HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-06-13 Council PacketWORK SESSION AGENDA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
Monday , May 6 , 201 3
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Community Room (not televised)
5:30 P.M.
Local Board of Appe al continuation
1 . Local Surface Water Management Plan (EOR, Inc.)
2 . Exterior Storage – 7309 Lake Dr ive to follow
3 . Emergency Management Plan (sent by email)
4 . Off -Sale Liquor Licensing
Review Regular Agenda
Adjourn
201 3
ASSESSOR’S
REPORT
BOARD OF APPEAL AND
EQUALIZATION
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
1
2013 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Agenda
April 22 , 201 3
1. Call the Board of Review to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Read Official Notice of the Board of Review
4. Board Chair outlines the ground rules for the meeting. The specific ground rules may vary for
e ach local board but should include:
Purpose of the meeting;
Remind property owners that only appeals for the current year valuation or
classification may be made. The 201 3 board is to review the assessment as
of January 2, 201 3 , which will be used to comp ute the property taxes payable
in 201 4 . Prior years’ assessments or taxes (including taxes payable in 201 3 )
are not within the jurisdiction of the board;
The order of the appellants - by appointment first, followed by walk -ins on a
first -come basis. The board will also receive written appeals from property
owners. The secretary will record the required information (name, mailing
address, telephone number, and address of property, etc.)
The expectations of the appellant when presenting their appeal (i.e. the appeal
must be substantiated by facts; where the appellant should stand or sit; the
appellant should be prepared to answer questions posed by the board, etc.);
Time limits imposed (if any);
The procedure the board will follow for making decisions (Will the board hear
all appeals before making any decisions? Will the board send a letter to
appellants to inform them of the decision? Etc.) The Board may correct any
erroneous valuation and add any omission of properties or increase of value
after due proc ess. The total decrease of valuations may not exceed one
percent of the total valuation of the taxing district;
5. The Board Chair should give the assessor the opportunity to present a brief overview of the
property tax process and a recap of the current ass essment.
6. Appellants should then present their appeals to the board. If the assessor has had a chance to
review the property prior to the meeting, the assessor can present facts and information either
supporting the valuation and or classification, or reco mmend that the board make a change. If
the assessor has not had a chance to review the property prior to the meeting, the board may
ask the assessor to review the property and present his/her findings to the board at a reconvene
meeting.
7. Recess or Close t he Meeting. (If needed, the meeting will be reconvened at a date to be determined. The Board of
Appeal and Equalization of any city must complete its work and adjourn within twenty days from the time of convening as specified in
the notice of the clerk , u nless a longer period is approved by the Commissioner of Revenue . No action taken subsequent to such date
shall be valid.)
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
2
Lino Lakes Assessment Staff
Peggy Nordrum Residential Appraiser
Dan Eischens Commercial Industrial Appraiser
Jim Rouleau Apart ment Appraiser
Mike Sutherland County Assessor
20 1 3 Assessment Calendar
Jan 2 2013 Market Values for Property Established
Feb 1 Final Day to Deliver Assessment Records to County by Local Assessors
Feb 1 Final Day to File for an Exemption from Taxation
Mar 1 Final Day to File for 1B with County Assessor
Mar 22 2013 Valuation Notices Mailed
Apr - May Local Boards of Appeal and Equalization and Open Book Meetings
Apr 30 Final Day to File a Tax Court Petition for 2012 (payable 2013) Assessment
May 1 Final Day to File an Application for Green Acres
May 15 First Half of Payable 2013 Real Estate Tax is Due
May 29 Final Day to Apply for Manufactured Home Homestead
Jun 14 State Board of Equalization
Jun 17 County Board of Appeal and Equalization
Jun 28 2013 Assessment Finalized (After CBAE Adjourns)
Jul 1 Ownership Deadline for Tax Exempt Status
Aug 15 Final Day to File for 2013 Property Tax Refund
Aug 31 First Half of Payable 2013 Manufactured Home Tax is Due
Sep 1 2013 Abstract Due to Department of Revenue
Oct 15 2nd Half of Payable 2013 Tax is Due*
Nov 15 2nd Half of Payable 2013 Tax is Due on Ag and Manufactured Home Parcels*
Dec 15 Final Day to Apply for Real Estate Homestead
*2nd Half Tax due on October 15th for all property types except for Agrucultural and Manufactured Home, those are due on November 15th.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
3
Understanding Assessment and Tax Calculation
Assessment Process Timeline
In Minnesota it is the duty of the Assessor to value and classify property. This is done annually as of
the assessment date of January 2 nd . Each year's assessment is based on arms -length transactions
(sales that meet the criteria of an open market transaction, see market value definition below ) that
occurred the previous October thru September . When the assessment is complete the local taxing
jurisdictions begin their budgeting process for the following year . They us e the total assessment to
determine their tax base and develop their tax rates (formerly referred to as mill rates). All aspects of
th e assessment, including but not limi ted to the assessment date, sales period for each assessment
and property tax classification are dictated by state statute and under the oversight of the Minnesota
Department of Revenue.
Market Value Defined
As in pri vate appraisal, Market Value is defined as:
The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market
under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently
and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by any undue stimulus.
Implicit in this definition are the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the
passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
buyer and seller are typically motivated:
both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they
consider their own best interests;
a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial
arrangements comparable th ereto;
the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold
unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions
granted by anyone associated with the sale (a foreclosure sale or a
short sale [a sale to avoid foreclosure] is not considered an arms -
length transaction).
Mass Appraisal Defined
Property values for Minnesota real estate tax purposes are determined by mass appraisal. Mass
appraisal is the practice of determining individual values based on statistical analysis of a g roup of
sales for a large area. The values are determined as of a specific date and are based on arms -length
transactions that occurred during a specified sales period.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
4
As part of this mass appraisal process, all properties are re -valued annually based on the information
on record. Properties are physically inspected and property records reviewed once every 5 years (as
statutorily required). This is an ongoing process whereby 20% of a city is inspected each year so that
in a cycle of 5 years all proper ties have been inspected at least once. In addition to this quintile
review, properties are also inspected when there is a building permit issued or at the request of the
property owner. The sale of a property does not initiate a reassessment.
As stated earlier, Minnesota state law governs the assessment date, which is January 2nd of each
year, as well as the sales periods associated with each assessment date.
The 20 1 2 assessment which was used for tax calculations this year (20 1 3 ) was based on transact ions
that closed between October 1, 20 10 and September 30, 20 1 1 . Property owners were notified of their
20 1 2 value on their Notice of Valuation and Classification (also referred to as a valuation notice ).
The notices were mailed out in March of 20 1 2 in t he same envelope as the 20 1 2 tax statement. The
appeals process took place at the municipal level during the month of April of 201 2 and at the county
level in June of 201 2 . At this point, if a property owner wishes to appeal their 20 1 2 assessment (for
ta xes payable 20 1 3 ) their only option is to file a tax court petition. This must be done no later than
April 30, 20 1 3 .
The 20 1 3 assessment has just been completed and the valuation notices w ere mailed the week of
March 22nd . This is the assessment that will be used for tax calculations next year for taxes payable
in 201 4 . The sales period associated with this assessment is October 1, 20 1 1 thru September 30,
20 1 2 . As with past assessments, the local appeals process will begin in April and finish up in J une.
The options and requirements to appeal this assessment are listed on the back of the valuation notice .
If a property owner has an issue with their 20 1 3 assessment , the first thing they should do is contact
their local assessor. The phone numbers ar e listed on their notice of valuation .
In conclusion, a ll arms -length sales that closed between October 1, 20 1 1 and September 30, 20 1 2
have b e e n used to determine valuatio ns for the 20 1 3 assessment, for tax es payable in 201 4 . And by
the time you are payi ng your 1 st half real estate tax on May 15 of , 201 4 , the sales that were used to
determine the estimated market value on which your taxes are based occurred somewhere be tween
19 to 31 months earlier.
The following chart may be helpful in following the tim eline of your assessment.
SALES PERIOD ASSESSMENT DATE TAX YEAR
October 1, 2010
to January 2, 2012 2013
September 30, 2011
October 1, 2011
to January 2, 2013 2014
September 30, 2012
October 1, 2012
to January 2, 2014 2015
September 30, 2013
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
5
We are aware that due to the time frames we are required to work within it sometimes
appears as though the assessor’s estimated market value does not represent the market. It
seems lower than i t should be during times of infl ation and higher than it should be in times of
deflation. The following chart illustrates the relationship between assessed values and actual
sale prices ; and how the assessor’s market values have been following the changes as they
occur in the open marke t.
Note: The Median Assessor’s Estimated Market Value represents the homes that are in the sales study.
As you can see, there is a point in time where the relationship between the assessor’s values
and the sales prices intersect. It is at that point in time that the market took a large downward
turn . T he following year, in response to that market condition, the assessor’s values were
reduced to reflect that trend. And we have responded by adjusting assessed values each
year based on the prior year t rends . It’s interesting to note the upward shift for the 2012
assessment . It is somewhat deceiving in that the trend in sales prices was actually down, but
due to the segment of the market with the most arm’s -length transactions , the median sale
price di d go up for that year.
One last important point to make note of is that the assessment process is complete d before
the budgeting process begins. Assessors do not adjust values in order to increase revenue.
There is little correlation between changes in assessments due to market changes and how
the resu lting real estate tax changes. When we adjust assessments due to market
conditions , all properties are adjusted. The only time that an adjustment in an assessor’s
estimated market value will have an impac t on the increase or decrease in tax is if the
change in value is due to value added for new construction or value removed due to
demolition/destruction of an improvement.
$165,000
$170,000
$175,000
$180,000
$185,000
$190,000
$195,000
$200,000
$205,000
$210,000
$215,000
$220,000
$225,000
$230,000
$235,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
T ax Payable Year
Median Assessed Value as it Relates to Median Sale Price
Median Sale Price Median Assessor's Estimated Market Value
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
6
How your tax amount changes from year to year is influenced more by statutory cha nges to
the tax structure , and revenues needed by your local taxing authorities (including school
districts). If we were to reduce all values by 50%, the resulting tax amounts would not be
decrease d by 50%; the tax rates would be increased to generate the same amount of tax
revenue. The following example illustrates that basic concept.
Adhering to the same timeframes and working within the parameters of the law ensure s that
everyone is being treated fairly. If assessors were to choose t o work outside of those
timeframes , the end result would be inequity between taxing jurisdictions. Here is an
example of the impact at the local level:
The assessment sales period for Anoka County is October 1, 20 1 1 through
September 30, 20 1 2 , except for Lino Lakes , where the assessor decided to use
January 1, 20 1 2 to December 31, 20 1 2 . G iven the upward trend in market that
began late in 2012, the 201 3 Lino Lakes assessments c ould conceivably be
measurably higher than the rest of the county assessment s . That in turn would not
change the amount of county revenue generated by real estate tax . However, it
would result in a shift in the tax burden, with Lino Lakes property owner s paying more
than their fair share than the rest of the County.
So in conclusion , while it may seem arbitrary to have a set period to measure an
assessment, it does create an environment whereby the assessments are uniform , fair , and
equitable .
Property EMV Property EMV
Overall Change
In EMV
A $375,000 A $187,500 -$187,500
B $120,000 B $60,000 -$60,000
C $150,000 C $75,000 -$75,000
D $400,000 D $200,000 -$200,000
E $250,000 E $125,000 -$125,000
Total Tax Base $1,295,000 Total Tax Base $647,500 -$647,500
Revenue Needed $10,000 Revenue Needed $10,000
Divided by Total Tax Base $1,295,000 Divided by Total Tax Base $647,500
Equals Tax Rate 0.0077 Equals Tax Rate 0.0154
Property Tax Amount Property Tax Amount
Overall Change
In Tax Amount
A $2,896 A $2,896 $0
B $927 B $927 $0
C $1,158 C $1,158 $0
D $3,089 D $3,089 $0
E $1,931 E $1,931 $0
Total Tax Generated $10,000 Total Tax Generated $10,000 $0
Resulting 2013 Tax Calculations Resulting 2014 Tax Calculations
2012 Assessment 2013Assessment
Tax Payable 2011 Tax Payable 2012
2013 Tax Rate Calculation 2014 Tax Rate Calculation
INDIVIDUAL
TAX AMOUNTS
REMAIN
UNCHANGED
A REDUCED TOTAL TAX
BASE REQUIRES A HIGHER
TAX RATE TO GENERATE
THE SAME REVENUE
DECLINING VALUES
REDUCE THE
TOTAL TAX BASE
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
7
Understanding Recent Changes to Homestead Benefits
The following explanation of the recen t changes to homestead benefits is taken from the
Minnesota Department of Revenue website:
http://www.revenue.state.mn.us/propertytax/Documents/hmve -taxpayers.pdf
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
8
U nderstanding Recent Changes to Homestead Benefits continued.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
9
20 1 3 Assessment Statistics
With development slowing down, the complexion of the city h as remained constant in recent years.
As of January 2, 201 3 there were 7,867 parcels in the City. This total includes:
6,685 R esid ential P arcels
633 Tax Exempt Parcels
203 Agricultural P arcels
197 Commercial Industrial Parcels
95 Manufactured Home Parcel
37 Tax Forfeit P arcels
7 Personal Property Parcels
6 Utility Parcels
4 Apartment Parcels
Residential
84.97%
Tax Exempt & Tax Forfeit
8.52%
Commercial Industrial
2.50%
Agricultural
2.60%
Manufactured Home
1.20%
Apartment
0.05%
Utility & Personal Property
0.16%
Distribution of Parcel Count by Property Type
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
10
Reassessment
State Statute reads: "All real property subject to taxation shall be listed and reassessed every
year with reference to its value on January 2nd preceding the assessment ." This has been
done, and the owners of property in Lino Lakes h ave been notified of any value change. Minnesota
Statute 273.11 reads: "All property shall be valued at its market value ." It further states that "In
estimating and determining such value, the Assessor shall not adopt a lower or different
standard of va lue because the same is to serve as a basis for taxation, nor shall the assessor
adopt as a criterion of value the price for which such property would sell at auction or at a
forced sale, or in the aggregate with all the property in the town or district; b ut the assessor
shall value each article or description of property by itself, and at such sum or price as the
assessor believes the same to be fairly worth in money." The Statute says all property shall be
valued at market value, not may be valued at mar ket value. This means that no factors other than
market factors should affect the Assessor's value and the subsequent action by the Board of Appeal
and Equalization.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
11
In accordance with c urrent state law we physically review all properties at least once every five years.
Each year w e also inspect all properties with new construction , and at the property owners’ request .
During 20 1 2 there were 1 ,482 properties reviewed. Included in that number are 3 new homes.
This map illustrates the 20 1 2 (201 3 assess ment) residential review area and the projected
residential review area for 20 1 3 (201 4 assessment ).
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
12
Authority of the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Assessments of property are made to provide the means for the measuring of the relative
share of ea ch taxpayer in meeting the costs of local government. It is the duty of the
Assessor to assess all real and personal property except that which is exempt or taxable
under some special method of taxation. If the burden of local government is to be fairly and
justly shared among the owners of all property of value, it is necessary that all taxable
property be listed on the tax rolls and that all assessments be made accurately.
Whenever any property that should be assessed is omitted from the tax rolls, an unfair
burden falls upon the owners of all property that has been assessed. If any property is
undervalued in relation to the other property on the assessment record, the owners of the
other property are called upon automatically to assume part of the tax burden that should be
borne by the undervalued property. Fairness and justice in property taxation demands both
completeness and equality in assessment.
Minnesota Statutes Section 274.01 provides that the council of each city shall be or
appoint a Board of Appeal and Equalization . The charter of certain cities provides for the
establishment of a Board of Equalization. The provisions of Section 274.01 and this
regulation apply to all Boards of Appeal or Boards of Equalization.
The 2003 Legislature enac ted State Statute 274.014 which requires that there be at least one
member at each meeting of a Local Board of Appeal and Equalization who has attended an
appeals and equalization course developed or approved by the Commissioner of Revenue
within the last four years.
Section 274.01 states the county assessor shall fix a date for each Board of Appeal and
Equalization to meet for the purpose of reviewing the assessment of property in its respective
town or city. The county assessor is required to serve writ ten notice to the clerk of each of
such bodies on or before February 15th of each year. These meetings are required to be
held between April 1st and May 31st; and the clerk of the Board of Appeal and Equalization is
required to give published and posted n otice at least ten days before the date set for the first
meeting.
The Board of Appeal and Equalization of any city, unless a longer period is approved
by the Commissioner of Revenue , must complete its work and adjourn within twenty
days from the time of convening specified in the notice of the clerk. No action taken
subsequent to such date shall be valid .
A request for additional time in order to complete the work of the Board of Appeal and
Equalization must be addressed to the Commissioner of Revenue i n writing. The
Commissioner's approval is necessary to legalize any procedure subsequent to the
expiration of the twenty -day period. The Commissioner of Revenue will not, however, extend
the time for local Boards of Appeal and Equalization to meet beyond the time when the
County Board of Equalization meets, which is the Final two weeks of June.
The authority of the local Board extends over the individual assessments of real and personal
property. The Board does not have the power to increase or decrease by percentage all of
the assessments in the district of a given class of property. Changes in aggregate
assessments by classes are made by the County Board of Equalization.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
13
Although the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization has the authority to increas e or reduce
individual assessments, the total of such adjustments must not reduce the aggregate
assessment made by the Assessor by more than one percent of said aggregate assessment.
If the total of such adjustments does lower the aggregate assessment mad e by the Assessor
by more than one percent, none of the adjustments will be allowed. This limitation does not
apply, however, to the correction of clerical errors or to the removal of duplicate
assessments.
The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization does not have the authority in any year to
reopen former assessments on which taxes are due and payable. The Board
considers only the assessments that are in process in the current year. Adjustment
can be made only by the process of abatement or by legal act ion.
In reviewing the individual assessments, the Board may find instances of undervaluation .
Before the Board can raise the market value of property it must notify the owner. The law
does not prescribe any particular form of notice except that the pers on whose property is to
be increased in value must be notified of the intent of the Board to make the increase. The
Local Board of Appeal and Equalization meetings assure a property owner an opportunity to
contest any other matter relating to the taxabili ty of their property. The Board is required to
review the matter and make any corrections that it deems just.
When a Local Board of Appeal and Equalization convenes, it is necessary that a majority of
the members be in attendance in order that any valid action may be taken. The local
assessor is required by law to be present with her/his assessment books and papers.
She/he is required also to take part in the proceedings but has no vote. In addition to the
local assessor, the county assessor or one of her/his assistants is required to attend. The
Board should proceed immediately to review the assessments of property. The Board should
ask the local assessor and county assessor to present any tables that have been prepared,
making comparisons of the cur rent assessments in the district. The county assessor is
required to have maps and tables relating particularly to land values for the guidance of
Boards of Appeal and Equalization. Comparisons should be presented of assessments of
types of property with previous years and with other assessment districts in the same county.
It is the primary duty of each Board of Appeal and Equalization to examine the assessment
record to see that all taxable property in the assessment district has been properly placed
u pon the list and valued by the assessor. In case any property, either real or personal, has
been omitted; the Board has the duty of making the assessment.
The complaints and objections of persons who feel aggrieved with any assessments for the
current ye ar should be considered very carefully by the Board. Such assessments must be
reviewed in detail and the Board has the authority to make corrections it deems to be just.
The Board may recess from day to day until all cases have been heard. If complaints are
received after the adjournment of the Board of Appeal and Equalization they must be handled
at the staff level; as a property owner cannot appear before a higher board unless he or
she has first appeared at the lower board levels .
Pursuant to Minneso ta Statute 274.01: The Board may not make an individual market value
adjustment or classification change that would benefit the property in cases where the owner
or other person having control over the property will not permit the assessor to inspect the
p roperty and the interior of any buildings or structures.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
14
A non -resident may file written objections to his/her assessment with the county assessor
prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeal and Equalization. Such objections must be
presented to the Boar d for consideration while it is in session.
Before adjourning, the Board of Appeal and Equalization should cause the record of the
official proceedings to be prepared. The law requires that the proceedings be listed on a
separate form which is appended t o the assessment book. The assessments of omitted
property must be listed in detail and all assessments that have been increased or decreased
should be shown as prescribed in the form. After the proceedings have been completed, the
record should be signe d and dated by the members of the Board of Appeal and
Equalization. It is the duty of the county assessor to enter changes by Boards of Appeal and
Equalization in the assessment book of each district.
The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization has the op portunity of making a great
contribution to the equality of all assessments of property in a district. No other agency in the
assessment process has the knowledge of the property within a district that is possessed
jointly by the individual members of a B oard of Appeal and Equalization. The County or State
Board of Equalization cannot give the detailed attention to individual assessments that is
possible in the session of the Local Board. The faithful performance of duty by the Local
Board of Appeal and Equalization will make a direct contribution to the attainment of equality
in meeting the costs of providing the essential services of local government.
