the variance for an encroachment into a setback, the focus is how the particular building will look closer to a lot line and if that fits in with the character of the area. Are there are other factors a city should consider? Yes. State statute provides variances shali only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and when the terms of the variance are consistent he comprehensive plan. So. in addition to the three -factor practical difficulties test. a city evaluating a variance application should make findings as to (1) whether or not the variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance, and (2) whether or not the variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. What about economic considerations? Sometimes landowners insist that they deserve a variance because they have already incurred substantial costs or argue they will not receive expected revenue without the variance. State statute specifically notes that economic considerations alone cannot create practical difficulties. Rather, practical difficulties exists only when the three statutory factors are met. What about undue hardship? "Undue hardship" was the name of the three -factor test prior to a May 2011 change of law. Effective May 6, 2011 'Nfinnesoio, Laws. Chapter 19. amended Mini-:. Sim to restore municipal variance authority in response to K17177117707 aCher 1'. Cilrl" of Minnelonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. June 24. 2010). In Krummenacher, the Minnesota Supreme Court interpreted the statutory definition of "undue hardship" and held that the "reasonable use" prong of the "undue hardship" test was not whether the proposed use is reasonable, but rather whether there is a reasonable use in the absence of the variance. What did the 2011 law change? The 2011 law changed the first factor back to the "reasonable manner" understanding that had been used by some lower courts prior to the Krummenacher ruling. The 2011 law renamed the municipal variance standard from "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties," but otherwise retained the familiar three -factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. The 2011 law also provides that: "Variances shall only be permitted when they arc in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan." Can a city grant a use variance? Sometimes a landowner will seek a variance to allow a particular use of their property that would otherwise not be permissible under the zoning ordinance. Such variances are often termed "use variances.' as opposed to "area variances" from dimensional standards. Use variances are not generally allowed in Minnesota state law prohibits a city from permitting by variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance for the zoning district where the property is located. For more information. see StaI. Is a public hearing required? Minnesota statute does not clearly require a public hearing before a variance is P,ranted or denied, but many practitioners and attorneys agree that the best practice is to hold public hearings on all variance requests. A public hearing allows the city to establish a record and elicit facts to help determine if the application meets the practical difficulties factors. What is the role of neighborhood opinion? Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a variance request. While city officials may feel their decision should reflect the overall will of the residents, the task in considering a variance request is limited to evaluating how the variance application meets the statutory practical difficulties factors, Residents can often provide important facts that may help the city in addressing these factors. but unsubstantiated opinions and reactions to a request do not form a legitimate basis for a variance decision. If neighborhood opinion is a significant basis for the variance decision, the decision could be overturned by a court. What is the role of past practice? While past practice may be instructive, it cannot replace the need for analysis of all three of the practical difficulties factors for each and every variance request. In evaluating a variance request, cities are not generally bound by decisions made for prior variance requests. If a city finds that it is issuing many variances to a particular zoning standard, the city should consider the possibility of amending the ordinance to change the standard. When should a variance decision be made? A written request for a variance is subject to Minnesota's 60-day rule and must be approved or denied within 60 days of the time it is submitted to the city. A city may extend the time period for an additional 60 days, but only if it does so in writing before expiration of the initial 60-day period. Linder the 60-day rule. failure to approve or deny a request within the statutory time period is deemed an approval. For more information. see ' How should a city document a variance decision? Whatever the decision, a city should create a record that will support it. In the case of a variance denial, the 60-day rule requires that the reasons for the denial be put in writing. Even when the variance