Lake Elmo approves purchase agreements for two parcels to pursue new athletic park

The Lake Elmo City Council voted to approve purchase agreements for two adjacent parcels — referred to in the meeting as the Olson and Jurick properties — as the first step toward developing a community athletic park to replace ball fields lost when the Tartan Park/Royal Club area was redeveloped.

Mayor Caden Head and staff described the approvals as an opportunity to secure central city land the council said could be lost to development if it waited. The motion to adopt resolution 2025-007 (Olson property) and resolution 2025-008 (Jurick property) passed by voice vote.

Why it matters: council members and staff said the properties are central to the city nd align with goals in the city's parks master plan. Securing the land does not create an immediate construction plan; it preserves the option to create an athletic complex in a location the council said better serves city residents than more peripheral sites.

What the city will buy and next steps

Staff said the Olson property will total about 37 acres after a 5.1-acre lot-line adjustment; the Jurick parcel would be bought in full. The council was told the two purchases combined would total a little less than $2 million for the initial acquisitions. Funding sources described in the meeting include a $1,000,000 payment previously received from a developer to replace ball fields, interest earned on that account, and internal city funds that staff plan to loan to the project and repay over five to 10 years via a small levy increase; staff said they were leaning toward a 10-year payback period and would return to council with details.

Staff identified several regulatory and planning steps that would follow purchase: a comprehensive plan amendment, a zoning map amendment (from rural residential to public facilities), a possible variance because the city's public facilities zoning currently allows only 20 acres, and a minor subdivision or plat for right-of-way dedication along County Road 14.

Questions and legal considerations

Council members asked how the original $1,000,000 developer payment (received in 2021 under a developer agreement) would be treated if the city later chose not to develop athletic fields and instead sold the property. City attorney staff said a developer or interested party could potentially seek legal action to require the city to use the funds for ball fields or to replace the funds elsewhere in the city, and noted that the council could consider a restrictive covenant on the property limiting its use to park or athletic purposes; removing such a covenant later would require additional council and legal action.

Community input and timing

Staff said concept planning, outreach to sports organizations, Parks Commission input, and public engagement would follow acquisition. The council and staff estimated that construction is unlikely in 2025 and that concept work and potential funding planning would extend into 2026 and beyond. Bolton & Menk was mentioned as a potential consultant for concept plans; staff said preliminary concept work could cost around $7,000 nd up depending on scope.

Action recorded

Resolutions 2025-007 (Olson property) and 2025-008 (Jurick property) authorizing purchase agreements were adopted by the council.