The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-27-2009 Council Minutes COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED 1 2 3 CITY OF LINO LAKES 4 MINUTES 5 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING 6 7 8 DATE : July 27, 2009 9 TIME STARTED : 6:45 p.m. 10 TIME ENDED : 8:50 p.m. 11 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Members Gallup, Reinert, O'Donnell, 12 Stoltz and Mayor Bergeson 13 MEMBERS ABSENT : none 14 15 Staff members present: City Attorney, Joseph Langel; Director of Community Development, 16 Michael Grochala; City Engineer, Jim Studenski; Environmental Coordinator, Marty Asleson; 17 Police Captain Kent Strege; City Planner, Jeff Smyser; City Clerk, Julie Bartell. 18 19 PUBLIC COMMENT/OPEN MIKE 20 21 There was no public comment. 22 23 SETTING THE AGENDA 24 25 The agenda was approved as presented. 26 27 CONSENT AGENDA 28 29 Council Member Gallup moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Council Member Stoltz 30 seconded the motion. Motion carried. 31 32 ITEM ACTION 33 34 1A. Consideration of Expenditures: 35 i) July 27, 2009 (Check No. 86252 through 86373), $245,711.08; Approved 36 ii) Centennial Fire District(Check No. 3856 through 3873), 37 $33,767.02 Approved 38 39 1B. Approval of July 6, 2009 Special City Council Meeting Minutes Approved 40 41 1C. Approval of July 13, 2009 City Council Meeting Minutes Approved 42 43 1D. Approval of July 13, 2009 Special Council Work Session Minutes Approved 44 45 1E. Approval of June 3, 2009 Special Council Work Session Minutes Approved 1 COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED 46 47 1F. Approval of Resolution No. 09-51 Amending Resolution No. 09-40 Approved 48 49 FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT,AL ROLEK 50 51 There was no report from the Finance Department. 52 53 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAN TESCH 54 55 There was no report from the Administration Department. 56 57 PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAVE PECCHIA 58 59 4A. Consideration of Resolution No. 09-49, Accepting a donation of$100 from 60 Residential Mortgage Group's "Refer a friend, Build your community" program 61 62 Police Captain Strege announced that the police department has received a charitable donation 63 through the Residential Mortgage Group's program. The department wishes to accept the 64 donation and thank the donor, Adam and Laura VanderPoel, who make the donation in loving 65 memory of Officer Shawn Silvera. 66 67 Council Member Reinert moved to approve Resolution No. 09-49 as presented. Council 68 Member Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried. �_. 69 70 PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, RICK DEGARDNER 71 72 There was no report from the Public Services Department. 73 74 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT, MICHAEL GROCHALA 75 76 6A. Consideration of Resolution No. 09-52, Approving variances to the requirements 77 for lot area, lot width and road frontage for Xcel Energy 78 79 Community Development Director Grochala reviewed the staff report that outlines a request 80 from Xcel Energy that the city approve certain variances to lot area, lot width and road frontage 81 to allow division of certain sites by a future administrative minor subdivision. This would allow 82 the parcels to be divided in the future and sold to adjacent property owners for combination into 83 existing parcels and allow Xcel Energy to update their transmission line easements. He pointed 84 out that the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed and unanimously approved the variance 85 requests. 86 87 Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve Resolution No. 09-52 as presented. Council 88 Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried. 89 90 2 COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED 91 6B. Public Hearing, I-35E/CSAH 14 Interchange Improvement Project 92 93 Community Development Director Grochala reported that the council is holding a hearing for 94 the purpose of soliciting public comment on a proposed interchange improvement project. The 95 council has previously received a feasibility study prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. that 96 lays out project details. He reviewed the estimated cost of the project(approximately$23 97 million), federal, state and county funding involved and noted that approximately$5.5 million is 98 proposed to be assessed to benefiting property owners. More work is being done seeking 99 funding sources and that may lower assessment amounts and would be a part of final assessment 100 consideration later in the process. He noted that there are provisions available for deferment of 101 assessments. He is asking that the council open the public hearing, accept public testimony and 102 then close the hearing. 103 104 When asked by a council member for a definition of the term "green acres", Mr. Grochala 105 explained that in this case it generally refers to a tax classification intended to encourage 106 continued agricultural uses. 107 108 The public hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m. 109 110 Jerry Filla, attorney representing the Rainier Family Farm LLP, thanked staff for their help in 111 answering questions about the proposed project and assessments. He expressed concern that the 112 project is a regional improvement and should not be funded locally. The council should 113 recognize that the assessments can be very large(possibly more than $500,000 for his client) X114 and there are significant additional costs attached to deferment. 115 116 David Graetzer, 7306 24th Av S, announced that he questions the fairness in how this project 117 will be funded. He is concerned that his assessment of approximately$20,000 could become as 118 much as $130,000 with deferment interest; he would like to know as soon as possible what the 119 interest rate would be. In the interest of fairness,he suggests that an entity should step forward 120 (perhaps the city and pay the deferment interest so that only the principal is assessed. 