Market Value Statistic s
After thorough studies of the sales in the market place are conducted, we esta blish the assessed
value of all real property. During the 20 1 2 study period for the 201 3 assessment , we recorded
6,218 sales countywide of all property types . O f these sales , only 2,266 were considered "arms -
length" transactions . The remaining 3,952 sal es not considered arms -length would include
foreclosure sales, bank sales, sales involving government entities and sales between related
parties.
During the 2011 Sales Perio d the total number of transactions rose by 1,043 , or 20%. The
number of non -arms -length transactions (mostly foreclosure sales) rose only 298 , or 8%. We
believe that this is reflective of the recovery that we’ve been hearing about in the media.
Later in the report you will see s ales analysis information for this city and for the ent ire county.
This information will relate to improved residential properties only and will not include vacant land
sales or sales for commercial, industrial or apartment properties.
In accordance with the results of these sales studies, certain areas of th e city and certain styles
and grades of homes m ay have adjusted values either lower or higher than the previous year's
value. Th e new values reflect market trends during the period of October 20 1 1 thru September
20 1 2 .
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
15
The 20 1 3 assessment that is up for your review has a total unaudited assessed value of
$1,607,814,700 , excluding exempt, forfeit, utility, manufactured homes and personal property. It
reflects an overall value de crease of 0.7 % below the 20 1 2 assessment.
The pattern of growth and decline (i ncluding new construction) in the City's total value over the past 10
years can be seen in the following list and chart :
Growth and Decline in Property Values
2004 to 20 1 3
(Total does not include manufactured homes, personal property, utilities, exempt or tax forfeit property values.)
Residential includes all property classified Residentia l, Agricultural and Apartment.
Commercial Industrial includes all property classified Commercial, Industrial and Manufactured Home Park.
Residential Commercial Industrial Total Percent
Year Property Property Estimated of
Value Value Market Value Change
2013 $1,478,809,900 $129,004,800 $1,607,814,700 -0.7%
2012 $1,480,988,700 $137,442,300 $1,618,431,000 -6.9%
2011 $1,583,277,300 $155,488,900 $1,738,766,200 -5.0%
2010 $1,651,198,900 $179,463,200 $1,830,662,100 -8.9%
2009 $1,816,215,700 $193,442,000 $2,009,657,700 -5.9%
2008 $1,929,960,400 $204,597,800 $2,134,558,200 3.7%
2007 $1,873,327,500 $185,403,200 $2,058,730,700 4.6%
2006 $1,800,319,200 $167,297,500 $1,967,616,700 5.5%
2005 $1,715,519,200 $149,418,900 $1,864,938,100 13.9%
2004 $1,513,665,700 $123,115,600 $1,636,781,300 NA
$0
$250,000,000
$500,000,000
$750,000,000
$1,000,000,000
$1,250,000,000
$1,500,000,000
$1,750,000,000
$2,000,000,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Citywide Residential Assessed Value Citywide Commercial Industrial Assessed Value
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
16
Market Value Effect of New Improvements
The next example is a more detailed breakdown of changes for the 20 1 3 assessm ent as compared to
the 20 1 2 assessment . The chart first shows the change in value and percentage of change when not
including value added for new improvements ; it then shows the change in value including new
improvement values. As you can see, the overall decrease in value before adjusting for new
construction is 1 .3 %. W hen new construction was accounted for , the over all decrease changed to
0 .7 %.
Residential in cludes all property classified Residential, Agricultural and Apartment.
Commercial Industrial includes all property classified Commercial, Industrial and Manufactured Home Park.
2013 Percent of 2013 Percent of
2012 Estimated Change Estimated Change
Total Market Value 2012 to 2013 2013 Market Value 2012 to 2013
Estimated Not Including Not Including New Including Including
Property Market New Improvement New Improvement Improvement New Improvement New Improvement
Type Value Value Value Value Value Value
Residential $1,480,988,700 $1,469,203,500 -0.8%$9,606,400 $1,478,809,900 -0.1%
Commercial
Industrial $137,442,300 $128,477,700 -6.5%$527,100 $129,004,800 -6.1%
Total $1,618,431,000 $1,597,681,200 -1.3%$10,133,500 $1,607,814,700 -0.7%
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
17
Market Value Distribution by Property Type
The chart s below illustrat e the relative distribution of estimated market value between residential (8 0 .6 2 %),
commercial and Industrial (7 .3 4 %), agricultural /apartment /m a n u f a c t u r e d h o m e (3 .6 3 %), and e x e m p t /p e r s o n a l
p r o p e r t y /t a x f o r f e i t /u t i l i t y (8 .4 1 %). The value distribution between property types within the city ha s remained
relati vely the same for a few years now.
Estimated Percent of
Property Type Market Total Estimated
Value Market Value
Residential $1,417,040,600 80.62%
Commercial Industrial $129,004,800 7.34%
Agricultural, Apartment, Manufactured Home $63,759,500 3.63%
Exempt, Personal Property, Tax Forfeit, Utility $147,888,500 8.41%
Total Estimated Market Value $1,757,693,400 100.00%
Residential
80.62%
Commercial Industrial
7.34%
Agricultural,
Apartment,
Manufactured Home
3.63%
Exempt, Personal
Property, Tax Forfeit,
Utility
8.41%
Estimated Market Value Distribution by Property Type
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
18
Residential Appraisal System
Per State Statute, each property must be physically inspected and individually appraised once
every five years. For this individual appraisal, or in the event of an assessed value appe al, we
use two standard appraisal methods to determine and verify the estimated market value of our
residential properties:
1. First, an appraiser inspects each property to verify
data. If we are unable to view the interior of a home on the
first visit, a tag is left requesting a return telephone call from
the owner to schedule this inspection. Interior inspections
are necessary to confirm our data on the plans and
specifications of new homes and to determine depreciation
factors in older homes.
2. To calcu late the estimated market value from
the property data we use a Computer
Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) system
based on a reconstruction less depreciation
method of appraisal. The cost variables and
land schedules are developed through an
analysis of stra tified sales within the city.
This method uses the "Principle of
Substitution" and calculates what a buyer
would have to pay to replace each home
today less age dependent depreciation.
3. A comparative market analysis is used to verify these estimates. Th e properties used for
these studies are those that most recently have sold and by computer analysis, are most
comparable to the subject property taking into consideration construction quality, location,
size, style, etc. The main point in doing a market an alysis is to make sure that you are
comparing "apples with apples". This will make the comparable properties "equivalent to"
the subject property and establish a probable sale price of the subject.
These three steps give us the information to verify asse ssed value or to adjust it if necessary. The
following pages contain an example of the appraisal information for one property. They include data
calculations, plan sketch, photo, comparative analysis, and photos and a map of comparable
properties.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
19
Sal es Studies
According to State Law, it is the assessor's job to appraise all real property at market value
for property tax purposes. As a method of checks and balances, the Department of
Revenue uses statistics and ratios relating to assessed market value and current sale
prices to confirm that the law is upheld. Assessors use similar statistics and sales ratios to
identify market trends in developing market values.
A sales ratio is obtained by comparing the assessor's market value to the adjusted sales
price of each property sold in an arms -length transaction within a fixed period. An "arms -
length" transaction is one that is generated after a property has had sufficient time on the
open market, between both an informed buyer and seller with no undue pre ssure on either
party. The median or mid -point ratios are calculated and stratified by property
classification.
The only perfect assessment would have a 100% ratio for every sale. This is of course,
impossible. Because we are not able to predict major events that may cause significant
shifts in the market, the state allows a 15% margin of error.
The Department of Revenue adjusts the median ratio by the percentage of growth from
the previous year's abstract value of the same class of property w ithin the same
jurisdiction. This adjusted median ratio must fall between 90% and 105%. Any deviation
will warrant a state mandated jurisdiction -w ide adjustment of at least 5%.
In Anoka County, we have the ability to stratify the ratios by style, age, q uality of
construction, size, land zone and value. This assists us in appraising all of our properties
closer to our goal ratio.
Sales Statistics Defined
We have the ability by using statistical analysis to test the accuracy of the assessment.
We use th ese statistics to ensure equity between properties at the neighborhood,
municipal and county levels. The Minnesota Department of Revenue also uses these
same techniques to test for equity between counties. The primary statistics used are:
Median Ratio: This is a measure of central tendency that is the midpoint of a group of
sales ratios when arrayed from low to high. The median is a useful statistic as it is not
affected by extreme ratios.
Aggregate Ratio : This is the total market value of all sale pr operties divided by the total
sale prices. It, along with the mean ratio, gives an idea of our assessment level.
Within the city, we constantly try to achieve an aggregate and mean ratio of 94% to
100%
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
20
95% to give us a margin to account for a fluctuating mark et and still maintain ratios
within state mandated guidelines. Also referred to as the Weighted Mean .
Mean Ratio : The mean is the average ratio. We use this ratio not only to watch our
assessment level, but also to analyze property values by development, type of
dwelling and value range. These studies enable us to track market trends in
neighborhoods, popular housing types and classes of property.
Coefficient of Dispersion (COD): The COD measures the accuracy of the assessment.
It is possible to have a median ratio of 93% with 300 sales, two ratios at 93%, 149 at
80% and 149 at 103%. Although this is an excellent median ratio, there is obviously a
great inequality in the assessment. The COD indicates the spread of the ratios from
the mean or median rat io.
The goal of a good assessment is a COD of 10 to 20. A COD under 10 is considered
excellent and anything over 20 will mean an assessment review by the Department of
Revenue.
Price Related Differential (PRD): This statistic measures the equality betwee n the
assessment of high and low valued property. A PRD over 100 indicates a regressive
assessment, or the lower valued properties are assessed at a greater degree than the
higher. A PRD of less than 100 indicates a progressive assessment or the opposite .
A perfect PRD of 100 means that both higher and lower valued properties are
assessed exactly equal.
Current Sales Study Statistics
The following statistics are based upon ratios calculated using 20 1 3 pay 20 1 4 market
values and October 20 1 1 thru Septemb er 20 1 2 sales. These are the ratios that our office
uses for c ountywide equalization , checking assessment accuracy, and predicting trends in
the market.
20 1 3 Anoka County
Residential Sales Ratio
Statistics
Median Ratio 94.5
Aggregate Ratio 94.2
Mean Ratio 96.0
Coefficient of Dispersion on Median 7.7
Price Related Differential 10 2
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
21
Anoka County Ratio Study – 20 1 3 Assessment
Assessment Year 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009
Municipality #Median Coeff #Median Coeff #Median Coeff #Median Coeff #Median Coeff
Andover 224 94.3 5.8 156 94.6 7.0 220 94.5 5.6 145 95.9 5.7 191 93.0 6.4
Anoka 87 94.9 8.8 65 94.8 8.4 83 94.5 7.6 61 95.5 8.1 75 94.5 7.0
Bethel 1 94.5 0.0 1 94.6 0.0 3 98.8 5.6 3 97.9 2.0 3 95.5 3.9
Blaine 456 94.3 7.7 313 94.4 7.3 400 95.4 7.1 344 95.6 8.7 325 94.8 5.7
Centerville 32 94.4 5.6 16 94.8 5.1 23 91.8 10.2 31 94.5 5.8 34 95.8 6.1
Circle Pines 45 94.3 7.5 31 94.4 7.8 27 95.3 7.4 33 93.8 7.0 32 94.1 7.1
Columbia Heights 125 94.6 11.2 98 94.1 8.5 106 96.2 9.4 128 96.5 10.2 134 94.6 8.3
Columbus 18 95.4 7.1 8 94.5 3.5 16 95.9 9.6 18 94.0 6.9 26 94.7 7.2
Coon Rapids 314 94.8 6.6 203 94.5 6.2 247 94.5 5.6 275 94.8 8.3 369 94.4 5.8
East Bethel 81 95.1 8.2 50 94.9 7.9 52 96.1 6.4 35 93.7 7.4 51 92.4 8.0
Fridley 107 94.3 6.6 90 94.6 8.2 117 95.0 7.4 126 94.4 9.9 160 94.4 8.0
Ham Lake 102 94.5 9.5 61 94.5 8.6 72 94.4 8.8 53 95.7 7.5 77 94.4 8.0
Hilltop 0 - - - - - -0 - - - - - -1 102.3 0.0 0 - - -- - -0 - - -- - -
Lexington 7 94.6 13.9 4 94.3 6.1 5 96.1 8.1 7 96.2 3.8 5 94.5 6.0
Lino Lakes 133 94.5 7.7 94 94.0 8.0 108 95.2 6.7 78 95.1 7.9 107 93.8 6.6
Linwood 25 95.5 11.0 15 94.5 6.8 23 97.2 9.3 15 96.6 6.4 20 93.8 8.1
Nowthen 28 94.5 10.9 6 94.6 4.0 19 94.4 10.5 15 95.3 16.0 7 92.4 6.7
Oak Grove 37 94.5 10.3 28 94.0 7.5 33 94.5 9.2 22 95.0 8.9 36 94.7 9.1
Ramsey 128 94.7 6.9 92 94.0 8.2 109 94.1 7.4 105 96.1 6.7 139 93.9 7.2
Spring Lake Park 27 95.5 7.7 14 94.1 5.7 36 95.1 9.4 30 92.1 7.5 42 94.8 6.7
St. Francis 27 94.5 12.2 25 94.5 6.9 34 95.2 6.3 24 97.2 6.6 32 94.0 4.5
County Total 2004 94.5 7.7 1370 94.5 7.4 1734 94.9 6.7 1548 95.3 8.2 1865 94.3 6.9 Price Related
Differential 102 101 101 102 101
Assessment Year 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004
Municipality #Median Coeff #Median Coeff #Median Coeff #Median Coeff #Median Coeff
Andover 248 94.4 4.4 370 93.3 4.9 550 94.5 4.2 591 95.4 23.6 479 94.4 3.6
Anoka 132 94.2 5.4 223 94.4 6.7 257 94.9 7.1 330 94.4 6.8 213 94.5 5.4
Bethel 8 94.2 7.3 10 91.1 4.8 8 94.5 7.4 23 99.9 27.7 7 94.4 2.4
Blaine 590 94.0 6.2 868 93.6 5.5 1007 94.4 5.5 1428 95.7 17.6 900 94.4 5.4
Centerville 45 95.3 4.5 75 93.6 7.5 84 94.7 6.3 106 93.7 9.1 74 94.3 5.5
Circle Pines 54 94.7 4.6 70 96.7 5.5 91 94.6 4.8 174 94.6 7.5 52 94.4 4.1
Columbia Heights 194 94.6 9.1 294 94.0 7.3 380 94.6 8.3 383 91.9 11.5 255 94.3 7.0
Columbus 20 97.7 7.0 29 96.4 11.2 29 99.8 18.2 40 93.3 9.3 27 94.2 6.7
Coon Rapids 613 93.7 4.9 1000 93.7 5.2 1268 94.5 5.8 1488 94.3 36.6 793 94.4 5.4
East Bethel 83 94.2 9.1 137 97.2 5.9 176 95.7 17.7 202 92.0 13.8 169 94.7 7.4
Fridley 253 94.7 6.8 317 93.4 6.1 429 94.7 8.4 441 98.0 7.7 290 94.5 6.5
Ham Lake 97 93.6 6.3 182 93.8 7.6 191 94.5 6.4 312 97.0 43.4 232 94.3 5.4
Hilltop 1 96.6 - - -1 86.0 - - -3 93.0 1.4 3 93.0 18.1 0 - - -- - -
Lexington 13 93.2 8.9 25 92.9 9.3 30 94.3 7.2 23 95.2 7.9 14 94.6 4.1
Lino Lakes 178 94.6 6.5 235 94.4 8.8 276 94.6 6.5 284 92.5 17.6 264 94.4 7.1
Linwood 51 95.7 9.4 85 91.0 16.2 68 94.4 9.3 75 94.3 23.5 66 94.4 7.4
Nowthen (fka Burns)31 96.7 7.6 35 90.5 9.0 44 94.2 5.2 91 95.2 51.8 77 94.5 9.2
Oak Grove 64 93.8 8.1 94 93.2 11.3 116 94.9 8.4 129 97.0 11.8 109 94.6 6.4
Ramsey 220 94.7 5.8 315 93.7 6.9 379 94.6 6.7 561 95.7 13.7 351 94.4 6.6
Spring Lake Park 59 93.6 4.8 69 96.1 4.8 87 94.5 8.8 112 94.9 6.4 71 94.4 4.3
St. Francis 87 94.7 5.0 129 93.7 4.3 158 94.7 4.3 203 96.9 31.7 250 94.4 5.0
County Total 3041 94.3 6.1 4,563 93.8 6.3 5,632 94.5 6.3 7,000 95.2 21.7 4,693 94.4 5.7 Price Related
Differential 101 99 101 111 101
Residential Single Family Sales Ratio History
2004 - 2013
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
22
201 3 Lino Lakes Residential Ratio by Zone
Number Median Coefficient
of Sales of
Sales Ratio Dispersion
LL00 2.5 & 5 Acre Tracts 2 94.8 8.8
LL01 2000 & Newer Executive 30 94.7 8.5
LL01-5 Lakeshore 5 94.1 11.9
LL02 1950's & 1960's 4 94.5 5.4
LL03 1990's & 2000's 28 96.3 8.1
LL04 1970's & 1980's 12 94.7 7.7
LL07 Detatched Townhomes 3 96.8 1.5
LL08 Midrange 29 94.6 8.3
LL09 Townhomes 10 94.4 4.1
LL10 Nature Conservation Plats 2 90.7 1.5
LL11 Condos 8 94.1 4.9
133 94.5 7.7
Neighborhood
Code
Neighborhood
Description
Citywide Residential Sales Ratio
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
23
Residential Tax Changes Examined
Although the Assessor’s Office is considered by many to be the primary reason for any property tax
changes there are actually several elements that can contribute to this change, including, but not
limited to:
Changes in the approved levies of individual taxing jurisdictions .
Bond referendum approv als.
Tax rate changes approved by the State Legislature.
Changes to the homestead credit, educational credits and agricultural aid.
Changes in assessed market value.
Changes in the classification of the property.
A combination of any of these factors can bring about a change in the annual property tax bill. If you
have questions, please call 763 -323 -5400.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
24
ADDENDA
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
25
Statutes
Minnesota State Statute 270.12 State Board of Equalization
section 8 of subd. 2 outlines sales study period
Minnesota State Sta tute 273.11 Valuation of Property
Minnesota State Statute 273.121 Valuation of Real Property Notice
Minnesota State Statute 273.13 Classification of Property
Minnesota State Statute 273.20 Assessor May Enter Dwellings, Buildings, or Structures
authori zes assessors to make assumptions if unable to
gain access to structures
Minnesota State Statute 274.01 Board of Appeal and Equalization
subd. 1b states that the board has no authority to make any
change that would benefit the property owner if th e
assessor has been denied entry
Minnesota State Statute 274.014 Local Boards; Appeals and Equalization Course and Meeting
Requirements
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
26
270.12 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION; DUTIES.
Subdivision 1.Commissioner of revenue constitutes board.
The com missioner of revenue shall constitute the State Board of Equalization. The board may
adjourn from day to day and employ necessary clerical assistance.
Subd. 2.Meeting dates; duties.
