HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-01-2017 Council Work Session MinutesCITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION
May 1, 2017
APPROVED
1 CITY OF LINO LAKES
2 MINUTES
3
4 DATE May 1, 2017
5 TIME STARTED 6:00 p.m.
6 TIME ENDED 9935 p.m.
7 MEMBERS PRESENT Council Member Rafferty, Kusterman,
8 Maher, Manthey and Mayor Reinert
9 MEMBERS ABSENT None
10
11 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Public Safety Director John
12 Swenson; Community Development Director Michael Grochala; City Engineer Diane
13 Hankee; City Planner Katie Larsen; Public Services Director DeGardner; City Clerk Julie
14 Bartell.
T.7
16 1. Anoka County Assessor —Preview of Board of Appeal and Equalization —
17 Alex Guggenberger, Anoka County Assessor, and Scott Schutz, Anoka County
18 Residential Appraiser, were present. Mr. Guggenberger referenced the Assessor's
19 Report for the Board of Appeal and Equalization that is included in council's packet and
20 that the county intends to make the report more user friendly in coming years. As
21 indicated in the Report, the number of sales in Anoka County increased by 11.6 percent
22 and registered a decrease in the number of disqualified sales. The city showed a similar
23 trend (in increased sales). He provided information to the council that is on file. Mr.
24 Guggenberger reviewed a chart of sales history, a sales breakdown by price, and sales
25 volume by price bracket. Information was also reviewed relative to sales that occurred
26 after the report deadline of September 30, 2016. Mr. Guggenberger moved to review of
27 the Board report, noting increases in property values by type (page 13).
28
29 The council will have their Board of Appeal meeting on Monday, May 8 at 6:00 p.m.
30 Anoka County staff said that, based on their phone calls, they do not anticipate any
31 property owners to be present however the board process was reviewed in preparation.
32 Mr. Guggenberger explained that some commercial/industrial properties have sent
33 correspondence to the county but they are normally matters handled by tax court.
34
35 Mayor Reinert explained that the city council acting as the Board does have the authority
36 to change valuations if they see fit. Mr. Guggenberger further explained that the role of
37 the Board is to judge valuations without preference to either the assessor or the property
38 owners. Council Member Kusterman clarified that most concerns (of residential property
39 owners) are handled by simply explaining the process and the inherent
40
41 need to reflect market increases.
42
43 2. Arlo Lane Stop Sign Request. City Engineer Hankee reviewed her written report
44 that explains the city's process for evaluating the need for traffic control, including
45 review by the city's staff traffic safety committee. The report is intended to be an update
it
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017
APPROVED
46 and staff intends that there will be more information and discussion in the future with
47 resident involvement included.
48
49 The council expressed their support for strong neighborhood involvement. The residents
50 would be directly affected by additional traffic control (or no additional traffic control)
51 and should have their voices heard. City Engineer Hankee explained that staff is still
52 looking at the validity of the stop sign request from an engineering perspective. Staff
53 could provide notice to the area residents at any time with council direction. Council
54 Member Kusterman pondered the council's authority if it comes to overruling a staff
55 recommendation. Ms. Hankee explained that safety is the number one priority and so a
56 recommendation would be based first on that consideration. If the addition of a stop sign
57 isn't the right action, there could be other traffic calming recommendations.
59 Council Member Rafferty asked if a traffic study and the work occurring on this situation
60 is a standard response to a resident's request and staff confinned that they review several
61 requests each year as part of their normal work load.
62
63 3. Public Works Site Analysis and Space Needs Study — Public Services Director
64 DeGardner introduced Quinn Hutson (Principal Architect) and Jessica Johnson
65 (Architectural Designer) representing CNH Architects, to present their report.
