Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-25-1991 Council AgendaAGENDA CITY OF LITTLE CANADA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Wednesday, September 25, 1991 A. 1. Call To Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Roll Call Mayor Mr. Raymond Hanson Councilperson Mrs. Beverly Scalze Councilperson Mr. Bill Blesener Councilperson Mr. Rick Collova Councilperson Mr. Jim LaValle City Administrator Mr. Joel R. Hanson City Attorney Mr. Thomas Sweeney Consulting Engineer Mr. Michael C. Lynch City Planner Mr. Steve Grittman Recording Secretary Mrs. Kathy Glanzer 3. Approval of the Minutes - September 11, 1991 Regular Meeting 4. Announcements This agenda is subject to change by additions and deletions. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA September 25, 1991 B. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REVIEWS 5. Property Division - 475 Viking Drive - John & Carol Brausen Correspondence Pages 12 through 14. 6. Zoning Text Amendment to allow continued use of property for auto repair - 2884 Centerville Road - Duane Meron Correspondence Page 15. 7. Conditional Use Permit to allow relocation of refined products pipeline - Northern Portion of North Star Estates Mobilehome Park - Amoco Oil Company Correspondence Pages 16 through 24. 8. Appeal of Denial of Conditional Use Permit & Variance to allow improvement of non - conforming single- family structure - 34 Little Canada Road - Jim Marshall Correspondence Page 25. 9. Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment Correspondence Pages 26 through 52. C. PRESENTATIONS 10. Association of Metropolitan Municipalities - Bob Long, St. Paul City Council Member - Little Canada's Dues $2,313 Correspondence Under Separate Cover. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA September 25, 1991 D. STAFF AND CONSULTANT REPORTS 11. City Attorney a. Application for Pawn Brokers License & Second Hand Goods Dealers License - Lincoln Pawn & Jewelry - Richard Bents b. Curfew Ordinance Amendment Correspondence Pages 53 and 54. 12. City Engineer 13. City Planner a. Outdoor Sales /Displays Correspondence Pages 55 through 57. 14. City Administrator a. Leeward Way Development Agreement Correspondence Page 58. b. Thunder Bay Drainage Improvement Update Correspondence Page 59. c. Charitable Gambling Workshop Correspondence Page 60. d. Rider to St. Paul Water Works Contract Correspondence Pages 61 through 64. e. Dianna Lane Speed Study Correspondence Pages 65 through 71. f. Frederickshaven Building Permits Correspondence Pending. E. COUNCIL REPORTS 15. Economic Development - Mr. Hanson 16. Public Safety - Mr. Hanson 17. Utilities - Mr. Blesener 18. Building /Zoning - Mr. Collova 19. Parks & Recreation - Mrs. Scalze 20. Administration - Mr. LaValle a. Vouchers 21. Adjourn Page 3 CORRESPONDENCE TO THE AGENDA CITY OF LITTLE CANADA September 25, 1991 PAGES CORRESPONDENCE 1 -11 Planning Commission Minutes 12 -14 Property Division - 475 Viking Drive 15 Zoning Text Amendment - 2884 Centerville Road 16 -24 Conditional Use Permit to relocate refined products pipeline - Amoco Oil Company 25 Appeal of Denial of Conditional Use Permit & Variance - 34 Little Canada Road - Jim Marshall 26 -52 Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment 53 -54 Curfew Ordinance 55 -57 Outdoor Sales /Displays 58 Leeward Way Development Agreement 59 Thunder Bay Drainage Improvement Update 60 Charitable Gambling Workshop 61 -64 Rider to St. Paul Water Works Contract 65 -71 Dianna Lane Speed Study MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Little Canada, Minnesota was held on the 12th day of September, 1991 in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. Chairman Gene DeLonais called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. and the following members of the Commission were present at roll call: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Gene DeLonais Mr. Dave Bendel Ms. Claudia Drabik Mr. Steve Garske Mr. Art Herkenhoff Mr. John Keis Mr. Bob Pedersen ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Steve Grittman, City Planner Mrs. Kathy Glanzer, Rec. Secretary MINUTES There being no corrections to the minutes of the August 8, 1991 meeting, the minutes stood approved as read. BRAUSEN Mr. John Brausen appeared before the Commission PROPERTY requesting approval of the division of property at 475 DIVISION Viking Drive. Brausen stated that he would like to adjust the rear lot line of the property in order that he can place a home he plans to build on the adjacent lot without need for a variance. Brausen pointed out that he previously requested the front yard setback variance, however, the Commission recommended denial of the variance since they felt there was no hardship present to justify it. The City Planner reviewed his report dated September 9, 1991 recommending approval of the property division. Garske recommended approval of the application for property division for 475 Viking Drive as requested by Mr. John Brausen, subject to compliance with the recommendations of the City Planner as outlined in his report dated September 9, 1991. Motion seconded by Pedersen. Motion carried 7 - 0. Page 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT AUTO REPAIR 1991 Mr. Duane Meron appeared before the Commission requesting approval of a Zoning Text Amendment which would allow auto repair in the Industrial Park District. It was noted that the property in question is located at 2884 Centerville Road. The building at this location consists of 5,200 square feet, and 2,000 square feet are being used for auto repair. Previously the property had been used for truck repair. In 1985 the Zoning was changed from I -1 to I -P making the truck repair business a non - conforming use. The operator of the auto repair business reported that all of their work is conducted indoors. Also, the business faces to the east, therefore, is not visible from the road. There is only a standard business sign at the road that indicates the location of the business. The operator also reported that overhauling of engines and transmissions is not done at the site, but sent out to other businesses. The City Planner reported that the business is considered major auto repair, which is not a permitted use in the I -P District. It was pointed out that there was major truck repair business at the site until the middle of December. Pedersen asked about the Stenger auto repair business. The City Planner reported that the Stenger business was in existence at the time the Ordinance was changed, therefore, that business is legally non - conforming under the Ordinance. Pedersen asked why the truck repair was allowed to operate, and why the non - conformity is not being allowed to continue. The City Planner reported that in Staff's review of the Ordinance, truck repair and auto repair are two separate uses, therefore, the non - conformity does not continue to be grandfathered in. Meron stated that it was his understanding that as long as there is not a 6 -month lapse in operation of a business, the non - conformity would continue to be grandfathered in. Page 2 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 The City Planner stated that this was correct for the same type of business. However, the ordinance defines major truck repair and major auto repair differently. Meron pointed out that major truck repair was a more intense use, and suggested that major auto repair was an improvement to the site. The Planner replied that it is considered that there is a use switch, therefore, auto repair would require an ordinance text amendment in order to be allowed in the I -P District. Drabik asked about the precedent that would be set by amending the ordinance to allow auto repair use in the I -P District. Drabik asked if an auto repair business wanting to locate in the I -P District would have to comply with the building standards required in the District. The City Planner indicated that if the text amendment is approved, the auto repair use would be allowed, however, new construction would have to comply with the I -P building standards. Keis asked the hours of operation and whether or not there would be outside parking of vehicles. The applicant replied that business hours are from 8 or 8:30 A.M. until 5 P.M. The business does open about 7 A.M. for drop off of vehicles and remains open until 5:30 P.M. for pick up. The applicant also indicated that vehicles are worked on indoors, and any cars parked outside overnight are keep near the backdoor area. The applicant reported that the business has a very low profile. DeLonais reported that the Ducharmes' have indicated that they have had no problems with the business. Garske pointed out that if the Ordinance is amended to allow this auto repair business, the City could end up with others in the I -P District. The Planner replied that this was correct, but noted that any new construction would have to conform with building and landscaping requirements set forth in the Ordinance. DeLonais asked if this auto repair business could be grandfathered in since there was a truck repair business in the same location. Page 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 The City Planner replied that reading through the ordinance, he does not believe this would be appropriate since the auto repair business could not be considered a continuation of the previous use. Keis pointed out that the use that currently exists is less intense than the truck repair business. The City Planner replied that the Zoning Ordinance treats the two uses differently. DeLonais pointed out that the business is not doing engine overhauling or transmission work, and asked if it would be appropriate to amend the ordinance to allow this type of use in the I -P District. The City Planner suggested that the definition of auto repair could be changed adding another category of auto repair use, one that does not include engine or transmission overhauling. Herkenhoff pointed out that the proposal is for a less intense use than what was previously at the site. The Planner replied that the ordinance differentiates between passenger class vehicles and commercial trucks. Therefore, you could not say that the same type of use is being continued. Drabik suggested that the use was probably not included in the i -P District in order to clean up this district. The City Planner stated that the use was taken out of the ordinance because of the performance standards that were included in the I -P District. The Planner pointed out that if the use is added to the Ordinance, any future auto repair business will have to meet those performance standards. The Planner stated that he did not feel the use presented any significant problems. The Planner's primary concern is where an auto repair facility asks to sell vehicles that they have fixed up. The I -P District was not set up to attract retail traffic. If that issue can be avoided, the Planner felt there was no problem with the auto repair use. Garske pointed out the campus -type setting that the I -P District is trying to achieve, and felt it would be difficult to get a good, clean auto repair business that would meet the I -P standards. However, Garske pointed out that the truck repair business was grandfathered in, and asked if the applicant would have legal grounds for denial of an auto repair license in this same location. Page 4 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 Bendel suggested that the matter be tabled and that the Planning Commission ask the staff to review the materiality of their distinction between auto and truck repair. Bendel stated that he was inclined to vote against the ordinance change, but is unclear how the distinction was made between the two uses. Drabik asked how many major and minor auto repair businesses there were in the City. The Planner replied that staff will obtain this information. Bob DeBace suggested that the use be allowed as a conditional use in the District. That way the applicant would have to make application, and meet the terms and conditions set forth by the City before a permit is granted. DeBace felt this would offer the City good control. Mr. Bendel recommended that the application for Zoning Ordinance Amendment submitted by Duane Meron be tabled and that City Staff review their determination that the auto repair use not be grandfathered in, specifically evaluating the materiality of their distinction between truck repair and major auto repair. Motion seconded by Garske. Motion carried 7 - 0. APPEAL Mr. Jim McBride, McBride Construction, representing 34 LITTLE Jim Marshall, appeared before the Commission to appeal CANADA ROAD the Council's denial of application for Conditional Use Permit and Variance to allow the improvement of a non - conforming single - family structure to bring the structure up to minimum standards and allow improvements to the property in excess of 50% of the fair market value. The property in question is located at 34 Little Canada Road. Bendel pointed out the concerns expressed at the previous Planning Commission meeting regarding parking and appearance of the structure. Bendel pointed out that McBride assured the Commission that he would put together a landscape plan for the property. McBride presented a revised plan that was presented to the Council at its last meeting. Garske asked why Jim Marshall is now the applicant. Page 5 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 McBride explained that the previous applicant, Gloria Favis, has given the property back to Jim Marshall. McBride reported that he is here this evening representing Marshall since he could better answer any questions related to construction design. McBride reported that Marshall has owned the property for about two years and was not aware of the problems with the structure when he bought it. McBride reported that the applicant is only asking to be able to remodel the structure and plans to live in the structure once the remodeling is completed. Garske pointed out that a variance is being requested, and the only basis for approving a variance is economic, which does not qualify. Economic circumstances are not enough to justify granting a variance. Herkenhoff asked the County's plans for Little Canada Road, and if there are any long -range plans for development along this road. DeLonais suggested that the Planning Commission and the City Council need to put their heads together and establish some long -range plans for this section of Little Canada Road. DeLonais asked if the City could establish a new district for the homes in this area due to their non - conformity. The City Planner replied that this could not be done since the area is overlaid by DNR Shoreland Regulations which the City must uphold. Garske agreed with the need to determine the County's plans for the area. The City Planner noted that the variance being requested is only to the 50o rule, and not whether the use will continue. Basically, the variance is asking whether the applicant can take nothing and make a house out of it. Pedersen pointed out that there are a couple of other