121 122 Jerry Broker, representing Eagle Brook Church, reported that the church was not informed of 123 hearings that were held previously; they would like to ensure that they are informed of any 124 hearings in the future, especially the assessment hearing. (Mr. Grochala replied that there were 125 two informational meetings held previously that were sponsored by the consultant, SRF 126 Consulting Group. He also reviewed the entire schedule outline for a county based project.). 127 Mr. Broker noted that Eagle Brook Church has already contributed $100,000 to roadway 128 improvements for the intersection area and there could be consideration of that. In addition,he 129 reported that when the church's engineers looked at the determination of usable acreage, they 130 came up with a lower figure than is included in the project study. 131 132 Lee Perrault, representing the Rainier Family Farm, stated that the family is concerned that their 133 property(55 acres) is located in a second tier area of the project but the proposed assessment 134 ratio is the same as for property directly adjacent to the interchange. The zoning that causes the 135 inequity isn't appropriate. He suggests that the whole process being proposed to determine the 3 COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED 136 assessments for this project"smells" full of errors. He has spoken with a local city 37 administrator in another area of the country and has heard that they use a better and more fair 138 process for an improvement of this type. 139 140 Mark Vargo, representing East Lino Lakes LLC, owners of 360 acres, stated that they are in 141 support of the proposed improvements as it will assist with development in the area. They 142 reserve the right to offer additional comments in the future as assessments are considered. 143 144 Bob McNeal, 7389 24th Av, said that he has a ten acre property that is residential. He is 145 interested in the deferment process. The road on which he lives, 24th Av,has no industrial 146 access and he wonders if that is a project in the future. Staff responded to Mr. McNeal that there 147 is an assessment deferment process available and that ultimately Otter Lake Road will be 148 extended but there is no project planned at this point and that too would probably be an 149 assessment situation. 150 151 Rosemary Storgard, 6978 Lake Drive, stated that she would like to speak on behalf of citizens of 152 Lino Lakes that will not benefit from the proposed project. She questions why the cities of 153 Hugo and Centerville are not contributing to the project when they will receive benefit? She 154 would like to know what the taxpayers of Lino Lakes will have to contribute to the project. 155 Staff responded that there is no direct Lino Lakes taxpayer costs at this time; if that were 156 included, the city charter process would engage. 157 158 Michael Trehus, 675 Shadow Court, remarked that this proposed project involves a county road ...„i59 going over a federal highway and his research indicates that such a project would normally be 160 funded through 80-90% federal funds and 10-20% county or state funds. He suggested that it 161 makes no sense that other cities aren't participating. This is a regional project and he believes 162 that in time it would be fully funded without any Lino Lakes' dollars. (Mr. Grochala noted that 163 the project is not in the Minnesota Department of Transportation 20-year Plan.) 164 165 Connie Sutherland, 889 Main Street, raised the question of who would pay if the assessments for 166 the project are not paid because they are appealed or for any other reason? (Mr. Grochala 167 explained that the city would not be issuing any debt for the project and also that assessment 168 rates include some consideration of appeal. He suggested that the impact in value is fairly clear 169 since it is well accepted that development in the area would not occur in some cases without the 170 improvements.) 171 172 Archie LeSard, owner of a Dairy Queen business on Northern Lights, commented that he very 173 much supports the improvement project. If the interchange isn't improved, he fears for the 174 future of his business and others in that area. 175 176 There being no one else wishing to speak, Council Member Stoltz moved to close the public 177 hearing at 8:00 p.m. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried. 178 179 Staff offered comments in response to questions posed at the hearing. The proposal includes 180 two areas—one governed by the charter and one exempted from the charter provisions. The 60- 4 COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED '81 day waiting period following the public hearing applies to the charter governed area only. He 82 intends to continue discussions with property owners during the waiting period as well as 183 continue negotiations with Anoka County(including discussion about assessment rates). There 184 will be other agreements involved with the project such as for signals. It is certain that more 185 answers about the project, including funding,will evolve as things move forward. 186 187 A council member stated that the council has heard questions about the fairness in the amount of 188 assessment and they are valid. It is anticipated that staff will continue evaluating the proposed 189 assessments and will work with those who would be impacted by them. The question of the 190 rate of interest that would be charged on deferred assessments is important and the city must do 191 what it can to make that consideration clear. Another concern is that the council is being asked 192 to be a part of this project before many of the elements are clear. Staff again outlined the 193 process involving a county road project. It was clarified that a key funding element of the 194 project, namely stimulus money, will not be available after November 15 of this year. 195 196 6C. Consideration of Resolution No. 09-48,Approving 2009/2010 Foxborough 197 Management Plan 198 199 Environmental Coordinator Asleson reported on the proposed 2009/2010 schedule of work 200 related to the Foxborough development