The board shall meet annually between April 15 and June 30 at the offi ce of the commissioner of
revenue and examine and compare the returns of the assessment of the property in the several
counties, and equalize the same so that all the taxable property in the state shall be assessed at
its market value, subject to the follo wing rules: (1) The board shall add to the aggregate valuation
of the real property of every county, which the board believes to be valued below its market value
in money, such percent as will bring the same to its market value in money; (2) The board shal l
deduct from the aggregate valuation of the real property of every county, which the board believes
to be valued above its market value in money, such percent as will reduce the same to its market
value in money; (3) If the board believes the valuation fo r a part of a class determined by a range
of market value under clause (8) or otherwise, a class, or classes of the real property of any town
or district in any county, or the valuation for a part of a class, a class, or classes of the real
property of any county not in towns or cities, should be raised or reduced, without raising or
reducing the other real property of such county, or without raising or reducing it in the same ratio,
the board may add to, or take from, the valuation of a part of a class, a class, or classes in any one
or more of such towns or cities, or of the property not in towns or cities, such percent as the board
believes will raise or reduce the same to its market value in money; (4) The board shall add to the
aggregate valuation of an y part of a class, a class, or classes of personal property of any county,
town, or city, which the board believes to be valued below the market value thereof, such percent
as will raise the same to its market value in money; (5) The board shall take from the aggregate
valuation of any part of a class, a class, or classes of personal property in any county, town or city,
which the board believes to be valued above the market value thereof, such percent as will reduce
the same to its market value in money; (6) The board shall not reduce the aggregate valuation of
all the property of the state, as returned by the several county auditors, more than one percent on
the whole valuation thereof; (7) When it would be of assistance in equalizing values the board may
require any county auditor to furnish statements showing assessments of real and personal
property of any individuals, firms, or corporations within the county. The board shall consider and
equalize such assessments and may increase the assessment of indiv iduals, firms, or corporations
above the amount returned by the county board of equalization when it shall appear to be
undervalued, first giving notice to such persons of the intention of the board so to do, which notice
shall fix a time and place of hear ing. The board shall not decrease any such assessment below the
valuation placed by the county board of equalization;
(8) In equalizing values pursuant to this section, the board shall utilize a 12 -month
assessment/sales ratio study conducted by the Depar tment of Revenue containing only
sales that are filed in the county auditor's office under section 272.115 , by November 1 of
the previous year and that occurred between October 1 of the year immediately preceding
the previous year and September 30 of the previous year . The assessment/sales ratio study
may separate the values of residential property into market value categories. The board may
adjust the market value cate gories and the number of categories as necessary to create an
adequate sample size for each market value category. The board may determine the
adequate sample size. To the extent practicable, the methodology used in preparing the
assessment/sales ratio stu dy must be consistent with the most recent Standard on
Assessment Sales Ratio Studies published by the Assessment Standards Committee of the
International Association of Assessing Officers. The board may determine the geographic
area used in preparing the study to accurately equalize values. A sales ratio study
separating residential property into market value categories may not be used as the basis
for a petition under chapter 278. The sales prices used in the study must be discounted for
terms of financin g. The board shall use the median ratio as the statistical measure of the
level of assessment for any particular category of property; and (9) The board shall receive
from each county the estimated market values on the assessment date falling within the st udy
period for all parcels by magnetic tape or other medium as prescribed by the commissioner of
revenue.
Subd. 3.Jurisdictions in two or more counties.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
27
When a taxing jurisdiction lies in two or more counties, if the sales ratio studies prepared by the
Department of Revenue show that the average levels of assessment in the several portions of the
taxing jurisdictions in the different counties differ by more than five percent, the board may order
the apportionment of the levy. When the sales ratio studie s prepared by the Department of
Revenue show that the average levels of assessment in the several portions of the taxing
jurisdictions in the different counties differ by more than ten percent, the board shall order the
apportionment of the levy unless (a) the proportion of total adjusted gross tax capacity in one of
the counties is less than ten percent of the total adjusted gross tax capacity in the taxing
jurisdiction and the average level of assessment in that portion of the taxing jurisdiction is the l evel
which differs by more than five percent from the assessment level in any one of the other portions
of the taxing jurisdiction; (b) significant changes have been made in the level of assessment in the
taxing jurisdiction which have not been reflected i n the sales ratio study, and those changes alter
the assessment levels in the portions of the taxing jurisdiction so that the assessment level now
differs by five percent or less; or (c) commercial, industrial, mineral, or public utility property
predomina tes in one county within the taxing jurisdiction and another class of property
predominates in another county within that same taxing jurisdiction. If one or more of these factors
are present, the board may order the apportionment of the levy. Notwithstand ing any other
provision, the levy for the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District, Metropolitan Council,
metropolitan transit district, and metropolitan transit area must be apportioned without regard to
the percentage difference. If, pursuant to this subdi vision, the board apportions the levy, then that
levy apportionment among the portions in the different counties shall be made in the same
proportion as the adjusted gross tax capacity as determined by the commissioner in each portion is
to the total adjus ted gross tax capacity of the taxing jurisdiction. For the purposes of this section,
the average level of assessment in a taxing jurisdiction or portion thereof shall be the aggregate
assessment sales ratio. Gross tax capacities as determined by the commis sioner shall be the
gross tax capacities as determined for the year preceding the year in which the levy to be
apportioned is levied. Actions pursuant to this subdivision shall be commenced subsequent to the
annual meeting on April 15 of the State Board of Equalization, but notice of the action shall be
given to the affected jurisdiction and the appropriate county auditors by the following June 30.
Apportionment of a levy pursuant to this subdivision shall be considered as a remedy to be taken
after equaliz ation pursuant to subdivision 2, and when equalization within the jurisdiction would
disturb equalization within other jurisdictions of which the several portions of the jurisdiction in
question are a part.
Subd. 4.Public utility property.
For purposes of equalization only, public utility personal property shall be treated as a separate
class of property notwithstanding the fact that its class rate is the same as commercial -industrial
property.
Subd. 5.Equalization orders.
The Board of Equalization may, pursuant to its responsibilities under subdivisions 2 and 3, issue
orders to ensure that the results of local and county boards of equalization are consistent with the
objective of state equalization. The board may issue, at its discretion, a supplem ental order to
amend, supersede, or correct a prior order of the board or an order of a local or county board. The
supplemental order must be issued within 60 days of the order to be changed. The board may
issue to a local or county board of equalization, within ten business days of the receipt of minutes
of a local or county board of equalization, an order explaining the action that the state board
believes will be necessary to effect the objective of state equalization.
History: (2366 ) RL s 863 ; 1971 c 564 s 3 ; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7 ; 1973 c 582 s 3 ; 1975 c 295 s 1 ; 1975 c 339 s 8 ;
1978 c 766 s 1 ; 1980 c 616 s 10 ; 1983 c 222 s 3 ; 1985 c 300 s 3 ; 1Sp1986 c 1 art 4 s 10 ; 1987 c 268 art 7 s
20 ,21; 198 8 c 719 art 5 s 84 ; 1989 c 277 art 2 s 12 ; 1989 c 329 art 15 s 20 ; 1Sp1989 c 1 art 2 s 11 ; art 3 s 1; art
9 s 9,10; 1991 c 291 art 1 s 7 ; art 12 s 3; 1994 c 416 art 1 s 7
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
28
273.11 VALUATION OF PROPERTY.
Subdivision 1. Generally. Except as provided in this section or section 273.17, subdi vision 1 , all
property shall be valued at its market value. The market value as determined pursuant to this section
shall be stated such that any amount under $100 is rounded up to $100 and any amount exceeding
$100 shall be rounded to the nearest $100. I n estimating and determining such value, the assessor
shall not adopt a lower or different standard of value because the same is to serve as a basis of
taxation, nor shall the assessor adopt as a criterion of value the price for which such property would
s ell at a forced sale, or in the aggregate with all the property in the town or district; but the assessor
shall value each article or description of property by itself, and at such sum or price as the assessor
believes the same to be fairly worth in money. The assessor shall take into account the effect on the
market value of property of environmental factors in the vicinity of the property. In assessing any tract
or lot of real property, the value of the land, exclusive of structures and improvements, shal l be
determined, and also the value of all structures and improvements thereon, and the aggregate value
of the property, including all structures and improvements, excluding the value of crops growing upon
cultivated land. In valuing real property upon whi ch there is a mine or quarry, it shall be valued at such
price as such property, including the mine or quarry, would sell for at a fair, voluntary sale, for cash, if
the material being mined or quarried is not subject to taxation under section 298.015 and the mine or
quarry is not exempt from the general property tax under section 298.25 . In valuing real prop erty
which is vacant, platted property shall be assessed as provided in subdivision 14. All property, or the
use thereof, which is taxable under section 272.01, subdivis ion 2 , or 273.19 , shall be valued at the
market value of such property and not at the value of a leasehold estate in such property, or at some
lesser value than its market value.
Subd. 1a. Limited market value. In the case of all property classified as agricultural homestead or
nonhomestead, residential homestead or nonhomestead, timber, or noncommercial seasonal
residential recreational, the assessor shall compare the value wi th the taxable portion of the value
determined in the preceding assessment.For assessment years 2004, 2005, and 2006, the amount of
the increase shall not exceed the greater of (1) 15 percent of the value in the preceding assessment,
or (2) 25 percent of t he difference between the current assessment and the preceding assessment.
For assessment year 2007, the amount of the increase shall not exceed the greater of (1) 15 percent
of the value in the preceding assessment, or (2) 33 percent of the difference bet ween the current
assessment and the preceding assessment. For assessment year 2008, the amount of the increase
shall not exceed the greater of (1) 15 percent of the value in the preceding assessment, or (2) 50
percent of the difference between the current assessment and the preceding assessment. This
limitation shall not apply to increases in value due to improvements. For purposes of this subdivision,
the term "assessment" means the value prior to any exclusion under subdivision 16.The provisions of
this s ubdivision shall be in effect through assessment year 2008 as provided in this subdivision. For
purposes of the assessment/sales ratio study conducted under section 127A.48 , and th e computation
of state aids paid under chapters 122A, 123A, 123B, 124D, 125A, 126C, 127A, and 477A, market
values and net tax capacities determined under this subdivision and subdivision 16, shall be used.
Subd. 2.[Repealed, 1979 c 303 art 2 s 38]
Subd. 3.[Repealed, 1975 c 437 art 8 s 10]
Subd. 4.[Repealed, 1976 c 345 s 3]
Subd. 5. Boards of review and equalization. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the
contrary, the limitation contained in subdivisions 1 and 1a shall also apply to the authority of the local
board of review as provided in section 274.01 , the county board of equalization as provided in section
274.13 , the State Board of Equalization and the commissioner of revenue as provided in sections
270.11, subdivision 1 , 270.12 , 270C.92 , and 270C.94 .
Subd. 6. Solar, w ind, methane gas systems. For purposes of property taxation, the market value
of real and personal property installed prior to January 1, 1984, which is a solar, wind, or agriculturally
derived methane gas system used as a heating, cooling, or electric pow er source of a building or
structure shall be excluded from the market value of that building or structure if the property is not
used to provide energy for sale.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
29
Subd. 6a. Fire -safety sprinkler systems. For purposes of property taxation, the market va lue of
automatic fire -safety sprinkler systems installed in existing buildings after January 1, 1992, meeting
the standards of the Minnesota Fire Code shall be excluded from the market value of (1) existing
multifamily residential real estate containing fo ur or more units and used or held for use by the owner
or by the tenants or lessees of the owner as a residence and (2) existing real estate containing four or
more contiguous residential units for use by customers of the owner, such as hotels, motels, and
lodging houses and (3) existing office buildings or mixed use commercial -residential buildings, in
which at least one story capable of occupancy is at least 75 feet above the ground. The market value
exclusion under this section shall expire if the proper ty is sold.
Subd. 7.[Repealed, 1984 c 502 art 3 s 36]
Subd. 8. Limited equity cooperative apartments. For the purposes of this subdivision, the terms
defined in this subdivision have the meanings given them.A "limited equity cooperative" is a
corpo ration organized under chapter 308A or 308B, which has as its primary purpose the provision of
housing and related services to its members which meets one of the following criteria with respect to
the income of its members: (1) a minimum of 75 percent of m embers must have incomes at or less
than 90 percent of area median income, (2) a minimum of 40 percent of members must have incomes
at or less than 60 percent of area median income, or (3) a minimum of 20 percent of members must
have incomes at or less tha n 50 percent of area median income. For purposes of this clause,
"member income" shall mean the income of a member existing at the time the member acquires
cooperative membership, and median income shall mean the St. Paul -Minneapolis metropolitan area
medi an income as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
It must also meet the following requirements:(a) The articles of incorporation set the sale price of
occupancy entitling cooperative shares or memberships at no more than a transfer value determined
as provided in the articles. That value may not exceed the sum of the following:(1) the consideration
paid for the membership or shares by the first occupant of the unit, as shown in the records of the
corporation;(2) the f air market value, as shown in the records of the corporation, of any improvements
to the real property that were installed at the sole expense of the member with the prior approval of the
board of directors;(3) accumulated interest, or an inflation allowan ce not to exceed the greater of a ten
percent annual noncompounded increase on the consideration paid for the membership or share by
the first occupant of the unit, or the amount that would have been paid on that consideration if interest
had been paid on it at the rate of the percentage increase in the revised Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers for the Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan area prepared by the United States
Department of Labor, provided that the amount determined pursuant to this cla use may not exceed
$500 for each year or fraction of a year the membership or share was owned; plus(4) real property
capital contributions shown in the records of the corporation to have been paid by the transferor
member and previous holders of the same m embership, or of separate memberships that had entitled
occupancy to the unit of the member involved. These contributions include contributions to a corporate
reserve account the use of which is restricted to real property improvements or acquisitions,
con tributions to the corporation which are used for real property improvements or acquisitions, and the
amount of principal amortized by the corporation on its indebtedness due to the financing of real
property acquisition or improvement or the averaging of p rincipal paid by the corporation over the term
of its real property -related indebtedness.(b) The articles of incorporation require that the board of
directors limit the purchase price of stock or membership interests for new member -occupants or
resident sh areholders to an amount which does not exceed the transfer value for the membership or
stock as defined in clause (a).(c) The articles of incorporation require that the total distribution out of
capital to a member shall not exceed that transfer value.(d) The articles of incorporation require that
upon liquidation of the corporation any assets remaining after retirement of corporate debts and
distribution to members will be conveyed to a charitable organization described in section 501(c)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1992, or a public agency.A
"limited equity cooperative apartment" is a dwelling unit owned by a limited equity
cooperative."Occupancy entitling cooperative share or membership" is the ownership interes t in a
cooperative organization which entitles the holder to an exclusive right to occupy a dwelling unit
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
30
owned or leased by the cooperative. For purposes of taxation, the assessor shall value a unit owned
by a limited equity cooperative at the lesser of i ts market value or the value determined by capitalizing
the net operating income of a comparable apartment operated on a rental basis at the capitalization
rate used in valuing comparable buildings that are not limited equity cooperatives. If a cooperative fails
to operate in accordance with the provisions of clauses (a) to (d), the property shall be subject to
additional property taxes in the amount of the difference between the taxes determined in accordance
with this subdivision for the last ten years th at the property had been assessed pursuant to this
subdivision and the amount that would have been paid if the provisions of this subdivision had not
applied to it. The additional taxes, plus interest at the rate specified in section 549.09 , shall be
extended against the property on the tax list for the current year.
Subd. 9. Condominium property. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, for
purposes of propert y taxation, condominium property shall be valued in accordance with this
subdivision.(a) A structure or building that is initially constructed as condominiums shall be identified
as separate units after the filing of a declaration. The market value of the residential units in that
structure or building and included in the declaration shall be valued as condominiums.(b) When 60
percent or more of the residential units in a structure or building being converted to condominiums
have been sold as condominiums i ncluding those units that the converters retain for their own
investment, the market value of the remaining residential units in that structure or building which are
included in the declaration shall be valued as condominiums. If not all of the residential units in the
structure or building are included in the declaration, the 60 percent factor shall apply to those in the
declaration. A separate description shall be recognized when a declaration is filed. For purposes of
this clause, "retain" shall mean uni ts that are rented and completed units that are not available for
sale.(c) For purposes of this subdivision, a "sale" is defined as the date when the first written
document for the purchase or conveyance of the property is signed, unless that document is r evoked.
Subd. 10.[Repealed, 1999 c 243 art 5 s 54]
Subd. 11. Valuation of restored or preserved wetland. Wetlands restored by the federal, state, or
local government, or by a nonprofit organization, or preserved under the terms of a temporary or
pe rpetual easement by the federal or state government, must be valued by assessors at their wetland
value. "Wetland value" in this subdivision means the market value of wetlands in any potential use in
which the wetland character is not permanently altered. Wetland value shall not reflect potential uses
of the wetland that would violate the terms of any existing conservation easement, or any one -time
payment received by the wetland owner under the terms of a state or federal conservation easement.
Wetland val ue shall reflect any potential income consistent with a property's wetland character,
including but not limited to lease payments for hunting or other recreational uses. The commissioner
of revenue shall issue a bulletin advising assessors of the provision s of this section by October 1,
1991.For purposes of this subdivision, "wetlands" means lands transitional between terrestrial and
aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by
shallow water. For purposes of this definition, wetlands must have the following three attributes:(1)
have a predominance of hydric soils;(2) are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetatio n typically adapted
for life in saturated soil conditions; and(3) under normal circumstances support a prevalence of such
vegetation.
Subd. 12. Neighborhood land trusts. (a) A neighborhood land trust, as defined under chapter
462A, is (i) a community -b ased nonprofit corporation organized under chapter 317A, which qualifies
for tax exempt status under 501(c)(3), or (ii) a "city" as defined in section 462C.02, subdivis ion 6 ,
which has received funding from the Minnesota housing finance agency for purposes of the
neighborhood land trust program. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency shall set the criteria for
neighborhood land trusts. (b) All occupants of a neighborhood land trust building must have a family
income of less than 80 percent of the greater of (1) the state median income, or (2) the area or county
median income, as most recently determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Before the neighbo rhood land trust can rent or sell a unit to an applicant, the neighborhood land trust
shall verify to the satisfaction of the administering agency or the city that the family income of each
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
31
person or family applying for a unit in the neighborhood land trus t building is within the income criteria
provided in this paragraph. The administering agency or the city shall verify to the satisfaction of the
county assessor that the occupant meets the income criteria under this paragraph. The property tax
benefits un der paragraph (c) shall be granted only to property owned or rented by persons or families
within the qualifying income limits. The family income criteria and verification is only necessary at the
time of initial occupancy in the property.(c) A unit which is owned by the occupant and used as a
homestead by the occupant qualifies for homestead treatment as class 1a under section 273.13,
subdivision 22 . A unit which is re nted by the occupant and used as a homestead by the occupant shall
be class 4a or 4b property, under section 273.13, subdivision 25 , whichever is applicable. Any
remai ning portion of the property not used for residential purposes shall be classified by the assessor
in the appropriate class based upon the use of that portion of the property owned by the neighborhood
land trust. The land upon which the building is located shall be assessed at the same class rate as the
units within the building, provided that if the building contains some units assessed as class 1a and
some units assessed as class 4a or 4b, the market value of the land will be assessed in the same
proporti ons as the value of the building.
Subd. 13. Valuation of income -producing property. Beginning with the 1995 assessment, only
accredited assessors or senior accredited assessors or other licensed assessors who have
successfully completed at least two i ncome -producing property appraisal courses may value income -
producing property for ad valorem tax purposes. "Income -producing property" as used in this
subdivision means the taxable property in class 3a and 3b in section 273.13, subdivision 24 ; class 4a
and 4c, except for seasonal recreational property not used for commercial purposes; and class 5 in
section 273.13, subdivision 31 . "Income -producing property" includes any property in class 4e in
section 273.13, subdivision 25 , that would be incom e -producing property under the definition in this
subdivision if it were not substandard. "Income -producing property appraisal course" as used in this
subdivision means a course of study of approximately 30 instructional hours, with a final
comprehensive t est. An assessor must successfully complete the final examination for each of the two
required courses. The course must be approved by the board of assessors.
Subd. 14. Vacant land platted before August 1, 2001. (a) All land platted before August 1, 20 01,
and not improved with a permanent structure, shall be assessed as provided in this subdivision. The
assessor shall determine the market value of each individual lot based upon the highest and best use
of the property as unplatted land. In establishing the market value of the property, the assessor shall
consider the sale price of the unplatted land or comparable sales of unplatted land of similar use and
similar availability of public utilities.(b) The market value determined in paragraph (a) shall be
i ncreased as follows for each of the three assessment years immediately following the final approval
of the plat: one -third of the difference between the property's unplatted market value as determined
under paragraph (a) and the market value based upon the highest and best use of the land as platted
property shall be added in each of the three subsequent assessment years.(c) Any increase in market
value after the first assessment year following the plat's final approval shall be added to the property's
mark et value in the next assessment year. Notwithstanding paragraph (b), if construction begins
before the expiration of the three years in paragraph (b), that lot shall be eligible for revaluation in the
next assessment year. The market value of a platted lot determined under this subdivision shall not
exceed the value of that lot based upon the highest and best use of the property as platted land.
Subd. 14a. Vacant land platted on or after August 1, 2001; located in metropolitan counties.
(a) All land pla tted on or after August 1, 2001, located in a metropolitan county, and not improved with
a permanent structure, shall be assessed as provided in this subdivision. The assessor shall
determine the market value of each individual lot based upon the highest a nd best use of the property
as unplatted land. In establishing the market value of the property, the assessor shall consider the
sale price of the unplatted land or comparable sales of unplatted land of similar use and similar
availability of public utilit ies.(b) The market value determined in paragraph (a) shall be increased as
follows for each of the three assessment years immediately following the final approval of the plat:
one -third of the difference between the property's unplatted market value as det ermined under
paragraph (a) and the market value based upon the highest and best use of the land as platted
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
32
property shall be added in each of the three subsequent assessment years.(c) Any increase in market
value after the first assessment year following the plat's final approval shall be added to the property's
market value in the next assessment year. Notwithstanding paragraph (b), if construction begins
before the expiration of the three years in paragraph (b), that lot shall be eligible for revaluation in the
next assessment year. The market value of a platted lot determined under this subdivision shall not
exceed the value of that lot based upon the highest and best use of the property as platted land.(d)
For purposes of this section, "metropolitan cou nty" means the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota,
Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington.