homes in the area in very bad shape. McBride pointed out that at the last Planning Commission meeting, the Commission suggested that if additional improvements were made, and the Building Inspector approved the proposal, the Commission would support it. Now the Commission sounds like it is against the proposal. Page 6 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 Bendel pointed out that the story has changed from the last meeting, and also pointed out that at the last meeting the applicant was different, and the Commission was dealing with a person who was very stressed. Herkenhoff agreed that tonight the matter is being discussed without the emotions that were present at the last meeting. McBride did not feel the consideration of the matter should change because the applicants are different. Drabik expressed concern that there has been some game - playing in this matter, noting that the Planning Commission has never gotten the information that it has requested throughout the process. Drabik suggested that the entire matter is about money, and a variance cannot be granted for an economic hardship. Herkenhoff asked if the City wanted to see the property as an empty lot or a structure that conforms to the others in the area. DeLonais suggested that the proposal before the Commission was no more than tearing down the existing structure and rebuilding a new one. McBride disagreed, and reported that he has not opened up the structure to determine the extent of replacement as yet. McBride suggested that the roof joists were fine. Drabik suggested that going beyond the 50% was a rebuild. McBride protested the $9,000 valuation that has been established for the property, and suggested that he may pursue that matter in another direction. Bendel suggested that this may be the route that should be taken. Bendel pointed out that the variance question is coming down to money, and economic hardship is not a basis for granting a variance. McBride pointed out that the owner just wants to remodel his property so that it conforms to the others on the block. Pat Molihan, 37 Round Lake Trail, reported that he lives across the lake from the property in question and he does not appreciate looking at the house in the condition that it is. Molihan reported that there are three properties in this area that are in bad shape, and he is disappointed that the City does not show more concern about aesthetics. Page 7 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 DeLonais again stated that the City and Planning Commission have to decide what they want for the area. Herkenhoff stated that if the decision is that homes will remain in this area, he has no objection to this house being brought up to Code standards. The Commission pointed out the lack of information from the applicant throughout the process, and the different information that has been shared tonight. Drabik suggested that when this matter reaches the Council, that a member of the Planning Commission be present at the meeting. Drabik was concerned that the information conveyed by McBride to the Council was not conveyed exactly as it occurred at the Commission meeting. Drabik stated that right now the only basis for the variance was economic, and she cannot support it. Pedersen stated that his inclination was to deny the variance and make a recommendation on the long -term use of the area. Pedersen stated that he was not sure what could be done with the area other than use it for park land. Herkenhoff pointed out that the area is now generating property taxes, and asked how much money the City would lose if the property becomes vacant in the future. Pedersen suggested that the 50% figure was put into the ordinance to trigger transition of areas exactly like this one. Pedersen felt that long -term planning was needed for the area, and once that is done the property owners put on notice of what those plans are. McBride felt that property owners should be allowed to upgrade their properties. If the long -term plans for the area are something other than residential, McBride felt that the entire area should be addressed at the same time. Pedersen pointed out that the City is not suggesting to change the rules, and that the 50% provision was put into the ordinance for specifically this purpose. McBride suggested that another alternative would be for him to have the property reappraised, and suggested that he would then do everything he could to work within the 50% rule. McBride stated that after the last Planning Commission meeting, he thought that he was doing everything that was asked of him. Page 8 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 Pedersen stated that he agreed that his opinion has changed from the last meeting. Pedersen stated that for the short -term he can agree with the remodeling, however, he cannot agree for the long -term. DeLonais stated that it is also up to McBride to find out how structurally sound the building is. Keis suggested that it was not fair to the applicant to have him spend more money on this matter if the long -range plan for the area does not include residential use. The Commission suggested that long -range planning be done for the area before acting on the application. With regard to the 50% rule, McBride pointed out that some of the improvements being required by the Building Inspector are not required under UBC, such as replacement of windows. Items like these have raised the cost of the remodeling. McBride suggested that the remodeling project may be able to come in under the wire without need for a variance if only UBC requirements are met. Pedersen recommended that action on the application for Conditional Use Permit and Variance for 34 Little Canada Road submitted by Jim Marshall be tabled for 60 days pending a recommendation to the Council by the Planning Commission for long -term plans for the area. Motion seconded by Herkenhoff. Motion carried 7 - 0. Drabik suggested that in addition to long -range planning for this area, the Commission should hold a workshop on code enforcement issues. Drabik suggested that the Commission discuss what it would like the City to look like. CONDITIONAL The City Planner reviewed the application for USE PERMIT Conditional Use Permit submitted by Amoco Oil Company AMOCO to allow the replacement of approximately 1,500 feet of refined products pipeline to increase setback from residential structures. The Planner noted that Amoco is proposing to move their existing pipeline approximately 30 feet from its present location. Mr. Herkenhoff recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Amoco Oil Company to allow the replacement of approximately 1,500 feet of refined Page 9 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 products pipeline to increase setback from residential structures subject to the recommendations of the City Planner as contained in his report dated September 9, 1991. Motion seconded by Keis. Motion carried 7 - 0. OUTDOOR The Commission reviewed the information on how SALES & neighboring communities handle outdoor sales and DISPLAYS displays. The City Planner reported that Little Canada's ordinance requires a conditional use permit for any type of outdoor sales and displays. If it is the thought of the Commission to allow temporary outdoor sales and displays by staff - issued permit, then a new category should be set up. The Planner pointed out that a conditional use permit is required for gas station /convenience stores, therefore, outdoor sales and displays can be addressed in the initial application process. The problem comes up when outdoor sales and displays were not addressed in the initial application, and the conditional use process must be gone through again. Pedersen felt that a permanent outdoor display should continue to require a conditional use permit, and should be restricted to a small enough area so that it is not overwhelming. The Commission discussed and reached the consensus that a staff - issued permit should be used for outdoor sales and displays of a temporary nature. The Commission discussed the length of time a temporary permit should be issued for, and consensus was that a business should be allowed a temporary outdoor sales /display permit for two weeks, twice per year. Garske recommended that the City continue to require a conditional use permit for permanent outdoor sales /displays and that a temporary administrative permit be issued for temporary outdoor sales /displays subject to the staff's approval of a site plan that does not restrict traffic, etc. and that businesses be limited to temporary permits for two week periods, twice per year. Motion seconded by Pedersen. Motion carried 7 - 0. Page 10 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, PARK MASTER PLAN LONG -RANGE PLANNING ADJOURN 1991 DeLonais noted that the Planning Commission has received copies of the proposed Park Master Plan. DeLonais suggested that the Commission review it over the next month, and be prepared to discuss it at the next meeting. It was the consensus of the Commission to begin next month's meeting at 6:30 P.M. for the purpose of discussing long -range plans for the Little Canada Road area adjacent to Round Lake. The Commission requested that the City Planner provide them with information on the County's plans for Little Canada Road, as well as information regarding how the DNR's shoreland regulations effect the area. The Commission also asked for information about the amount of taxes that the area currently generates for the City. Herkenhoff recommended that the meeting be adjourned. Motion seconded by Drabik. Motion carried 7 - 0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kathy G1ahzer Recording Secretary Page 11 Applicant Owner c c. Little Canada, Minnesota APPLICATION FORM PAID N9 576 Rec. No Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Zoning District Amendment Variance Text Amendment /Subdivision Subdivision '$ OO Other Planned Unit Development Plan Review )04N + CAR-01- ,8Rfilu,5cr3 02337 eCAYTO2viq.C- 51153 -5 y05! (Name) (Address) (Phone) (Name) Property Location (Street Address and Legal Description): L)75 E. /4N&- <J u€ (Address) (Phone) Loy Be- /ti b �v N °C 1-I-1 Description and /or Reason for Request (Cite Ordinance Sections): �1T Is PO/ Air We- o&ft) /jO( f{ 475 6467- /II< /1)6 - 1/U UQ + 7f-Je. LOT Be wnNc T�"- we_ /UecD TO Ch{AN6-�. LOT !.i //725 70 ,)El) 77) 774E LOT 070' ON rite. Cuc.sT cS /D2. ltd Pzg� or /0' C72/ue uy &sxs ernen)?- 3 #97 ies At-so ar' 7a T Theaur -7-H - z or 7v /nttr 6e.Ts-#9-e4 AQ u/gem @W O' - In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zon- ing and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional applica- tion expense. 4,(Aga4 (Signatur?Doa AApplicjaAt) (Date) WHITE— Office CANARY— Customer PINK —File GOLD — Planner Page G canaa 1---- ,4� KNorthwest Associated Consultants, Inc. C U R B A N P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H PLANNING REPORT TO: Little Canada Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: 9 September 1991 RE: Little Canada - Brausen Resubdivision FILE NO: 758.09 - 91.25 BACKGROUND Mr. and Mrs. John and Carol Brausen own property on Viking Drive between McMenomy and Edgerton Street. They had requested a variance to locate a new home within the 30 foot setback area north of the house at 475 Viking Drive. This variance was denied due to a finding that a true hardship did not exist on the parcel. Since that time, the Brausens have purchased the lot and house at 475 Viking. They are now requesting to resubdivide the two parcels to move the lot line separating the two building sites twenty feet closer to the existing house to the south. ANALYSIS This solution provides an excellent alternative to the situation and previous variance request. The new home will meet the 30 foot setback requirement and the 475 Viking Drive parcel will still greatly exceed Ordinance requirements. The resulting parcel will be approximately 19,285 square feet in area with a new rear setback of over 60 feet. We recommend approval of the Brausen resubdivision subject to a new survey of the property being drawn showing the new dimensions. cc: Kathy Glanzer John Palacio Tom Sweeney John and Carol Brausen 5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837 Page 13 ;70 u. f '2`00'•= — 1 GO, / — 'LZ ga• 1 F/P �YV /If Carl: p�t' J a. EUN` CaZEM"vr- r^ mt I 1' 11 I 1. •— ■..i0 Cie. ^� � / fit) i —� rrvp�S 1 I \ � 1 • 1 / _ v� / :L. -- - / Z N , S18 128 06- ' ? 4' Fr o 42 20'• E f pose� 1 r '_ • Dr;YEwc,j do' 'i tn 0 33324+° Ms 4"i' �n in / `"al, 1 °\t1 cn 4 �5 1� . 1 \�� I - c?-ti 3p t ra.1 CV' \ , ve �� Cr,d. N 79°55, /G4-I•47 - 170.44 ,1�'w N. R O rrom W line. \,101`to` 0 tr r M c o, 0 .. KI NG GRf VE 3nW0.y 3o -i18 E. Page i4 u.t ,0 0 —75 .00 i, c64,- Gift UQ,ve 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 September 20, 1991 TO: Mayor Hanson and Members of the City Council FROM: Kathy Glanzer, Administrative Assistant RE: Public Hearing - Zoning Text Amendment MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson At its recent meeting, the Planning Commission tabled action of the application submitted by Duane Meron for Zoning Text Amendment to allow the continued use of property at 2884 Centerville Road for auto repair pending additional information from the City Planner. Therefore, Council action this evening would be to continue the public hearing pending receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Page 15 c c Little Canada, Minnesota APPLICATION FORM PAID N° 579 Rec. No Comprehensive Plan Amendment X Conditional Use Permit Zoning District Amendment Variance Text Amendment Subdivision Other Planned Unit Development Plan Review Applicant Amoco Oil Company One Mid America Plaza Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181 (Name) - (Address) (708) 990 -6100 (Phone) Owner (Name) (Address) (Phone) Property Location (Street Address and Legal Description): Portion of the N 1/4 Sec. 6, T 29 N, R 23 W, Ramsey County, MN Description and /or Reason for Request (Cite Ordinance Sections): To replace approximately 1,500 ft of the 10" refined products pipeline to correct an encroachment of 25 mobilehomes which are located above or near the pipeline. In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zon- ing and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional applica- tion expense. (Signature of Applicant) WHITE— Office CANARY— Customer PINK —File GOLD — Planner Page 16 8/30/91 (Date) 0/ W/4 ceewala 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117-1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 PROPOSAL: CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the replacement of approximately 1,500 feet of refined products pipeline to increase setback from residential structures. The property is zoned I -P District. LOCATION: Northerly portion of North Star Estates Mobilehome Park within NSP Easement APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER: PLANNING Amoco Oil Company (Easement Holder) One Mid America Plaza Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181 COMMISSION: The Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter at their September 12, 1991 meeting. The meeting begins at 7:30 P.M. and will be held in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. CITY COUNCIL: Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council on Wednesday, September 25, 1991 at 7:30 P.M., or as soon thereafter as parties may be heard, in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. All persons with reference to this matter will be heard during the Planning Commission meeting on September 12, 1991 and the City Council meeting on Wednesday, September 25, 1991. Joel R. Hanson City Administrator Page 17 Amoco Oil Co. One Mid America Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181 Attn: Dennis Placke State of MN Trust Exempt 109 Court House St. Paul, MN 55102 _ 06- 29 -22 -11 -0002 06- 29 -22 -11 -0014 ; City of Little Canada 06- 29 -22 -11 -0001 John Larson Sharon Larson 1122 Edgewater Street Arden Hills, MN 55112 06- 29 -22 -11 -0015 James & Susan Burton 19699 Forest Blvd. N. Forest Lake, MN 55025 06- 29 -22 -11 -0016 Best Auto & Tire Center 3011 Country Drive Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -11 -0016 Robert DeBace Gordie Howe 127 E. County Road C Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -11 -0017 MN Department of Transportation 3485 Hadley Avenue N. Oakdale, MN Fra -Dor, Inc. 3066 Spruce Street St. Paul, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -12 -0001 Frank Frattalone 3066 Spruce Street St. Paul, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -12 -0001 nR_2Q_92 -21 -0030 State of MN Trust Exempt 109 Court House St. Paul, MN 55102 06- 29 -22 -12 -0002 Jerome Carle 3101 Country Drive Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -12 -0003 North Star Estates 3570 Lexington Avenue N #321 St. Paul, MN 55126 06- 29 -22 -12 -0004 North Star Estates P. 0. Box 2386 No. St. Paul. MN 55102 06- 29 -22 -12 -0005 D & H Enterprises 3570 Lexington Avenue N #321 St. Paul, MN 55126 06- 29 -22 -12 -0005 RLF Of MN 1690 University Ave #180 St. Paul, MN 55104 06- 29 -22 -13 -0015 Wellington III Associates c/o Yorktin Ltd., Inc. 1690 University Ave W #550 St. Paul, MN 55104 06- 29 -22 -13 -0016 Northum Berland Assoc. 