66
67 Mayor Reinert noted that he believes the council requested an option of fixing the current
68 facility but that doesn't seem to be included in the analysis. Mr. Hutson said that Option
69 One includes renovating the current facility with a building expansion.
70
71 Jessica Johnson and Quinn Hutson, reviewed a PowerPoint presentation that included
72 information on:
73 - Overview of analysis they have completed;
74 - Public Works site options map (site options are the existing site as Option A, or
75 site adjacent to fire station #2 as Option B);
76 - Space needs for the city's public works program: office, vehicle storage, vehicle
77 maintenance, and departmental shops;
78 - Growth consideration for the next 20 years;
79 - A comparison with other public works facilities in cities in the area and with
80 similar population;
81 - Layout options (two at site one and one at site two);
82 - Sanitary and water service addition would be required at current site; there would
83 be some disruption of services at current facilities (Council Members expressed
84 concern about losing the baseball field and suggested that should not be
85 necessary);
86 - Site Option B advantages were noted (sewer and water hookup;, etc); the site is
87 sufficient to meet the needs of both Phase 1 and 2;
88 - An architectural review of the current facilities; accessibility and code review
89 (several issues noted); mechanical systems review;
2
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017
APPROVED
- Cost estimate: Phase 1, all three options priced, both low cost options to higher
cost (Mayor Reinert remarked that a remodel without a space expansion hasn't
been priced and Mr. Hutson said that is because that option wouldn't address
future space needs). Mayor Reinert suggested that there is an even lower cost
option that would basically add an unheated pole barn, although Director
Grochala suggested there could be some space/utility services issues.
Mayor Reinert noted his concern about costs and prudence in spending the taxpayer's
funds. He is more supportive of exploring improvements at the Fire Station No. 2 land
for community use, such as a park, and improving the current public works facilities to
get equipment protected (i.e. unheated pole barn). Council Member Kustennan
remarked that perhaps a more detailed, lower level explanation of costs would be helpful
in a careful consideration of spending. Mayor Reinert remarked that the city just dugout
of a recession and he'd like to keep the city's budget small. He supports forward and
innovate thinking but this requires a lot of thought and there may be more urgent needs
right now.
106
107 In addition to more information on costs (at a more micro level),
108 a comparison of proposed square footages to current space would be helpful. Council
109 Member Rafferty remarked that city hall is a good example of a decision based on future
110 needs and the rocky road and changes that can occur as the future comes upon you.
III
112 Council Member Rafferty noted that one option would move facilities to the south side of
113 the city and he wonders if that is best location for service provision. Director DeGardner
114 suggested that the closer to the core of the city, the better as far as saving trips and driving
115 economy. Mayor Reinert noted that the future could mean population changes however.
116 Mr. Hutson added that with the south site, it is anticipated that the current site facilities
117 would continue to some extent.
118
119 The mayor asked Administrator Karlson, if the roof were leaking here at city hall, what
120 procedure and funding is available to address the problem. Mr. Karlson noted the
121 facilities fund that is available for building expenses at city hall; for the work itself, a
122 bidding process would be appropriate. The mayor asked, would that facilities fund be
123 the same source to fund repairs to the public works facilities. Director DeGardner
124 explained that staff makes judgements about how to move on repair situations. Mayor
125 Reinert suggested that repairs should be done as needed along the way and he feels the
126 funds were available for repairs.
127
128 The council concurred that they will receive additional information as they have
129 requested. Council Member Manthey asked about the move of city hall from the old
130 building to the current. Director Grochala noted a study that involved creating a town
131 center as well as the space needs that developed.
132
133 Council Member Rafferty requested that the Hugo, Shoreview, etc. public works
134 locations be shared with the council.
3
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017
APPROVED
135
136 3. Century Farm North Park Dedication Review, Michael Grochala/Rick
137 DeGardner - Community Development Director DeGardner reviewed the written staff
138 report. It includes background on the Century Farm development and the park
139 dedication element. The review includes information back to the preliminary plat that
140 included a linear park system, a map showing the development area and the upland that
141 has been included for the park dedication. Going back to 2003, the park dedication
142 requirements were reviewed and Mr. Grochala explained how they were met and what the
143 developer provided. The developer did argue the formula however and there was
144 discussion that included the city attorney who eventually opined on the amount that was
145 returned to the developer in 2003. When the 2" d addition came through, the council
146 discussed the situation again, there was the same discussion and the city attorney gave the
147 same opinion. Director Grochala concluded that the city has planned its park system to
148 serve certain amounts of areas. The current day park dedication formula has, of course,
149 increased and so the last phase currently underway is higher ($20,000 noted) but it
150 wouldn't be enough to provide a linking trail on its own; the possibility of supplementing
151 the park dedication budget is the council's prerogative.