conservation area. A plan has been put forward by the 201 ecologist hired by the Foxborough Association and the city's Environmental Board has 202 approved the plans. '03 ■..204 Council Member Stoltz moved to approve Resolution No. 09-48 as presented. Council Member 205 Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried. 206 207 6D. First reading of Ordinance No. 04-09,Amending Zoning Ordinance to Allow 208 Public, Educational, and Religious Buildings as Conditional Uses in General 209 Business and Limited Business Zoning Districts, and Amending City Code so that 210 Separation Distance for Liquor License shall not apply if School or Church is in 211 Limited Business or General Business Zoning District 212 213 City Planner Smyser reported that the item before the council is first reading of an ordinance 214 amending the zoning code to allow public, educational and religious buildings as conditional 215 uses in general business and limited business zoning districts in the city, and amending the 216 liquor code so that separation distance for liquor licenses shall not apply for a school or church 217 in said zoning districts. The city has received an application from a church wishing to acquire 218 the former VFW site (in a business district). Staff has reviewed uses allowed in business 219 districts. In consideration that similar uses should be allowed within established zoning 220 districts, Mr. Smyser pointed out similarities between the private lodge/club use of the VFW 221 (that use is currently allowed in business district as a conditional use) and the possible church 222 use (that use is not currently allowed in business district). Mr. Smyser then explained a federal 223 law prohibiting discrimination against churches (for land use) and pointed out that there have 224 been court cases that have found appropriate church uses similar to lodge/club use. He also 225 pointed out the current standards/conditions that apply to all conditional uses in the city as well 5 COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED 126 as the specific conditions for specific uses that apply to the "public, educational and religious ■ ...27 buildings"use. Based on analysis, staff is recommending first reading the zoning ordinance 228 amendment that is included in the ordinance that will accomplish the allowance of churches in 229 business districts as a conditional use and change the liquor code change to recognize that 230 churches and liquor uses will be occurring in the same district. The Planning and Zoning board 231 held a public hearing on the application and unanimously recommended approval of the 232 proposed ordinance amendments. 233 234 A council member noted concern that the change seems odd and there is no certainly as to it's 235 impact in the future. He doesn't agree that a church use is the same as the VFW. This is a 236 further example of the federal government shoving things down the throat of cities. 237 238 Council Member O'Donnell moved to dispense with full reading of the ordinance. Council 239 Member Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 240 241 Council Member Stoltz moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 04-09 as presented. 242 Council Member O'Donnell seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken. Motion carried as 243 follows: Yeas, 4; Nays. 1 (Reinert). 244 245 6E. First reading of Ordinance No. 05-09,Amending Zoning Ordinance to Remove the 246 Six-Month Maximum on Extensions for Submitting the Final Development Plan for 247 a Planned Unit Development 248 L, 49 City Planner Smyser explained staff's recommendation that the city's zoning regulations be 250 amended to remove a requirement that developments involved in the Planned Unit Development 251 (PUD)process must submit their final plans within a certain period of time or lose their 252 project's preliminary approval. The requirement is not appropriate during this difficult 253 economic time and would cause the city to lose several pending projects. The amendment has 254 been unanimously approved by the Planning and Zoning Board. 255 256 Council Member Gallup moved to dispense with full reading of the ordinance. Council Member 257 Stoltz seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 258 259 Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 05-09 as 260 presented. Council Member Gallup seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken. Motion 261 carried as follows: Yeas, 5; Nays none. 262 263 6F. Consideration of Resolution No. 09-50, Approving Plans and Specifications and 264 Authorizing a Request for Quotes, 2009 Surface Water Management Project 265 266 City Engineer Studenski reviewed the proposed 2009 Surface Water Management Project. If 267 approval is granted by the council, staff will proceed to get quotes on the storm sewer, storm 268 water ponds and drainage maintenance work that is proposed. 269 270 6 COUNCIL MINUTES July 27, 2009 APPROVED 171 Council Member Stoltz moved to approve Resolution No. 09-50 as presented. Council Member X72 O'Donnell seconded the motion. Motion carried. 273 274 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 275 276 There was no unfinished business. 277 278 NEW BUSINESS 279 280 There was no new business. 281 282 , ,. ,.� s � r..,.,. 283 284 There being no further business, Council Member Reinert moved to adjourn at 8:50 p.m. 285 Council Member Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried. 286 287 These minutes were considered and approved at the regular City Council Meeting on August 10, 288 2009. 289 290 Community Calendar—A Look Ahead 291 July 28, 2009 through August 10, 2009 292 293 Wednesday,July 29 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Environmental Board .94 4 Monday,August 3 5:30 pm, Community Room Council Work Session "295 4 Monday,August 3 6:30 pm,Council Chambers Park Board 296 4 Thursday,August 6 7:00 am, Community Room EDAC 297 4 Monday,August 10 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Council Meeting 298 299 300 agl:P46721.1*%) 301 302 303 Julianne Bartell, City Clerk John Bergeson, Mayor 304 7