1690 University Ave W St. Paul, MN 55104 06- 29 -22 -13 -0017 Dennis & Patricia O'Connell 2989 Country Drive Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -14 -0002 Douglas Johnston 1801 Courtyard Way #106 Naples, FL 33962 06- 29 -22 -13 -0003 Quebec Partners 949 Sibley Memorial Highway St. Paul, MN 55118 06- 29 -22 -13 -0003 Richard & Patricia Schreier Gerald, Arlene, Robert & Darlene Mogren 2125 DeSoto Avenue Little Canada, MN 55117 A J Ryan Landscaping Supply 3100 A Spruce Street Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -21 -0037 06- 29 -22- 21-0038 Bruce Olson 196 Ryan Lane Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -21 -0037 f f Leroy & Genevieve Rossow 3101 Spruce Street Little Canada, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -21 -0038 Richard Schreier 2125 DeSoto Street St. Paul, MN 55117 06- 29 -22 -24 -0016 St. Paul Water Department City Hall Annex 25 West 4th Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Page 19 August 30, 1991 City of Little Canada 515 Little Canada Road Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 Attn: City Administrator Reference: Amoco Oil Pipeline Replacement Dear Sirs: Amoco Oil Company One Mid America Plaza Suite 300 Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois 60181 Attached for your review and approval is the 'Conditional Use Permit' application and filing requirements. I have also attached for your review a copy of the proposed route for the new pipeline, pictures showing the area of concern, and the written statement describing the reasons for the proposed work. I would greatly appreciate all efforts to expedite this permit due to the onset of the winter months. If you have any questions or if I can help in any way please feel free to call me at (708) 990 -3746. Sincerely, Cavn;a A 4@ _ Dennis A. Placke Staff Engineer cc: K.C. Andreen W.A. Moore T.M. Thompson Page 20 Amoco Oil Pipeline Replacement In a continued effort for correcting encroachments Amoco Oil Company identified an area of 25 trailer homes above or near the products pipeline in Little Canada, Minnesota. After attempting legal action to get the owners of the North Star Estates to move, Amoco now is proposing to adjust and upgrade this pipeline segment for the safety of the public. The pipeline is a 10 inch high pressure pipeline which transports refined products. The project was identified in 1989 and originally was to replacement and adjust the pipeline in a marshy area directly north of the trailers. However, after completing the design and ordering the materials we found out that the City of Little Canada was to construct a hydraulic retention pond in this same area to provide flood protection to the residents of the North Star Estates trailer park. It is now planned to relocate the pipeline approximately 35 ft north of the trailers and 15 ft south of the retention pond. This line segment is approximately 1,500 ft in length and will run from the parking area on the west edge, along the retention pond, across Country Road and will tie -in at the eastern end near I -35. The retention pond runs form approximately Station 0 +00 to Station 1175 +00. An adjustment will be made at Station 1175 +00 to increase the spacing distance from 35 ft to 75 ft from the trailer homes. Also a bored crossing of Country Road will be required to enable a tie -in to the existing pipeline. I have attached photographs and a diagram for your convenience and review of the proposed route. The pipeline will be a heavier wall thickness pipe and will be an additional one foot below grade, for a total cover of 5 ft. A hydrostatic pressure test and radiographic examination of all welded joints will be conducted to Amoco's Safety Policy. This pipeline replacement and adjustment to Amoco's facilities is to increase the safety to the people of the North Star Estates and the community of Little Canada. This corridor is the only option available for the pipeline relocation, and your approval of this permit is requested. Dennis A. Placke Staff Engineer Page 21 Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. U R B A N P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H MEMORANDUM TO: Little Canada Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: 9 September 1991 RE: Little Canada - Amoco Pipeline. CUP FILE NO: 758.09 - 91.22 Amoco Oil Company has requested a conditional use permit to replace a current pipeline which lies under or near several mobile homes with a new section of pipe approximately 35 feet from the mobile homes. This project requires a conditional use permit as an essential service pipeline for non -local transmission under Zoning Ordinance Section 903.100.D. The requirements of this section are as follows: 1. Prior to the installation of any of the previous essential services, the owner of such service shall file with the Zoning Administrator, all maps and other pertinent information as deemed necessary for the Planning Commission to review the proposed project. 2. The Zoning Administrator shall transmit the map and accompanying information to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendations regarding the project's relationship to the Comprehensive Plan and parts thereof. A part of this review shall be a written report from the City Engineer. 3. The Planning Commission shall report in writing to the City Council its findings as to compliance of the proposed project with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Council shall hold the necessary public hearings as prescribed by this Ordinance for conditional use. 5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837 Page 22 5. In considering the applications for the placement of essential services, as regulated by this subdivision, the City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed project upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the City, existing and anticipated; and the effect of the proposed project upon the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission is to make a finding as to the project's compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. In our review, the Comprehensive Plan has little to say to this specific subject, with the exception of general references to the protection of public health, safety, and welfare. We believe that this project is definitely in the interests of improving public safety. We recommend approval of the project subject to the review of the City Engineer and Building Official. cc: Kathy Glanzer John Palacio Tom Sweeney Mike Lynch Margaret Ann Hartzog 2 Page 23 Ptly.t • • • . •• • co eJ ID cs• hn 7,484.1„— A 5 , • 8 r a 1r, 1 1 0 N zi I 1 0! C is 0 .• • •••• •••••■••• •.• I,. • Page 24'° 515 Little Canada Road, (612) 484 -2177 Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 September 20, 1991 MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson TO: Mayor Hanson and Members of the City Council FROM: Kathy Glanzer, Administrative Assistant RE: Appeal of Deniel of Conditional Use Permit & Variance COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson At its recent meeting, the Planning Commission tabled action of the application submitted by Jim Marshall appealing the denial of Conditional Use Permit and Variance to allow the improvement of a non - conforming single - family structure at 34 Little Canada Road pending long -range planning for the area. Therefore, Council action this evening would be to continue the public hearing pending receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Page 25 7d*Z ceerzteack 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 PROPOSAL: CITY COUNCIL: CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Request for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, specifically update of the Flood Plain Ordinance as required by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Federal regulations. Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council on Wednesday, September 25, 1991 at 7:30 P.M., or as soon thereafter as parties may be heard, in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. All persons with reference to this matter will be heard during the City Council meeting on Wednesday, September 25, 1991. Joel R. Hanson City Administrator 13a-566' 2 6 A Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. C U R B A N P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H MEMORANDUM TO: Little Canada Planning Commission FROM: Allan Hunting /Stephen Grittman DATE: 5 August 1991 RE: Little Canada - Zoning Ordinance Revision - Floodplain FILE NO: 758.09 - 91.11 This memo forwards the draft Little Canada Floodplain Ordinance update as required by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Federal regulations. The updated Ordinance contains all the requirements in the new DNR Model Ordinance while maintaining the original Little Canada format. Our office has already sent an initial draft checklist to the DNR for review. The comments received back from the DNR have been incorporated into the draft document. Review of this document is scheduled for the 8 August Planning Commission meeting. cc: Kathy Glanzer John Palacio Thomas Sweeney 5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837 Page 27 * 916. "FP ", FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT 916.010. PURPOSE. The intent of this Section is to provide for the protection and preservation of water channels and those portions of the adjoining floodplains which are reasonably required to carry and discharge a regional flood and are subject to inundation by regional floods. (Regional flood shall be defined according to standards established by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and illustrated on the Little Canada Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) effective 3 November 1982.) It is the intent of this district to be applied to those areas which if left unrestricted, could result in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce, utilities and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for floodplain protection and relief and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare. This district is furthermore created and applied in compliance with requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 103F and 462, as amended. In addition, Minnesota Regulations N.R. 85, as may be amended, shall be consulted in administering and applying this district. 916.020. WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY. This Section does not apply that areas outside the "FP ", Floodplain District boundaries or land uses allowed within this district will be free from flooding or flood damages. This Section shall not create liability on the part of the City of Little Canada or any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages which result from reliance on this Ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. 916.030. DISTRICT APPLICATION. The "FP ", Floodplain District shall be applied to and superimposed upon all districts as existing or amended by the text and map of this Ordinance. The regulations and requirements imposed by the "FP ", Floodplain District shall be in addition to those established by other districts of this Ordinance. The "FP ", Floodplain District shall be established based upon the specific information contained in the Flood Boundary, Floodway and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (dated 3 November 1982) and the Flood Insurance Study for the- City of Little Canada (dated 3 May 1982). All aforementioned official maps and documents are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be an integral part of this Ordinance. A. Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. The Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall be an elevation no lower than one (1) foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the flood plain that result from designation of a floodway. Page 28 r B. Interpretation: 1. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this Ordinance shall be held to be minimum requirements and shall be liberally construed in favor of the Governing Body and shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any other powers granted by State Statutes. 2. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions: It is not intended by this Ordinance to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this Ordinance imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. All other ordinances inconsistent with this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency only. 3. Warnings and Disclaimer of Liability: This Ordinance does not imply that areas outside the flood plain districts or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from flooding or flood damages. This Ordinance' shall not create liability on the part of Little Canada or any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages that result from reliance on this Ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. 