Subd. 14b. Vacant land platted on or after August 1, 2001; located in nonmetropolitan
counties. (a) All land platted on or after August 1, 2001, located in a non metropolitan county, and not
improved with a permanent structure, shall be assessed as provided in this subdivision. The assessor
shall determine the market value of each individual lot based upon the highest and best use of the
property as unplatted land. In establishing the market value of the property, the assessor shall
consider the sale price of the unplatted land or comparable sales of unplatted land of similar use and
similar availability of public utilities.(b) The market value determined in paragra ph (a) shall be
increased as follows for each of the seven assessment years immediately following the final approval
of the plat: one -seventh of the difference between the property's unplatted market value as
determined under paragraph (a) and the market v alue based upon the highest and best use of the
land as platted property shall be added in each of the seven subsequent assessment years.(c) Any
increase in market value after the first assessment year following the plat's final approval shall be
added to the property's market value in the next assessment year. Notwithstanding paragraph (b), if
construction begins before the expiration of the seven years in paragraph (b), that lot shall be eligible
for revaluation in the next assessment year. The market val ue of a platted lot determined under this
subdivision shall not exceed the value of that lot based upon the highest and best use of the property
as platted land.
Subd. 15. Vacant hospitals. In valuing a hospital, as defined in section 144.50, subdivisi on 2 , that
is located outside of a metropolitan county, as defined in section 473.121, subdivision 4 , and that on
the date of sale is vacant and not used for hospital purposes or for any other purpose, the assessor's
estimated market value for taxes levied in the year of the sale shall be no greater than the sales price
of the property, including both the land and the buildings, as adjusted for terms of financing. If t he sale
is made later than December 15, the market value as determined under this subdivision shall be used
for taxes levied in the following year. This subdivision applies only if the sales price of the property was
determined under an arm's -length transa ction.
Subd. 16. Valuation exclusion for certain improvements. Improvements to homestead property
made before January 2, 2003, shall be fully or partially excluded from the value of the property for
assessment purposes provided that (1) the house is a t least 45 years old at the time of the
improvement and (2) the assessor's estimated market value of the house on January 2 of the current
year is equal to or less than $400,000.For purposes of determining this eligibility, "house" means land
and buildings . The age of a residence is the number of years since the original year of its construction.
In the case of a residence that is relocated, the relocation must be from a location within the state and
the only improvements eligible for exclusion under this s ubdivision are (1) those for which building
permits were issued to the homeowner after the residence was relocated to its present site, and (2)
those undertaken during or after the year the residence is initially occupied by the homeowner,
excluding any ma rket value increase relating to basic improvements that are necessary to install the
residence on its foundation and connect it to utilities at its present site. In the case of an owner -
occupied duplex or triplex, the improvement is eligible regardless of which portion of the property was
improved. If the property lies in a jurisdiction which is subject to a building permit process, a building
permit must have been issued prior to commencement of the improvement. The improvements for a
single project or in any one year must add at least $5,000 to the value of the property to be eligible for
exclusion under this subdivision. Only improvements to the structure which is the residence of the
qualifying homesteader or construction of or improvements to no more th an one two -car garage per
residence qualify for the provisions of this subdivision. If an improvement was begun between January
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
33
2, 1992, and January 2, 1993, any value added from that improvement for the January 1994 and
subsequent assessments shall qualif y for exclusion under this subdivision provided that a building
permit was obtained for the improvement between January 2, 1992, and January 2, 1993. Whenever
a building permit is issued for property currently classified as homestead, the issuing jurisdict ion shall
notify the property owner of the possibility of valuation exclusion under this subdivision. The assessor
shall require an application, including documentation of the age of the house from the owner, if
unknown by the assessor. The application may be filed subsequent to the date of the building permit
provided that the application must be filed within three years of the date the building permit was issued
for the improvement. If the property lies in a jurisdiction which is not subject to a building permit
process, the application must be filed within three years of the date the improvement was made. The
assessor may require proof from the taxpayer of the date the improvement was made. Applications
must be received prior to July 1 of any year in orde r to be effective for taxes payable in the following
year. No exclusion for an improvement may be granted by a local board of review or county board of
equalization, and no abatement of the taxes for qualifying improvements may be granted by the
county boa rd unless (1) a building permit was issued prior to the commencement of the improvement
if the jurisdiction requires a building permit, and (2) an application was completed. The assessor shall
note the qualifying value of each improvement on the property's record, and the sum of those amounts
shall be subtracted from the value of the property in each year for ten years after the improvement has
been made. After ten years the amount of the qualifying value shall be added back as follows:(1) 50
percent in the two subsequent assessment years if the qualifying value is equal to or less than
$10,000 market value; or(2) 20 percent in the five subsequent assessment years if the qualifying value
is greater than $10,000 market value. If an application is filed after the first assessment date at which
an improvement could have been subject to the valuation exclusion under this subdivision, the ten -
year period during which the value is subject to exclusion is reduced by the number of years that have
elapsed since the pr operty would have qualified initially. The valuation exclusion shall terminate
whenever (1) the property is sold, or (2) the property is reclassified to a class which does not qualify
for treatment under this subdivision. Improvements made by an occupant w ho is the purchaser of the
property under a conditional purchase contract do not qualify under this subdivision unless the seller
of the property is a governmental entity. The qualifying value of the property shall be computed based
upon the increase from that structure's market value as of January 2 preceding the acquisition of the
property by the governmental entity. The total qualifying value for a homestead may not exceed
$50,000. The total qualifying value for a homestead with a house that is less than 70 years old may
not exceed $25,000. The term "qualifying value" means the increase in estimated market value
resulting from the improvement if the improvement occurs when the house is at least 70 years old, or
one -half of the increase in estimated market value resulting from the improvement otherwise. The
$25,000 and $50,000 maximum qualifying value under this subdivision may result from multiple
improvements to the homestead. If 50 percent or more of the square footage of a structure is
voluntarily razed or removed, the valuation increase attributable to any subsequent improvements to
the remaining structure does not qualify for the exclusion under this subdivision. If a structure is
unintentionally or accidentally destroyed by a natural disaster, the pro perty is eligible for an exclusion
under this subdivision provided that the structure was not completely destroyed. The qualifying value
on property destroyed by a natural disaster shall be computed based upon the increase from that
structure's market valu e as determined on January 2 of the year in which the disaster occurred. A
property receiving benefits under the homestead disaster provisions under section 273.123 is not
disquali fied from receiving an exclusion under this subdivision. If any combination of improvements
made to a structure after January 1, 1993, increases the size of the structure by 100 percent or more,
the valuation increase attributable to the portion of the imp rovement that causes the structure's size to
exceed 100 percent does not qualify for exclusion under this subdivision.
Subd. 17. Valuation of contaminated properties. (a) In determining the market value of property
containing contaminants, the assesso r shall reduce the market value of the property by the
contamination value of the property. The contamination value is the amount of the market value
reduction that results from the presence of the contaminants, but it may not exceed the cost of a
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
34
reasonab le response action plan or asbestos abatement plan or management program for the
property.(b) For purposes of this subdivision, "asbestos abatement plan," "contaminants," and
"response action plan" have the meanings as used in sections 270.91 and 270.92 .
Subd. 18. Disclosure of valuation exclusion. No seller of real property shall sell or offer for sale
p roperty that, for purposes of property taxation, has an exclusion from market value for home
improvements under subdivision 16, without disclosing to the buyer the existence of the excluded
valuation and informing the buyer that the exclusion will end upon the sale of the property and that the
property's estimated market value for property tax purposes will increase accordingly.
Subd. 19. Valuation exclusion for improvements to certain business property. Property
classified under Minnesota Statutes, sec tion 273.13, subdivision 24 , which is eligible for the preferred
class rate on the market value up to $150,000, shall qualify for a valuation exclusion for assessment
purposes, provided all of the following conditions are met: (1) the building must be at least 50 years
old at the time of the improvement or damaged by the 1997 floods;(2) the building must be located in
a city or town with a population of 10,000 or less t hat is located outside the seven -county metropolitan
area, as defined in section 473.121, subdivision 2 ; (3) the total estimated market value of the land and
buildings must be $100,000 or less prior to the improvement and prior to the damage caused by the
1997 floods;(4) the current year's estimated market value of the property must be equal to or less than
the property's estimated market value in each of the two previo us years' assessments;(5) a building
permit must have been issued prior to the commencement of the improvement, or if the building is
located in a city or town which does not have a building permit process, the property owner must notify
the assessor prior to the commencement of the improvement;(6) the property, including its
improvements, has received no public assistance, grants or financing except, that in the case of
property damaged by the 1997 floods, the property is eligible to the extent that the fl ood losses are not
reimbursed by insurance or any public assistance, grants, or financing;(7) the property is not receiving
a property tax abatement under section 469.1813 ; and (8 ) the improvements are made after the
effective date of Laws 1997, chapter 231, and prior to January 1, 1999.The assessor shall estimate
the market value of the building in the assessment year immediately following the year that (1) the
building permit was taken out, or (2) the taxpayer notified the assessor that an improvement was to be
made. If the estimated market value of the building has increased over the prior year's assessment,
the assessor shall note the amount of the increase on the property's rec ord, and that amount shall be
subtracted from the value of the property in each year for five years after the improvement has been
made, at which time an amount equal to 20 percent of the excluded value shall be added back in each
of the five subsequent as sessment years. For any property, there can be no more than two
improvements qualifying for exclusion under this subdivision. The maximum amount of value that can
be excluded from any property under this subdivision is $50,000.The assessor shall require an
application, including documentation of the age of the building from the owner, if unknown by the
assessor. Applications must be received prior to July 1 of any year in order to be effective for taxes
payable in the following year. For purposes of this su bdivision, "population" has the same meaning
given in Minnesota Statutes, section 477A.011, subdivision 3 .
Subd. 20. Valuation exclusion for improvements to cert ain business property. Property
classified under section 273.13, subdivision 24 , qualifies for a valuation exclusion for assessment
purposes, provided all of the follo wing conditions are met: (1) the building must have been damaged
by the 2002 floods;(2) the building must be located in a city or town with a population of 10,000 or less
that is located in a county in the area included in DR -1419;(3) the total estimated m arket value of the
land and buildings must be $150,000 or less for assessment year 2002;(4) a building permit must
have been issued prior to the commencement of the improvement, or if the building is located in a city
or town which does not have a building permit process, the property owner must notify the assessor
prior to the commencement of the improvement;(5) the property is not receiving a property tax
abatement under section 4 69.1813 ; and (6) the improvements are made before January 1, 2004.The
assessor shall estimate the market value of the building in the assessment year immediately following
the year that (1) the building permit was taken out, or (2) the taxpayer notified t he assessor that an
improvement was to be made. If the estimated market value of the building has increased over the
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
35
2002 assessment before any reassessment due to flood damage, the assessor shall note the amount
of the increase on the property's record, a nd that amount shall be subtracted from the value of the
property in each year for five years after the improvement has been made. In each of the next five
subsequent assessment years, an amount equal to 20 percent of the value excluded in the fifth year
f or that improvement shall be added back. The maximum amount of value that can be excluded for all
improvements to any property under this subdivision is $50,000.The assessor shall require an
application. Applications must be received by December 31, 2002, or December 31, 2003, in order to
be effective for taxes payable in the following year. For purposes of this subdivision, "population" has
the meaning given in section 477A.011, subdivision 3 .
Subd. 21. Valuation reduction for homestead property dama ged by mold. (a) The owner of
homestead property may apply in writing to the assessor for a reduction in the market value of the
property that has been damaged by mold. The notification must include the estimated cost to cure the
mold condition provided by a licensed contractor. The estimated cost must be at least $20,000. Upon
completion of the work, the owner must file an application on a form prescribed by the commissioner
of revenue, accompanied by a copy of the contractor's estimate.(b) If the conditio ns in paragraph (a)
are met, the county board must grant a reduction in the market value of the homestead dwelling equal
to the estimated cost to cure the mold condition. If a property owner applies for a reduction under this
subdivision between January 1 and June 30 of any year, the reduction applies for taxes payable in the
following year. If a property owner applies for a reduction under this subdivision between July 1 and
December 31 of any year, the reduction applies for taxes payable in the second fol lowing year.(c) A
denial of a reduction under this section by the county board may be appealed to the tax court. If the
county board takes no action on the application within 90 days after its receipt, it is considered an
approval.(d) For purposes of subdi vision 1a, in the assessment year following the assessment year
when a valuation reduction has occurred under this section, any market value added by the assessor
to the property resulting from curing the mold condition must be considered an increase in va lue due
to new construction. Subd. 22. Lead hazard market value reduction. Owners of property classified
as class 1a, 1b, 1c, 2a, 4b, 4bb, or 4d under section 273.13 may apply fo r a lead hazard valuation
reduction, provided that the property is located in a city which has authorized valuation reductions
under this subdivision. A city that authorizes reductions under this subdivision must establish
guidelines for qualifying lead ha zard reduction projects and must designate an agency within the city
to issue certificates of c ompletion of qualifying projects. For purposes of this subdivision, "lead hazard
reduction" has the same meaning as in section 144.9501, subdivision 17 .The property owner must
obtain a certificate from the agency stating (1) that the project has been completed and (2) the total
cost incurred by the owner, which must be at le ast $3,000. Only projects originating after July 1, 2005,
and completed before July 1, 2010, qualify for a reduction under this subdivision. The property owner
shall apply for the valuation reduction to the assessor on a form prescribed by the assessor
acc ompanied by a copy of the certificate of completion from the agency. A qualifying property is
eligible for a one -year valuation reduction equal to the actual cost incurred, to a maximum of $20,000.
If a property owner applies to the assessor for the valuat ion reduction under this subdivision between
January 1 and June 30 of any year, the reduction applies for taxes payable in the following year. If a
property owner applies to the assessor for the valuation reduction under this subdivision between July
1 and December 31, the reduction applies for taxes payable in the second following year. For
purposes of subdivision 1a, any additional market value resulting from the lead hazard removal must
be considered an increase in value due to new construction.
Subd . 23. First tier valuation limit; agricultural homestead property. (a) Beginning with
assessment year 2006, the commissioner of revenue shall annually certify the first tier limit for
agricultural homestead property as the product of (i) $600,000, and (ii) the ratio of the statewide
average taxable market value of agricultural property per acre of deeded farm land in the preceding
assessment year to the statewide average taxable market value of agricultural property per acre of
deeded farm land for assessme nt year 2004. The limit shall be rounded to the nearest $10,000.(b) For
the purposes of this subdivision, "agricultural property" means all class 2 property under section
273.13, subdivision 23, except for (1) timberland, (2) a landing area or public access area of a
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
36
privately owned public use airport, and (3) property consisting of the house, garage, and immediately
surrounding one acre of land of an agricultural homes tead.(c) The commissioner shall certify the limit
by January 2 of each assessment year, except that for assessment year 2006 the commissioner shall
certify the limit by June 1, 2006.
History: (1992) RL s 810; Ex1967 c 32 art 7 s 3; 1969 c 574 s 1; 1969 c 9 90 s 1; 1971 c 427 s 1;
1971 c 489 s 1; 1971 c 831 s 1; 1973 c 582 s 3; 1973 c 650 art 23 s 1 -4; 1974 c 556 s 14; 1975 c 437
art 8 s 4 -6; 1976 c 2 s 93; 1976 c 345 s 1; 1977 c 423 art 4 s 4; 1978 c 786 s 10,11; 1979 c 303 art 2 s
7; 1Sp1981 c 1 art 2 s 3,4 ; 1Sp1981 c 4 art 2 s 50; 1982 c 424 s 61,62; 1982 c 523 art 19 s 2; art 21 s
1; 1983 c 222 s 7; 1983 c 342 art 2 s 5 -7; 1984 c 502 art 3 s 6; 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 35; 1986 c 444;
1Sp1986 c 1 art 4 s 12; 1987 c 268 art 5 s 1; art 7 s 32; 1987 c 384 art 3 s 10; 1988 c 719 art 5 s 84;
1989 c 329 art 13 s 20; 1989 c 356 s 13; 1990 c 480 art 7 s 5; 1990 c 604 art 3 s 9; 1991 c 291 art 1 s
12; 1991 c 354 art 10 s 7,8; 1992 c 511 art 2 s 11,12; 1992 c 556 s 2,3; 1992 c 597 s 14; 1993 c 375
art 5 s 8 -13; art 8 s 1 4; art 11 s 3; art 12 s 9; 1994 c 416 art 1 s 13; 1994 c 587 art 5 s 3 -5; 1995 c 1 s
2; 1995 c 264 art 16 s 9; 1996 c 471 art 3 s 5; 1997 c 231 art 2 s 10,11,52; art 8 s 2; 1997 c 251 s 16;
1998 c 397 art 11 s 3; 1999 c 243 art 5 s 6,7; 1Sp2001 c 5 art 3 s 23 -26; 1Sp2002 c 1 s 14; 2003 c
127 art 5 s 15; 1Sp2003 c 21 art 4 s 3; 2005 c 151 art 2 s 6; art 5 s 16; 1Sp2005 c 3 art 1 s 8 -10; 2006
c 259 art 4 s 11
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
37
273.121 VALUATION OF REAL PROPERTY, NOTICE.
Any county assessor or city assessor having the power s of a county assessor, valuing or classifying taxable real property
shall in each year notify those persons whose property is to be included on the assessment roll that year if the person's
address is known to the assessor, otherwise the occupant of the p roperty. The notice shall be in writing and shall be sent
by ordinary mail at least ten days before the meeting of the local board of appeal and equalization under section 274.01
or the review process established under section 274.13, subdivision 1c . It shall contain: (1) the market value for the
current and prior assessment, (2) the limited mark et value under section 273.11, subdivision 1a , for the current and
prior assessment, (3) the qualifying amount of any improvements under section 273.11, subdivision 16 , for the current
assessment, (4) the market value subject to taxation after subtracting the amount of any qualifying improvements for the
current assessment, (5) the classification of the property for the current and prior assessment, (6) a note that if the
property is homestead and at least 45 years old, improvements made to the property may be eligible for a valuation
exclusion under section 273.11, subdivision 16 , (7) the assessor's office address, and (8) the dates, places, and times
set for the meetings of the local board of appeal and equalization, the review process establish ed under section 274.13,
subdivision 1c , and the county board of appeal and equalization. The commissioner of revenue shall specify the form of
the notice. The assesso r shall attach to the assessment roll a statement that the notices required by this section have
been mailed. Any assessor who is not provided sufficient funds from the assessor's governing body to provide such
notices, may make application to the commissi oner of revenue to finance such notices. The commissioner of revenue
shall conduct an investigation and, if satisfied that the assessor does not have the necessary funds, issue a certification t o
the commissioner of finance of the amount necessary to provi de such notices. The commissioner of finance shall issue a
warrant for such amount and shall deduct such amount from any state payment to such county or municipality. The
necessary funds to make such payments are hereby appropriated. Failure to receive the notice shall in no way affect the
validity of the assessment, the resulting tax, the procedures of any board of review or equalization, or the enforcement of
delinquent taxes by statutory means.
History: Ex1971 c 31 art 23 s 2; 1973 c 492 s 14; 1974 c 36 3 s 1; 1975 c 437 art 8 s 7; 1980 c 437 s 3; 1982 c 523 art 23
s 1; 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 41; 1986 c 444; 1988 c 719 art 6 s 8; 1993 c 375 art 5 s 16; 1995 c 1 s 3; 1997 c 231 art 2 s 17;
1Sp2001 c 5 art 7 s 20; 2002 c 377 art 10 s 5
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
38
273.13 CLASSIFICATI ON OF PROPERTY.
Subdivision 1.How classified.
All real and personal property subject to a general property tax and not subject to any gross
earnings or other in -lieu tax is hereby classified for purposes of taxation as provided by this
section.
Subd. 2.[Re pealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 2a.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 3.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 4.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Su bd. 5.[Repealed, Ex1971 c 31 art 22 s 5 ]
Subd. 5a.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 6.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 6a.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 7.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 7a.[Repealed, 1988 c 719 art 5 s 81 ]
Subd. 7b.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 7c.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 7d.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 8.[Repealed, Ex196 7 c 32 art 4 s 3 ]
Subd. 8a.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 9.[Repealed, 1 988 c 719 art 5 s 81 ]
Subd. 10.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 11.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 12.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 13.[Repealed, 1974 c 313 s 1 ]
Subd. 14.[Repealed, 1984 c 593 s 46 ]
Subd. 14a.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 15.[Repealed, Ex1971 c 31 art 36 s 2 ]
Subd. 15a.[Repealed, 1988 c 719 art 5 s 81 ]
Subd. 15b.[Repealed, 1983 c 342 art 2 s 30 ]
Subd. 16.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 17.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 17a.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 17b.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 17c.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 17d.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 18.[Repealed, 1983 c 222 s 45 ]
Subd. 19.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 20.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 21.[Repealed, 1Sp1985 c 14 art 4 s 98 ]
Subd. 21a.Class rate .
