HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-01-2016 Council Packet
WORK SESSION AGENDA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
Monday, August 1, 2016
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Community Room (not televised)
6:00 P.M.
1. St. Clair Estates Residential Subdivision, Katie Larsen
2. Public Safety Department Fleet, John Swenson
3. Public Services Department 2017 CIP Requests, Rick DeGardner
4. Pole Barn Roof Replacement Plan, Rick DeGardner
5. Council Updates on Boards/Commissions
6. Monthly Progress Report
7. Review Regular Agenda
8. Adjourn
1
WS – Item #1
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 1
Date: August 1, 2016
To: City Council
From: Katie Larsen, City Planner
Re: St. Clair Estates Residential Subdivision
Background
At the August 1, 2016 Council Work Session, staff will review in detail the variance and
preliminary plat land use application for St. Clair Estates. At the August 8, 2016 City
Council meeting, staff will be requesting Council action on these items.
Jamie Jensen, developer, submitted a land use application for a variance and preliminary
plat on May 10, 2016. The proposed development is a 35 lot single family residential
subdivision located north of CSAH 34 (Birch Street) and east of Hokah Drive. The
development contains one 30.47 gross acre parcel and is called St. Clair Estates.
The Land Use Applications are:
• Variance
o Proposed cul-de-sac length exceeds design standards
• Preliminary Plat
Traffic Concerns
The Planning & Zoning staff reports dated June 8, 2016 and July 13, 2016 detail the
project. The Planning & Zoning Board opened the public hearing on June 8th and
continued it to July 13th. Several residents spoke at the hearing in regards to increased
traffic on Sioux Lane and Hokah Drive and the development’s lack of access to Birch
Street.
Per the 2011 CSAH 34 Corridor Study and Anoka County Access Spacing Guidelines,
access to Birch Street is not warranted. Site constraints such as wetlands and the fact the
site only abuts CSAH 34 with 80 feet of right of way that is over an open stormwater
ditch also makes access to Birch Street cost prohibitive. The existing roads have
structural capacity to handle an additional 334 trips per day. Spirit Hills, Shenandoah 3rd
Addition and St. Clair Estates function as a 134 lot residential subdivision with 2 access
intersections at Sioux Lane/Ware Road and Hokah Drive/Birch Street. The entire area
also benefits from a signalized intersection at Ware Road and Birch Street.
2
On July 12, 2016, city staff met with the Anoka County Highway Department to discuss
potential access to Birch Street. ACHD is currently evaluating safety improvements from
Ware Road and West Shadow Lake Drive as part of their 5 year Capital Improvements
Plan. This evaluation will include a possible connection of Enid Trail (St. Clair Estates)
to Birch Street. In order to preserve the opportunity to make this connection, the cul de
sac bulb at the south end of Enid Trail shall be re-located to the east.
Variance
Section 302.03(1)(h) states the minimum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 500 feet. The
proposed cul-de-sac in St. Clair Estates is approximately 1,200 feet. A variance shall be
required.
Cul de sacs are limited in length due to concerns regarding access for emergency
services. This concern is being addressed because the City is requiring the construction
of a 10 foot wide, 7 ton emergency access trail as recommended by the City’s Public
Safety Department.
St. Clair Estates is a 35 lot low density residential development. Sioux Lane existed as a
1,500 foot cul de sac from 2001 to 2012 (11 years) and Hokah Drive existed as a as 2,000
foot cul de sac from 1979 to 2012 (33 years) without an emergency access trail and
without issue. Sioux Lookout is an existing 740 foot cul de sac. West Shadow Lake Road
is an existing 7,800+ foot cul de sac with trail access on the north through Chomonix
Golf Course. Black Duck Drive is an existing 5,500+ foot cul de sac.
Overall, St. Clair Estates is consistent with the comprehensive plan and compliant city
ordinances.
Tentative Review Schedule:
Complete Application Date: May 10, 2016
60-Day Review Deadline: July 9, 2016
60-Day Extension Deadline: September 7, 2016
Environmental Board Meeting: June 29, 2016
Park Board Meeting: June 6, 2016
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: June 8, 2016 & July 13, 2016
Tentative City Council Work Session: August 1, 2016
Tentative City Council Meeting: August 8, 2016
Requested Council Direction
None. Review of August 8, 2016 Council action items only.
3
Attachments
1. Site Location Map
2. St. Claire Estates Preliminary Plat
3. Proposed cul de sac re-alignment
0 1,000 2,000500
Feet
GOLDENLAKE
BALDWIN LAKEOHWL 883.1100-yr 886.1FIRM BFE 887FIS BFE 887
WARDSLAKE
RESHANAU LAKEOHWL 883.5100-yr 886.0FIRM BFE 887FIS BFE 887
RICE LAKEOHWL 883.1100-yr 886.0FIRM BFE 887FIS BFE 887
CENTERVILLE LAKE OHWL 885.0 100-yr 886.3 FIRM BFE 888 FIS BFE 887.9
CEDAR LAKEOHWL 892.9
Lino LakesCircle Pines
Site Location Map µ
St Clair Estates
35Cul de Sac Bulb Re‐located to the East
WS – Item 2
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item
Date: August 1, 2016
To: City Council
From: John Swenson, Public Safety Director
Re: Public Safety Department Fleet
Background
During the discussion of the requested 2017 Budget on July 11, 2016 Council members
requested additional information on the Public Safety Department fleet and proposed
police and fire capital replacement schedules.