4. Severability: If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this Ordinance is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby. 5. Definitions: Unless specifically defined in Section 902 of the Zoning Ordinance, words or phrases used in this Ordinance shall be interpreted so as to give them the same meaning as they have in common usage and so as to give this Ordinance its most reasonable application. 916.040. FLOODPLAIN SUBDISTRICTS. The area within a Floodplain District is further divided into floodway, flood fringe, and general floodplain. A floodway includes the channel of a river or stream and those portions of the adjoining floodplain which are required to carry and discharge the regional flood. A flood fringe includes the area outside of the floodway, but subject to inundation by the regional flood. The general floodplain shall include those areas designated as unnumbered A Zones on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Page 29 A. Compliance. No new structure or land shall hereafter be used and no structure shall be located, extended, converted, or structurally altered without full compliance with the terms of this Ordinance and other applicable regulations which apply to uses within the jurisdiction of this Ordinance. Within the Floodway, Flood Fringe and General Flood Plain Districts, all uses not listed as permitted uses or conditional uses in Sections 916.080 and 916.090 that follow, respectively, shall be prohibited. In addition, a caution is provided here that: 1. New manufactured homes, replacement manufactured homes and certain travel trailers and travel vehicles are subject to the general provisions of this Ordinance and specifically Section 916.110. 2. Modifications, additions, structural alterations or repair after damage to existing nonconforming structures and nonconforming uses of structures or land are regulated by the general provisions of this Ordinance and specifically Section 916.140; and 3. As -built elevations for elevated or flood proofed structures must be certified by ground surveys and flood proofing techniques must be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer or architect as specified in the general provisions of this Ordinance and specifically as stated in Section 916.060 of this Ordinance. 916.050. RULES FOR INTERPRETATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES. The boundaries of the Floodplain District shall be determined by scaling distances on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, dated 3 November 1982. Where interpretation is needed as to the exact location of the boundaries of the District as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, as for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions, the City Engineer shall make the necessary interpretation. The person contesting the location of the district boundary. shall be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case and to submit his own technical evidence if he so desires. 916.060. ZONING CERTIFICATE REQUIRED. A Zoning Certificate shall be required in the "FP ", Floodplain District prior to the erection, addition, or alteration of any building, structure, use or land; and prior to the change, modification, or extension of a non - conforming building, structure or use. A. Application and Fee. A Zoning Certificate shall be applied for from the Zoning Administrator: Said application shall be. made in triplicate and shall Page 30 include the following where applicable: plans in triplicate drawn to scale, showing the nature, location, dimensions, and elevations of the lot; existing or proposed structures, fill, or storage of materials; and the location of the foregoing in relation to the stream or lake channel. Any application for a building permit which contains the above information shall be deemed to be an application for a Zoning Certificate. B. Determination. Within ten (10) ,days after the application for a Zoning Certificate, the City Engineer shall determine whether the change, modification, or alteration conforms to the requirements of all applicable City and State regulations and ordinances. This time limit for determination of acceptability shall be automatically extended should referral to, or permit from, another governmental jurisdiction be required. The applicant shall be advised in writing of the City Engineer's determination and findings and if acceptable, a Zoning Certificate shall be issued. C. Non - Conforming Use. Where a use or structure which does not currently conform with the requirements of this Section is extended or substantially altered, the Certificate of Occupancy shall specifically state the manner in which the non - conforming structure or use differs from the provisions of this Ordinance. D. Certification of Compliance. Zoning Certificates, Conditional Use Permits and Certificates of Occupancy issued on the basis of approved plans and applications authorize only the use, arrangement and construction set forth in such approved plans and applications, and no other use, arrangement, or construction. Any use, arrangement or construction at variance with that authorized shall be deemed violation of this Ordinance, and punishable as provided in Section 925 of this Ordinance. The applicant shall be required to submit certification by a registered professional engineer, registered architect, or registered land surveyor that the finished fill and building elevations were accomplished in compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. Flood- proofing measures shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or registered architect. 1. State and Federal Permits. Prior to granting a permit or processing an application for a conditional use permit or variance, the Zoning Administrator shall determine that the applicant has obtained all necessary State and ,Federal Permits. Page 31 E. Record of First Floor Elevation. The Zoning Administrator shall maintain a record of the elevation of the first floor (including basement) and of all new structures or additions to existing structures in the floodplain districts. He shall also maintain a record of the elevations to which structures or additions to structures are flood - proofed. F. Flood Insurance Notice and Record Keeping. The Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant for a variance that: 1) The issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the base flood level will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance up to amounts as high as $25 for $100 of insurance coverage and 2)Such construction below the 100 -year or regional flood level increases risks to life and property. Such notification shall be maintained with a record of all variance actions. A community shall maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and report such variances issued in its annual or biennial, and report such variances issued in its annual or biennial report submitted to the Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program. 916.070. AMENDMENTS AND VARIANCES. A. In addition to the procedures and requirements for amendments and variances as established in Sections 921 and 922 of this Ordinance, the Commissioner of Natural Resources shall be given at minimum a ten (10) day notice of any public hearing, and a review and written report must be obtained from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and any other governmental body or commission having jurisdiction for such changes, additions or modifications affecting a "FP ", Floodplain District. The Commissioner of Natural Resources shall be advised in writing of all decisions made regarding amendments and variances within ten (10) days of such action. B. No amendment or variance shall have the effect of allowing a prohibited use within a "FP ", Floodplain District, permit a lesser degree of flood protection than the established flood protection elevation, and /or permit standards lower than those required under applicable state law. C. The floodplain designation on the Official Zoning Map shall not be removed from floodplain areas unless it can be shown that the designation is in error or that the area has been filled to or above the elevation of the regional flood and is contiguous to lands outside the floodplain. Special exceptions to this rule may be Page 32 permitted by the Commissioner of Natural Resources if he determines that, through other measures, lands are adequately protected for the intended use. D. All amendments to this Ordinance, including amendments to the Official Zoning Map, must be submitted to and approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources prior to adoption. Changes in the Official Zoning Map must meet the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Technical Conditions and Criteria and must receive prior FEMA approval before adoption. the Commissioner of Natural Resources must be given ten (10) days written notice of all hearings to consider an amendment to this Ordinance and said notice shall include a draft of the ordinance amendment or technical study under consideration. 916.080. PERMITTED USES. Uses having a low flood damage potential and not obstructing flood flows shall be permitted within the "FP ", Floodplain District to the extent that they are not prohibited by any other ordinances and are allowed within all districts which jointly apply, and provided they do not require structure, fill, or storage of materials or equipment. In addition, no use shall adversely affect the capacity of the channels, or floodway of any tributary to the main stream, drainage ditch or any other drainage facility or system. Permitted uses are limited to the following: A. Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries, forestry, horticulture, truck farming, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting. B. Residential: lawns, gardens, parking areas, docks, piers and play area. C. Industrial- Business: loading areas and parking areas. D. Public and private recreational uses. 916.090. CONDITIONAL USES. The following uses require a Conditional Use Permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by Section 921 of this Ordinance. In addition, the City Engineer shall determine whether the proposed conditional use location is within a floodway or flood fringe area. Upon such determination, the applicable conditions, provisions and restrictions shall be imposed. The Commissioner of Natural Resources shall be given at minimum ten (10) days notice of the required public hearing and shall be advised in writing of decisions made concerning any conditional use within ten (10) days of the decision. Page 33 A. Floodway. 1. The following open space uses require accessory structures (temporary or permanent), or fill or storage of materials or equipment. These uses may be permitted in the Floodway District only after the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit: a. Uses or structures accessory to open space or conditional uses. b. Extraction of sand, gravel, and other materials. c. Marinas and water control structures. d. Railroads, streets, bridges, utility transmission lines, and pipelines. e. Storage yards for equipment, machinery or material. f. Placement of fill. 2. Standards for Floodway Conditional Uses. a. No structure (temporary or permanent), fill (including fill for roads and levees), deposit, obstruction, storage of materials or equipment, or other uses may be allowed as a conditional use which, acting alone or in combination with existing or anticipated future uses, adversely affect the capacity of the floodway, or increases flood heights. Consideration of the effects of a proposed use shall be based upon the reasonable assumption that there will be an equal degree of encroachment extending for a significant reach on both sides of the stream. All conditional use applications shall be accompanied by a floodway impact statement drafted by a registered engineer. The Zoning Administrator shall be responsible for submitting the proposal and application to the Department of Natural Resources and any other governmental unit having jurisdiction over the area for review and comment. b. Fill. (1) Any fill deposited in the floodway shall be no more than the minimal amount necessary to conduct a conditional use. Generally, fill shall be limited to that needed to grade or landscape for that use and shall not in any way further obstruct the flow of flood waters. Page 34 (2) Spoil from dredging or sand and gravel operations shall not be deposited in the floodway unless it can be done in accordance with (1) above. (3) Such fill or other materials shall be protected against erosion by rip -rap, vegetative cover, or bulkheading. (4) Dredge spoil sites and sand and gravel operations shall not be allowed in the floodway unless a 'long -term site development plan is submitted which includes an erosion /sedimentation prevention element to the plan. c. Structures. (1) Structures shall not be designed for human habitation. (2) Structures shall have a low flood damage potential. (3) Structures, if permitted, shall be constructed and placed on the building site so as to offer the minimum obstruction to the flow of flood waters. (a) Whenever possible, structures shall be constructed with the longitudinal axis parallel to the direction of the flood flow, and (b) So far as practicable, structures shall be placed approximately on the same flood flow lines as those of adjoining structures. (4) The structure must be adequately anchored to prevent flotation,.collapse or lateral movement of the structure and shall be designed to equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls. (5) Any mechanical and utility equipment in a structure must be elevated to or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation or properly flood proofed. (6) Storage of material and equipment: Page 35 (a) The storage or processing of materials that are in time of flooding buoyant, flammable, explosive, or could be injurious to human, animal, or plant life, is prohibited. (b) Storage of other material or equipment may be allowed if not subject to major damage by floods and firmly anchored to prevent flotation or readily removable from the area within the time available after flood warning and in accordance with a plan approved by Little Canada. (7) Garbage and Solid Waste Disposal. No conditional use permits for garbage and waste disposal sites shall be issued for floodway areas. (8) Structural works for flood control such as dams, levees, dikes, and floodwalls, shall be allowed only upon issuance of a conditional use permit. In addition, any proposed work in the beds of public waters which will change the course, current or cross - section of the waters shall be subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 103G and other applicable statutes. B. Flood Fringe. 1. Uses allowed within the floodway. 