Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-2016 Council Meeting MinutesCOUNCIL MINUTES October 10, 2016 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2 MINUTES 3 4 5 DATE October 10, 2016 6 TIME STARTED 6:30 p.m. 7 TIME ENDED 8:05 p.m. 8 MEMBERS PRESENT Council Member Rafferty, Kusterman, Maher, 9 Manthey, and Mayor Reinert 10 MEMBERS ABSENT 11 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Community Development Director Michael 13 Grochala; City Engineer Diane Hankee; Director of Public Safety John Swenson; and City Clerk Julie 14 Bartell 15 16 PUBLIC COMMENT 17 18 No one was present to address the council regarding a matter not on the agenda. 19 20 SETTING THE AGENDA 21 22 The agenda was approved as presented. Mayor Reinert said he would be reading the Proclamation 23 Honoring Toastmasters Month 2016. 24 25 CONSENT AGENDA 26 27 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items I through I as presented. 28 Council Member Maher seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 29 30 ITEM ACTION 31 32 Consideration of Expenditures: 33 34 October 10, 2016 (Check No. 10494 — 35 104663, $209,075.83) Approved 36 37 September 26, 2016 Council Work Session 38 Minutes Approved 39 40 September 26, 2016 City Council Meeting 41 Minutes Approved ![d 43 Consider Resolution 16-131, Approving Off -Sale Liquor Approved 44 and Tobacco License for Liquor Barrel 45 COUNCIL MINUTES October 10, 2016 46 Proclamation Honoring Toastmasters Month 2016 Approved 47 48 FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT 49 5o There was no report from the Finance Department. 51 52 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT 53 54 There was no report from the Administration Department. 55 56 PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT 57 58 There was no report from the Public Safety Department, 59 60 PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT 61 62 There was no report from the Public Services Department. 63 64 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT 65 66 6A) Public Hearing, Consider Resolution No. 16430, Adopting Special Assessments, Otter 67 Lake Road Extension - Community Development Director Grochala reviewed the written staff 68 report, including the history that brings the project forward to this point of adopting special 69 assessments that support the extension of Otter Lake Road. He reviewed the improvements included 70 in the project. He noted the total cost of the project and that all of that is not being assessed; the city 71 is paying for a larger water main pipe for future expansion. He reviewed the process used to 72 determine assessments and the property owners impacted. Mr. Grochala explained that some of the 73 process for obtaining property included eminent domain proceedings. The proposed assessments will 74 be spread over ten years with an interest rate imposed. A public hearing is required, property owners 75 have been notified and a notice published in the official newspaper. Staff is recommending adoption 76 of the assessments. 77 78 Council Member Rafferty asked about businesses impacted by the project. Director Grochala 79 reviewed how the plans were adjusted to minimize the impact for some concerned property owners. 80 81 Council Member Kusterman asked if there has been any feedback on the assessment proceedings. 82 Mr. Grochala said that a representative of BLino LLC did contact him and indicated that they 83 wouldn't be challenging the assessments. 84 85 Mayor Reinert opened the public hearing. 86 87 There being no one present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. 88 89 Council Member moved to approve Resolution No. 16-130 as presented. Council Member Manthey 90 seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 2 COUNCIL MINUTES October 10, 2016 idilrMAN-M 92 613) Consider Resolution No. 16-128, Order the Project, Approving the Plans m Specifications 93 and Authorizing the Ad for Bid, 2016 Surface Water Management Project - City Engineer 94 Hankee noted that the resolution approves the City's 2016 Surface Water Management Project. Sites 95 included in this project are selected based on feasibility and public input. The project is preferred to 96 be done in the late fall. She noted the project budget and, if approved, that the council will receive 97 the results of a bid process in the near future. 98 99 Council Member Kusterman asked if this is the type of work that could be done by city staff. Ms. 100 Hankee explained that staff is involved to a certain level, including assisting with impacts on property 101 owners. Past that it is appropriate to outsource this work. 102 103 Council Member Manthey asked if the project is always within the allotted budget and Ms. Hankee 104 explained that there is an established list and they work toward completing that list as much as they 105 can within the budget. 106 107 Council Member Manthey moved to approve Resolution No. 16-128 as presented. Council Member 108 Kusterman seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 109 110 6C) Consider Resolution No. 16429, Accepting and Approving the Grant Agreement between 111 the City of Lino Lakes and the Metropolitan Council of Environmental Service for the 112 Improvement of Publically Owned Infrastructure - City Engineer Hankee noted that the resolution 13 authorizes staff to accept and approve an agreement related to receipt of funds to support a sewer 114 lining project within the Shenandoah neighborhood. Ms. Hankee explained that the Metropolitan 115 Council has identified the city as eligible for the grant and the eligibility doesn't mean the city is 116 mandated in any way at this time. 117 118 Council Member Kusterman moved to approve Resolution No. 16-129 as presented. Council 119 Member Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 120 121 6D Consider Resolution No. 16-80, Approving a Minnesota Department of Transportation 122 Final Laout, State Proj yect 6284-172 I-35W North Corridor Improvements -Community 123 Development Director Grochala reviewed the request before the council to approve a project on 124 Highway I-35W, extending into Lino Lakes. The project scope was reviewed, including: 125 - the area involved; 126 - the addition of a lane in each direction 127 - the inclusion of a MnPass Lane 128 - spot improvements. 