Police Division:
The below table is the current active fleet inventory for the Police Division.
302 2016 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked - Sgts.Patrol 1,555
303 2016 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 1,498
304 2016 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 497
383 2013 Ford Interceptor AWD 4DR Maroon Patrol 61,749
388 2013 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 60,580
392 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 27,499
393 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 34,757
394 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 28,394
395 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Grey Unmarked Patrol 58,354
396 2015 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 27,245
399 2015 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Black Unmarked Patrol 18,932
386 2013 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked - K9 Patrol - K9 61,280
301 2016 Ford Explorer Police Admin AWD 4DR Unmarked Black Admin 4,763
397 2015 Ford Explorer Police Admin AWD 4DR Unmarked DUI Admin 17,000
398 2015 Ford Explorer Police Admin AWD 4DR Unmarked Gray Admin 14,721
379 2009 Ford Taurus Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 117,450
380 2011 Chev Impala Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 109,486
385 2011 Chev Impala Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 98,786
390 2009 Toyota Corolla Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 93,865
300 2004 Ford F-150 Pickup CSO/Reserve 77,069
382 2013 Ford Interceptor AWD 4DR Marked CSO/Reserve 44,848
2001 Polaris Snowmobile Special Detail 1,401
ASSIGNED DESCRIPTIONUNITYEAR MILEAGE *
*Mileage as of July 18, 2016
The police division fleet are assigned with four functions which are: patrol,
investigations, CSO/Reserve, and administration. Patrol vehicles are dedicated to the
patrol section and equipped with all the instruments necessary for police response and
cross trained fire response. There are currently twelve vehicles assigned to the patrol
section with one vehicle dedicated to our K9 team and one vehicle dedicate to the traffic
safety officer. This equates to ten patrol vehicles available to staff assigned to the patrol
section.
There are four vehicles assigned to the five members of the investigation section. These
vehicles are unmarked but have lights and emergency medical equipment. These
vehicles are also used by staff for surveillance and “follow” details.
Community Service Officer and Police Reserve functions have two vehicles assigned.
These vehicles are not fully equipped for use in patrol section, rather they are equipped to
provide assistance to the patrol section with prisoner transport, traffic direction at
accident scenes or special events, and visible presence in the community.
There are three administrative vehicles assigned to the Director, Deputy Director, and
Public Safety Captain. Administrative vehicles are used for supervisor/management and
emergency response to police and fire scenes. These vehicles have also been used to
supplement both the patrol and investigation sections when needed.
There are two rubrics we use when determining the appropriate number of vehicles in the
fleet. The first measurement is “maximum planned use” and the second is the “fleet
management miles per year/maintenance” as recommended by the International
City/County Management Association. The industry standard is a three year replacement
schedule, but many vehicles are extended past three years when the following factors are
considered on a vehicle by vehicle basis:
• Current mileage or engine hours
• Current mechanical condition and anticipated repairs
• Previous accidents or repetitious failures
• Trade-in or resale value
Maximum planned use:
Patrol officers are scheduled on a 9.5 hour day, 6 day on 4 day off rotation. This
schedule allows for overlap of peak hours while maintaining a 2 officer minimum at all
times. There are three overlap periods a day. If we are scheduled at minimums, we need
4 cars during the overlap period. If we are staffed above minimums, we could need as
many as 6 cars during shift overlap.
Officers are assigned traffic detail at Eaglebrook Church (EBC) every Saturday and
Sunday. The Saturday service occurs during shift overlap, bringing the number of squads
needed between 6 and 8. Please note that EBC reimburses the City for all expenses to
include wages, benefits, equipment/vehicle, as well as administrative fee for this service.
In addition to patrol and Eaglebrook, Officers also work special grant funded traffic
details. In 2015, there were 100 grant funded details. Year to date 2016, there have been
20 grant funded details. All of these details occurred during a shift overlap time. Special
details bring the needed number of assigned cars to between eight and ten.
We must also take squad issues and repairs into account. We looked at the service record
for seven vehicles that were in use all of 2015 and year-to-date 2016. Those 7 vehicles
were out of service a total of 52 times in 2015 and 30 times so far in 2016. We do not
have data on the duration each vehicle was out of service, but we do know that squad 387
was out of service for over a month as we waited for a replacement part, 383 was down
for three weeks with a power supply issue, and 383 was out of service for over 5 months
while a battery issue was investigated. It is not uncommon to have two or three squads
out of service at any given time. Another issue unique to the patrol squads is the
compatibility between the squad camera and the assigned squad computer. With the
current video hardware, you cannot take the tablet computer from one squad and put it
into another. This results in a squad cars being out of service each time a squad computer
is out of service.