In this section, wherever the "class rate" of a class of property is specified without
qualification as to whether it is the property's "net class rate" or its "gross class rate," the
"net class rate" and "gross class rate" of that property are the same as its "class rate."
Subd. 21b.Tax capacity .
(a) Gross tax capacity means the product of the appropriate gross class rates in this
section and market values. (b) Net tax capacity means the product of the appropriate net
class rates in this section and market values.
Subd. 22. Class 1 .
(a) Except as provided in subdivision 23 and in paragraphs (b) and (c), real estate which is
residential and used for homestead purposes is class 1a. In the case of a duplex or triplex
in which one of the units is used for homestead purposes, the entire property is deem ed to
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
39
be used for homestead purposes. The market value of class 1a property must be
determined based upon the value of the house, garage, and land. The first $500,000 of
market value of class 1a property has a net class rate of one percent of its market v alue;
and the market value of class 1a property that exceeds $500,000 has a class rate of 1.25
percent of its market value. (b) Class 1b property includes homestead real estate or
homestead manufactured homes used for the purposes of a homestead by: (1) any
person who is blind as defined in section 256D.35 , or the blind person and the blind
person's spouse; (2) any person who is permanently and totally disabled or by the
disab led person and the disabled person's spouse; or (3) the surviving spouse of a
permanently and totally disabled veteran homesteading a property classified under this
paragraph for taxes payable in 2008. Property is classified and assessed under clause (2)
only if the government agency or income -providing source certifies, upon the request of
the homestead occupant, that the homestead occupant satisfies the disability
requirements of this paragraph, and that the property is not eligible for the valuation
ex clusion under subdivision 34. Property is classified and assessed under paragraph (b)
only if the commissioner of revenue or the county assessor certifies that the homestead
occupant satisfies the requirements of this paragraph. Permanently and totally d isabled
for the purpose of this subdivision means a condition which is permanent in nature and
totally incapacitates the person from working at an occupation which brings the person an
income. The first $50,000 market value of class 1b property has a net c lass rate of .45
percent of its market value. The remaining market value of class 1b property has a class
rate using the rates for class 1a or class 2a property, whichever is appropriate, of similar
market value. (c) Class 1c property is commercial use re al and personal property that
abuts public water as defined in section 103G.005, subdivision 15 , and is devoted to
temporary and seasonal residential occupancy for recreati onal purposes but not devoted
to commercial purposes for more than 250 days in the year preceding the year of
assessment, and that includes a portion used as a homestead by the owner, which
includes a dwelling occupied as a homestead by a shareholder of a corporation that owns
the resort, a partner in a partnership that owns the resort, or a member of a limited liability
company that owns the resort even if the title to the homestead is held by the corporation,
partnership, or limited liability company. For purposes of this clause, property is devoted
to a commercial purpose on a specific day if any portion of the property, excluding the
portion used exclusively as a homestead, is used for residential occupancy and a fee is
charged for residential occupancy. Class 1c property must contain three or more rental
units. A "rental unit" is defined as a cabin, condominium, townhouse, sleeping room, or
individual camping site equipped with water and electrical hookups for recreational
vehicles. Class 1c property mus t provide recreational activities such as the rental of ice
fishing houses, boats and motors, snowmobiles, downhill or cross -country ski equipment;
provide marina services, launch services, or guide services; or sell bait and fishing tackle.
Any unit in wh ich the right to use the property is transferred to an individual or entity by
deeded interest, or the sale of shares or stock, no longer qualifies for class 1c even
though it may remain available for rent. A camping pad offered for rent by a property that
otherwise qualifies for class 1c is also class 1c, regardless of the term of the rental
agreement, as long as the use of the camping pad does not exceed 250 days. The portion
of the property used as a homestead is class 1a property under paragraph (a). Th e
remainder of the property is classified as follows: the first $600,000 of market value is tier
I, the next $1,700,000 of market value is tier II, and any remaining market value is tier III.
The class rates for class 1c are: tier I, 0.50 percent; tier II, 1.0 percent; and tier III, 1.25
percent. Owners of real and personal property devoted to temporary and seasonal
residential occupancy for recreation purposes in which all or a portion of the property was
devoted to commercial purposes for not more than 25 0 days in the year preceding the
year of assessment desiring classification as class 1c, must submit a declaration to the
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
40
assessor designating the cabins or units occupied for 250 days or less in the year
preceding the year of assessment by January 15 of t he assessment year. Those cabins or
units and a proportionate share of the land on which they are located must be designated
as class 1c as otherwise provided. The remainder of the cabins or units and a
proportionate share of the land on which they are loc ated must be designated as class 3a
commercial. The owner of property desiring designation as class 1c property must provide
guest registers or other records demonstrating that the units for which class 1c
designation is sought were not occupied for more t han 250 days in the year preceding the
assessment if so requested. The portion of a property operated as a (1) restaurant, (2)
bar, (3) gift shop, (4) conference center or meeting room, and (5) other nonresidential
facility operated on a commercial basis n ot directly related to temporary and seasonal
residential occupancy for recreation purposes does not qualify for class 1c. (d) Class 1d
property includes structures that meet all of the following criteria: (1) the structure is
located on property that is classified as agricultural property under section 273.13,
subdivision 23 ; (2) the structure is occupied exclusively by seasonal farm workers during
the time when they work on that farm, and the occupants are not charged rent for the
privilege of occupying the property, provided that use of the structure for storage of farm
equipment and produce does not disqualify the property from classification under this
paragraph; (3) the structure meets all applicable health and safety requirements for the
appropriate season; and (4) the structure is not salable as residential property because it
does not comply with local ordinances relating to location in relation to streets or roads.
The market value of class 1d property has the same class rates as class 1a property
under paragraph (a).
Subd. 23.Class 2 .
(a) An agricultural homestead consists of class 2a agricultural land that is homesteaded,
along with any class 2b rural vacant lan d that is contiguous to the class 2a land under the
same ownership. The market value of the house and garage and immediately surrounding
one acre of land has the same class rates as class 1a or 1b property under subdivision 22.
The value of the remaining l and including improvements up to the first tier valuation limit
of agricultural homestead property has a net class rate of 0.5 percent of market value. The
remaining property over the first tier has a class rate of one percent of market value. For
purposes of this subdivision, the "first tier valuation limit of agricultural homestead
property" and "first tier" means the limit certified under section 273.11 , subdivision 23. (b)
Clas s 2a agricultural land consists of parcels of property, or portions thereof, that are
agricultural land and buildings. Class 2a property has a net class rate of one percent of
market value, unless it is part of an agricultural homestead under paragraph (a). Class 2a
property must also include any property that would otherwise be classified as 2b, but is
interspersed with class 2a property, including but not limited to sloughs, wooded wind
shelters, acreage abutting ditches, ravines, rock piles, land subject to a setback
requirement, and other similar land that is impractical for the assessor to value separately
from the rest of the property or that is unlikely to be able to be sold separately from the
rest of the property. An assessor may classify the part o f a parcel described in this
subdivision that is used for agricultural purposes as class 2a and the remainder in the
class appropriate to its use. (c) Class 2b rural vacant land consists of parcels of property,
or portions thereof, that are unplatted real estate, rural in character and not used for
agricultural purposes, including land used for growing trees for timber, lumber, and wood
and wood products, that is not improved with a structure. The presence of a minor,
ancillary nonresidential structure as d efined by the commissioner of revenue does not
disqualify the property from classification under this paragraph. Any parcel of 20 acres or
more improved with a structure that is not a minor, ancillary nonresidential structure must
be split -classified, and ten acres must be assigned to the split parcel containing the
structure. Class 2b property has a net class rate of one percent of market value unless it is
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
41
part of an agricultural homestead under paragraph (a), or qualifies as class 2c under
paragraph (d). (d) Class 2c managed forest land consists of no less than 20 and no more
than 1,920 acres statewide per taxpayer that is being managed under a forest
management plan that meets the requirements of chapter 290C, but is not enrolled in the
sustainable fores t resource management incentive program. It has a class rate of .65
percent, provided that the owner of the property must apply to the assessor in order for the
property to initially qualify for the reduced rate and provide the information required by the
assessor to verify that the property qualifies for the reduced rate. If the assessor receives
the application and information before May 1 in an assessment year, the property qualifies
beginning with that assessment year. If the assessor receives the appli cation and
information after April 30 in an assessment year, the property may not qualify until the
next assessment year. The commissioner of natural resources must concur that the land is
qualified. The commissioner of natural resources shall annually pro vide county assessors
verification information on a timely basis. The presence of a minor, ancillary nonresidential
structure as defined by the commissioner of revenue does not disqualify the property from
classification under this paragraph. (e) Agricultu ral land as used in this section means
contiguous acreage of ten acres or more, used during the preceding year for agricultural
purposes. "Agricultural purposes" as used in this section means the raising, cultivation,
drying, or storage of agricultural pro ducts for sale, or the storage of machinery or
equipment used in support of agricultural production by the same farm entity. For a
property to be classified as agricultural based only on the drying or storage of agricultural
products, the products being dr ied or stored must have been produced by the same farm
entity as the entity operating the drying or storage facility. "Agricultural purposes" also
includes enrollment in the Reinvest in Minnesota program under sections 103F.501 to
103F.535 or the federal Conservation Reserve Program as contained in Public Law 99 -198
or a similar state or federal co nservation program if the property was classified as
agricultural (i) under this subdivision for the assessment year 2002 or (ii) in the year prior
to its enrollment. Agricultural classification shall not be based upon the market value of
any residential s tructures on the parcel or contiguous parcels under the same ownership.
(f) Real estate of less than ten acres, which is exclusively or intensively used for raising or
cultivating agricultural products, shall be considered as agricultural land. To qualify under
this paragraph, property that includes a residential structure must be used intensively for
one of the following purposes: (i) for drying or storage of grain or storage of machinery or
equipment used to support agricultural activities on other parce ls of property operated by
the same farming entity; (ii) as a nursery, provided that only those acres used to produce
nursery stock are considered agricultural land; (iii) for livestock or poultry confinement,
provided that land that is used only for pastu ring and grazing does not qualify; or (iv) for
market farming; for purposes of this paragraph, "market farming" means the cultivation of
one or more fruits or vegetables or production of animal or other agricultural products for
sale to local markets by th e farmer or an organization with which the farmer is affiliated.
(g) Land shall be classified as agricultural even if all or a portion of the agricultural use of
that property is the leasing to, or use by another person for agricultural purposes.
Classific ation under this subdivision is not determinative for qualifying under section
273.111 . (h) The property classification under this section supersedes, for property tax
purposes only, any locally administered agricultural policies or land use restrictions that
define minimum or maximum farm acreage. (i) The term "agricultural products" as used in
this subdivision includes production for sale of: (1) livestock, dairy animals, dair y products,
poultry and poultry products, fur -bearing animals, horticultural and nursery stock, fruit of
all kinds, vegetables, forage, grains, bees, and apiary products by the owner; (2) fish bred
for sale and consumption if the fish breeding occurs on la nd zoned for agricultural use; (3)
the commercial boarding of horses if the boarding is done in conjunction with raising or
cultivating agricultural products as defined in clause (1); (4) property which is owned and
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
42
operated by nonprofit organizations used for equestrian activities, excluding racing; (5)
game birds and waterfowl bred and raised for use on a shooting preserve licensed under
section 97A.115 ; (6) insects primarily bred to be used as food for animals; (7) trees,
grown for sale as a crop, including short rotation woody crops, and not sold for timber,
lumber, wood, or wood products; and (8) maple syrup taken from trees grown by a person
licensed by the Minnesota Depart ment of Agriculture under chapter 28A as a food
processor. (j) If a parcel used for agricultural purposes is also used for commercial or
industrial purposes, including but not limited to: (1) wholesale and retail sales; (2)
processing of raw agricultural p roducts or other goods; (3) warehousing or storage of
processed goods; and (4) office facilities for the support of the activities enumerated in
clauses (1), (2), and (3), the assessor shall classify the part of the parcel used for
agricultural purposes as class 1b, 2a, or 2b, whichever is appropriate, and the remainder
in the class appropriate to its use. The grading, sorting, and packaging of raw agricultural
products for first sale is considered an agricultural purpose. A greenhouse or other
building whe re horticultural or nursery products are grown that is also used for the conduct
of retail sales must be classified as agricultural if it is primarily used for the growing of
horticultural or nursery products from seed, cuttings, or roots and occasionally as a
showroom for the retail sale of those products. Use of a greenhouse or building only for
the display of already grown horticultural or nursery products does not qualify as an
agricultural purpose. (k) The assessor shall determine and list separately o n the records
the market value of the homestead dwelling and the one acre of land on which that
dwelling is located. If any farm buildings or structures are located on this homesteaded
acre of land, their market value shall not be included in this separate determination. (l)
Class 2d airport landing area consists of a landing area or public access area of a
privately owned public use airport. It has a class rate of one percent of market value. To
qualify for classification under this paragraph, a privately owned public use airport must be
licensed as a public airport under section 360.018 . For purposes of this paragraph,
"landing area" means that part of a privately owned public u se airport properly cleared,
regularly maintained, and made available to the public for use by aircraft and includes
runways, taxiways, aprons, and sites upon which are situated landing or navigational aids.
A landing area also includes land underlying bot h the primary surface and the approach
surfaces that comply with all of the following: (i) the land is properly cleared and regularly
maintained for the primary purposes of the landing, taking off, and taxiing of aircraft; but
that portion of the land tha t contains facilities for servicing, repair, or maintenance of
aircraft is not included as a landing area; (ii) the land is part of the airport property; and
(iii) the land is not used for commercial or residential purposes. The land contained in a
landing area under this paragraph must be described and certified by the commissioner of
transportation. The certification is effective until it is modified, or until the airport or landing
area no longer meets the requirements of this paragraph. For purposes of this paragraph,
"public access area" means property used as an aircraft parking ramp, apron, or storage
hangar, or an arrival and departure building in connection with the airport. (m) Class 2e
consists of land with a commercial aggregate deposit that is n ot actively being mined and
is not otherwise classified as class 2a or 2b, provided that the land is not located in a
county that has elected to opt -out of the aggregate preservation program as provided in
section 273.1115, subdivision 6 . It has a class rate of one percent of market value. To
qualify for classification under this paragraph, the property must be at least ten contiguous
acres in size and the owner of the proper ty must record with the county recorder of the
county in which the property is located an affidavit containing: (1) a legal description of
the property; (2) a disclosure that the property contains a commercial aggregate deposit
that is not actively being mined but is present on the entire parcel enrolled; (3)
documentation that the conditional use under the county or local zoning ordinance of this
property is for mining; and (4) documentation that a permit has been issued by the local
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
43
unit of government or the mining activity is allowed under local ordinance. The disclosure
must include a statement from a registered professional geologist, engineer, or soil
scientist delineating the deposit and certifying that it is a commercial aggregate deposit.
For purpo ses of this section and section 273.1115 , "commercial aggregate deposit" means
a deposit that will yield crushed stone or sand and gravel that is suitable for use as a
constru ction aggregate; and "actively mined" means the removal of top soil and
overburden in preparation for excavation or excavation of a commercial deposit. (n) When
any portion of the property under this subdivision or subdivision 22 begins to be actively
min ed, the owner must file a supplemental affidavit within 60 days from the day any
aggregate is removed stating the number of acres of the property that is actively being
mined. The acres actively being mined must be (1) valued and classified under subdivisi on
24 in the next subsequent assessment year, and (2) removed from the aggregate resource
preservation property tax program under section 273.1115 , if the land was enrolled in that
program. Copies of the original affidavit and all supplemental affidavits must be filed with
the county assessor, the local zoning administrator, and the Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Land and Minerals. A supplemental affidavit must be filed each
time a subsequent portion of the property is actively mined, provided that the minimum
acreage change is five acres, even if the actual mining activity constitutes less than five
acres. (o) The definitions prescribed by the commissioner under paragraphs (c) and (d)
are not rules and are exempt from the rulemaking provisions of chapter 14, and the
provisions in section 14.386 concerning exempt rules do not apply.
Subd . 24.Class 3 .
(a) Commercial and industrial property and utility real and personal property is class 3a.
(1) Except as otherwise provided, each parcel of commercial, industrial, or utility real
property has a class rate of 1.5 percent of the first tier of market value, and 2.0 percent of
the remaining market value. In the case of contiguous parcels of property owned by the
same person or entity, only the value equal to the first -tier value of the contiguous parcels
qualifies for the reduced class rate, exce pt that contiguous parcels owned by the same
person or entity shall be eligible for the first -tier value class rate on each separate
business operated by the owner of the property, provided the business is housed in a
separate structure. For the purposes o f this subdivision, the first tier means the first
$150,000 of market value. Real property owned in fee by a utility for transmission line
right -of -way shall be classified at the class rate for the higher tier. For purposes of this
subdivision, parcels are considered to be contiguous even if they are separated from each
other by a road, street, waterway, or other similar intervening type of property.
Connections between parcels that consist of power lines or pipelines do not cause the
parcels to be contiguo us. Property owners who have contiguous parcels of property that
constitute separate businesses that may qualify for the first -tier class rate shall notify the
assessor by July 1, for treatment beginning in the following taxes payable year. (2) All
persona l property that is: (i) part of an electric generation, transmission, or distribution
system; or (ii) part of a pipeline system transporting or distributing water, gas, crude oil, or
petroleum products; and (iii) not described in clause (3), and all railro ad operating property
has a class rate as provided under clause (1) for the first tier of market value and the
remaining market value. In the case of multiple parcels in one county that are owned by
one person or entity, only one first tier amount is eligi ble for the reduced rate. (3) The
entire market value of personal property that is: (i) tools, implements, and machinery of an
electric generation, transmission, or distribution system; (ii) tools, implements, and
machinery of a pipeline system transportin g or distributing water, gas, crude oil, or
petroleum products; or (iii) the mains and pipes used in the distribution of steam or hot or
chilled water for heating or cooling buildings, has a class rate as provided under clause (1)
for the remaining market value in excess of the first tier. (b) Employment property defined
in section 469.166 , during the period provided in section 469.170 , shall constitute class
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
44
3b. The class rates for class 3b property are determined under paragraph (a). Subd. 24a.
[Repealed, 1Sp2001 c 5 a rt 3 s 96 ]
Subd. 25.Class 4 .
(a) Class 4a is residential real estate containing four or more units and used or held for
use by the owner or by the tenants or lessees of the owner as a residence for rental
periods of 30 days or more, excluding property qu alifying for class 4d. Class 4a also
includes hospitals licensed under sections 144.50 to 144.56 , othe r than hospitals exempt
under section 272.02 , and contiguous property used for hospital purposes, without regard
to whether the property has been platted or subdivided. The market value of class 4a
property has a class rate of 1.25 percent. (b) Class 4b includes: (1) residential real estate
containing less than four units that does not qualify as class 4bb, other than seasonal
residential recreational property; (2) manufactured ho mes not classified under any other
provision; (3) a dwelling, garage, and surrounding one acre of property on a
nonhomestead farm classified under subdivision 23, paragraph (b) containing two or three
units; and (4) unimproved property that is classified r esidential as determined under
subdivision 33. The market value of class 4b property has a class rate of 1.25 percent. (c)
Class 4bb includes: (1) nonhomestead residential real estate containing one unit, other
than seasonal residential recreational proper ty; and (2) a single family dwelling, garage,
and surrounding one acre of property on a nonhomestead farm classified under
subdivision 23, paragraph (b). Class 4bb property has the same class rates as class 1a
property under subdivision 22. Property that h as been classified as seasonal residential
recreational property at any time during which it has been owned by the current owner or
spouse of the current owner does not qualify for class 4bb. (d) Class 4c property includes:
(1) except as provided in subdiv ision 22, paragraph (c), real and personal property
devoted to temporary and seasonal residential occupancy for recreation purposes,
including real and personal property devoted to temporary and seasonal residential
occupancy for recreation purposes and no t devoted to commercial purposes for more than
250 days in the year preceding the year of assessment. For purposes of this clause,
property is devoted to a commercial purpose on a specific day if any portion of the
property is used for residential occupanc y, and a fee is charged for residential occupancy.