129 130 He reviewed the project funding and proposed schedule. A map was shown indicating the spot 131 improvements. Noise walls are proposed to extend into Lino Lakes (a picture indicating the type of 132 wall proposed was shown). The project layout was reviewed including the type of improvement that 133 would occur on the Lino Lakes' portion of the project. The Lino Lakes' portion of this project would 134 be rolled ahead from plans to do it at a later date. The noise wall process includes a vote of the �35 residents and that is underway (with resident approval anticipated). Since the project extends into 3 COUNCIL MINUTES October 10, 2016 136 Lino Lakes, MnDOT has asked the city for municipal consent. Mr. Grochala reviewed the process 137 expected of the city (pass a resolution, not pass a resolution). The council did have a discussion 138 about a possible resolution and an alternate resolution was developed that reflected some council 139 concerns. That resolution was forwarded to MriDOT staff and they have indicated they would take 140 the resolution as a disapproval of the project. Staff is now presenting three resolution options to the 141 council: a) approving the layout with conditions related to lane restrictions; b) opposing MnPass in 142 general but approving the layout of the project; or c) approving the lay out as is. The council did see 143 resolution options at the last work session, and he reviewed each of those three resolutions as they are 144 included in the staff report. 145 146 Mayor Reinert moved to approve Resolution 16-80A (he read a section of the resolution.). He noted 147 that he feels the resolution is a win/win for everyone as it allows the city to oppose the concept of 148 special lanes for special people (as he does) while allowing the project to go forward for those who 149 support it. It also will assure, if the state were to come to the city and ask for city assistance, the city l 50 cannot be asked for funds for that purpose. This protects the city from having to fund a special lane 151 and thereby protects the city's residents from that. Council Member Rafferty seconded the motion 152 for discussion purposes. l53 154 Mayor Reinert asked City Attorney Langel to further explain the resolution. l55 156 Mr. Langel explained that the language of the resolution was previously proposed. He agrees that the 157 language agrees with the improvements outside of the MnPass lanes. His understanding is that 158 MnDOT has looked at the language and is interpreting it as a city denial. That would have 159 consequences that could remove Lino Lakes from the project and therefore risk loss of the 160 improvements. Mayor Reinert suggested that the consequences aren't based on legality but on the 161 firm hand of the state in their need to get full compliance. He is fully opposed to the MnPass lanes 162 and would like to state that. 163 164 Council Member Manthey noted that there are three resolution options. He understands that the 165 mayor is in favor of 1640A. He noted 16-8013 and that it allows some footing for the city while 166 allowing the project to continue within the city. The goal seems to be to get a message on MnPASS 167 lanes but not to stop the project. 168 169 Mayor Reinert remarked that Resolution No. 16-80b doesn't have any teeth. Council Member 170 Manthey said the council has discussed the options and MnDOT has come back with their opinion; he 171 thinks getting the project done is important. 172 173 Council Member Kusterman said he will vote no on all three of the resolutions. He prefers to ensure 174 there will be a noise wall and not allow that to fall on principle. That is the most important thing for 175 him. 176 177 The motion failed on a voice vote. 178 0 OUN ILMIN TES October1 F , 179 Council Member Manthey moved to approve Resolution 16-80B as presented. Council Member A0 Maher seconded the motion. Mayor Reinert suggested that this resolution gives the council cover, 181 standing on principle but not really standing on anything. Motion failed on a voice vote. 182 183 There were no additional motions and therefore no action by the council. 184 185 6E) Consider Resolution No. 16-132, Clarifying Licensing Requirements for owner Installed 186 Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) - Community Development Director Grochala 187 reviewed the written report outlining staff s request for the council to clarify the city's permitting 188 requirements for owner installed sewer systems. He noted a single address where orders were issued 189 on the regulations. The city council received a request to review that situation. 190 191 Staff would suggest that either the owner or that owner's designated representative should be on the 192 site when work is going on. Staff has drafted a resolution that would set those items as the city's 193 policy in these matters. 194 195 Mayor Reinert said he supports the resolution as it gives residents more flexibility in this type of work 196 and allows them to have family and friends assist with projects. 197 198 Council Member Manthey asked if the resolution replaces the statute and Mr. Grochala said no, this 199 would be a situation of the city stating its policy. Council Member Manthey suggested that there is a 200 safety issue if appropriate regulations don't remain; Mr. Grochala suggested that there will be always 01 be a licensed designer involved in plans but there could be installation by an individual without 202 experience. He clarified that it not very typical to have an owner ask for this. 203 204 Council Member Manthey asked if it would be appropriate to link on -site inspections to the owner by 205 requiring a homeowner sign -off. Mr. Grochala explained that the homeowner will need to take out 206 the permit and would actually be the contact for the city. 207 208 Council Member Kusterman received clarification that homeowners will first be abiding by state and 209 local regulations and then will be aware of the city's additional policy. 