Miles per year/maintenance:
The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) uses maintenance costs
and mileage to determine the appropriate number of squad cars in a fleet. They suggest
enough squads in a fleet to keep yearly mileage totals below 20,000 miles per vehicle.
Their research has shown that, “after the threshold of 20,000 miles driven per vehicle,
other maintenance costs per vehicle become much larger” (ICMA journal June 21, 2012).
Squads are assigned and rotated based on mileage in an attempt to keep each below
20,000 miles per year. In 2013, we averaged 18,527 miles on each patrol vehicle. In
2014, we averaged 19,045 miles per vehicle. In 2015, we averaged 18,051 miles.
To minimize costs, we use many parts from the vehicles that we are retiring from service
and put them in new squads. This is a time intensive process and both vehicles are out of
service until the new squad is outfitted. This creates the false impression of an increase
in vehicles. If we are retiring three cars, and outfitting three new cars, it appears on paper
as if we have six cars, when really none of them are suitable for patrol.
Based on current community needs, the current state of the police division vehicles, and
industry best practices standards; staff is recommending the purchase of three patrol
vehicles and the purchase of two vehicles for investigations for use in the police fleet.
Once authorized to make the purchase of the vehicles, it will take five to six months to
have new vehicles in operation in the fleet, which equates to the mileage on the patrol
vehicles to increase by 8,000 to 10,000 in that timeframe. Given this fact, staff will
determine what vehicle replacement and rotations will take place when the new vehicles
are available for deployment. The number of vehicles active in the police fleet will not
increase as a result of this proposed vehicle purchase as three patrol vehicles will be
rotated or taken out of service and sold and two investigations vehicles will be taken out
of service and sold.
The police division requires twenty-one vehicles to operate within the industry best
practices. Not included in the twenty-one vehicles is the snowmobile, as it is not used on
a daily basis.
Fire Division:
The below table is the current active fleet inventory for the Fire Division.
UNIT YEAR DESCRIPTION ASSIGNED MILEAGE *
605 1994 Chev S10 PU - Grass Unit (Grass 11) Station 1 13,801
607 2013 Ford F250 (Rescue 11) Station 1 17,479
610 1991 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank (Tender 11) Station 1 12,271
611 2000 Freightliner Toyne 1250GPM/500 Tank/ 75 ft. (Aerial 11) Station 1 30,302
601 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank (Engine 11) Station 1 72,838
606 1994 GMC PU Grass Unit (Grass 21) Station 2 18,285
617 2013 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Station 2 71,557
609 1991 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank (Tender 21) Station 2 15,545
602 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank (Engine 21) Station 2 64,379
600 2015 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Deputy Director Admin 18,850
618 2013 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Marked Admin 65,316
619 2013 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Marked Admin 58,739
603 2009 Ford Escape Fire Inspection/Fire Investigations Insp./Inv. 79,720
615 2000 Polaris UTV Grass Equipped w/ trailer
Special
Detail
142
(Hours)
1997 Yamaha Snowmobile
Special
Detail 255.9
2012 Zodiac Boat w/ trailer
Special
Detail N/A
* Mileage as of 7/18/2016
Attached to this staff report is the memo pertaining to the fire capital needs for the fire
division that distributed to Council members as part of the July 11, 2016 budget
discussion. Also attached is the proposed fire capital replacement schedule that was
included in the July 11, 2016
Attachments
Fire Equipment Replacement Memo 7.11.2016
Fire Equipment Replacement Summary 7.11.2016
ONE VISION. ONE MISSION. LINO LAKES PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT.
Lino Lakes Public
Safety Department
Memo
DATE: June 10, 2016
TO: John Swenson, Public Safety Director
CC: Dan L’Allier, Deputy Public Safety Director – Fire Division
FROM: Jonas Werpy, Station #1 District Chief
RE: Fire Department capital replacement needs
Leadership of the Lino Lakes Public Safety Fire Division carefully considered all options for the
replacement and addition of apparatus to the existing fleet. This memo covers major apparatus
but does not include grass-rigs, boat, or utility vehicles. Extensive consideration was given to
balance the current and future safety needs of Lino Lakes residents and commerce with the cost
of the fleet transition. The Lino Lakes Fire Division currently has an aged fleet of vehicles which
are maintenance intensive and in the case of the current Aerial (A11), functionally obsolete. See
the attached replacement schedule and costs for full details.
The following recommendation is made to maximize the value of service for Lino Lakes tax
payers:
• Complete acquisition of Light Rescue/Quick Attack Pumpers. Will be used as
primary responding vehicles for fire suppression, medical/rescue response and vehicle
collisions from each station.
o Delivery of the first is expected at the end of July, 2016.
o The second chassis is in possession of LLPSD and awaiting the authorization
from council to build.