2. Conditional uses as allowed and regulated in all districts which jointly apply, plus as may be hereinafter modified. a. Residential Uses. Residences shall be constructed on fill with the first floor or basement floor at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The finished fill elevation shall be no lower than one (1) foot below the regulatory flood protection elevation for the particular area and shall extend at such elevation at least fifteen (15) feet beyond the limits of any structure or building erected thereon. Where existing streets or utilities are at elevations which make compliance with this provision impractical or in other special circumstances Page 36 the City Engineer may authorize other techniques for protection, provided the residence is flood - proofed in accordance with the StateBailding Code. b. Non - Residential Structures. Commercial, manufacturing, and industrial structures shall ordinarily be elevated on fill so that their first floor (including basement) is above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation, but may in spe,c,ial circumstances be flood - proofed in accordance with the State Building Code. Structures that are not elevated to above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall be flood- proofed to FP -1 or FP -2 classification as defined by the State Building Code. Structures flood - r'roofed to FP -3 or FP -4 classification shall iot be permitted. c. As an alternative to elevation on fill, accessory structures that constitute a minimal investment and that do not exceed 500 square feet for the outside dimension at ground level may be internally flood proofed in accordance with Section 916.090.A.2.c. 3. Standards for Flood Fringe Uses. a. All new principal structures must have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two (2) feet below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. If a variance to this requirement is granted, the Board of Adjustment must specify limitations on the period of use or occupancy of the structure for times of flooding and only after determining that adequate flood warning time and local flood emergency response procedures exist. b. Business Use. Commercial s- tructures generally must be constructed on fill with no first floor or basement floor below the flood protection elevation. Accessory land uses, such as yards, railroad tracks, and parking lots may be at lower elevations. However, a permit for such facilities to be used by the general public shall not be granted, in the absence of a flood warning system, if the area is inundated to a depth greater than two (2) feet or subject to flood velocities greater than four (4) feet per second upon the occurrence of the regional flood. Page 37 c. Manufacturing and Industrial Uses. Manufacturing and industrial buildings, structures and appurtenant works shall be protected to the flood protection elevation. Measures shall be taken to minimize interference with normal plant operations especially for streams having protracted flood durations. Certain necessary land uses such as yards and parking lots may be at lower elevations subject to requirements set out in paragraph b. above. In considering permit applications, the City Engineer shall give due consideration to needs of an industry whose business requires that it be located in floodplain areas. d. Waste Treatment and Waste Disposal. (1) No new construction, addition, or modification to existing waste treatment facilities shall be permitted within the floodplain unless emergency plans and procedures of actions to be taken in the event of flooding are prepared, filed with, and approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The emergency plans and procedures must provide for measures to prevent introduction of any pollutant or toxic material into the flood waters. (2) There shall be no disposal of garbage or solid waste materials within floodplain areas except upon issuance of a conditional use permit at sites approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and subject to the requirements of Section 921 of this Ordinance. e. Fill shall be properly compacted and the slopes shall be properly protected by the use of riprap, vegetative cover or other acceptable method. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has established criteria for removing the special flood hazard area designation for certain structures properly elevated on fill above the 100 -year flood elevation - FEMA's requirements incorporate specific fill compaction and side slope protection standards for multi- structure or multi -lot developments. These standards should be investigated prior to the initiation of site Page 38 preparation if a change of special flood hazard area designation will be requested. f. Floodplain developments shall not adversely affect the hydraulic capacity of the channel and adjoining floodplain of any tributary watercourse or drainage system where a floodway or other encroachment limit has not been specified on the Official Zoning Map. All manufactured homes must be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system that resists flotation, collapse and lateral movement. Methods of anchoring may include, but are not to be limited to, use of over - the -top or frame ties to ground anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable state or local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces. h. The cumulative placement of fill where at any one time in excess of one - thousand (1,000) cubic yards of fill is located on the parcel shall be allowable only as a conditional use, unless said fill is specifically intended to elevate a structure in accordance with Section 916.090.B.2.a of this Ordinance. i. The storage of any materials or equipment shall be elevated on fill to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. When at any one time more than one thousand (1,000) cubic yards of fill or other similar material is located on a parcel for such activities as on -site storage, landscaping, sand and gravel operations, landfills, roads, dredge spoil disposal or construction of flood control works, an erosion /sedimentation control plan must be submitted unless the community is enforcing a state approved shoreland management ordinance. In the absence of a state approved shoreland ordinance, the plan must clearly specify methods to be used to stabilize the fill on site for a flood event at a minimum of the 100 -year or regional flood event. The plan must be prepared and certified by a registered professional engineer or other qualified individual acceptable to the Governing Body. The plan may incorporate alternative procedures for removal of the material from the floodplain if adequate flood warning time exists. g. J. • Page 39 k. Storage of Materials and Equipment: (1) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. (2) Storage of other materials or equipment may be allowed if readily removable from the area within the time available after a flood warning and in accordance with a plan approved by Little Canada. 1. Conditional Uses: Any structure that is not elevated on fill or flood proofed in accordance with Section 916.090.B.3.a or any use of land that does not comply with the standards in Section 916.090.B.3.h -i shall only be allowable as a conditional use. An application for a conditional use shall be subject to the standards and criteria and evaluation procedures specified in Sections 916.090.B and 916.130 of this Ordinance. 4. Standards for Flood Fringe Conditional Uses. a. Alternative elevation methods other than the use of fill may be utilized to elevate a structure's lowest floor above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. These alternative methods may include the use of stilts, pilings, parallel walls, etc. or above - grade, enclosed areas such as crawl spaces or tuck -under garages. The base or floor of an enclosed area shall be considered above -grade and not a structure's basement or lowest floor if: 1) the enclosed area is above -grade on at least one side of the structure; 2) it is designed to internally flood and is constructed with flood 'resistant materials; and 3) it is used solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage. The above -noted alternative elevation methods are subject to the following additional standards: (1) Design and Certification. The structure's design and as -built condition must be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect as being in compliance with the general design standards of the Page 40 State Building Code and, specifically, that all electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities must be at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation or be designed to prevent flood water from entering or accumulating within these components during times of flooding. (2) Specific Standards for Above -Grade Enclosed Areas. Above - grade, fully enclosed areas such as crawl spaces or tuck -under garages must be designed to internally flood and the design plans must stipu'ate: (a) The minimum areas of openings in the walls where internal flooding is to be used as a flood proofing technique. When openings are placed in a structure's walls to provide for entry of flood waters to equalize pressures, the bottom of . all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. (b) That the enclosed area will be designed of flood resistant materials in accordance with the FP -3 or FP -4 classifications in the State Building Code and shall be used solely for building access, parking of vehicles or storage. b. Basements, as defined by Section 902.010.10 of this Ordinance shall be subject to the following: (1) Residential basement construction shall not be allowed below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. (2) Non - residential basements may be allowed below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation provided the basement is structurally dry flood proofed in accordance with Section 91.6.090.B.2.b of this Ordinance. Page 41 C. General Floodplain. 1. Permissible Uses. a. The uses listed in Section 916.080 of this Ordinance shall be permitted uses. b. All other uses shall be subject to the floodway /flood fringe elevation criteria pursuant to Section 916.090.C.2 below. Section 916.080 shall apply if the proposed use is in the Floodway District and Section 916.090.B shall apply if the proposed use in the Flood Fringe District. 2. Procedures for Floodway and Flood Fringe Determinations Within the General Floodplain District. a. Upon receipt of an application for a conditional use permit for a use within the General Floodplain District, the applicant shall be required to furnish such of the following information as is deemed necessary by the Zoning Administrator for the determination of the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and whether the proposed use is within the Floodway or Flood Fringe District. (1) A typical valley cross - section showing the channel of the stream, elevation of land areas adjoining each side of the channel, cross - sectional areas to be occupied by the proposed development, and high water information. (2) Plan (surface view) showing elevations or contours of the ground; pertinent structure, fill, or storage elevations; size, location, and spatial arrangement of all proposed and existing structures on the site; location and elevations of streets; photographs showing existing land uses and vegetation upstream and downstream; and soil type. Profile showing the slope of the bottom of the channel or flow line of the stream for at least 500 feet in either direction from the proposed development. (3) Page 42 (b) The applicant shall be responsible to submit one copy of the above information to a designated engineer or other expert person or agency for technical assistance in determining whether the proposed use is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe District and to determine the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. Procedures consistent with Minnesota Regulations 1983, Parts 6120.5000- 6120.6200 shall be followed in this expert evaluation. The designated engineer or expert is strongly encouraged to discuss the proposed technical evaluation methodology with the respective Department of Natural Resources' Area Hydrologist prior to commencing the analysis. The designated engineer or expert shall: (1) Estimate the peak discharge of the regional flood. (2) Calculate the water surface profile of the regional flood based upon a hydraulic analysis of the stream channel and overbank areas. (3) Computer the floodway necessary to convey or store the regional flood without increasing flood stages more, than 0.5 foot. A lesser stage increase than .5 feet shall be required if, as a result of the additional stage increase, increased flood damages would result. An equal degree of encroachment on both sides of the stream within the reach shall be assumed in computing floodway boundaries. (c) The Zoning Administrator shall present the technical evaluation and findings of the designated engineer or expert to Little Canada. Little Canada must formally accept the technical evaluation and the recommended Floodway and /or Flood Fringe District boundary or deny the permit application. Little Canada, prior to official action, may submit the application and all supporting data and analyses to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Department of Natural Resources or the Planning Commission for review and comment. Once the Floodway and Flood Fringe boundaries have been determined, the City Council shall refer the matter back to the Zoning Administrator who shall process Page 43 the permit application consistent with the applicable provisions of Sections 916.080 and 916.090.B of this Ordinance. 916.100. SUBDIVISION. All lots within the Floodplain District shall contain a building site at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. All subdivisions shall have water and sewage disposal facilities that comply with the provisions of this Ordinance and have road access both to the subdivision and to the individual building sites no lower than t,wo (2) feet below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. A. Review Criteria. No land shall be subdivided which is unsuitable for the reason of flooding, inadequate drainage, water supply or sewage treatment facilities. All lots within the floodplain districts shall contain a building site at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. All subdivisions shall have water and sewage treatment facilities that comply with the provisions of this Ordinance and have road access both to the subdivision and to the individual building sites no lower than two (2) feet below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. For all subdivisions in the floodplain, the floodway and flood fringe boundaries, the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and the required elevation of all access roads shall be clearly labelled on all required subdivision drawings and platting documents. B. Floodway /Flood Fringe Determinations in the General Floodplain District. In the General Floodplain District, applicants shall provide the information required in Section 916.130.0 of this Ordinance to determine the 100 -year flood elevation, the Floodway and Flood Fringe district boundaries and the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation for the subdivision site. C. Removal of Special Flood Hazard Area Designation. