Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Growth Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer seeks to move up 120‑acre Summergate concept; council raises infrastructure and phasing concerns
Summary
Summergate Development presented two concept alternatives for a roughly 120‑acre South Growth area site and asked whether the council would consider advancing the site's Musa phasing to allow development sooner; council members flagged concerns about utilities, 5th Street alignment, environmental review and Met Council comp‑plan timing and declined to endorse accelerating the timeline at this meeting.
Developers with Summergate Development asked the Lake Elmo City Council on May 19 to consider advancing a roughly 120‑acre concept plan in the city's South Growth area so the project could start as early as 2028. Staff and the developer presented two alternatives — one showing a mix of single‑family lots and ~122 attached townhomes, the other showing all single‑family lots — and noted that environmental review (an EAW) and Musa‑phasing questions apply.
Summergate representatives said they have option contracts on the parcels and are willing to participate in environmental review and corridor planning; they proposed setting aside funds for future construction of the 5th Street corridor to support development. City staff and council members raised multiple concerns: utility looping and sewer connection feasibility, the 5th Street corridor alignment and whether it should be developer‑ or city‑led, legal disputes among landowners that could delay right‑of‑way assembly, mandatory environmental review and the Met Council's upcoming pause on comp‑plan amendments. Several council members said it was premature to move the site forward and urged sticking to existing Musa phasing unless clear value and infrastructure plans are in place.
Developers and staff agreed to continue dialogue and noted that a comp‑plan amendment this year could be necessary to meet a 2028 window because the Metropolitan Council will pause comp‑plan amendments during parts of the upcoming plan cycle. No formal action was taken.