• Acquisition of two “Quint” apparatus with 100-foot or greater ladder. Note: “Quint”
is the correct term to describe a fire apparatus that provides: pump, water tank, fire hose,
aerial device, and ground ladders. This term replaces the term “Aerial” or “ladder” which
are often incorrectly used to describe the individual functions of a Quint.
o Two Quints are required based on the geographical distance and lack of direct
route to each side of the city. Both sides contain a high volume of residential and
commercial structures that will require immediate response by a Quint.
o The 100-foot or greater requirement is based on the typical minimum setback for
construction in the city. A 75-foot device is insufficient to reach most two-story
ONE VISION. ONE MISSION. LINO LAKES PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT.
homes in Lino Lakes to effect a rescue or properly place a master stream of water
on a structure fire.
o These apparatus will serve as both an aerial/ladder truck as well as primary or
secondary engine based on the situation. Example: The Quint from station 2 may
serve as a relay pumper for a fire in the station 1 area, or could be used for a
primary rescue if first on scene to a station 2 call to a structure where
conventional egress is prohibited.
o The current Quint (A11) that was purchased from CFD in the distribution of
assets would be replaced by a 100-foot or greater Quint at station 1. A11 has a 75-
foot ladder which is not suitable for our city. A11 has a history of expensive
maintenance and several safety concerns exist (limited visibility for ladder
operator, cab mounted pump panel, low tip weight capacity and the risk of injury
when retracting stabilizers).
o A Quint would be added to the fleet at Station 2.
o As the most expensive piece of equipment, response and use of the Quints will be
limited to training and calls where they are needed. Quints will not respond to
medical calls which create unnecessary wear and tear. We estimate that annual
mileage will be around 1,500 to 2,000. This will allow the useful life of these
apparatus to be extended to 25-years.
• Extend the life of water tenders (T11 and T21)
o These apparatus are lightly used and in overall generally good condition.
o Minor upgrades are sufficient to keep them in safe operation.
o Depending on hydrant development in the future, maintaining two water tenders
may not be needed.
• Evaluate the need to keep current Engines (E11 and E21) in the future
o If other recommendations are adopted, current E11 and E21 should not be needed
since both stations would operate a Class A type 1 pumper and Quint.
o We anticipate at least one could be liquidated. One could also be kept as a spare
for times when other apparatus are Out of Service or in use.
This approach is unique, but so is our service model. Utilizing the Light Rescue/Quick Attack
pumper in conjunction with the Quints at each station gives us the maximum ability to respond to
a variety of situations with the appropriate equipment without having an excessive inventory of
apparatus.
City of Lino LakesPublic Safety DepartmentFire Equipment Replacement Schedule2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 CommentsQuint Station #1 A11 - 500,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1,500,000 Replace A11 with used QuintLight Rescue Station #1 LR11 211,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 155,000 Replace E11 with LR11 - Build Out, Have ChassisTender Station #1 T11 - 12,500 - - - - - 350,000 - - - - - - - - - Refurb T11Quint Station #2 A21 - - 1,300,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Replace E21 with 2nd Quint - Issue Cert of Indebt for PartialLight Rescue Station #2 LR21 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 155,000 - Tender Station #2 T21 - 12,500 - - - - - - 350,000 - - - - - - - - Refurb T21UTV Station #2 UTV21 - - - - 25,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - Boat Station #2 BOAT21 - - - - - - 60,000 - - - - - - - - - - Replace w/ AirboatFord ExplorerDeputy DirectorDD600- - - 36,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 211,000$ 525,000$ 1,300,000$ 36,000$ 25,000$ -$ 60,000$ 350,000$ 350,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 155,000$ 1,655,000$ Cash Flow ScenarioBeg Bal674,990 463,990 138,990 38,990 202,990 377,990 577,990 717,990 567,990 417,990 617,990 817,990 1,017,990 1,217,990 1,417,990 1,617,990 1,662,990 Contribution- 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Cert of Indebt - - 1,000,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ending Bal 463,990 138,990 38,990 202,990 377,990 577,990 717,990 567,990 417,990 617,990 817,990 1,017,990 1,217,990 1,417,990 1,617,990 1,662,990 207,990 842,531 CFD Equipment Fund Distribution269,303 CFD Operating Fund Distribution(51,344) Chassis #1(51,344) Chassis #2(183,357) Outfit Chassis #1(150,800) FFE674,990
Item #6
Monthly Progress Report
August 1, 2016
Item Last Action Taken Staff Status
Digital Scanning Project 3/14/16 – Council approved transfer of
$15,000 from Contingency Fund for
scanning and indexing building plans
Julie Large format scanning is in
progress
White Bear Lake Restoration
Assn. v. Dept. of Natural
Resources (DNR)
The WBL Restoration Assn. & WBL
Homeowners’ Assn. reached a settlement
agreement with the DNR that imposes a
three-year stay on the lawsuit so funds
can be appropriated for a Northeast Metro
Project. This involves a construction
project to connect Northeast cities to the
St. Paul Regional Water Service. Lino
Lakes is one of seven cities included in
the second phase of the project.
Jeff The DNR developed cost
estimates for augmenting
White Bear Lake with surface
water. Legislators and
augmentation proponents
questioned the construction
cost estimate, which the DNR
revised to $38.4 million. The
total cost range is $36.5 to
$78.2 million.
Legion Parking Lot 3/7/16 – Staff was directed to obtain
an appraisal for City property
Mike Legion wishes to purchase
property, but must submit a
design to the bank before
securing a loan.