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has established criteria for removing the special flood hazard area designation for certain structures properly elevated on fill above the 100 -year flood elevation. FEMA's requirements incorporate specific fill compaction and side slope protection standards for multi- structure or multi -lot developments. These standards should be investigated prior to the initiation of site preparation if a change of special flood hazard area designation will be requested. Page 44 916.110. MOBILE HOMES AND MOBILE HOME PARKS. A. New mobile home parks and expansions to existing mobile home parks shall be subject to the provisions placed on subdivisions by Section 916.100 of this Ordinance and Little Canada's Subdivision Ordinance. B. Mobile homes in existing mobile home parks that are located in Floodplain Districts are non- conforming uses and may be replaced only if in compliance with the following conditions: 1. The mobile home lies in the Flood Fringe District. 2. The mobile home is anchored with tiedowns that comply with requirements of Minnesota Regulations MoH 450. 3. The mobile home owner or renter is notified that the mobile home site lies in the floodplain and may be subject to flooding. 4. The mobile home park owner develops a flood emergency plan consistent with the time available after a flood warning. The plan shall be filed with and approved by the City of Little Canada. C. Travel trailers and travel vehicles that do not meet the exemption criteria specified in Section 916.110.D below shall be subject to the provisions of this Ordinance and as specifically spelled out in Sections 916.110.F -G below. D. Exemption. Travel trailers and travel vehicles are exempt from the provisions of this Ordinance if they are placed in any of the areas listed in Section 916.110.E below and further they meet the following criteria: 1. Have current licenses required for highway use. 2. Are highway ready meaning on wheels. or the internal jacking system, are attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities commonly used in campgrounds and trailer parks and the travel trailer /travel vehicle has no permanent structural type additions attached to it. 3. The travel trailer or travel vehicle and associated use must be permissible in any pre- existing, underlying zoning use district. Page 45 E. Areas Exempted for Placement of Travel /Recreational Vehicles. 1. Individual lots or parcels of record. 2. Existing commercial recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds. 3. Existing condominium type associations. F. Travel trailers and travel vehicles exempted in Section 916.110.D.2 lose this exemption when development occurs on the parcel exceeding $500.00 for a structural addition to the travel trailer /travel vehicle or an accessory structure such as a garage or storage building. The travel trailer /travel vehicle and all additions and accessory structures will then be treated as a new structure and shall be subject to the elevation /flood proofing requirements and the use of land restrictions specified in Sections 916.080 and 916.090.B of this Ordinance. G. New commercial travel trailer or travel vehicle parks or campgrounds and new residential type subdivisions and condominium associations and the expansion of any existing similar use exceeding five (5) units or dwelling sites shall be subject to the following: 1. Any new or replacement travel trailer or travel vehicle will be allowed in the Floodway or Flood Fringe Districts provided said trailer or vehicle and its contents are placed on fill above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and proper elevated road access to the site exists in accordance with Section 916.090.C.3.a of this Ordinance. No fill placed in the floodway to meet the requirements of this Section shall increase flood stages of the 100 year or regional flood. 2. All new or replacement travel trailers or travel vehicles not meeting the criteria of 1. above may, as an alternative, be allowed as a conditional use if in accordance with the following provisions and the provisions of Section 916.090 of the Ordinance. The applicant must submit an emergency plan for the safe evacuation of all vehicles and people during the 100 year flood. Said plan shall be prepared by a registered engineer or other qualified individual and shall demonstrate that adequate time and personnel exist to carry out the evacuation. All attendant sewage and water facilities for new or replacement travel trailers or other recreational vehicles must be protected or constructed so as to not be impaired or Page 46 contaminated during times of flooding in accordance with Section 916.120.0 of this Ordinance. 916.120. PUBLIC UTILITIES, RAILROADS, ROADS, AND BRIDGES. A. Public Utilities. All public utilities and facilities 'such as gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply systems to be located in the floodplain shall be flood - proofed in accordance with the State, Building Code or elevated to above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. B. Public Transportation Facilities. Railroad tracks, roads, and bridges to be located within the Floodway District shall comply with Section 916.090,A.2.a. and b. of this Ordinance. Elevation to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall be provided where failure of interruption of these transportation facilities would result in danger to the public health or safety or where such facilities are essential to the orderly functioning of the area. Minor or auxiliary roads or railroads may be constructed, at a lower elevation where failure or interruption of transportation services would not endanger the public health or safety. C. On -site Sewage Treatment and Water Supply Systems. Where public utilities are not provided: 1) on -site water supply systems must be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems; and 2) new or replacement on -site sewage treatment systems must be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters and they shall not be subject to impairment or contamination during times of flooding. Any sewage treatment system designed in accordance with the State's current statewide standards for on -site sewage treatment systems shall be determined to be in compliance with this Section. 916.130. PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS FOR EVALUATING PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USES. A. Conditional Uses. The City Council shall hear and decide applications for conditional uses permissible under this Ordinance. Applications shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator who shall forward the application to the Planning Commission for consideration. Page 47 B. Hearings. Upon filing with the Zoning Administrator an application for a conditional use permit, the Zoning Administrator shall submit by mail to the Commissioner of Natural Resources a copy of the application for proposed conditional use sufficiently in advance so that the Commissioner will receive at least ten (10) days notice of the hearing. A copy of all decisions granting conditional use permits shall be forwarded by mail to the Commissioner of Natural. Resources within ten (10) days of such action. C. Information Required. Upon receipt of an application for a Conditional Use Permit for a use within the Floodplain District, the applicant shall be required to furnish such of the following information as is deemed necessary for the determination of the regulatory flood protection elevation and whether the proposed use is in the floodway or the flood fringe. 1. A typical valley cross - section showing the channel of the watercourse, elevation of land areas adjoining each side of the channel, cross - sectional areas to be occupied by the proposed development and high water information. 2. Plan (surface view) showing the nature, locations, dimensions, and elevation of the lot, contours of the ground, fill; storage of materials; flood - proofing measures; the arrangement of all proposed and existing structures on the site; locations and elevations of streets; existing land uses and vegetation upstream and downstream; soil type, and the relationship of the above to the location of the channel. 3. Profile showing the slope of the bottom of the channel or flow line of the stream for at least five hundred (500) feet in either direction from the proposed development. D. Factors Upon Which the Decision of the City Council Shall be Based. In passing upon conditional use applications, the City Council shall consider all relevant factors specified in other sections of this Ordinance, and: 1. The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. 2. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others or they may block bridges, culverts or other hydraulic structures. Page 48 3. The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary conditions. 4. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. 5. The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the Community. 6. The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location. 7. The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. 8. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future. 9. The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for the area. 10. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. 11. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 12. Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this Ordinance. E. Conditions Attached to Conditional Use Permits. Upon consideration of the factors listed above and the purpose of this Ordinance, the City Council shall attach such conditions to the granting of conditional use permits as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Ordinance. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Modification of waste treatment and water supply facilities. 2. Limitations on period of use, occupancy, and operation. 3. Imposition of operational controls, sureties, and deed restrictions. Page 49 4. Requirements for construction of channel modifications, compensatory storage, dikes,levees, and other protective measures. 5. Flood- proofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code and this Ordinance. the applicant shall submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood - proofing measures are consistent with the Regulatory ,Flood Protection Elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. 916.140. NONCONFORMING USES. A. A structure or the use of a structure or premises which was lawful before the passage or amendment of this Ordinance but which is not in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance may be continued subject to the following conditions: 1. No such use shall be expanded, changed, enlarged, or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity. 2. Any alteration or addition to a nonconforming structure or nonconforming use which would result in increasing the flood damage potential of that structure or use shall be protected to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation in accordance with any of the elevation on fill or flood proofing techniques (i.e., FP -1 through FP -4 floodproofing classifications) allowable in the State Building Code, except as further restricted in 3 below. 3. The cost of any structural alterations or additions to any nonconforming structure over the life of the structure shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the market value of the structure unless the conditions of this Section are satisfied. The cost of all structural alterations and additions constructed since the adoption of the Community's initial floodplain controls must be calculated into today's current cost which will include all costs such as construction materials and a reasonable cost placed on all manpower or labor. If the current cost of all previous and proposed alterations and additions exceeds fifty (50) percent of the current market value of the structure, then the structure must meet the standards of Sections 916.080.A and 916.080.8 of this Ordinance for new structures depending upon Page 50 whether the structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe, respectively. 4. If any nonconforming use is discontinued for twelve (12) consecutive months, any future use of the building premises shall conform to this Ordinance. The assessor shall notify the Zoning Administrator in writing of instances of nonconforming uses which have been discontinued for a period of twelve (12) months. 5. If any nonconforming use or structure is destroyed by any means, including floods, to an extent of fifty (50) percent or more of its market value at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance. The applicable provisions for establishing new uses or new structures in Sections 916.080.A and 916.080.B will apply depending upon whether the use or structure is in the Floodway, Flood Fringe or General Floodplain District, respectively. 916.150. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION A. Violation of the provisions of this Ordinance or failure to comply with any of its requirements (including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variances or conditional uses) shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as defined by law. B. Nothing herein contained shall prevent the City Council from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. Such actions may include, but are not limited to: 1. In responding to a suspected ordinance violation, the Zoning Administrator and Local Government may utilize the full array of enforcement actions available to it including but not limited to prosecution and fines, injunctions, after - the -fact permits, orders for corrective measures or a request to the National Flood Insurance Program for denial of flood insurance 'availability to the guilty party. The community must act in good faith to enforce these official controls and to correct ordinance violations to the extent possible so as not to jeopardize its eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. Page 51 2. When an ordinance violation is either discovered by or brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, the Zoning Administrator shall immediately investigate the situation and document the nature and extent of the violation of the official control. As soon as is reasonably possible, this information will be submitted to the appropriate Department of Natural Resources and Federal Emergency Management Agency Regional Office along with the Community's plan of action to correct the violation to the degree possible. 