Class 4c property under this clause must contain three or more rental units. A "rental unit"
is defined as a cabin, condominium, townhouse, sleeping room, or individual camping site
equipped with water and electrical hookups for recreational vehicles. Class 4c property
under this clause must provide recreational activities such as renting ice fishing houses,
boats and motors, snowmobiles, downhill or cross -country ski equipment; provide marina
services, lau nch services, or guide services; or sell bait and fishing tackle. A camping pad
offered for rent by a property that otherwise qualifies for class 4c under this clause is also
class 4c under this clause regardless of the term of the rental agreement, as lon g as the
use of the camping pad does not exceed 250 days. In order for a property to be classified
as class 4c, seasonal residential recreational for commercial purposes under this clause,
at least 40 percent of the annual gross lodging receipts related to the property must be
from business conducted during 90 consecutive days and either (i) at least 60 percent of
all paid bookings by lodging guests during the year must be for periods of at least two
consecutive nights; or (ii) at least 20 percent of the an nual gross receipts must be from
charges for rental of fish houses, boats and motors, snowmobiles, downhill or cross -
country ski equipment, or charges for marina services, launch services, and guide
services, or the sale of bait and fishing tackle. For pur poses of this determination, a paid
booking of five or more nights shall be counted as two bookings. Class 4c property
classified under this clause also includes commercial use real property used exclusively
for recreational purposes in conjunction with ot her class 4c property classified under this
clause and devoted to temporary and seasonal residential occupancy for recreational
purposes, up to a total of two acres, provided the property is not devoted to commercial
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
45
recreational use for more than 250 days in the year preceding the year of assessment and
is located within two miles of the class 4c property with which it is used. Owners of real
and personal property devoted to temporary and seasonal residential occupancy for
recreation purposes and all or a portion of which was devoted to commercial purposes for
not more than 250 days in the year preceding the year of assessment desiring
classification as class 4c, must submit a declaration to the assessor designating the
cabins or units occupied for 250 days or less in the year preceding the year of assessment
by January 15 of the assessment year. Those cabins or units and a proportionate share of
the land on which they are located must be designated class 4c under this clause as
otherwise provided. The remai nder of the cabins or units and a proportionate share of the
land on which they are located will be designated as class 3a. The owner of property
desiring designation as class 4c property under this clause must provide guest registers or
other records demo nstrating that the units for which class 4c designation is sought were
not occupied for more than 250 days in the year preceding the assessment if so
requested. The portion of a property operated as a (1) restaurant, (2) bar, (3) gift shop, (4)
conference center or meeting room, and (5) other nonresidential facility operated on a
commercial basis not directly related to temporary and seasonal residential occupancy for
recreation purposes does not qualify for class 4c; (2) qualified property used as a golf
c ourse if: (i) it is open to the public on a daily fee basis. It may charge membership fees or
dues, but a membership fee may not be required in order to use the property for golfing,
and its green fees for golfing must be comparable to green fees typically charged by
municipal courses; and (ii) it meets the requirements of section 273.112, subdivision 3 ,
paragraph (d). A structure used as a clubhouse, restaurant, or place of r efreshment in
conjunction with the golf course is classified as class 3a property; (3) real property up to a
maximum of three acres of land owned and used by a nonprofit community service
oriented organization and not used for residential purposes on eithe r a temporary or
permanent basis, provided that: (i) the property is not used for a revenue -producing
activity for more than six days in the calendar year preceding the year of assessment; or
(ii) the organization makes annual charitable contributions and donations at least equal to
the property's previous year's property taxes and the property is allowed to be used for
public and community meetings or events for no charge, as appropriate to the size of the
facility. For purposes of this clause, (A) "charit able contributions and donations" has the
same meaning as lawful gambling purposes under section 349.12, subdivision 25 ,
excluding those purposes relating to the payment of tax es, assessments, fees, auditing
costs, and utility payments; (B) "property taxes" excludes the state general tax; (C) a
"nonprofit community service oriented organization" means any corporation, society,
association, foundation, or institution organized a nd operated exclusively for charitable,
religious, fraternal, civic, or educational purposes, and which is exempt from federal
income taxation pursuant to section 501(c)(3), (8), (10), or (19) of the Internal Revenue
Code; and (D) "revenue -producing activi ties" shall include but not be limited to property or
that portion of the property that is used as an on -sale intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent
malt liquor establishment licensed under chapter 340A, a restaurant open to the public,
bowling alley, a retail store, gambling conducted by organizations licensed under chapter
349, an insurance business, or office or other space leased or rented to a lessee who
conducts a for -profit enterprise on the premises. Any portion of the property not qualifying
under eith er item (i) or (ii) is class 3a. The use of the property for social events open
exclusively to members and their guests for periods of less than 24 hours, when an
admission is not charged nor any revenues are received by the organization shall not be
consi dered a revenue -producing activity. The organization shall maintain records of its
charitable contributions and donations and of public meetings and events held on the
property and make them available upon request any time to the assessor to ensure
eligibi lity. An organization meeting the requirement under item (ii) must file an application
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
46
by May 1 with the assessor for eligibility for the current year's assessment. The
commissioner shall prescribe a uniform application form and instructions; (4)
postsecon dary student housing of not more than one acre of land that is owned by a
nonprofit corporation organized under chapter 317A and is used exclusively by a student
cooperative, sorority, or fraternity for on -campus housing or housing located within two
miles of the border of a college campus; (5) manufactured home parks as defined in
section 327.14, subdivision 3 ; (6) real property that is actively and exclusively devoted to
indoo r fitness, health, social, recreational, and related uses, is owned and operated by a
not -for -profit corporation, and is located within the metropolitan area as defined in section
473.121, subdivision 2 ; (7) a leased or privately owned noncommercial aircraft storage
hangar not exempt under section 272.01, subdivision 2 , and the land on which it is
l ocated, provided that: (i) the land is on an airport owned or operated by a city, town,
county, Metropolitan Airports Commission, or group thereof; and (ii) the land lease, or any
ordinance or signed agreement restricting the use of the leased premise, pr ohibits
commercial activity performed at the hangar. If a hangar classified under this clause is
sold after June 30, 2000, a bill of sale must be filed by the new owner with the assessor of
the county where the property is located within 60 days of the sal e; (8) a privately owned
noncommercial aircraft storage hangar not exempt under section 272.01, subdivision 2 ,
and the land on which it is located, provided that: (i) the land a buts a public airport; and (ii)
the owner of the aircraft storage hangar provides the assessor with a signed agreement
restricting the use of the premises, prohibiting commercial use or activity performed at the
hangar; and (9) residential real estate, a p ortion of which is used by the owner for
homestead purposes, and that is also a place of lodging, if all of the following criteria are
met: (i) rooms are provided for rent to transient guests that generally stay for periods of 14
or fewer days; (ii) meals are provided to persons who rent rooms, the cost of which is
incorporated in the basic room rate; (iii) meals are not provided to the general public
except for special events on fewer than seven days in the calendar year preceding the
year of the assessmen t; and (iv) the owner is the operator of the property. The market
value subject to the 4c classification under this clause is limited to five rental units. Any
rental units on the property in excess of five, must be valued and assessed as class 3a.
The por tion of the property used for purposes of a homestead by the owner must be
classified as class 1a property under subdivision 22; (10) real property up to a maximum
of three acres and operated as a restaurant as defined under section 157.15, subdivision
12 , provided it: (A) is located on a lake as defined under section 103G.005, subdivision 15 ,
pa ragraph (a), clause (3); and (B) is either devoted to commercial purposes for not more
than 250 consecutive days, or receives at least 60 percent of its annual gross receipts
from business conducted during four consecutive months. Gross receipts from the s ale of
alcoholic beverages must be included in determining the property's qualification under
subitem (B). The property's primary business must be as a restaurant and not as a bar.
Gross receipts from gift shop sales located on the premises must be exclude d. Owners of
real property desiring 4c classification under this clause must submit an annual declaration
to the assessor by February 1 of the current assessment year, based on the property's
relevant information for the preceding assessment year; and (11 ) lakeshore and riparian
property and adjacent land, not to exceed six acres, used as a marina, as defined in
section 86A.20, subdivision 5 , which is made accessible to the publ ic and devoted to
recreational use for marina services. The marina owner must annually provide evidence to
the assessor that it provides services, including lake or river access to the public. No more
than 800 feet of lakeshore may be included in this clas sification. Buildings used in
conjunction with a marina for marina services, including but not limited to buildings used to
provide food and beverage services, fuel, boat repairs, or the sale of bait or fishing tackle,
are classified as class 3a property. Class 4c property has a class rate of 1.5 percent of
market value, except that (i) each parcel of seasonal residential recreational property not
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
47
used for commercial purposes has the same class rates as class 4bb property, (ii)
manufactured home parks asse ssed under clause (5) have the same class rate as class
4b property, (iii) commercial -use seasonal residential recreational property and marina
recreational land as described in clause (11), has a class rate of one percent for the first
$500,000 of market value, and 1.25 percent for the remaining market value, (iv) the market
value of property described in clause (4) has a class rate of one percent, (v) the market
value of property described in clauses (2), (6), and (10) has a class rate of 1.25 percent,
an d (vi) that portion of the market value of property in clause (9) qualifying for class 4c
property has a class rate of 1.25 percent. (e) Class 4d property is qualifying low -income
rental housing certified to the assessor by the Housing Finance Agency under section
273.128, subdivision 3 . If only a portion of the units in the building qualify as low -income
rental housing units as certified under section 273.128, subdivision 3 , only the proportion
of qualifying units to the total number of units in the building qualify for class 4d. The
remaining portion of the building shall be classified by the asse ssor based upon its use.
Class 4d also includes the same proportion of land as the qualifying low -income rental
housing units are to the total units in the building. For all properties qualifying as class 4d,
the market value determined by the assessor mus t be based on the normal approach to
value using normal unrestricted rents. Class 4d property has a class rate of 0.75 percent.
Subd. 25a.Elderly assisted living facility property .
"Elderly assisted living facility property" means residential real estate containing more than
one unit held for use by the tenants or lessees as a residence for periods of 30 days or
more, along with community rooms, lounges, activity rooms, and related facilities,
designed to meet the housing, health, and financial security n eeds of the elderly. The real
estate may be owned by an individual, partnership, limited partnership, for -profit
corporation or nonprofit corporation exempt from federal income taxation under United
States Code, title 26, section 501(c)(3) or related secti ons. An admission or initiation fee
may be required of tenants. Monthly charges may include charges for the residential unit,
meals, housekeeping, utilities, social programs, a health care alert system, or any
combination of them. On -site health care may b e provided by in -house staff or an outside
health care provider. The assessor shall classify elderly assisted living facility property,
depending upon the property's ownership, occupancy, and use. The applicable class rates
shall apply based on its classif ication, if taxable.
Subd. 26. [Repealed, 1987 c 268 art 6 s 53 ]
Subd. 27. [Repealed, 1987 c 268 art 6 s 53 ]
Subd. 28. [Repealed, 1987 c 268 art 6 s 53 ]
Subd. 29. [Repealed, 1987 c 268 art 6 s 53 ]
Subd. 30. [Repealed, 1988 c 719 art 5 s 81 ]
Subd. 31.Class 5.
Class 5 property includes: (1) unmined iron ore and low -grade iron -bearing formations as
defined in section 273.14 ; and (2) all other property not otherwise classified. Class 5
property has a class rate of 2.0 percent of market value.
Subd. 32. [Repeal ed, 1998 c 389 art 2 s 21 ]
Subd. 33.Classification of unimproved property .
(a) All real property that is not improved with a structure must be classified according to it s
current use. (b) Except as provided in subdivision 23, paragraph (c) or (d), real property
that is not improved with a structure and for which there is no identifiable current use must
be classified according to its highest and best use permitted under t he local zoning
ordinance. If the ordinance permits more than one use, the land must be classified
according to the highest and best use permitted under the ordinance. If no such ordinance
exists, the assessor shall consider the most likely potential use o f the unimproved land
based upon the use made of surrounding land or land in proximity to the unimproved land.
Subd. 34. Homestead of disabled veteran. (a) All or a portion of the market value of
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
48
property owned by a veteran or by the veteran and the vetera n's spouse qualifying for
homestead classification under subdivision 22 or 23 is excluded in determining the
property's taxable market value if it serves as the homestead of a military veteran, as
defined in section 197.447 , who has a service -connected disability of 70 percent or more.
To qualify for exclusion under this subdivision, the veteran must have been honorably
discharged from the United States armed forces, as indicated by United States
Government Form DD214 or other official military discharge papers, and must be certified
by the United States Veterans Administration as having a service -connected disability.
(b)(1) For a disability rating of 70 percent or more, $150,00 0 of market value is excluded,
except as provided in clause (2); and (2) for a total (100 percent) and permanent disability,
$300,000 of market value is excluded. (c) If a disabled veteran qualifying for a valuation
exclusion under paragraph (b), clause (2 ), predeceases the veteran's spouse, and if upon
the death of the veteran the spouse holds the legal or beneficial title to the homestead and
permanently resides there, the exclusion shall carry over to the benefit of the veteran's
spouse for one additiona l assessment year or until such time as the spouse sells,
transfers, or otherwise disposes of the property, whichever comes first. (d) In the case of
an agricultural homestead, only the portion of the property consisting of the house and
garage and immedia tely surrounding one acre of land qualifies for the valuation exclusion
under this subdivision. (e) A property qualifying for a valuation exclusion under this
subdivision is not eligible for the credit under section 273.1384, subdivision 1 , or
classification under subdivision 22, paragraph (b). (f) To qualify for a valuation exclusion
under this subdivision a property owner must apply to the assessor by July 1 of each
assess ment year, except that an annual reapplication is not required once a property has
been accepted for a valuation exclusion under paragraph (b), clause (2), and the property
continues to qualify until there is a change in ownership.
History:
(1993 ) 1913 c 483 s 1 ; 1923 c 140 ; 1933 c 132 ; 1933 c 359 ; 1937 c 365 s 1 ; Ex1937 c 86 s 1 ; 1939 c 48 ;
1941 c 436 ; 1941 c 437 ; 1941 c 438 ; 1943 c 172 s 1 ; 1943 c 648 s 1 ; 1945 c 274 s 1 ; 1945 c 527 s 1 ; 1947 c
537 s 1 ; 1949 c 723 s 1 ; 1951 c 510 s 1 ; 1951 c 585 s 1 ; 1953 c 358 s 1 ,2; 1953 c 400 s 1 ; 1953 c 747 s 1 ,2;
1955 c 751 s 1 ,2; 1957 c 866 s 1 ; 1957 c 959 s 1 ; 1959 c 40 s 1 ; 1959 c 338 s 1 ; 1959 c 541 s 1 ; 1959 c 562
s 3 ; Ex1959 c 70 art 1 s 2 ; 1961 c 243 s 1 ; 1961 c 322 s 1 ; 1961 c 340 s 3 ; 1961 c 475 s 1 ; 1961 c 710 s 1 ;
1963 c 426 s 1 ; 1965 c 259 s 1 ; 1967 c 606 s 1 ; Ex1967 c 32 art 1 s 2 -4; art 4 s 1; art 9 s 1,2; 1969 c 251 s
1 ; 1969 c 399 s 49 ; 1969 c 407 s 1 ; 1969 c 417 s 1 ; 1969 c 422 s 1 ,2; 1969 c 709 s 4 ,5; 1969 c 760 s 1 ; 1969
c 763 s 1 ; 1969 c 965 s 2 ; 1969 c 1126 s 2; 1969 c 1128 s 1,2; 1969 c 1132 s 1; 1969 c 1137 s 1; 1971 c 226
s 1 ; 1971 c 427 s 3 -12,16,17; 1971 c 747 s 1 ; 1971 c 7 91 s 1 ; 1971 c 797 s 3 ,4; Ex1971 c 31 art 9 s 1 ; art 22
s 1,2,4,6,7,8; Ex1971 c 31 art 36 s 1 ; 1973 c 355 s 1 ,2; 1973 c 456 s 1 ; 1973 c 492 s 14 ; 1973 c 582 s 3 ;
1973 c 590 s 1 ; 1973 c 650 art 14 s 1 ,2; art 20 s 3; art 24 s 3; 1973 c 774 s 1 ; 1974 c 545 s 3 ; 1974 c 556 s
16 ; 1975 c 46 s 3 ; 1975 c 339 s 9 ; 1975 c 359 s 23 ; 1975 c 376 s 1 ; 1975 c 395 s 1 ; 1975 c 437 art 1 s
25 ,27,28; 1976 c 2 s 96 ,159 -161,170; 1976 c 181 s 2 ; 1976 c 245 s 1 ; 1977 c 319 s 1 ,2; 1977 c 347 s 43 ,44;
1977 c 423 art 3 s 5 -8; 1978 c 767 s 7 -11; 1979 c 303 art 2 s 11 -17; art 10 s 5; 1979 c 334 art 1 s 25 ; 1980 c
437 s 5 ; 1980 c 562 s 1 ; 1980 c 607 art 2 s 7 -15; art 4 s 4; 1981 c 188 s 1 ; 1981 c 356 s 248 ; 1981 c 365 s 9 ;
1Sp1981 c 1 art 2 s 7 -11; art 5 s 2; 1Sp1981 c 3 s 1 ; 1Sp1981 c 4 art 2 s 27 ; 2Sp1981 c 1 s 6 ; 3Sp1981 c 1
art 1 s 2 ; 1982 c 523 art 6 s 1 ; art 14 s 1; art 23 s 2; 1982 c 642 s 9 ; 1983 c 216 art 1 s 43 ,44; 1983 c 222 s
11 -13; 1983 c 342 art 2 s 9 -18; art 8 s 1; 1984 c 502 art 3 s 9 -14; art 7 s 1,2; 1984 c 522 s 2 ; 1984 c 593 s
22 -28; 1984 c 654 art 5 s 58 ; 1985 c 248 s 70 ; 1985 c 300 s 6 ; 1Sp1985 c 14 art 3 s 5 -12; art 4 s 45 -56;
1986 c 444 ; 1Sp1986 c 1 art 4 s 18 -21; 1987 c 268 art 5 s 4 ; art 6 s 18,20 -23; 1987 c 291 s 208 -209; 1987 c
384 art 1 s 25 ; 1988 c 719 art 5 s 13 -19; 1989 c 277 art 2 s 28 ,29; 1989 c 304 s 137 ; 1Sp1989 c 1 ar t 2 s 1 -
8,11; 1990 c 480 art 7 s 7 ; 1990 c 604 art 3 s 16 -19; 1991 c 249 s 31 ; 1991 c 291 art 1 s 20 -25; 1992 c 363
art 1 s 12 ; 1992 c 511 art 2 s 17 ,18; art 4 s 4,5; 1993 c 224 art 1 s 27 ; 1993 c 375 art 3 s 16 ; art 5 s 23 -26;
1994 c 416 art 1 s 18 ,19; 1994 c 483 s 1 ; 1994 c 587 art 5 s 10 ,11; 1995 c 264 art 3 s 9 ,10; 1996 c 471 art 3
s 10 -12; 1997 c 231 art 1 s 6 -10; art 2 s 20,21; 3Sp1997 c 3 s 28 ; 1998 c 254 ar t 1 s 74 ; 1998 c 389 art 2 s
8 -12; 1999 c 243 art 5 s 15 -20; 1999 c 248 s 18 ; 1999 c 249 s 22 ; 2000 c 490 art 5 s 12 ,13; 1Sp2001 c 5 art
3 s 32 -36; 2002 c 377 art 4 s 1 6 ,17; art 10 s 6; 2003 c 127 art 2 s 13 ,14; art 5 s 17; 2003 c 128 art 3 s 45 ;
1Sp2003 c 21 art 4 s 4 ; 2005 c 151 art 3 s 12 ; 1Sp2005 c 3 art 1 s 15 ,16; 2006 c 259 art 4 s 13 ; art 5 s 1,2;
2008 c 154 art 2 s 11 -14; 2008 c 366 art 6 s 26 -28; art 11 s 13; art 15 s 14,15; 2009 c 12 art 2 s 6 ; 2009 c 88
art 2 s 18 ; art 10 s 6 -8
NOTE: The amendment to subdivision 22 by Laws 2008, chapter 154, article 2, section 11, is effect ive for
taxes payable in 2010 and thereafter, except the amendments to paragraph (b) and to the portions of
paragraph (c) decreasing the class rate and increasing the market value of the first tier of class 1c
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
49
homestead resorts are effective for taxes paya ble in 2009 and thereafter. Laws 2008, chapter 154, article 2,
section 11, the effective date, and Laws 2008, chapter 366, article 6, section 44.
NOTE: The amendment to subdivision 23 by Laws 2008, chapter 366, article 6, section 26, is effective for
taxe s payable in 2010 and thereafter, except the portions of subdivision 23 reducing the agricultural class
rate, expanding the definition of "agricultural purposes" in paragraph (e) and "agricultural products" in
paragraph (h), and relating to managed forest land in paragraph (d), are effective for taxes payable in 2009
and thereafter. Laws 2008, chapter 366, article 6, section 26, the effective date.