Location of Veteran’s
Memorial
6/6/16 – Council was directed to visit
potential sites for veteran’s memorial
The Council agreed that the
memorial could be built in
conjunction with a new
“Veteran’s Memorial Park”
south of the new fire
station.
Lino Lakes Public Safety
One Vision. One Mission.
John Swenson
Public Safety Director
Police Presentation Overview
•Overview of methods used for determining proper police fleet size
•Current police fleet (type and use)
•Discuss proposed 2017 replacement
Fleet Size and Replacement
•We use a hybrid of two rubrics (Max Use and Fleet Management
Miles Per Year)
•Created by the International City/County Management Association
•Max Use –Total number of vehicles needed at the busiest time
•Fleet Management Miles Per Year-Have enough vehicles that you don’t put
over 20,000 miles per year on any one vehicle. Includes a three year
replacement schedule. Benefits are lower maintenance costs, higher resale.
Average Miles Per Squad Per Year
•2013 = 18,527 Miles
•2014 = 19,045 Miles
•2015 = 18,051 Miles
(Personally owned vehicles average 12,000 miles per year)
Administration and Investigation Vehicles
•Admin squads are used to
respond to police incidents, fire
incidents, on-call during “off”
hours, and as special event/back
up squads if patrol vehicles are
being repaired.
•397 Commander McCarthy
•398 Capt. Wegener
•301 Dir. Swenson
•Investigation Vehicles are used
for investigators to conduct
police business and to respond
to fire incidents. The vehicles
are also used by patrol when
covert/un-marked vehicles are
needed.
•385 Chev. Impala
•380 Chev. Impala
•390 Toyota Corolla
•379 Ford Taurus
.
Reserve and Community Service Officer (CSO)
and Special Detail
•There are two vehicles assigned to the Reserve Unit and the CSO
•These vehicles are not fully equipped for police patrol or fire response
•The one vehicle is a Ford Interceptor that can transport 2 prisoners
(police squads can only transport 1) and the other vehicle is a Ford F-
150 that is primarily used by the CSO for animal control and
equipment transport.
•We have a 2001 Polaris snowmobile used for enforcement,
snowmobile safety class, and responding to incidents.
Patrol division
There are 12 cars assigned to the
Patrol Division. Two of the
vehicles, 386 and 399, are
assigned to specialty patrol (K9
and the grant funded traffic
position) and are not available for
officers responding to calls.
383388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
399
Grant Funded
386
K9
•With the specialty
vehicles out of the
rotation, there are 10
squads left for call
cars.
•I took a typical day,
July 12th, to illustrate
vehicle use.
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
•0600-1600 Sgt. Owens383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
•0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
•0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
304
302
396 393
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303 392
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
Ofc. Wagner
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303
392
393
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
Ofc. Wagner
2130-0700 Ofc. Strub
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303 392
393
395
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
Ofc. Wagner
2130-0700 Ofc. Strub
Ofc. Werneke
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303 392
393
395
394
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
Ofc. Wagner
2130-0700 Ofc. Strub
Ofc. Werneke
Ofc. Swanson
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396
393
303 392
393
395
394
396
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
Ofc. Wagner
2130-0700 Ofc. Strub
Ofc. Werneke
Ofc. Swanson
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303
392
393
395
394
396
If this was a Saturday or Sunday, we would need 2
squads for Eaglebrook.
302
0600-1600 Sgt. Owens
0630-1600 Ofc. Boehme
Ofc. Peterson
1400-0000 Sgt. Schirmers
1530-0100 Ofc. Kraemer
Ofc. McIntosh
Ofc. Wagner
2130-0700 Ofc. Strub
Ofc. Werneke
Ofc. Swanson
383
388
392
393
394
395
396
302
303
304
302
396 393
303
392
393
395
394
396
If this was a Saturday or Sunday, we would need 2
squads for Eaglebrook. If there was a squad being
repaired or a TZD detail, that would be another squad
in use.
302
Maintenance
We take squads out of service for everything from routine maintenance
to issues with any of the vital systems in the squad (lights, radar,
computer..)
•Public Works: 7 vehicles out of service 52 times in 2015 and 30 times
YTD 2016
•Metro-Inet/Technology Issues: 111 documented issues in 2015, 57
YTD 2016
•In 2015, there were 35 days where a single squad had to run for 24
hours straight (16 times 2016 YTD)
Proposed 2017 Replacement
UNIT YEAR DESCRIPTION ASSIGNED MILEAGE *
302 2016 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked -Sgts.Patrol 1,555
303 2016 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 1,498
304 2016 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 497
383 2013 Ford Interceptor AWD 4DR Maroon Patrol 61,749
388 2013 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 60,580
392 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 27,499
393 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 34,757
394 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 28,394
395 2014 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Grey Unmarked Patrol 58,354
396 2015 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked Patrol 27,245
399 2015 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Black Unmarked Patrol 18,932
386 2013 Ford Explorer Police AWD 4DR Marked -K9 Patrol -K9 61,280
301 2016 Ford Explorer Police Admin AWD 4DR Unmarked Black Admin 4,763
397 2015 Ford Explorer Police Admin AWD 4DR Unmarked DUI Admin 17,000
398 2015 Ford Explorer Police Admin AWD 4DR Unmarked Gray Admin 14,721
379 2009 Ford Taurus Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 117,450
380 2011 Chev Impala Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 109,486
385 2011 Chev Impala Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 98,786
390 2009 Toyota Corolla Unmarked Vehicle Investigations 93,865
300 2004 Ford F-150 Pickup CSO/Reserve 77,069
382 2013 Ford Interceptor AWD 4DR Marked CSO/Reserve 44,848
2001 Polaris Snowmobile Special Detail 1,401
2017 Requested Amount: $144,000
Current plan is to replace three of the
highest mileage patrol vehicles and two
investigator vehicles.