3. The Zoning Administrator shall notify the suspected party of the requirements of this Ordinance and all other official controls and the nature and extent of the suspected violation of these controls. If the structure and /or use is under construction or development, the Zoning Administrator may order the construction or development immediately halted until a proper permit or approval is granted by the Community. If the construction or development is already completed, then the Zoning Administrator may either (1) issue an order identifying the corrective actions that must be made within a specified time period to bring the use or structure into compliance with the official controls, or (2) notify the responsible party to apply for an after - the -fact permit /development approval within a specified period of time not to exceed thirty (30) days. Page 52 SEP -20 -1991 15 :05 FROM SWEENEY & BORER ORDINANCE NO. TO LITTLE-CANADA P.02/03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 1202.010 AND 1202.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF LITTLE CANADA, RELATING TO CURFEW WITHIN THE CITY OF LITTLE CANADA THE CITY COUNCIL OF LITTLE CANADA HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 1202.010. of the Municipal Code of the City of Little Canada is hereby amended to read as follows: 1202.010. Restrictions on Minors Under the Age of Eighteen Years. It shall be unlawful for any minor under the age of sixteen (16) years to loiter, or be in or upon the public streets, highways, roads, alleys, parks, playgrounds or other public grounds, public places and public buildings, places of entertainment, amusement or refreshment, vacant lots, and other unsupervised places in the City of Little Canada between the hours of ten o'clock p.m. and five o'clock a.m. the following day. It shall be unlawful for any minor sixteen (16) or seventeen (17) years of age to loiter, or be in or upon the public streets, highways, roads, alleys, parks, playgrounds or other public grounds, public places and public buildings, places of entertainment, amusement or refreshment, vacant lots and other unsupervised places in the City of Little Canada between the hours of twelve o'clock midnight and five o'clock a.m. the following morning. The provisions of this section do not apply when a minor is accompanied by his or her parent, guardian, or other adult person having the care and custody of the minor, when a minor is on an emergency errand or other legitimate business directed by his or her parent, guardian, or other adult person having the care and custody of the minor, or when the presence of said minor in said place or places is connected with and required by some legitimate business, trade, profession or occupation in which said minor is permitted by law to be engaged. Section 2. Section 1202.020. of the Municipal Code of the City of Little Canada is hereby amended to read as follows: 1202.020. Duties of Parents or Guardians. It shall be unlawful for the parent, guardian, or other adult person having the care and custody of a minor under the age of eighteen (18) years to permit such minor to loiter, or be Page 53 SSEP -20 -1991 15:06 FROM SWEENEY & BORER TO LITTLE- CRNRDR P.03 /@3 in or upon the public streets, highways, roads, alleys, parks, playgrounds or other public grounds, public places and public buildings, places of entertainment, amusement or refreshment, vacant lots and other unsupervised places in the City of Little Canada during the hours prohibited by this Chapter. The provisions of this section do not apply when the minor is accompanied by his or her parent, guardian, or other adult person having the care and custody of the minor, when the minor is on an emergency errand or other legitimate business directed by his or her parent, guardian, or other adult person having the care and custody of the minor, or when the presence of said minor in said place is connected with and required by some legitimate business, trade, profession or occupation in which said minor is permitted by law to be engaged. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication. PASSED by the City Council of Little Canada this day of , 1991. ATTEST: Joel R. Hanson City Administrator Page 54 Raymond G. Hanson, Mayor Ayes Nays -- Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. C j U R B A N P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H MEMORANDUM TO: Little Canada Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: 5 August 1991 RE: Little Canada - Outside Sales /Display FILE NO: 758.09 - 91.20 There have been concerns raised over the City's regulation of outside sales and display. The Zoning Ordinance allows such activities in B -2 and B -3 Districts by Conditional Use Permit. However, several local retailers have begun to display certain goods outside of their establishments. This issue is being brought as a discussion item prior to formulating any Ordinance amendments. In general, ordinances which regulate outdoor sales or display are set up to be somewhat burdensome in order to discourage the activity. This is because such sales areas do not add Lo the tax revenue of the property, but may increase public service requirements, e.g. police calls for shoplifting. In addition, outdoor sales and display areas typically require controls to avoid blocking or cluttering visibility of the building, encroaching on sidewalk space planned for pedestrian circulation or traffic hazards slating to sudden stops or intersection visibility. The other issue which bears on the City's consideration of outdoor sales is the permanence or transience of the use. The former case is typified by convenience gas /grocery facilities which store or display motor oil or other similar items near the pump islands or on the sidewalk. Our feeling is that since these uses must be approved through the conditional use process, the outside sales /display should either be a part of their approval or if added later, should be evaluated as an amendment to the original CUP. Therefore, the process is no more burdensome than anything else they may want to do to their property. However, it would be possible to add a section in the General Provisions of the Ordinance which regulated the activity, but avoided the CUP process for those uses which are permitted themselves. 5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837 Page 55 With regard to transient uses, again the process is set up to discourage this type of activity. The conflict of flowers, souvenirs, or art objects being sold on the street corner in competition with permanent local businesses has been the basis for this regulation. One type of situation the City may wish to exempt would be transient vendors associated with civic sponsored events, such as Canadian Days. We would still recommend a licensing procedure so that in the event that,a vender causes a problem, the City would have something to revoke. The Planning Commission is being asked to discuss these issues with the goal of making a recommendation to the City Council. Any Ordinance amendments would arise from this informal process at a future date. cc: Kathy Glanzer John Palacio Tom Sweeney 2 Page 56 OUTDOOR SALES & DISPLAYS ROSEVILLE - Two categories Administrative permit for temporary sales and displays - up to an 8 day maximum. Issues by Staff. Permanent special use permit that requires public hearing. City requires that certain conditions and standards are met. They went to the SUP process because when outdoor sales and displays were a permitted use it became an enforcement headache. MAPLEWOOD - Two categories Temporary Vendors License issued by staff. Permanent Conditional Use Permit that requires public hearing. However, they "overlook" situations where there are a few cases of pop or other merchandise outside. In commercial districts they expect to see some of this outdoor storage. VADNAIS HEIGHTS Temporary Vendors License issued by staff. In retail zones a certain amount of outdoor sales and displays is allowed as a permitted use. The ordinance sets the specific amount. Anything beyond that amount requires a Special Use Permit, which requires a public hearing. SHOREVIEW No license required of temporary vendors. These vendors cannot be located in the right -of -way, and must have the permission of the property owner for use of property. Outdoor sales and displays permitted use in commercial areas, excepting produce. Page 57 r•� 9 W7 ceemagia 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Hanson and Members of the City Council FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator DATE: September 20, 1991 RE: Leeward Way Development Agreement MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson We are in the process of finalizing negotiations on the Leeward Way Development Agreement. Assuming both sides have agreed as to the final draft, this agreement will be presented at Wednesday's meeting for approval. JRH:kpv Pa cCJ4 e( 29(11(8 Ceernada 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Hanson and Members of the City Council FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator DATE: September 20, 1991 RE: Thunder Bay Drainage Improvement Update MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Easements and waivers of right to appeal special assessments have been delivered to the five property owners along Ditch "D ". I had asked them to have executed copies of those documents returned to the City by Friday, September 20, 1991. As of this writing, two complete sets of documents have been received. I am anticipating at least two more to be received before the end of the day. I am still not certain as to the status of the 5th property owner regarding his willingness to participate in the project as originally outlined. Pursuant to Council direction, should he not participate, we will proceed with relocating the storm sewer to avoid the need for an easement on his property. The preconstruction conference has been set for this project for early next week. We anticipate construction to commence soon thereafter and work to be fully completed yet this fall barring any catastrophic weather conditions. JRH:kpv a 59 c‘4 2W14 ce(maela 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117-1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Hanson and Members of the City Council FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator DATE: September 20, 1991 RE: Charitable Gambling Workshop MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson We have been advised by the State Gambling Control Board that all vacancies have been filled on the Compliance Review Board. They will be meeting on October 7 to review the audits of the bingo hall operations. After that meeting, we will be furnished copies of the audit reports. They are not available to us prior to that meeting. Mayor Hanson, Council Member LaValle, Kathy Glanzer, and I conducted a tour of Minneapolis' gambling control procedures. I believe we all came away with ideas and impressions which may influence how Little Canada should approach regulation of charitable gambling in our community. To impose regulations upon charitable gambling in Little Canada and to collect the 3% tax, we will have to have an ordinance in place. In order to affectuate that, I am recommending we conduct a workshop to begin review of the various ordinances and to report on the findings of our tour of the City of Minneapolis' procedures. Therefore, I would like the Council to set a date for a workshop to discuss charitable gambling regulations. This would consist of a review of the example ordinances and reporting on the results of our tour of Minneapolis. Based on this information, further information can be given to staff in order that we can prepare the information the Council needs to enact the appropriate policy. Please have an idea of what date you would like to hold this workshop. JRH:kpv Pag`tb ce § MGM€ ciersek 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Harris, Public Works Superintendent DATE: September 19, 1991 RE: Meter House on Roselawn Avenue MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Back in February of this year, the City Council authorized an expenditure for repairs on the meter house. Since that time, St. Paul Water has requested that we do not perform any repairs or upgrades to our meter. They propose to install and maintain a meter at no cost to us. Through negotiations, we have reached an agreement which I believe is mutually beneficial to both parties. The City of St. Paul shall supply and maintain a new water meter in the metering house on Roselawn Avenue and the City of Little Canada will no longer be required to perform any maintenance, thereby saving approximately $1,000 per year in manpower and maintenance costs to the present system. With the new system, St. Paul Water will do all maintenance work on the meter and take responsibility for the costs of any calibrations or repairs. In addition, St. Paul Water will test the meter every year with the testing to be done in the presence of myself or another City representative to ensure that the techniques and methods for testing are within AWWA standards. This will then ensure less disagreement about consumption and charges. The City also retains the right that if it does not accept the results of the testing of the master meter that we may hire an independent testing firm to perform a test although these costs will be borne by the City. DBH:kpv Pag6 61 SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR WATER SERVICE BETWEEN THE BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA AND THE CITY OF LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA This Agreement, made and entered into as of the _ day of 1991, by and between the BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "BOARD ", and the CITY OF LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "CITY ", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Board and City have heretofore entered into a certain Agreement dated the 14th day of September, 1970, hereinafter referred to as "Agreement ", for the provision of water from the Board to City, (formerly referred to as "Village ") and the parties do now wish to amend the said Agreement in the following manner: 1) That paragraphs numbered 3A, 3C and 3F of the Agreement are hereby amended to read as follows: 3. WATER SYSTEM FACILITIES A. The Board shall make investment in and retain title to all facilities necessary for the supply, production, storage and transmission of water to the City, including the master meter or master meters. C. The City shall maintain at no expense to the Board its entire City water system from point or points of delivery to the City, excepting the master meter or master meters. Page 62 F. Water delivered to the City shall be measured by a master meter or meters furnished, installed and maintained by the Board at its own cost and expense at such locations as agreed upon by the City and the Board. Such meters shall be housed in a facility constructed by the City subject to approval of the Board. Such meters shall be tested annually by the Board and test results shall be provided to the City. Advance notification of the testing date shall be given to the City and a City representative may witness the testing if