is approved, the city should consider a written statement explaining the decision. The written statement should explain the variance decision. address each of the three practical difficulties factors and list the relevant facts and conclusions as to each factor. Can meeting minutes adequately document a variance decision? If a variance is denied, the 60-day rule requires a written statement of the reasons for denial be provided to the applicant within the statutory time period. While meeting. minutes may document the reasons for denial, usually a separate written statement will need to be provided to the applicant in order to meet the statutory deadline. A separate written statement is advisable even for a variance approval, although meeting minutes could serve as adequate documentation. provided they include detail about the decision factors and not just a record indicating an approval motion passed. Can a city attach conditions to a variance? By law, a city may impose a condition when it grants a variance so long as the condition is directly related and bears a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. For instance, if a variance is granted to exceed an otherwise applicable height limit, arty conditions attached should presumably relate to mitigating the affect of excess height. For more information, see Nziinn. What happens to the variance once granted? A variance once issued is a property right that "runs with the land" so it attaches to and benefits the land and is not limited to a particular landowner. A variance is typically filed with the county recorder. Even if the property is sold to another person, the variance applies. Jed Burkett 201 1 /06 4 COMMUNI T N DATE: 3/6/12 REGULAR ITEM: 9 AGENDA ITEM: Fire Relief Association Raffle Drawing SUBMITTED BY: Brad Winkels, District Chief THROUGH: Carole Luczak, Interim City Clerk REVIEWED: Dean A. Zuleger. City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED Requested that the Mayor andior City Council members draw the winning raffle tickets from the Annual fund raising raffle. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Lake Elmo Fire Relief Association has had the iinning iickeis drawn at City Council meeting Jar the last three years and would like to continue with is year's drawing, ATTACHMENTS: None SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item ...... ........... ...... ....... Brad Winkels - 1Zeport/Presentation,..... .................. ...... . ..... ............ Brad Winkels AGENDA ITEM: rl\JC/L COMMUNICATION DATE: 3/06/2012 REGULAR ITEM #: 10 MOTION Resolution # 2012-011 DeMontrevilie Flig,hlands Arca Street Improvements — Public Improvement Hearn -it), and Resolution No. 2012-011 Ordering Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger. City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to hold the Public Improvement Hearing for the DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements, and following the hearing. adopt Resolution No, 2012-011 thereby ordering the improvement and the preparation of plans and specifications, STAFF REPORT: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429,011 to 429.111, a Public Improvement Hearing has been noticed for March 6, 2012, sometime after 7:00 P.M. to consider makinti improvements to the following street segments: Highlands Trail North (from DeMontreville Trail to Trunk Highway 36) Hytrail Avenue North (Highlands Trail North to 59th Street North) 59th Street North (Ilytrail Avenue North to Cul-de-sac) Highlands Court North (from Highlands Trail North to Cul-de-sac) DeMontreville Trail Circle North (from DeMontreville Trail to Cul-de-sac) DeMontreville Trail Place North (from DeMontreville Trail Circle to Cul-de-sac) 53rd Street North (from DeMontreville Trail to Cul-de-sac) The attached notice was published in the official newspaper and individual notifications were sent to each address that potentially will be impacted by these improvements. A Feasibility Report has been completed and adopted by the City Council defining the scope of the proposed improvements together with the estimated project costs. The detailed findings of the report will be presented at the meeting and an opportunity for public comment and input will be provided. This report is available for review at City Hall. A .1; easibilit Report for they streets was completed and presented to the City Council at the February 7. 2012 Council Meeting and at the February 28. 