152
153 Mayor Reinert recalled that the developer was sold some property and the dedication
154 funds received were supposed to be used for park development. Director Grochala
155 explained that the funds were used for Behm's Park.
156
157 The council discussed the cost of trail development. Community Development Director
158 Grochala added that there isn't a master plan in place for the park.
159
160 Robert Sibell, 7898 Century Trail, spoke on behalf of the Century Farm North Homeowners
161 Association (49 homes); reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file). Some points
162 included:
163 - Noting the city's comprehensive plan;
164 - Issues with the park dedication fee reversal;
165 - Issues with land provided for park land and its usability;
166 - Developer dispute timeline review;
167 - 2003 Developer Agreement (validity; cannot be altered); Community
168 Development Director Grochala suggested that the agreement is done when the
169 phase is done; Mayor Reinert suggested staff obtain a legal opinion on the point;
170 - Information in staff report for council approval states the amount of the park
171 dedication fee;
172 - A sample from current development agreement (NorthPointe) language on park
173 dedication fees;
174 - The generosity of the deal to the developer based on county tax appraisal of land,
175 city ordinance value of land and developer appraisal of land (developer shouldn't
176 be able to return and change contract terms);
177 - State statutes (history) regarding park dedication fees and judicial review of
178 actions;
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION
May 1, 2017
APPROVED
179 - His recommendations: pursue collection of funds based on improper procedure;
180 restructure based on lack of usability of land dedicated; follow through on park
181 plans to grade area and provide work to make the land suitable for development of
182 park (Director Grochala explained the work that's been done to a portion of the
183 land to date);
184 - Discussion of the number of acres dedicated (Director Grochala suggested that
185 any upland is considered usable);
186 - Original maps shown;
187 - Recommendation to verify status of 4.7 acres dedicated; evaluate if the remaining
188 dedicated park land acreage is open and usable to public;
189 - Developer trails that were put in; a master plan was called for by the city;
190
191 Mr. Sibell explained that the property owners were told that they would get more.
192
193 Community Development Director Grochala suggested that the presentation is really
194 bits and pieces of information from a 13 year period and a conclusion is attempted
195 based just on that. He cannot fully reconstruct the entire scenario considering the
196 many discussions and decisions along the way. There was a determination along the
197 way that the developer fulfilled his obligations.
198
199 Mayor Reinert suggested that the city attorney should review Mr. Sibell's presentation
200 and any information that is pertinent. The city could find that there is some
201 responsibility but the council must have a discussion with the complete information.
202 He has heard of developments falling short of expectations. Staff should obtain a
203 legal opinion on the presentation, implications, council discussion and a
204 recommendation on how to proceed. The city has been presented with a serious
205 question and it deserves a thorough review.
206
207 Council Member Rafferty asked that the developer's appraisal information should be
208 available.
210 The mayor asked to be involved in the attorney s review and staff suggested that the
211 attorney will have to review prior to an opinion. The mayor wants to make sure the
212 information is all that is available.
213
214 Council Member Kusterman suggested that there should be a dual track of the council
215 considering how to provide some relief moving alongside the legal review.
216
217 Council Member Manthey asked if there was an original design for a park that changed
218 with the change in funding and Director Grochala remarked that there wasn't a plan
219 that he was aware of.
220
221 The mayor is hearing that, at a minimum, the request is to fix the existing trails and
222 also improve the park land.