NOTE: The amendment to subdivision 25 by Laws 2008, chapter 154, article 2, section 13, relating to class
4c resorts in paragraph (d), clause (1), is effective for assessment year 2009 and thereafter, for taxes
payable in 2010 and thereafter. Laws 2008, chapter 154, article 2, section 13, the effective date.
NOTE: The amendment to subdivision 33 by Laws 2008, ch apter 366, article 6, section 28, is effective for
taxes payable in 2010 and thereafter. Laws 2008, chapter 366, article 6, section 28, the effective date.
NOTE: The amendment to subdivision 23 by Laws 2009, chapter 12, article 2, section 6, is effective for
assessments in 2010 for taxes payable in 2011, and thereafter. Laws 2009, chapter 12, article 2, section 6,
the effective date.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
50
273.20 ASSESSOR MAY ENTER DWELLINGS, BUILDINGS, OR STRUCTURES.
Any officer authorized by law to assess property for ta xation may, when necessary to the proper
performance of duties, enter any dwelling -house, building, or structure, and view the same and the
property therein. Any officer authorized by law to assess property for ad valorem tax purposes
shall have reasonabl e access to land and structures as necessary for the proper performance of
their duties. A property owner may refuse to allow an assessor to inspect their property. This
refusal by the property owner must be either verbal or expressly stated in a letter to the county
assessor. If the assessor is denied access to view a property, the assessor is authorized to
estimate the property's estimated market value by making assumptions believed appropriate
concerning the property's finish and condition.
History : (1997 ) RL s 814 ; 1986 c 444 ; 1999 c 243 art 5 s 24
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
51
274.01 BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION.
Subdivision 1. Ordin ary board; meetings, deadlines, grievances. (a) The town board of a town, or the
council or other governing body of a city, is the board of appeal and equalization except (1) in cities whose
charters provide for a board of equalization or (2) in any city o r town that has transferred its local board of review
power and duties to the county board as provided in subdivision 3. The county assessor shall fix a day and time
when the board or the board of equalization shall meet in the assessment districts of the county. Notwithstanding
any law or city charter to the contrary, a city board of equalization shall be referred to as a board of appeal and
equalization. On or before February 15 of each year the assessor shall give written notice of the time to the city
o r town clerk. Notwithstanding the provisions of any charter to the contrary, the meetings must be held between
April 1 and May 31 each year. The clerk shall give published and posted notice of the meeting at least ten days
before the date of the meeting. T he board shall meet at the office of the clerk to review the assessment and
classification of property in the town or city. No changes in valuation or classification which are intended to
correct errors in judgment by the county assessor may be made by the county assessor after the board has
adjourned in those cities or towns that hold a local board of review; however, corrections of errors that are merely
clerical in nature or changes that extend homestead treatment to property are permitted after adjournm ent until
the tax extension date for that assessment year. The changes must be fully documented and maintained in the
assessor's office and must be available for review by any person. A copy of the changes made during this period
in those cities or towns t hat hold a local board of review must be sent to the county board no later than December
31 of the assessment year.(b) The board shall determine whether the taxable property in the town or city has
been properly placed on the list and properly valued by th e assessor. If real or personal property has been
omitted, the board shall place it on the list with its market value, and correct the assessment so that each tract or
lot of real property, and each article, parcel, or class of personal property, is entere d on the assessment list at its
market value. No assessment of the property of any person may be raised unless the person has been duly
notified of the intent of the board to do so. On application of any person feeling aggrieved, the board shall review
the assessment or classification, or both, and correct it as appears just. The board may not make an individual
market value adjustment or classification change that would benefit the property if the owner or other
person having control over the property has refused the assessor access to inspect the property and
the interior of any buildings or structures as provided in section 273.20 .(c) A local board may reduce
assessments upon petit ion of the taxpayer but the total reductions must not reduce the aggregate assessment
made by the county assessor by more than one percent. If the total reductions would lower the aggregate
assessments made by the county assessor by more than one percent, none of the adjustments may be made.
The assessor shall correct any clerical errors or double assessments discovered by the board without regard to
the one percent limitation.(d) A local board does not have authority to grant an exemption or to order prope rty
removed from the tax rolls.(e) A majority of the members may act at the meeting, and adjourn from day to day
until they finish hearing the cases presented. The assessor shall attend, with the assessment books and papers,
and take part in the proceeding s, but must not vote. The county assessor, or an assistant delegated by the
county assessor shall attend the meetings. The board shall list separately, on a form appended to the
assessment book, all omitted property added to the list by the board and all i tems of property increased or
decreased, with the market value of each item of property, added or changed by the board, placed opposite the
item. The county assessor shall enter all changes made by the board in the assessment book.(f) Except as
provided in subdivision 3, if a person fails to appear in person, by counsel, or by written communication before
the board after being duly notified of the board's intent to raise the assessment of the property, or if a person
feeling aggrieved by an assessment or cl assification fails to apply for a review of the assessment or classification,
the person may not appear before the county board of appeal and equalization for a review of the assessment or
classification. This paragraph does not apply if an assessment was made after the local board meeting, as
provided in section 273.01 , or if the person can establish not having received notice of market value at least five
days before the local boar d meeting.(g) The local board must complete its work and adjourn within 20 days from
the time of convening stated in the notice of the clerk, unless a longer period is approved by the commissioner of
revenue. No action taken after that date is valid. All c omplaints about an assessment or classification made after
the meeting of the board must be heard and determined by the county board of equalization. A nonresident may,
at any time, before the meeting of the board file written objections to an assessment o r classification with the
county assessor. The objections must be presented to the board at its meeting by the county assessor for its
consideration.
Subd. 2. Special board; duties delegated. The governing body of a city, including a city whose charter
provides for a board of equalization, may appoint a special board of review. The city may delegate to the special
board of review all of the powers and duties in subdivision 1. The special board of review shall serve at the
direction and discretion of the appointing body, subject to the restrictions imposed by law. The appointing body
shall determine the number of members of the board, the compensation and expenses to be paid, and the term
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
52
of office of each member. At least one member of the special board of review must be an appraiser, realtor, or
other person familiar with property valuations in the assessment district.
Subd. 3. Local board duties transferred to county. The town board of any town or the governing body of
any home rule charter or statu tory city may transfer its powers and duties under subdivision 1 to the county
board, and no longer perform the function of a local board. Before the town board or the governing body of a city
transfers the powers and duties to the county board, the town b oard or city's governing body shall give public
notice of the meeting at which the proposal for transfer is to be considered. The public notice shall follow the
procedure contained in section 13D.04, subdivision 2 . A transfer of duties as permitted under this subdivision
must be communicated to the county assessor, in writing, before December 1 of any year to be effective for the
following year's assessment. This transfe r of duties to the county may either be permanent or for a specified
number of years, provided that the transfer cannot be for less than three years. Its length must be stated in
writing. A town or city may renew its option to transfer. The option to trans fer duties under this subdivision is only
available to a town or city whose assessment is done by the county.
History: (2034) RL s 847; 1941 c 402 s 1; 1945 c 402 s 1; 1949 c 543 s 1; Ex1967 c 32 art 8 s 3; 1971 c 434 s 3;
1971 c 564 s 6; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 150 s 1; 1973 c 582 s 3; 1975 c 339 s 5; 1977 c 434 s 11; 1986 c
444; 1987 c 229 art 4 s 1; 1987 c 268 art 7 s 37; 1988 c 719 art 7 s 8; 1990 c 480 art 7 s 14; 1995 c 264 art 3 s
13; 1997 c 231 art 2 s 23; 1998 c 254 art 1 s 77; 1999 c 243 art 5 s 25; 1Sp2001 c 5 art 7 s 21; 2003 c 127 art 5
s 22; 1Sp2005 c 3 art 1 s 18
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
53
274.014 LOCAL BOARDS; APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION COURSE AND
MEETING REQUIREMENTS.
Subdivision 1. Handbook for local boards. By no later than January 1, 2005, the commissio ner of revenue
must develop a handbook detailing procedures, responsibilities, and requirements for local boards of appeal and
equalization. The handbook must include, but need not be limited to, the role of the local board in the
assessment process, the l egal and policy reasons for fair and impartial appeal and equalization hearings, local
board meeting procedures that foster fair and impartial assessment reviews and other best practices
recommendations, quorum requirements for local boards, and explanatio ns of alternate methods of
appeal. Subd. 2. Appeals and equalization course. Beginning in 2006, and each year thereafter, there must
be at least one member at each meeting of a local board of appeal and equalization who has attended an
appeals and equal ization course developed or approved by the commissioner within the last four years, as
certified by the commissioner. The course may be offered in conjunction with a meeting of the Minnesota League
of Cities or the Minnesota Association of Townships. The course content must include, but need not be limited to,
a review of the handbook developed by the commissioner under subdivision 1.
Subd. 3. Proof of compliance; transfer of duties. (a) Any city or town that conducts local boards of appeal
and equaliz ation meetings must provide proof to the county assessor by December 1, 2006, and each year
thereafter, that it is in compliance with the requirements of subdivision 2. Beginning in 2006, this notice must also
verify that there was a quorum of voting membe rs at each meeting of the board of appeal and equalization in the
current year. A city or town that does not comply with these requirements is deemed to have transferred its board
of appeal and equalization powers to the county beginning with the following year's assessment and continuing
unless the powers are reinstated under paragraph (c).(b) The county shall notify the taxpayers when the board of
appeal and equalization for a city or town has been transferred to the county under this subdivision and, pri or to
the meeting time of the county board of equalization, the county shall make available to those taxpayers a
procedure for a review of the assessments, including, but not limited to, open book meetings. This alternate
review process shall take place in April and May.(c) A local board whose powers are transferred to the county
under this subdivision may be reinstated by resolution of the governing body of the city or town and upon proof of
compliance with the requirements of subdivision 2. The resolution and proofs must be provided to the county
assessor by December 1 in order to be effective for the following year's assessment.
History: 2003 c 127 art 2 s 16; 2005 c 151 art 5 s 25,26
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
54
Appraisal Terminology
CLASSIFICATION The class that a type of proper ty is assigned. A property's classification is
based upon the existing use of the property. If the land is vacant and there is no identifiable use,
the proper classification would be the most probable use of the land, which would most likely be
determine d by the zoning classification.
CLASSIFICATION RATES The class rate assigned to a particular classification of property.
Classification rates are established by the state legislature. Class rates are the same upon the
same class of property throughout Minnesota.
COEFFICIENT OF DISPERSION Average deviation of a group of numbers from the median,
expressed as a percentage of the median.
COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION Standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean.
COMPARABLES (COMPARABLE SALES) R ecently sold properties that are similar in
important respects to a property being appraised to assist in estimating the value of a specific
property.
COST APPROACH That approach in appraisal analysis which is based on the proposition that
the informed p urchaser would pay no more than the cost of producing a substitute property with
the same utility as the subject property. It is particularly applicable when the property being
appraised involves relatively new improvements which represent the highest and best use of the
land or when relatively unique or specialized improvements are located on the site and for which
there exist no comparable properties on the market.
DEPRECIATION A loss of utility and, hence, value from any cause. An effect caused by
de terioration and/or obsolescence. Deterioration or physical depreciation is evidenced by wear
and tear, decay, dry rot, cracks, encrustational or structural defects. Obsolescence is divisible
into two parts, functional and economic. Functional obsolescen ce may be due to poor floor plan,
mechanical inadequacy or over adequacy, functional inadequacy or over adequacy due to size,
style, age, etc. It is evidenced by conditions within the property. Economic obsolescence is
caused by changes external to the p roperty, such as neighborhood infiltrations of inharmonious
groups or property uses, legislation, etc. It is also the actual decline in market value of the
improvement to land from time of purchase to the time of resale.
CURABLE DEPRECIATION Those items of physical deterioration and functional
obsolescence which are economically feasible to cure and hence are customarily
repaired or replaced by a prudent property owner. The estimate of this depreciation is
usually computed as a dollar amount of the cost -to -cure.
INCURABLE DEPRECIATION Elements of physical deterioration or functional
obsolescence which either cannot be corrected; or, if possible to correct, cannot be
corrected except at a cost in excess of their contribution to the value of the property .
PHYSICAL DEPRECIATION A reduction in utility resulting from an impairment of physical
condition. For purposes of appraisal analysis, it is most common and convenient to divide
physical deterioration into curable and incurable components.
PHYSICAL CUR ABLE DEPRECIATION Physical deterioration which the prudent
buyer would anticipate correction upon purchase of the property. The cost of effecting
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
55
the correction or cure would be no more than the anticipated addition to utility, and
hence ultimately to va lue, associated with the cure.
PHYSICAL INCURABLE DEPRECIATION Physical deterioration which in terms of
market conditions as of the date of the appraisal is not feasible or economically justified
to correct. The cost of correcting the condition or effec ting a cure is estimated to be
greater than the anticipated increase in utility, and hence ultimately in value of the
property that will result from correcting or curing the condition.
FUNCTIONAL DEPRECIATION Impairment of functional capacity or efficien cy. Functional
obsolescence reflects the loss in value brought about by such factors as overcapacity,
inadequacy and changes in the art, that affect the property item itself or its relation with
other items comprising a larger property. The inability of a structure to perform adequately
the function for which it is currently employed.
FUNCTIONAL CURABLE DEPRECIATION Functional obsolescence which may be
corrected or cured when the cost of replacing the outmoded or unaccep -table
component is at least offse t by the anticipated increase in utility, and hence ultimately in
value, resulting from the replacement.
FUNCTIONAL INCURABLE DEPRECIATION Functional obsolescence that results
from structural deficiencies or superadequacies that the prudent purchaser or owner
would not be justified in replacing, adding or removing, because the cost of effecting a
cure would be greater than the anticipated increase in utility resulting from the
replacement, addition or removal.
ECONOMIC OBSOLESCENCE Impairment of desirab ility or useful life arising from factors
external to the property, such as economic forces of environmental changes which affect
supply -demand relationships in the market. Loss in the use and value of a property arising
from the factors of economic obsol escence is to be distinguished from loss in value from
physical deterioration and functional obsolescence, both of which are inherent to the
property. Also referred to as Locational or Environmental Obsolescence.
EASEMENT A right held by one person to u se the land of another for a specific purpose such as
access to other property.
EQUALIZATION The adjustment of estimated market valuation of real property in a particular
area to establish a more equitable division of the total tax burden within the area .
ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE Represents the assessor's estimate of the property's actual
market value. Market value is defined as the most probable price that a well informed buyer
would pay a well informed seller for a property without either party being u nduly forced to buy or
sell. In other words, what the property would likely sell for if it were to be sold in an arm's length
transaction. Although the sale price of a property often reflects the market value; market value
and sale price are not always synonymous.
GRADING OF PROPERTY The process used by an appraiser to identify the quality of
construction in the physical structure.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE That reasonable and probable use that will support the highest
present value, as defined, as of the effective date of an appraisal.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
56
HOMESTEAD For property tax purposes, homestead is a tax benefit granted to property
owners (or qualifying relatives) who are Minnesota residents and who own and occupy their
home as their primary place of residence. Hom estead is a fact question which may require the
assessor to utilize a number of indicators to determine if it is being appropriately claimed.
Although factors such as mailing address and drivers license may sometimes be useful
indicators to determine wher e a person lives, in the final analysis, the question comes down to,
"Is the residence occupied as the applicant's primary place of residence ?" In other words,
do they actually live there? If the answer is no, no amount of supporting documentation such as
voter registrations or mailing addresses can alter the fact.
IMPROVED LAND Land having either on -site improvements, off -site improvements or both.
I MPROVEMENT A structure or building permanently attached to the land.
INCOME APPROACH That procedur e in appraisal analysis which converts anticipated benefits
(dollar income or amenities) to be derived from the ownership of property into a value estimate.
The income approach is widely applied in appraising income -producing properties. Anticipated
futu re income and/or revisions are discounted to a present worth figure through the capitalization
process.
INDEX OF REGRESSION Mean assessment ratio divided by the sales weighted -aggregate
ratio.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION A statement containing a designation by wh ich land is identified
according to a system set up by law or approved by law.
LIMITED MARKET VALUE A limitation which is imposed on how much the taxable value of
certain classes of property (agricultural homestead or nonhomestead, residential homestead or
nonhomestead, noncommercial seasonal recreational residential) can increase over the
preceding year's value. This limit does not apply to an increase in your value due to
improvement made to the property.
MARKET APPROACH Traditionally, an appraisal procedure in which the market value estimate
is predicated upon prices paid in actual market transactions and current listings, the former fixing
the lower limit of value in a static or advancing market (price wise), and fixing the higher limit of
value i n a declining market; and the latter fixing the higher limit in any market. It is a process of
analyzing sales of similar recently sold properties in order to derive an indication of the most
probable sales price of the property being appraised. The reli ability of this technique is
dependent upon (a) the availability of comparable sales data, (b) the verification of the sales
data, (c) the degree of comparability or extent of adjustment necessary for time differences; and
(d) the absence of non -typical co nditions affecting the sale price.
MASS APPRAISING A method used in revaluation of a community for tax purposes. As the
term implies, it is a method of appraising a large number of properties at one time by adopting
standard techniques, and giving due c onsideration to the appraisal process so that uniformity or
equality of values may be achieved between all properties.
MEAN ASSESSMENT RATIO Total of ratios divided by number of properties.
MEDIAN ASSESSMENT RATIO Middle assessment ratio or the average o f the two middle terms
when the ratios are lined up from low to high.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
57
METES AND BOUNDS A description of a parcel of land by reference to the courses (bearings,
that is, the angles East or West of due North and due South) and distances (usually feet or
ch ains) of each straight line which forms its boundary, with one of the corners tied to an
established point; that is, the bearing and distance from an established point, such as a section
corner or to the intersection of the center lines of two roads, etc.
If one part of the boundary is on a curve, this part is described by showing the number of
degrees of the central angle subtended by the curve (arc), the length of the radius and the length
along the curve.
MODE Assessment -ratio that appears most frequen tly.
NET TAX CAPACITY New for payable 1990. Is used to extend taxes in accordance to
multiplying the market value by the appropriate class rate.
OBSOLESCENCE One of the causes of depreciation. It is the impairment of desirability and
usefulness bro ught about by new inventions, current changes in design and improved processes
for production, or from external influencing factors, which make a property less desirable and
valuable for a continued use. Obsolescence may be either economic or functional.
PARCEL A piece of land, regardless of size in one ownership.
PROPERTY CLASS The class that has been assigned to the property based upon the use of
the property.
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER A geographically related parcel numbering system.
The num ber contains twelve digits made up of section, township, range, quarter -quarter and
parcel. The first six digits, based on the public land survey, geographically locate the section in
which the property is located. The next two digits will designate in w hich quarter -quarter the
property is located. The ninth through twelfth digits indicate the parcel within the quarter -quarter.
The parcels will be numbered consecutively beginning with 0001. When a division is made, the
next consecutive available number (s) will be assigned, and the old number(s) will be retained for
historical data.
RANGE Difference between the high sales ratio and the low sales ratio.
REVALUATION The mass appraisal of all property within an assessment jurisdiction to obtain
equalizat ion of estimated market values. Reappraisal of a former assessment.
SALES ASSESSMENT RATIO The ratio derived by dividing the estimated market value by the
selling price.
AGGREGATE RATIO The ratio determined by dividing the total estimated market value of all
sales by the total selling prices.
AVERAGE MEAN The total of all the ratios in a given set divided by the number of items in the
set.
MEDIAN RATIO The value of the middle item where an odd number of items are arranged
(arrayed) according to siz e, or the arithmetic average of the two central items if there is an even
number of items. It is a positional average and is not affected by the size of extreme values.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
58
SALES WEIGHTED AGGREGATE RATIO Total of assessment values divided by total of selling
price.
SAMPLE SUFFICIENCY GAUGE Square root of half the range divided by the number of
properties.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT A charge made by government against real estate to defray the cost
of making a public improvement adjacent to the property which, whil e of general community
benefit, is of special benefit to the property so assessed.
STANDARD DEVIATION Square root of total of squared deviations from mean divided by
number of properties.
TAX CAPACITY RATE (Local Tax Rate): Determined by dividing a tax ing district's property tax
levy by the taxing district's total net tax capacity. The tax capacity rate is expressed as a
percentage of net tax capacity.
TOPOGRAPHY The contour of land surface, i.e., flat, rolling, mountainous, etc.
TRUTH IN TAXATION Provides taxpayers with a pr eliminary property tax notifica tion if any
taxing district proposes to increase taxes through proposed budget increases. Included on the
notification is the market value, classification, a proposed tax by taxing district, and time and
place of taxing district budget hearings.
UNIMPROVED LAND Land without buildings, in its natural state.
VACANT LAND Land without buildings. May or may not have improvements such as grading,
sewer, etc.