2012 Workshop. The Report recommends a street reclamation improvement to be completed for all street segments. Street -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting DeMoth,. ville Highlands Area Street Improvements 36/2012 Public Improvement Hearing and Resolution No, 2012-01 I Regular Agenda Item #10 Reclamation is 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 City to improve it's streets at a significantly reduced cost while gaining a reasonable service life for the street, Subgrade corrections will be necessary in a few locations to address more distressed areas. The Report provides total project cost estimates for two alternatives; 1) restoring the wider streets to their current widths of 32 feet: and 2) narrowing most of those streets to 28 feet. Estimated Total Project Costs for Reclamation of Neighborhood Streets to their current width of 32 feet is S1.000,000. In this scenario the City cost participation would be $700.000 and the estimated unit property assessment would be $3,200 each. Estimated Total Project Costs for Reclamation of Neighborhood Streets with some streets reduced to 28 feet in width is S1,046.000. In this scenario the City cost participation would he $732.200 and the estimated unit property assessment would be $3.350 each. There are an estimated 95 assessable properties for this improvement project. In past years the feasibility reports provided cost estimates for council consideration regarding curb replacement with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous curb. However. at council direction last year the Street C1P was revised to reflect bituminous curb costs (Joint, forward. Should the improvements be ordered, the project will be partially financed through special assessments. The Lake Elmo City Council adopted an assessment policy, dated November 16, 2010. The final assessments in the Report are consistent with this assessment policy. The report also investigated the opportunity to incorporate rain gardens within the public right-of- way to improve water quality as part of the overall project. Nineteen (19) potential rain garden 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 estimated costs for nineteen rain gardens is $52.000. A funding application has been prepared and submitted through the VBWD Community Grant Program. In excess of 50%-i- of the water quality improvement costs are grant eligible. The remaining amounts would he funded through the City's storm water utility fund. Staff will continue to implement this program through a cooperative effort between City stafT, the VBWD and the Washington Conservation District. BACKGROUND INFORMATION,: The DeMontreville Highlands Area Streets were generally 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 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. - - pale 2 - - City Council Meetine 3/62012 DeMontreville Highlauus Area Street improvements Public Improvement Hearing and Resolution No, 2012-011 Reeular Auenda item 10 RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above staff report, the City Council is respectfully requested to consider adopting Resolution No. 2012-011, Ordering the Improvement- and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements. Please note that because this project was initiated by the City Council, and not by a resident petition. the improvements must be ordered bv a 4,/fith majority of the City Council by undertaking the following action: The suggested motion to approve this action is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 20I2-011, ordering the Improvement and the preparation of the Plans and Specifications for the DeMontreville Highlands Area Street Improvements." Alternatively. the City Council may choose not to order a portion or all of the improvements. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2012-011 2. Notice of Public flearinQ, SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item ....... ......... . ...... ... - Report/Presentation of Item ............ ..... .......... Questions from Council to Staff_............, ............ .... - Call for ...... ..... ...... - Discussion/Comments.... ........ ....... ..... Public Input. if Appropriate ........ ...... - Action on Motion _ ... ..... ....... .. ....City ,Administrator Citv Engineer . . ..... Mayor Facilitates Mavor & City Council ... ....Mayor Facilitates .......Mayor Facilitates ....... Mavor Facilitates CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-011 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE DEMONTREVILLE HIGHLANDS AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant a resolution of the City Council adopted the 8th day of February, 2012, the Council ordered a hearing 017 Improvement _fen. the Dellonrreville Highlands Area Street Improvenients, and WHEREAS, ten days" mailed nonce and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given. and the hearing was held thereon on the 61/7 dal of March, 2012, at which all persons desiring to he heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon, WHEREAS, the.feasibility report states that the project is necessau, cost-effective, and feasible, NOY'', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, Such improvement is deemed necessary, cost-effective, and :feasible as detailed in the Feasibilio Report. 2. Such ill7p1'01T111e171 is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted the 8th C1101' 011.C17111(11T, 2012. 3. The C'ity Engineer is hereby designated as the engineer ,for this improvement. The engineer shall oversee the preparation of the Plans and Specifications for the making of 51/1/7 /177171"0vemen1. 