223
5
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017
APPROVED
224 4. West Shadow Lake and LaMotte Projects — City Engineer Hankee presented
225 information from the feasibility study on the proposed projects:
226 - background on city's pavement management plan that guides maintenance and
227 reconstruction work on the city's roadways;
228 - where the projects fit in to the plan recommendations (there is a strong need to
229 reconstruct these streets based on their condition);
230 West Shadow Lake Drive
231 - Establishment of roadway project first (neighborhood meeting didn't seem to
232 show interest in water utility);
233 - Separate project would be sanitary sewer;
234 - Determining project scope (input, safety and function; cost effectiveness; funding
235 within five year plan);
236 - West Shadow Lake Drive existing conditions (roadway, drainage and wells with
237 ISTS systems);
238 - Picture shown indicating water sitting on roadway and ditch;
239 - Culvert under roadway (flooding has occurred in the area) that staff is researching;
240 - Proposed improvements (three options presented): Option 1 is to reclaim the
241 existing roadway with no subgrade or drainage improvements that would result in
242 a reduced use expectancy; Option 2 would be reconstruction to city standards;
243 Option 3 would be reconstruction to city standards but also widen roadway,
244 stormwater management and curb and gutter in various sections;
245 - How staff proposes to move ahead (continue to work on cost effective design);
246 - Estimated project costs for roadway, drainage, curb and gutter and culvert (total
247 $4.5 million);
248 - Proposed funding source is through street reconstruction bonds (couldn't include
249 all curb and gutter); no proposed assessments; Sewer and water funding source
250 would have to be determined (Mayor noted that sewer and water will be up to the
251 residents);
252 - Proposed project schedule.
253 LaMotte neighborhood
254 - Roadway project and sanitary sewer repair or reconstruction;
255 - Water system extension;
256 - Project would include roadway, drainage improvements, with remaining wells and
257 sanitary sewer improvements;
258 - Roadway pictures shown (high water table, drainage issues, ice issues);
259 - Estimated project costs (total $1.1 million);
260 - Project funding proposed through street reconstruction funds with no proposed
261 assessments for roadway or drainage, sewer through operating funds;
262 - Same schedule proposed as for West Shadow Lake Drive;
263
264 Rough costs noted for municipal utility improvements for each project.
265
266 Community Development Director Grochala noted that the West Shadow Lake Drive
267 project is quite complicated. There is discussion for packaging of some elements of the
268 two projects together.
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017
APPROVED
269
M Mayor Reinert acknowledged that there are some residents who have actually waited
271 decades for improvements in the area.
272
273 5. Public Safety Update — Director Swenson reviewed his presentation:
274 - Reiteration of the department's mission;
275 - Statistics for the lst Quarter of 2017, including emergency response times and
276 medical calls for service and who responded.
277 - Fire division total calls;
278 - Mutual aid given;
279 - Criminal offenses by category;
280 - Arrest data;
281 - Felony case submissions.
282
283 Director Swenson also reviewed HeartSafe training that has been provided in city hall and
284 out, as well as fire training and CERT training. The department is also in the process of
285 expanding the fire prevention program, continuing car seat training, and smoke detector
286 distribution through a grant. There is also research underway on body cameras. They
287 will be reinstituting the citizens' academy and will continue training officers in crisis
288 intervention (nine trained already).
289
290 Regarding the department's upcoming volunteer recognition event, the council is
291 encouraged to attend and will receive a reminder invitation.
292
293 6. Council Updates on Boards/Commissions, City Council — There was no report.
294
295 7. Monthly Progress Report — Administrator Karlson reviewed the written report.
296
297 8. Review Regular Agenda — The agenda was reviewed with a brief review of items
298 presented by the Community Development Division:
300 6A) Consider Second Reading of No. 04-17, Vacating Drainage &Utility
301 Easements over Outlot A, NorthPointe 3rd Addition and Outlot C, NorthPointe 4th
302 Addition — City Planner Larsen explained that is second reading of the vacation
303 ordinance.
304
305 6B) Saddle Club Third Addition: Consider Resolution No. 17-39 Approving
306 Final Plat; Consider Resolution No. 17-40 Approving Development Agreement —City
307 Planner Larsen reviewed the inclusion of a road connection and land change between the
308 Comcast/City/Developer. This would be the final addition of eight new lots. There is
309 standard final plat and development agreement included for council approval.
310
311 6C) Woods Edge 2nd Addition Final Plat: Consider Resolution No. 17-37
312 Approving Final Plat; Consider Resolution No. 17-38 Approving Development
313 Agreement; Consider Resolution No. 1742 — City Planner Larsen explained this would
7
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017
APPROVED
314 be the second and final phase —the first is under construction. The project is going well,
315 with many walkthroughs and sale of some units.
316
317 9. Adjourn
318
319 The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
320
321 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on
322 May 22, 2017.
323
324
325
326 v_-
327 Juliann Bartell, City , erk
328
0