This plan is subject to change based on
several factors including maintenance
issues and fluctuations in equipment
prices.
Fire Presentation Overview
•Overview of methods used for determining proper fleet size
•Current fire fleet (type and use)
•Review operational deficiencies and safety concerns with A11
•Discuss proposed capital replacement
Fleet Size and Replacement
•We used NFPA 1901 Appendix D and ISO to help guide us in our
apparatus replacement plan
•We reviewed repair and maintenance cost
•Evaluated the needs of the Lino Lakes community related to
emergency fire response
•Reviewed operational procedures and safety concerns for firefighters
during the operation of current apparatus
Current Active Fire Division Fleet
UNIT YEAR DESCRIPTION ASSIGNED MILEAGE *
605 1994 Chev S10 PU -Grass Unit (Grass 11)Station 1 13,801
607 2013 Ford F250 (Rescue 11)Station 1 17,479
610 1991 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank (Tender 11)Station 1 12,271
611 2000 Freightliner Toyne 1250GPM/500 Tank/ 75 ft. (Aerial 11)Station 1 30,302
601 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank (Engine 11)Station 1 72,838
606 1994 GMC PU Grass Unit (Grass 21)Station 2 18,285
617 2013 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Station 2 71,557
609 1991 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank (Tender 21)Station 2 15,545
602 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank (Engine 21)Station 2 64,379
600 2015 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Deputy Director Admin 18,850
618 2013 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Marked Admin 65,316
619 2013 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Marked Admin 58,739
603 2009 Ford Escape Fire Inspection/Fire Investigations Insp./Inv.79,720
615 2000 Polaris UTV Grass Equipped w/ trailer Special Detail 142 (Hours)
1997 Yamaha Snowmobile Special Detail 255.9
2012 Zodiac Boat w/ trailer Special Detail N/A
* Mileage as of 7/18/2016
Operational Concern
•The controls for A11 are located
on the rear of the apparatus
•This design makes safe operation
of A11 difficult as the operator
either can not or has limited
visibility of aerial tip; this can
lead to slowed operation in
emergency situation and
increases the chances the aerial
device will be damaged
Operational Concern
•A11 is outfitted with an extended
tailboard to allow the operator to
stand on tailboard to operate the
aerial device.
•When deploying or retracting the
outriggers, the tailboard move up
when deploying and down with
retracting.
•The operator must reach across the
tailboard to perform this action. If
operator is in contact with tailboard
while performing this action this
exposes the firefighter to significant
risk of injury.
Operational Concern
•The need for 100 foot or greater aerial device is based on the typical
minimum setback for construction in Lino Lakes.
•A11, which has a 75 foot aerial device, is insufficient to reach most
two story homes in Lino Lakes to effect a rescue or properly place a
master stream of water on a structure fire.
•Fire staff deployed A11 at two homes in Lino Lakes to provide a
pictorial depiction of the shortcomings of the 75 foot aerial device.
•6700 block of Clearwater Creek Drive –48 feet from curb to closest point of
structure
•6600 block of White Birch Court -44 feet from curb to closest point of
structure; located on cul-de-sac
Operational Concern -Clearwater Creek
Operational Concern -Clearwater Creek
Operational Concern –Clearwater Creek
Operational Concern -Clearwater Creek
Operational Concerns -White Birch Ct
White Birch Ct.
Operational Concern -White Birch Ct.
Operational Concern -White Birch Ct.
Operational Concern -White Birch Ct.
Proposed Capital Replacement
•Complete the buildout of the second Light Rescue/Quick Attack
Pumper.
•2017 purchase one used Quint (estimated cost $500,000); refurbish
Tender 11 and Tender 21 ($12,500 per Tender)
What is a Quint?
•A Quint provides an aerial device, pump, water tank, fire hose, and
ground ladders on board.