4. The City Engineer shall 'v1al/7 the services of a consiilting engineering firm to assist, where needed, to prepare Plans and Specifications for the making of such improvement, and to assist the City Engineer during the construction phase of the iinpl'OVelnent as requested 5. The City Council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement Iron? the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. Adopted by the Council this oth day of March. 2012. Resolution No, 2012-01 1 Date: ,1012 CITY OF LAKE ELMO Bv: ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleuer City Administrator Dean A. Johnston Mayor Resolulion No, 2(112-0 I. 1 CERTIFICATION I 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 al a duly authorized meetim; thereof held on 6th day of March 2012, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Carole Luczak Interim City Clerk (Seal) Resolution No, 2012-01 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO NOTICE OF HEARING DEMONTREVILLE HIGHLANDS AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereb\ given that the City Council of Lake Elmo will meet in the council chambers of the Cit Hall at or approximately atter 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 429,111: The improvement will consist of reclaiming the pavement surface and aggregate base the for DeMontreville Highlands Area street improvements consisting of Highlands 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 Itom 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 \vill be available at the hearing. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting,. DATED: February 8. 2012 BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Brett Emmons, Acting Mayor (PlIbliShed iii the Oakclule-Lake E/,m Review on February 15. 20/2 anal I:eh-Italy 22, 2012) AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: 'u. I4UNICA TIO DATE: 3/06/2012 REGULAR ITEM 4: 11 MOTION Resolution # 2012-012 Keats Avenue North: VISA Street and Trunk Watennain Improvements — Public Improvement Hearing, and Resolution No. 2012-xxx Ordering Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications Jack Griffin, City Engineer Dean Zule er. City Administrator Ryan Stempski. Assistant City Enaineer SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to hold the Public Improvement Hearing for the Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements. and following the hearing, adopt Resolution No. 2012-xxx thereby, ordering the improvement and the preparation of plans and specifications. STAFF REPORT: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111, a Public Improvement Hearing has been noticed for March 6. 2012, sometime after 7:00 P.M. to consider making the following improvements: Street Reconstruction of Keats Avenue North. from 47th Street North to Trunk Highway 36 install 16-inch diameter Trunk Watermain from Julep Avenue North (Tapestry Development) along 47th Street North. then north along Keats Avenue North to 59th Street North The attached notice was published in the official newspaper and individual notifications were sent to each address that potentially will he impacted by these improvements. A Feasibility Report has been completed and adopted by the City Council defining the scope of the proposed improvements together with the estimated project costs. The detailed findings oldie report will be presented at the meeting and an opportunity for public comment and input will be provided. This report is available for review at City Hall. A Feasibility Report for these improvements was completed and presented to the City Council at the February 8, 2012 Council Meeting and at a February 28, 2012 Workshop. The Report recommends the reconstruction of Keats Avenue North using Municipal State Aid funding but designing to a 10 ton road using 11 foot driving lanes. 5 foot shoulders and a 15 foot clear zone; including 4 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. Staving within the existing foot print will control the construction limits and impacts thereby reducing ditch -- page Cit> Council Meeting Keats Avenue North: MSA .eet and Trunk Watermain improvements 3/6;2012 Public Improvement Hearin 4 and Resolution No. 2012-012 RegularAgenda Item #11 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 shoulder widths from 6 feet. and the clear zone from 30 feet. The recommended project improvements also include the replacement of all cross culverts and replacement of driveway culverts as deemed necessary. The proposed trunk watermain improvements include the installation of a 16-inch diameter Trunk Watermain line to interconnect the water system from the Tapestry Development to Rock Point Church. The improvement includes approximately 8,400 feet of waterniain. This trunk watermain extension project was programmed for construction in 2011 in the city Water System CIP 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 watermain line can be accomplished at a significant cost savings by combining the project restoration costs. With this information it was determined that the proposed reconstruction of Keats Avenue North be completed concurrently with the Keats Avenue Trunk Watennain Extension project. 