210 211 Council Member Rafferty remarked that he concurs that it would be appropriate for the homeowner to 212 sign off on who will actually do the job so city hall can properly follow the project. Mayor Reinert 213 remarked that staff has indicated that there will be higher scrutiny in the case of a permit issued to an 214 owner; the case that brought this forward was clearly one where some long-term residents required 215 more flexibility in their situation but with additional city oversight. The bottom line remains that the 216 system must be done right. 217 218 Council Member Kusterman said that gets back to the law which seems to be written to protect 219 against the city determining to what level they can allow people to do the work. Mayor Reinert 220 suggested that the city's policy isn't in conflict with the statute but provides the city's interpretation 221 within the terms of those regulations. 222 5 OUN IL MIN T S October 223 Council Member Maher suggested that the policy set by the resolution would require staff process be 224 developed and Mr. Grochala concurred. 225 226 Mayor Reinert asked Mr. Grochala if he has any concern that the job that has brought this policy 227 forward will be done correctly? Mr. Grochala said he suspects there will be more staff involvement 228 and there may be kick -back. He believes that regardless there must be that line of communication. 229 230 Council Member Kusterman recalled that staff reported that the homeowner himself applied for the 231 permit. Mayor Reinert explained that staff will be held accountable for a safe end product. 232 233 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve Resolution No. 16 as amended to reflect that 234 communication is required to the homeowner. Attorney Langel explained the difficulty of adding 235 language that would actually serve that purpose. Council Member Rafferty withdrew his motion. 236 237 Mayor Reinert said the bottom line is to have a system installed correctly; a process including some 238 city oversight seems the answer to him. Will staff put together that process? Mr. Grochala explained 239 that the existing rules establish the process; additionally they would have to be clear on everyone who 240 is working on the project so contact and oversight doesn't become unclear. 241 242 Council Member Kusterman expressed concern that this action could open the process up very wide. 243 Would a bonding process be appropriate? He isn't uncomfortable opening the door for all 244 homeowners to bring in unlicensed, non -bonded individuals to do this important work. 245 246 Mr. Grochala clarified that the current law allows an individual to put in their own system, without a 247 bond but with a plan prepared under license. For staff, understanding who to contact is very 248 important. 249 250 Mayor Reinert asked, under what the state allows are there issues that arise? Mr. Grochala said he 251 doesn't think so. Mayor Reinert suggested that the action is a resolution, presenting a policy, not 252 changing regulations; perhaps the city could have discussion in the future about how this is working 253 and tweak it if necessary. 254 255 Council Member Manthey suggested that he hears staff indicating concern that project standards 256 could be lessened. Mayor Reinert said staff will require certain standards and enforce them and he 257 feels that getting a report back on this from staff is an important element to moving forward. 258 259 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve Resolution No. 16-132, amended to require that the 260 subject will be revisited at a future work session. Council Member Manthey seconded the motion. 261 Motion carried on a voice vote. Council Member Maher voted "no". 262 263 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 264 265 There was no Unfinished Business. 266 267 NEW BUSINESS COUNCIL MINUTES October 10, 2016 APPROVED _69 Public Safety Director Swenson briefly updated the council on the active, multi jurisdictional 270 investigation that is on -going regarding a recent helicopter crash in Lino Lakes. Residents are 271 requested to turn in any debris that is located. 272 273 COMMUNITY EVENTS 274 275 MONTHLY RECYCLE DAY will be held at Lino Park (7850 Lake Drive) on Saturday, October 15 276 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. See city website for a list of accepted items. 277 278 BEYOND THE YELLOW RIBBON Lino Lakes has fulfilled all the requirements to become an 279 official Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Community. The public is welcome to join us for the 280 proclamation ceremony in the West Learning Center at Centennial High School on Thursday, October 281 27, at 7:00 p.m. 282 283 ABSENTEE VOTING HAS BEGUN You may absentee vote at City Hall. Hours are 8:00 a.m. to 284 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday now through November 7. Information is available on the City 285 website to apply for a ballot by mail. 286 287 WALDOCH FARM PUMPKIN PATCH AND CORN MAZE will be open daily September 17 288 through October 31 from 10*00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 289 M COMMUNITY CALENDAR 291 292 293 294 295 296 Community Calendar —A Look Ahead October 10, 2016 through October 24, 2016 Wednesday, October 12 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Planning & Zoning Monday, October 24 6:00 pm, Community Room Council Work Session Monday, October 24 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting 297 298 ADJOURN 299 300 There being no further business, Council Member Rafferty moved to adjourn at 8:05 p.m. Council 301 Member Manthey seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 302 303 These minutes were considered and approved at the gular Co u cil Meeting, October 24, 2016. 304 �� \ 3 e Bartell, Cil Cler e einert, Mayor 307 7