Quint
St. Clair Estates
Council Work Session Meeting
August 1, 2016
Land Use Applications
•Variance
•Proposed cul-de-sac length exceeds
design standards
•Preliminary Plat
2
Background
•St. Clair Estates
•35 lots
•R-1 single family residential subdivision
•30.47 gross acre parcel
3
4
5
6
Revised Preliminary Plat
7
Emergency Access/Pedestrian TrailSidewalk
Comprehensive Plan
•St. Clair Estates is consistent with the goals and
policies of the comprehensive plan in regards:
•resource management
•land use
•housing
•transportation
•utilities
8
Density
Gross Area (acres)30.47
Wetlands & Water Bodies 13.60
Public Parks & Open Space 0.00
Arterial ROW 0.00
Other (Wetland Buffer Conservation Easement)2.40
Net Area (acres)14.47
# of Units 35
Gross Density (units/acre)1.15
Net Density (units/acre)2.42
9
Low Density Residential allows 1.6 to 3.9 units per net acre
Density Comparison
Spirit Hills Shenandoah 3rd St. Clair Estates
# SF Units 51 48 35
Gross Acres 30.65 22.14 30.47
Gross Density 1.66 2.17 1.15
Net Acres 23.65 22.14 14.47
Net Density 2.16 2.17 2.42
10
Transportation Plan
•June 8th public hearing concerns
•Increased traffic on Sioux Lane and Hokah Drive
•Lack of access to Birch Street
•Revised Traffic Study
•actual data counts
•analysis if Hokah Drive were to become right
in/right out at Birch Street in the future
11
Revised Traffic Study
•St. Clair Estates is expected to generate daily:
•27 a.m. peak hour trips
•36 p.m. peak hour trips
•334 total trips
•These counts did not change from the original
traffic study.
12
13
Original
May 12, 2016
Revised
June 23, 2016
Road Estimated ADT Actual ADT Difference
Hokah Drive 250 270 +20
Sioux Lane 600 520 -80
May 2016: Estimated ADT based on video for peak hours
June 2016: Actual counts from 24 hour video from May 3, 2016
Actual traffic counts increased 20 on Hokah Drive and decreased 80 on Sioux Lane
Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
14
Road
Actual ADT
(Average Daily
Traffic)
Estimated ADT
(2019 Build
Conditions)
Estimated ADT
(RI/RO at
Hokah Drive)
Hokah Drive 270 455 175
Sioux Lane 520 670 950
Current vs. 2019 Build vs. RI/RO ADT Scenarios
•Per the City’s Transportation Plan, typical average daily traffic
on local streets is less than 1,000.
•Increased projected trips on Hokah Drive and Sioux Lane are
less than 1,000 in all 3 scenarios.
Level of Service
Existing Peak Hour LOS Proposed Peak Hour LOS
Intersection A.M. Peak P.M. Peak A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Birch Street and Hodgson Drive B D C D
Birch Street and Ware Road A B A B
Birch Street and Hokah Drive A/C A/C A/C A/C
Ware Road and Sioux Lane A/A A/A A/A A/A
Ware Road and Hodgson Road A/B A/B A/B A/C
Hokah Drive and Sioux Lane A/A A/A A/A A/A
15
•LOS is a capacity analysis that indicates the quality of traffic flow through an
intersection.
Level of Service
•No change in LOS from original traffic study.
•Proposed Levels of Service do not degrade by more than one
(1) LOS
•Sioux Lane and Hokah Drive have structural capacity to
accommodate the projected traffic from the proposed
subdivision.
•Subdivision is not considered premature. 16
LL Police Radar & Speed Data
•June 11, 2016
•Ran radar on all 3 shifts
•highest speed observed was 27 mph
•June 28, 2016
•12:43 pm to 1:30 pm on Sioux Lane
•24 vehicles averaging 18 mph
•June 29, 2016
•7:52 am to 8:10 am and 8:36am to 9:20am on Sioux Lane
•25 vehicles averaging 19 mph
17
WSB Speed Readings
•July 5, 2016, WSB collected speed data on Sioux
Lane
•North of Sioux Court
•Median Speed = 21 mph
•South of Sioux Court
•Median Speed = 20 mph
•Speed limit on Sioux Lane is 30 mph.
18
CSAH 34 Corridor Study
•April 2011: City and Anoka County retained SRF
Consulting Group to analyze CSAH 34 (Birch Street)
Corridor
•CSAH 46 (Hodgson Road) to CSAH 54 (20th Avenue)
•Address safety, access and mobility needs
•Study guides transportation improvement decisions and
establishes an improvement plan to address corridor
needs. 19
20
21Totem TrailTomahawk Trail
22
23
ACHD Access Spacing Guidelines
•Anoka County Highway Department Access Spacing Guidelines
also dictate intersection and signal spacing along county road.
•Full movement intersection spacing is typically allowed every
¼ to ½ mile.
•Signal spacing is typically allowed every ½ mile.
•Managing access along CSAH 34 (Birch Street) corridor is a critical
safety issue.
24
Ware Road Signal Improvements
•2012-2013, road and signal improvements were
installed at CSAH 34 (Birch Street) and Ware
Road
•Consistent with the CSAH 34 Corridor Study
•Anoka County Highway Department Access
Spacing.
25
Ware Road Signal Improvements
•These improvements were installed to accommodate
traffic from:
•Sprit Hills Center (commercial development),
•Spirit Hills (current residential development),
•Shenandoah 3rd Addition (current residential
development)
•Subject Site (future residential development)
26
Ware Road Signal Improvements
•Hokah Drive and Sioux Lane were
connected.