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. As a collector road, Keats Avenue North serves a broader role in the transportation system then just local traffic. Therefore, the project would be funding primarily using the City's Municipal State Aid construction account. However. some properties will receive a local benefit and it is proposed that properties with direct driveway access to Keats Avenue North be specially assessed a portion of the project consistent with the City's Assessment Policy. There are 23 properties that are proposed to be specially assessed and the estimated unit assessment is $3,000. The City cost participation is therefore $1.073.000, The Estimated Total Project Costs for the Trunk Watermain Extension is $1,028,000, As a trunk watermain line the improvement is being installed as a part of the community wide integrated water system. Therefore. the watermain extension project will be primarily funded using the City's $1.0 million DEED water system grant with matching funds from the City's Water Enterprise Fund. Like the Keats Avenue North collector street improvement, a local benefit will be realized by the properties adjacent to the trunk watermain line. It is recommended that the City considered assessing a water lateral benefit charge to those 20 properties. Should the improvements be ordered, the project will be partially financed through special assessments. The Lake Elmo City Council adopted an assessment policy, dated November 16, 2010. The final assessments in the Report are consistent with this assessment policy. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 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 CIP programmed for improvement in 2012. In preparation of this improvement a geotechnical 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 -- page 2 -- City Council Meetin2 3/6720 12 Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunrc Watermain Improvements Public Improvement Hearing and Resolution No, 2012-012 Re2ular A2enda Item tfl 1 roadway improvement project, a low cost pavement rehabilitation option. Unfortunately. the report findings indicated that a complete reconstruction will be required. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above staff report, the City Council is respectfully requested to consider adopting Resolution No, 2012-012, Ordering the Improvement and the preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements. Please note that because this project was initiated by the City Council, and not by a resident petition, the improvements must be ordered bv a 4/5th majority of the Citv Council by undertaking the following action: The suggested motion to approve this action is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 201.2-012, ordering the Improvement and the preparation of the Plans and Specifications for the Keats Avenue North: MSA Street and Trunk Watermain Improvements." Alternatively. the City Council may choose not to order a portion or all of the improvements. ATTACHMENTS: 1 Resolution No. 2012-01' 2. Notice of Public Hcarin SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Itern ..... ....... ............ ..City Administrator Report/Presentation of Item Citv Engineer - Questions from Council to Staff.......... ..... ....... ..... ............ Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion................... ............... ....... . ...... ........Mayor & City Council - Discussion/Comments ..... ...... ..... ....... .......... ....Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if .Appropriate ..... ...................... ...... . ...... ........ ...Mayor Facilitates Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates page 3 -- CITY OF LAKE ELM, WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-012 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE KEATS AVENUE NORTH: MSA STREET AND TRUNK WATE • AIN IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant a resolution of the City Council adopted the 8t1i day of February, 2012. the Council ordered ci hearing 017 Improvement /or the Keats Avenue north: AEA Street and Trunk Fr'atermain Improvements., and WHEREAS, ten daysmailed notice and twoweeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon 017 the Oth day of March, 2012. at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunitv to he heard thereon, WHERE4S, the yeasibility report states that the project is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible, NON; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, Such improvement is deemed necessary, cosi-effective, and ,feasible as detailed in the Feasibilio Report. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed iii the Council resolution adopted the Nth day of Februarv, 2012. 3. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the engineer fqr this improvement, The engineer shall oversee the preparation of the Plans and Specifications for the making q such improvement, 4. The City Engineer shall retain the services qf a consulting engineering ,firm to assist, where needed, to prepare Plans and Specifications /or the making of such improvement, WWI 10 assist the City Engineer during the construction phase of the improvement as requested. The C'ity Council declares its o —cial intent to reimburse itself jOr the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of x exempt bonds. AdOpled by the Council this 6ili day of March, 2012. Resolution No. 2012-0 Date: , 2012 CT ' OF LAKE ELMO By: ATTEST: Dean A. Zuleger City Administrator Dean A. Johnston Mayor Resolution No. 2012-012 CERTIFICATION I 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 6th day of March 2012, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Carole Luczak Interim City Clerk (Seal) Resolution No, 201 I 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 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 429.1 1 1: 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 S1.142.000 and the estimated total cost of the trunk watermain improvements is $1.028.000. 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 vill be heard at this meeting. DATED: February 08. 2012 BY ORDER. OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Brett Emmons, Acting Mayor (Published in theUaAdak—Luke Elmo Review on februarT 15, 2012 and Februcn:r 22, 2012) ()ft' KE ELMO MAYORCOU CIL CO C T DATE: March 6, 2012 REGULAR ITEM #: 12 MOTION $S AGENDA ITEM: Council — Staff Goal Setting / Development Retreat SUBMITTED BY: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator THROUGH: Mayor Johnston S.: Council Member Emmons REVIEWED BY: Dean Z leger, City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: With the addition of new staff and the assignment of new roles. it has been suggested that a segregated time he committed to engage in a retreat to develop goals long/short-term goals for the City of Lake Elmo and create synergy in the execution of those goals between elected policy -makers and operational staff. FISCAL IMPACT: 52,500 Facilitator Fee, 5280 Educational Costs, 5500 Meeting Logistics = 53,280 (Approximate Total) BACKGROUND INFORMATION: For some time, it has been the desire of certain members of the City Council to facilitate a forum ./ retreat to define and improve the relationship between the elected City Council and appointed operational staff. STAFF REPORT: Council Member Emmons. Mayor Johnston and the City Administrator have met with local government facilitator. Don Salverda. to discuss the parameters of a Council - Staff retreat for the purposes building relationships, establishing short-term and long-term uoals, defining roles and responsibilities, and creating operational efficiency. In turn. Mr. Salverda has proposed a retreat that would accomplish these goals (see attached). This retreat would take place in late April at a time convenient to the Council, RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended. that the City Council approved the expenditure of funds not to exceed $3300 and to engage in a developmental retreat. "Move to _Ands not to exceed S3300 for the purpose of tonducting a Council -Staff Developmental Retreat 10 be held in April 2012" City Council Meeting !Regular _Agenda Item 12] March () 2012 Alternatively, the City Council may decide to forego the Council — Staff Developmental Retreat and hold a one -day goal settinw. retreat focusini4 on five -core issues: Growth. Finances. Utilities. Park & Recreation, and Public Safety. This retreat would be facilitated by the City Administrator with staff presenters in each discipline. The cost of the event would be $500 for meeting and meal purposes. The date of such a retreat would be in May 2012 prior to the budget creation season. ATTACHMENTS: Donald Salverda & Associates Retreat Proposal SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS; Introduction of Item . ....... ........... City Administrator Report/Presentation.......... ............... Administrator Questions from Council to Staff ...... ....... Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if ,Appropriate ..... ....... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........ ...... Mayor & City Council ........ ...... ..... .......... ..... IVIayor & City Council Action on Motion....... ..... ....... ......... Mayor Facilitates -- page Donald Salverda & Associates Roseville Professional Center • Suite 620 • 2233 N. Hemline Avenue • Roseville, MN 55113 (651) 484-1335 Proposal To Mr. Dean Zuleger City Administrator Proposed By Don Salverda Consultant/Facilitator HY HAVE A LEADERSHIP PLANNING TEAM BUILDING RETREAT? 1) Organizations need to periodically assess progress, reestablish direction and enhance team spirit 2) How well the mayor, council members, city administrator and department heads communicate and work together toward common goals is key to the city's effectiveness 3) It's easier to develop consensus on issues, opportunities, and goals in an off -site relaxed environment rather than the formality of the normal work environment 4) A Leadership — Planning — Team Building Retreat is an excellent way to integrate new members onto the leadership team CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNCIL MEMBERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS, 2012 LEADERSHIP - PLANNING - TEAM BUILDING RETREAT PRIMARY OBJECTIVES 1) To build trust, enhance communication, and develop positive team spirit among the city's new leadership team 2) To