the City so desires. The City may hire an independent contractor at the City's expense to verify test results. A copy of the independent con- tractor's findings shall be furnished to the Board. Any City -owned pipe, fittings, meter, etc. removed by the Board during meter installation, repair or removal shall be returned to the City. 2) Effective date of Amendments The date of making and entering into this Amendment to the September 14, 1970 Agreement and the date of execution thereof shall be the date when the Director of the Department of Finance and Management Services of the City of Saint Paul countersigns this Second Amendment to Agreement. This Second Amendment to Agreement shall not be binding until the same has been accepted by resolutions of the Board of Water Commissioners of the City of Saint Paul, the City Council of the City of Saint Paul and the City Council of the City of Little Canada. - 2 - Page 63 BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS APPROVED: CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA By Thomas D. Mogren, General Manager Roger J. Goswitz, President By Approved as to form: Verne E. Jacobsen, Secretary Assistant City Attorney By Richard A. Gehrman, Director of the Department of Finance & Management Services CITY OF LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA By Mayor By City Clerk - 3 - Page 64 ci f 2V/4 ceemaeia 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 September 20, 1991 TO: Mayor Hanson and Members of the City Council FROM: Kathy Glanzer, Administrative Assistant RE: Dianna Lane Speed Study MAYOR Raymond G. Hanson COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Bill Blesener Rick Collova Jim LaValle ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Attached are two letters in response to the City's request for a speed study on Dianna Lane. The first letter suggests advisory signing on the curves of Dianna Lane. The second letter addresses the speed limit for Dianna Lane. I spoke with MN DOT regarding their speed limit recommendation, and MN DOT suggested that the best way to handle the situation would be to remove the 30 MPH speed limit sign that is posted on Dianna Lane near County Road B -2. It was further suggested that the City increase the size of the sign in this same area which indicates that there is no lake access and that Dianna Lane is not a through street. If the Council agrees with these recommendations, Council action instructing Public Works accordingly would be necessary. 0104Esorq Minnesota Department of Transportation is(br I Metropolitan District Transportation Building Pri St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 TaP`' Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Reply to Oakdale Office Telephone No 779 -1121 July 26, 1991 Ms. Kathy Glanzer Administrative Assistant City of Little Canada 515 Little Canada Road Little Canada, Minnesota 55117 -1600 Dear Ms. Glanzer: SUBJECT_ City of Little Canada Dianna Lane Suggested Signing When we were doing the speed zone study on Dianna Lane, we noticed a need for advisory signing for the curves on this road. We suggest the following signing: The first curve, which is to the left, should be advised for 20 mph, the following two curves, which are to the right, should be advised for 10 mph. If you have any questions, feel free to contact us. Sincerely, k.o apt- Mary B!/LaPlante, P.E. District Traffic Engineer An Equal Op poa g e'ty6E6mployer Minnesota Department of Transportation � a cc Occ Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 F 5Q OF TRW' September 12, 1991 (612) 296 -2950 Kathy Glanzer Administrative Assistant 515 Little Canada Road Little Canada, Minnesota 55117 -1600 Dear Ms. Glanzer: As requested by City Council Resolution, dated May 8, 1991, we have completed a traffic investigation to determine the safe speed on Dianna Lane. Due to the number of driveways and geometrics of this street we recommend to continue reliance on the Mn Statute 169.14, particularly Subd. 1. I have attached a copy of this section for your information. To safely negotiate this street the driver must choose a variety of different speeds depending on the conditions present and we cannot recommend a single speed limit that would be safe all of the time. Violation of the "Basic Speed Rule" is an offense and is fully enforceable. We did notice that there are some hazards on this street and we recommend that waming signs in very visible locations with good target value should be used to identify the hazard and inform the motorist of what lies ahead on the road. This approach should increase the safety on Dianna Lane. Sincerely, / — Assist. Office Director Traffi Engineering Attachment: Copy of MS169.14 cc: Milner Carley and Associates Little Canada City Engineer An Equal (Ovrlurey bre, heedlessly in disregard of the rights of others, or in a manner that endangers or is likely to endanger any property or any person, including the driver or passengers of the vehicle, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Subd. 3. Application. The provisions of this section apply, but are not limited in application, to any person who drives any vehicle in the manner prohibited by this section: (1) upon the ice of any lake, stream, or river, including but not limited to the ice of any boundary water; or (2) in a parking lot ordinarily used by or available to the public though not as a matter of right, and a driveway connecting such a parking lot with a street or highway. HIST: (2720 -177) 1937 c 464 s 27; 1939 c 430 s 5; 1947 c 428 s 11; 1967 c 569 s 2; Ex1971 c 27 s 7; 1983 c 236 s 1; 1984 c 622 s 15 169.131 Repealed, 1976 c 103 s 1 169.132 Repealed, 1977 c 347 s 29 169.14 SPEED RESTRICTIONS. Subdivision 1. Basic rule. No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. In every event speed shall be so restricted as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care. Subd. 2. Speed limits. Where no special hazard exists the following speeds shall be lawful, but any speeds in excess of such limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that the speed limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful: (1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district; (2) 65 miles per hour in other locations during the daytime; (3) 55 miles per hour in such other locations during the nighttime; (4) ten miles per hour in alleys. "Daytime" means from a half hour before sunrise to a half hour after sunset, except at any time when due to weather or other conditions there is not sufficient light to render clearly discernible persons and vehicles at a distance of 500 feet. "Nighttime" means at any other hour or at any time when due to weather or other conditions there is not sufficient light to render clearly discernible persons and vehicles at a distance of 500 feet. Subd. 3. Reduced speed required. The driver of any Page 68 239 vehicle shall, consistent with the requirements, drive at an appropriate reduced speed when approaching and crossing an intersection or railway grade crossing, when approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway, and when special hazards exist with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions. Subd. 4. Establishment of zones by commissioner. On determining upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that any speed set forth in this section is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist on any trunk highway or upon any part thereof, the commissioner may erect appropriate signs designating a reasonable and safe speed limit thereat, which speed Limit shall be effective when such signs are erected. Any speeds in excess of such limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that any speed limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful. On determining upon that basis that a part of the trunk highway system outside a municipality should be a zone of maximum speed limit, the commissioner may establish that part as such a zone by erecting appropriate signs showing the beginning and end of the zone, designating a reasonable and safe speed therefor, which may be different than the speed set forth in this section, and that it is a zone of maximum speed limit. The speed so designated by the commissioner within any such zone shall be a maximum speed limit, and speed in excess of such limit shall be unlawful. The commissioner may in the same manner from time to time alter the boundary of such a zone and the speed limit therein or eliminate such zone. Subd. 5. Zoning within local areas. When local • authorities believe that the existing speed limit upon any street or highway, or part thereof, within their respective jurisdictions and not a part of the trunk highway system is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under existing conditions, they may request the commissioner to authorize, upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation, the erection of appropriate signs designating what speed is reasonable and safe, and the commissioner may authorize the erection of appropriate signs designating a reasonable and safe speed limit thereat, which speed limit shall be effective when such signs are erected. Any speeds in excess of these speed limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that any speed Limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful. Alteration of speed limits on streets and highways shall be made only upon authority of the commissioner except as provided in subdivision 5a. 240 Page 69 Subd. 5a. Speed zoning in school zones. Local authorities may establish a school speed limit within a school zone of a public or nonpublic school upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation as prescribed by the commissioner of transportation. The establishment of a school speed limit on any trunk highway shall be with the consent of the commissioner of transportation. Such school speed limits shall be in effect when children are present, going to or leaving school during opening or closing hours or during school recess periods. The school speed Limit shall not be lower than 15 miles per hour and shall not be more than 20 miles per hour below the established speed limit on an affected street or highway if the established speed limit is 40 miles per hour or greater. The school speed limit shall be effective upon the erection of appropriate signs designating the speed and indicating the beginning and end of the reduced speed zone. Any speed in excess of such posted school speed limit is unlawful. All such signs shall be erected by the local authorities on those streets and highways under their respective jurisdictions and by the commissioner of transportation on trunk highways. For the purpose of this subdivision, "school zone" means that section of a street or highway which abuts the grounds of a school where children have access to the street or highway from the school property or where an established school crossing is located provided the school advance sign prescribed by the manual on uniform traffic control devices adopted by the commissioner of transportation pursuant to section 169.06 is in place. All signs erected by local authorities to designate speed limits in school zones shall conform to the manual on uniform control devices. Subd. 5b. Segments in urban districts. When any segment of at least a quarter -mile in distance of any city street, municipal state aid street or town road on which a speed limit in excess of 30 miles per hour has been established pursuant to an engineering and traffic investigation by the commissioner meets the definition of "urban district" as defined in section 169.01, subdivision 59, the governing body of the city or town may by resolution declare the segment to be an urban district and may establish on the segment the speed limit for urban districts prescribed in subdivision 2. The speed limit so established shall be effective upon the erection of appropriate signs designating the speed and indicating the beginning and end of the segment on which the speed limit is established, and any speed in excess of such posted limits shall be unlawful. A copy of the resolution shall be transmitted to the commissioner at least ten days prior to the erection of the signs. Subd. 5c. Speed zoning in alleyways. Local authorities may regulate speed Limits for alleyways as defined Page 70 241 in section 169.01 based on their own engineering and traffic investigations. Alleyway speed limits established at other than ten miles per hour shall be effective when proper signs are posted. Subd. 5d. Speed zoning in work zones. The commissioner, on trunk highways and temporary trunk highways, and local authorities, on streets and highways under their jurisdiction, may authorize the use of reduced maximum speed limits in highway work zones. The commissioner or Local authority is not required to conduct an engineering and traffic investigation before authorizing a reduced speed limit in a highway work zone. The minimum highway work zone speed limit is 20 miles per hour. The work zone speed limit must not reduce the established speed limit on the affected street or highway by more than 15 miles per hour, except that the highway work zone speed limit shall not exceed 40 miles per hour. Highway work zone speed limits are effective on erection of appropriate regulatory speed limit signs designating the beginning and end of the affected work zone. The signs must be removed or covered when they are not required. A speed greater than the posted highway work zone speed limit is unlawful. For purposes of this subdivision, "highway work zone" means a segment of highway or street where a road authority or its agent is constructing, reconstructing, or maintaining the physical structure of the roadway, its shoulders, or features adjacent to the roadway, including underground and overhead utilities and highway appurtenances. Subd. 6. Repealed, Ex1971 c 27 s 49 Subd. 7. Burden of proof. The provisions of this chapter declaring speed limitation shall not be construed to relieve the plaintiff in any civil action from the burden of proving negligence on the part of the defendant as the proximate cause of an accident. Subd. 8. Minimum speeds. On determining upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that a speed at least as great as, or in excess of, a specified and determined minimum is necessary to the reasonable and safe use of any trunk highway or portion thereof, the commissioner may erect appropriate signs specifying the minimum speed on such highway or portion thereof. The minimum speed shall be effective when such signs are erected. Any speeds Less than the posted minimum speeds shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful. Subd. 9. Standards of evidence. In any prosecution in which the rate of speed of a motor vehicle is relevant, evidence of the speed of a motor vehicle as indicated on the speedometer thereof shall be admissible on a showing that a vehicle is regularly used in traffic law enforcement and that the speedometer thereon is regularly and routinely tested for 242 Page 71,