•Hokah Drive was reconstructed in 2015.
27
ACHD Comments
•March 14, 2016 ACHD provides the following
comments:
•No additional right of way is required along
CSAH 34.
•The development proposes no new access
points onto CSAH 34 which is consistent with
the 2011 Corridor Plan.
28
Traffic Concerns
•Per the 2011 CSAH 34 Corridor Study and Anoka County
Access Spacing Guidelines, access to Birch Street is not
warranted.
•Site constraints that restrict access to Birch Street
•wetlands
•site only abuts CSAH 34 with 80 feet of right of way
•open stormwater ditch
29
30
Traffic Concerns
•Existing roads have structural capacity to handle an additional
334 trips per day.
•Spirit Hills, Shenandoah 3rd Addition and St. Clair Estates
function as a 134 lot residential subdivision
•2 access intersections at Sioux Lane/Ware Road and Hokah
Drive/Birch Street.
•Entire area also benefits from a signalized intersection at Ware
Road and Birch Street.
31
New ACHD Comments
•Temporary construction access will be allowed off of Birch
Street
•Tuesday, July 12th: City staff met with ACHD to discuss access
to Birch Street
•ACHD is currently evaluating safety improvements from Ware
Road to West Shadow Lake Drive
•Evaluation will include possible connection of Enid Trail to Birch St
•5 year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
•In order to preserve the opportunity, the cul de sac bulb shall
be re-located to the east
32
33
Cul de Sac Bulb Re-located to the East
Zoning
Current Zoning R-1, Single Family Residential
Current Land Use Open Space, Grassland
Future Land Use per CP Low Density Residential
(1.6 to 3.9 units per acre)
Utility Staging Area 1A=2008-2015 (south 2/3 )
34
Zoning Requirements
Required per R-1 Proposed
Min. Lot Size1 (upland)10,800 s.f.Ave. 13,677 s.f. gross
Min. Lot Width (feet)80 Min. 80 feet
Min. Lot Depth (feet)135 Ave. 135 feet
Building Setback (feet)
-From Local Streets 30 30
-Rear
--Principal 30 30
-Side
--Principal 10 10
--Accessory 5 5
Buffer Adjacent to Collector 15 foot NA
Impervious Surface 40%
--Outside Shoreland District 40%Reviewed at building permit
--Within Shoreland District 30%Reviewed at building permit
35
Subdivision Ordinance
•Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code
•The preliminary plat is consistent with the comprehensive
plan for low density residential development and zoning code
requirements for R-1, Single Family as discussed above.
36
Cash in Lieu of Land Dedication
St. Clair Estates
35 lots x $2,500 =$87,500
37
Wetlands
•A wetland boundary delineation report was prepared by
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC on April 18, 2016.
•RCWD approved delineation on June 8, 2016
•Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan
boundary and Wetland Management Corridor (WMC).
•Conservation easement covering wetlands and wetland buffer
is required.
38
39
Wetland Map
Floodplain
•DFIRM indicates a Zone AE floodplain
•Base flood elevation of 887.0
•Lots 8-10, Block 1 potentially extend into the floodplain but
the site grading and building pads will not impact the
floodplain.
40
41
Floodplain Map
Shoreland Management Overlay
•Land within 1,000 feet of OHWL of lakes
•Rice Lake is a Natural Environment Lake with an 883.1 OWHL
elevation.
•A setback of 150 feet from the OHWL is required for all
primary and accessory structures.
•Impervious surface coverage of 30% applies to all lots within
the overlay district.
42
43
Shoreland Management Overlay
Variance
•Section 302.03(1)(h) states the minimum length of a cul-de-
sac shall be 500 feet.
•Proposed cul-de-sac in St. Clair Estates is approximately
1,200 feet.
44
Variance
•Cul de sacs are limited in length due to concerns regarding
access for emergency services.
•Concern is being addressed
•City is requiring an emergency access trail
•Reviewed and approved by the City’s Public Safety Department.
•10 foot wide, 7 ton
•St. Clair Estates is a 35 lot low density residential
development.
45
46
Emergency Access Trail
47
Google Earth 1991
Hokah Drive platted 1979
49 SF lots
2,000 foot cul de sac
1979 to 2012 (33 years)
48
Google Earth 2002
Sioux Lane platted 2001
51 SF lots
1,500 foot cul de sac
2001 to 2012 (11 years)
49
West Shadow Lake Drive
1st plat = 1969
60+ SF homes
7,800 foot cul de sac
1 access onto Birch St.
50
Black Duck Drive
1st plat=1970
200+ SF homes
5,500 foot cul de sac
1 access onto Birch St
Findings of Fact
•Resolution No. 16-78 details the Findings of Fact
•Variance
•Preliminary Plat
51
Planning & Zoning Board
•Held public hearing
•June 8, 2016
•July 13, 2016
•Voted 4-2 in favor of the variance and
preliminary plat
•Condition the cul de sac bulb at the south end of
Enid Trail is re-located to the east. 52
Council Action
•Consider Resolution No. 16-78 Approving
Variance and Preliminary Plat
53