review progress being made by the city during the last year 3) To discuss changes and forces likely to impact the city 4) To develop_updated consensus on issues and opportunities facing the city (1-3 year perspective) 5) To develop an updated Goals Program for the city (1-3 year perspective) 6) To review the roles, responsibilities, and expectations of the city's leadership team 7) To develop preliminary action plans for the highest priority goals 8) To be both educational and eniovable 9) Other 11 FORMAT OF THE RETREAT The sessions will be highly participative combining facilitator comments, group participation and discussion, and individual activities. Seating Arrangements: Tables (preferably round) seating five participants per table Audio-visual Needs: Three large, standing easels and writing pads (None required) (facilitator will provide) III TIMING AND LOCATION Timing: To be determined — suggest a Saturday in March Location: To be determined IV PARTICIPANT MATERIALS Each participant will receive a comprehensive outline, related supplemental materials and an Executive Summary of the Retreat V THE CONSULTANT/FACILITATOR - Over twenty-five years experience in the professional development field - Skilled seminar, workshop, and retreat leader - Leadership experience in the private, public, and volunteer sectors - Student of leadership VI INVESTMENT Pre -Retreat Planning and Preparation. $ 500.00 On -Site Retreat . 1,500.00 Post -Retreat Executive Summary ..... 500.00 Learning instrument investment of $20.00 per participant, plus additional expenses incurred with the engagement such as duplicating of handout materials, easel pads, travel expenses @ $.50/mile, etc. 'ITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNCIL EMBERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS, 2012 LEADERSHIP - PLANNING TEA BUILDING RETREAT Tentative Agenda 8:00 — 8:30 8:30 — 8:35 8:35 — 10:00 COFFEE AND DONUTS — INFORMAL VISITING OPENING REMARKS — MAYOR AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR SESSION 1: "WORKING AS A TEAM — THE CHALLENGE OF PUBLIC SECTOR LEADERSHIP" Focus • Objectives and expectations for the retreat • Communication enhancement exercise • Review of Progress Key elements of public sector leadership 10:00 — 10:15 BREAK 10:15 — 12:00 SESSION 2: "WORKING AS A TEAM - PROVIDING DIRECTION" Focus: • Changes and forces that are likely to impact the city • Updated consensus on issues and opportunities • Updating the city's goal's program (1-3 year perspective) • The city's mission and values 12:00 — 12:45 LUNCH 12:45 — 2:30 SESSION 3: "ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, EXPECTATIONS, AND POSITIVE WORKING RELATIONSHIPS" Focus • The importance of working together as a team • Review of the roles and responsibilities of team members • Understanding behavior styles • Expectations and Contributions — Council and Staff 2:30 — 2:45 BREAK 2:45 — 4:15 SESSION 4: "PRELIMINARY ACTION PLANNING" Focus • Preliminary action plans on the highest priority goals • Discussion and reaction to the preliminary action plans 4:15 — 4:30 SUMMARY AND WRAP-UP COMMENTS Focus • Review of the day • Importance of follow-up • Making a positive impact AV Don Salverda is President of DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES, a consulting firm dedicated to enhancing the leadership and management knowledge, skills and effectiveness of individuals and organizations in an ever -changing world. He has designed and led leadership. goal setting, strategic planning and team building retreats and workshops for over twenty-five years for a variety of organizations in both the public and private sectors. As a consultant and retreat and workshop facilitator, his positive and enthusiastic approach convey his own sense of purpose. He further believes that: 1) People are busy with limited time; therefore, the process should be practical, results oriented, and highly productive People learn from each other; therefore, the process should be highly participative The process should be educational, enjoyable. and non -threatening Combining an academic background in engineering with over thirty years of practical experience in the private, public, and volunteer sectors in a variety of roles and settings. he has gained a unique and broad perspective of the challenges facing individuals and organizations. He has served as President of the Sales and Marketing Executives of Minneapolis, the Roseville -Falcon Heights Chamber of Commerce, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the Ramsey County League of Local Governments. the North Suburban Community Foundation. the Roseville Jaycees and the North Suburban Gavel Association. He is a former District Chair of the Indianhead Council of the Boy Scouts of America and has served on a number of other boards and commissions. He has been elected to public office and served eighteenyears on the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners. He is an active member of the Rotary Club of Roseville and has been an avid downhill skier and bik Donald Salverda & Associates 2233 N. Hamline Ave, Suite 620 Roseville, MN 55113 651-484-1335