VALUE EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN IMPROVEMENT S (THIS OLD HOUSE) Qualifying
homes, 35 years or older, were previously eligible to receive a temporary exemption on all or a
portion of the assessor's estimated value for certain newly constructed improvements with an
assessed value of $1,000 or more if a building permit was issued by June 30, 1999. Legislative
action in 1999 amended this law effective July 1, 1999 that to qualify for exemption of
improvements from the property tax, the property must be 45 years of age or older at the time
the improveme nts commence and the property must be receiving the homestead classification.
The minimum assessed value must be $5,000 for eligible improvement. This includes properties
classified as residential homestead (including duplexes and triplexes), blind/parap legic
veteran/disabled homestead and agricultural homestead. In addition, the owner must have taken
out a building permit and file an application for the exemption with the assessor. This law has
since expired and only improvements made prior to January 2, 2003 have been grandfathered in
and are still enrolled in the program .
Appeals Procedure
Each spring Anoka County sends out a property tax bill (based on the prior year assessment) along
with a notice of the new assessment. Three factors that affect the tax bill are:
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
59
1. The amount your local governments (town, city, county, etc.) spend to provide services to your
community;
2. The estimated market value of your property;
3. The classification of your property (how it is used).
The assessor determines the fin al two factors. You may appeal the value or classification of your
property as described below.
Informal Appeal
• Property owners are encouraged to call the appraiser or assessor whenever they have
questions or concerns about their market value, classifica tion of the property, or the assessment
process.
• Almost all questions can be answered during this informal appeal process.
• When taxpayers call questioning their market value, every effort is made to make an
appointment to inspect properties that were not previously inspected.
• If the data on the property is correct, the appraiser is able to show the property owner other
sales in the market that support the estimated market value.
• If errors are found during the inspection, or other factors indicate a val ue reduction is warranted,
the appraiser can easily make the changes at this time.
Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
• The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization is typically made up of city council members or
township board members.
• The Board meets during late April and early May.
• Taxpayers can make their appeal in person or by letter.
• The assessor is present to answer any questions and present evidence supporting their value.
County Board of Appeal and Equalization
In order to appeal to the Coun ty Board of Appeal and Equalization, a property owner must first appeal
to the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization.
• The County Board of Appeal and Equalization follows the Local Board of Appeal and
Equalization in the assessment appeals process.
• The ir role is to ensure equalization among individual assessment districts and classes of
property.
• The board meets during the Final ten working days in June.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
60
• A taxpayer must first appeal to the local board before appealing to the county board.
Decisions of the County Board of Appeal and Equalization can be appealed to tax court.
Minnesota Tax Court
The Tax Court has statewide jurisdiction. Except for an appeal to the Supreme Court, the Tax Court
shall be the sole, exclusive and final authority for the hear ing and determination of all questions of law
and fact arising under the tax laws of the state. There are two divisions of tax court: the small claims
division and the regular division.
The Small Claims Division of the Tax Court only hears appeals involv ing one of the following
situations:
The assessor’s estimated market value of the property is <$300,000
The entire parcel is classified as a residential homestead and the parcel contains no more than
one dwelling unit.
The entire property is classified as an agricultural homestead.
Appeals involving the denial of a current year application for homestead classification of the
property.
The proceedings of the small claims division are less formal and property owners often represent
themselves. There is no o fficial record of the proceedings . Decisions made by the small claims
division are final and cannot be appealed further. Small claims decisions do not set
precedent.
The Regular Division of the Tax Court will hear all appeals, including those with the j urisdiction of the
small claims division. Decisions made here can be appealed to a higher court.
The principal office for the Tax Court is located in St. Paul. However, the Tax Court is a circuit court
and can hold hearings at any other place within the state so that taxpayers may appear with as little
inconvenience and expense to the taxpayer as possible. Appeals of property located in Anoka County
are heard at the Anoka County Courthouse, with trials scheduled to begin on Thursdays. Three
judges make up the Tax Court. Each may hear and decide cases independently. However, a case
may be tried before the entire court under certain circumstances.
The petitioner must file in tax court on or before April 30 of the year in which the tax is payable.
On th e following two pages is a sample Valuation Notice.
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
61
Sample Valuation Notice Front
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
62
Sample Valuation Notice Back
Anoka County City of Lino Lakes
63
More housing statistics may be found on the websites of local area
realtor associations. The following links will take you to two hel pful
web sites.
St. Paul Area A ssociation of Realtors
http://www.spaar.com/
SPAAR 2012 Annual Report
http://www.spaar.com/_uls/resources/SPAAR_ANN_2012 .pdf
Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors
http://mplsrealtor.com/market.aspx
MAAR 2012 Annual Report
http://mplsrealtor.com/downl oads/market/RREAR/RREAR.pdf
WS – Item # 1
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 1
Date: May 6, 2013
To: City Council
From: Michael Grochala
Re: Local Surface Water Management Plan
Background
The City of Lino Lakes is required to prepare a Surface Water Manag ement Plan that
must, at a minimum, meet the requ irements for local plans in Minnesota Statutes, Section
103B.235 and be in conformance with Watershed District, Management Organization,
and Metropolitan Council plans. The Rice Creek Watershed District (RC WD) completed
an update to their watershed management plans in June of 2010 which subsequently
required an update to the C ity’s plan.
The City Council authorized preparation of the plan in June of 2011. EOR, Inc., the
City’s W ater R esource C onsultant , ha s completed the draft plan and staff is requesting
authorization to distribute the plan for review. Under state law t he plan must be
distrib ut ed for review and comment to RCWD , VLAWMO, Metropolitan Council, and
Anoka County prior to City approval of the document .
The plan provides an assessment of the City’s land and water resources, identifies issues
and establishes goals and policies for 12 management categories, identifies proposed
actions to implement the plan and estimated costs, as well as describi ng the process to
administer the plan and coordinate with other local and regional agencies.
The City’s Environmental Board reviewed the plan at their March 27, 2013 regular
meeting and recommended approval of the plan. Representatives from EOR will be
p resent to provide an overview of the document.
Requested Council Direction
Staff is requesting council direction to place the item on the May 13, 2013 agenda for
authorization to distribute.
Attachments
1. Draft Surface Water Management Plan
March 25, 2013 DRAFT
City of Lino Lakes
Surface Water Management Plan
water
ecology
community Prepared by Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc.
Document Component Specs
Text: Staples • multipurpose paper, 24 lb. text – 50% post-consumer fibers, FSC Certified.
Back Cover: Neenah Paper • Esse • Texture, Sapphire • 100 lb. cover • 30% post-consumer fibers, Green Seal ® Certified
Wire Binding: Manufactured using recycled high carbon steel
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | i
Contents
1.0 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Introduction & Purpose ................................................................................................................ 3
2.1. Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 3
2.2. Past Planning & Studies ...................................................................................................... 3
2.3. Plan Objectives & Summary ............................................................................................... 6
3.0 Land & Water Resource Assessment ........................................................................................... 7
3.1. History ................................................................................................................................ 7
3.2. Resource Management Framework .................................................................................... 9
3.3. Climate & Precipitation .................................................................................................... 11
3.4. Topography ....................................................................................................................... 12
3.5. Geology ............................................................................................................................. 12
3.6. Soils .................................................................................................................................. 15
3.7. Groundwater Resources .................................................................................................... 18
3.8. Surface Water Resources .................................................................................................. 23
3.9. Stormwater Management System ..................................................................................... 38
3.10. Land Use ........................................................................................................................... 41
3.11. Unique Natural Features ................................................................................................... 46
3.12. Pollutant Sources .............................................................................................................. 49
3.13. Water Resource Related Agreements ............................................................................... 57
4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies ........................................................................................... 57
4.1. Water Rate & Quantity ..................................................................................................... 57
4.2. Water Quality .................................................................................................................... 58
4.3. Wetland Management ....................................................................................................... 60
4.4. Floodplain Management ................................................................................................... 60
4.5. Public Ditch System .......................................................................................................... 61
4.6. Groundwater Management ................................................................................................ 61
4.7. Natural Resources ............................................................................................................. 62
4.8. Erosion & Sediment Control ............................................................................................. 63
4.9. Regulations, Permitting and Reporting ............................................................................. 64
4.10. Monitoring, Maintenance & Inspection Issues ................................................................. 64
4.11. Public Participation, In formation & Education ................................................................. 65
4.12. Financing .......................................................................................................................... 66
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | ii
5.0 Implementation Activities ........................................................................................................... 67
5.1. City -Wide Actions ............................................................................................................ 67
5.2. P riority RMU Specific Actions ......................................................................................... 72
5.3. Other RMU Actions .......................................................................................................... 78
5.4. Implementation Costs ....................................................................................................... 81
6.0 Administration ............................................................................................................................. 83
6.1. Regul atory Coordination ................................................................................................... 83
6.2. City Administration of Surface Water Management Plan ................................................ 84
6.3. Amendments to Surface Water Management Plan ........................................................... 85
7.0 Financial Considerations ............................................................................................................. 86
8.0 Glossary & Acronyms .................................................................................................................. 87
8.1. Glossary ............................................................................................................................ 87
8.2. Acronyms .......................................................................................................................... 89
Appendix A
Summary of Relevent Modeling
Appendix B
Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities
Appendix C
Fully -Funded Scenario Implementation Costs
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | iii
List of Tables
Table 1. Monthly Averages, 1981 -2010 ..................................................................................................... 11
Table 2. Design Storm Events ..................................................................................................................... 12
Table 3. Soil hydrologic groups .................................................................................................................. 15
Table 4. Impaired Waters in Lino Lakes ..................................................................................................... 24
Table 5. Summary of Flooding Concerns by Resource Ma nagement Unit ................................................ 36
Table 6. Documented Rare Features in Lino Lakes .................................................................................... 47
Table 7. Number of Potential Environmental Hazard Sites in City of Lino Lakes ..................................... 52
Table 8. City -Wide Actions ........................................................................................................................ 69
Ta ble 9. RMU Specific Actions: Reshanau RMU ...................................................................................... 75
Table 10. RMU Specific Actions: Marshan RMU ...................................................................................... 76
Table 11. RMU Specific Actions: Clearwater Creek RMU ........................................................................ 77
Table 12. RMU Specific Actions: George Watch RMU ............................................................................. 78
Table 13. RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU ...................................................................................... 78
Table 14. RMU Specific Actions: Peltier RMU ......................................................................................... 79
Table 15. RMU Specific Actions: Hardwood Creek RMU ........................................................................ 79
Table 16. RMU Specific Actions: Upper Rice Creek RMU ....................................................................... 79
Table 17. RMU Specific Actions: Rice Lake RMU ................................................................................... 80
Table 18. RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU .................................................................................. 80
Table 19. RMU Specific Actions: Sherman RMU ...................................................................................... 80
Table 20. RMU Specific Actions: Amelia RMU ........................................................................................ 80
Table 21. RMU Specific Actions: Baldwin RMU ...................................................................................... 81
Table 22. RMU Specific Actions: Middle Rice Creek RMU ..................................................................... 81
Table 23. RMU Specific Actions: Wilkinson RMU ................................................................................... 81
Table 24. Estimated Costs of City -Wide Actions in 2012 dollars .............................................................. 82
Table 25. Estimated Costs of RMU -Specific Actions in 2012 dollars ....................................................... 82
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | iv
List of Figures
Figure 1. City of Lino Lakes Location Map [from SAMP] .......................................................................... 8
Figure 2. Resource Management Units [from Comprehensive Plan] ......................................................... 10
Figure 3. Surficial Geology ......................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 4. Bedrock Geology ......................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 5. Hydrologic Soil Group ................................................................................................................ 16
Figure 6. Infiltration Potential within the Rice Creek Watershed District [from RCWD, 2003 Infiltration
Implementation Study] ................................................................................................................................ 17
Figure 7. Groundwater contours [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Management Program] .. 19
Figure 8. Groundwater recharge and discharge areas [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt.
Program] ..................................................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 9. Groundwater dependent resources [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program]
.................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 10. Areas not recommended for infiltration [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt.
Program] ..................................................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 11. Impaired Lakes within the City of Lino Lakes .......................................................................... 2 7
Figure 12. St. Paul Water Utility Area [from 2005 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan] ........... 29
Figure 13. Nutrient Loading to Wetlands [from SAMP] ............................................................................ 32
Figure 14. Wetland Restoration Potential based on MnRAM Evaluation [from SAMP] .......................... 33
Figure 15. FEMA Floodplain ...................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 16. Points of Flooding Concern identified in Lino Lakes RMP (2008) [from Lino Lakes RMP] ... 37
Figure 17. Ditch Systems in the City of Lino Lakes [from SAMP]............................................................ 40
Figure 18. Existing Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] ........................................................................ 42
Figure 19. Full Build Out Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] .................................................. 44
Figure 20. 2030 Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] .................................................................. 45
Figure 21. Presettlement Vegetation [from Comprehensive Plan] ............................................................. 48
Figure 22. Potential Environmental Hazards .............................................................................................. 53
Figure 23. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from ma jor drainage areas as calculated in PLOAD.
[Reproduced from LL RMP] ...................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 24. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drai nage areas as calculated in P8. [from Lino
Lakes Chain of Lakes Draft TMDL] ........................................................................................................... 56
Figure 25. Conceptual Lino Lakes Resource Management Unit (RMU) Corridor Configurations ............ 74
Surface Water Summary Map (enclosed)
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 1
1.0 Executive Summary
The City of Lino Lakes (City) has retained its rural charm while developing a quality residential and
commercial base. It is a bedroom community, with over 81 percent of its residents traveli ng at least 15
minutes to work each day.
The City’s landscape and environment is largely a function of its 15 lakes, widespread wetlands, two
tributaries and Rice Creek. Eight lakes are located in or abutting the Chain of Lakes Regional Park and
bisect t he community . Approximately 40 percent of the City’s total land area is comprised of lakes and
natur al wetlands. Lino Lakes’ wetlands are widespread and these areas often help mitigate excess
stormwater runoff peak flows while also creating challenges and opportunities for development . The
City’s lakes generally fall into three shoreland management categories: Natural Environment ,
Recreational , and General Development as classified by the MN DNR . The Natural Environment Lakes
are primarily located in the Chain of Lakes areas and include Peltier, George Watch, Marshan, Rice,
Ward, Sherman, Cedar, Amelia, Rondeau, and Wilkinson. Recreational lakes include Otter, Cent e rville,
Rehanau, Baldwin . Bald Eagle Lake is a General Development Lake . Recreational us es include
swimming, boating, fishing and water skiing. Centerville, Bald Eagle, Peltier and Reshanau are
considered game fishing lakes. Centerville and Bald Eagle Lakes are managed fisheries and are stocked
annually with Walleye and Muskellunge.
Curr ently, there are a number of water quality issues that the City of Lino Lakes will need to address in
partnership with the watershed management organizations, state agencies, the County and surrounding
communities. Within the municipal boundary of the Cit y of Lino Lakes, seven lakes within the Chain of
Lakes (Baldwin, Centerville, George Watch, Marshan, Peltier, Reshanau, and Rice), Bald Eagle Lake,
and two creek reaches (Clearwater and Hardwood) are currently listed on the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agen cy’s 2010 Draf t 303d list of impaired waters . The eight lakes are listed for nutrient/eutrophication
biological indicators affecting aquatic recreation uses, Clearwater and Hardwood Creeks are listed for fish
and/or aquatic macroinvertebrate bioassessments affecting aquatic life, and Hardwood Creek is also listed
for dissolved oxygen affecting aquatic life. There are also three lakes that h ave fish consumption
impairments due to high mercury concentrations in fish : Peltier Lake, Otter Lake, and Bald Eagle Lake .
A number of TMDL Reports and Implementation Plans have been drafted or are in various stages of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s
(MPCA’s) approval process. At some point, the City of Li no Lakes will receive wasteload allocations
(WLA) for one or more of the TMDLs listed above. When the WLAs are approved by the EPA, the City
will need to demonstrate progress towards meeting the WLAs.
The City of Lino Lakes has taken an active role in nat ural resources management by conducting or
participating in planning efforts that will allow for development in the context of preserving the
environmental assets that make the City unique in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. These previous
planning effo rts lay the foundation for the issues, goals, policies and implementation activities identified
in this local surface water management plan.
Issues, goals and policies have been identified under the following categories in Chapter 4 :
4.1 Water Rate & Quantity
4.2 Water Quality
4.3 Wetland Management
4.4 Floodplain Management
4.5 Public Ditch System
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 2
4.6 Groundwater Management
4.7 Natural Resources
4.8 Erosion and Sediment Control
4.9 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting
4.10 Monitoring, Maintenance and Inspection
4.11 Public Participation, Informatio n and Education
4.12 Financing
Consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, some of the activities are organized o n a geographic
basis, using Resource Management Units (RMUs) following watershed boundaries as the best scale for
planning and implementation. The Surface Water Management Plan i mplementation is organized into
three categories : City -Wide Actions; Priority RMU Specific Actions and Other RMU Actions. City -Wide
Actions include activities that apply on a broader scale while RMU Specific Actions incl ude activities
that had previously been identified for the three highest priority RMUs , based on development potential :
Reshanau RMU
Marshan RMU
Clearwater Creek RMU
Similarly, Other RMU Actions include activities that have previously been identified for the remaining
RMUs. The Implementation and Capital Improvement Plan presented in this Plan includes estimated
costs, scheduling , and project partners for each Issue Category. The City of Lino Lakes will determine
which specific implementation activities to implement as part of the annual budgeting process.
The Plan supports Anoka County in fulfillment of its responsibilities for ground water protection.
Similarly, the City will support the RCWD and VLAWMO roles in wetland protection under the
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act , and in its administration of a construction permit program. Within
this context, the Plan develops objec tives and action items that will support these entities goals and
policies.
Finally, the Plan recognizes the need for flexibility and, therefore, establishes criteria for amendments. In
addition, it calls for the development of a nnual w ork p lans and five -year updates to address changing
conditions, such as annexation or regulatory changes .
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 3
2.0 Introduction & Purpose
The City of Lino Lakes is abundant with water and natural resources. The lakes, wetlands and associated
uplands are arranged geographically t hroughout the City creating the potential to develop corridors that
protect rare species, support fish and wildlife, and provide recreational opportunities . This Stormwater
Plan provides policies and actions to support and improve the City’s water and nat ural resources.
2.1. Purpose
T he purpose of this Plan is to guide the actions of the City of Lino Lakes with respect to the management
and support of the City’s water and natural resources. The Plan accomplishes this by bring ing together
background informatio n and action items from a number of previously conducted studies and planning
efforts . In addition, this Plan is intended to fulfill the requirements for Local Water Management Plans
under MN Statute 103B and MN Rule 8410.
Not only does this Plan meet regulatory requirements , it also reflects the resource -based vision of its
residents and civic leaders. Since its last preparation of a Local Surface Water Management Plan, the
City has been very proactive working with local partners to inventory existing resources, model future
land use development scenarios, develop plans to improve water quality in its lakes, protect high quality
resources and wetlands, and develop a multi -functional greenway corridor system . All of this work
supports the need for acti vities that implement the Natural Resource Systems Plan and Resource
Management Unit projects identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Resource Management Plan
respectively.
2.2. Past Planning & S tudies
Past planning efforts and studies provide informa tion used to support this Plan . These previous efforts are
reflected in the land and water resources inventory and as the goals, policies, and actions. The following
is a summary of each of these studies.
Lino Lakes 2005 Surface Water Management Plan
Th e 2005 Surface Water Management Plan presented a vision of high quality natural and water resources
for the City. The plan’s overall goal was to improve the quality of surface waters by delivering good
quality storm water runoff to lakes and wetlands at a cceptable rates and volumes, while reducing pollutant
and sediment loadings and stream bed/stream bank erosion and water quality degradation. The plan
focused on the implementation of the City’s NPDES program to accomplish this goal.
Lino Lakes 2010 Comp rehensive Plan
The Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan is the City's plan for the future. It contains analyses of
existing conditions, policy goals, long -range plans for utility and roadway infrastructure, and guides the
development of land to the year 2030. In addition to an extensive community survey and citizen
visioning process, the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan is unique due to the level of coordination and
involvement with the Rice Creek Watershed District throughout the process. The City prepared its
Comprehensiv e Plan in concert with the Rice Creek Watershed District’s (RCWD) Resource
Management Plan to balance growth and natural resource protection objectives. This coordinated effort
resulted in new land development policies and implementation tools for low impa ct development, water
resource management, growth management, and community design. The Comprehensive Plan establishes
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 4
the policy foundations for ordinances regulating zoning, subdivision, and other official controls related to
the use of land.
Hardwood Creek TMDL and Implementation Plan
In 2002, Hardwood Creek was listed on Minnesota’s 303(d) List of Impaired Waters, for biological
impairment resulting from a low fish index of biological integrity (IBI) score. In 2004, Hardwood Creek
was again listed on Minnesota’s 303(d) List of Impaired waters for biological impairment, this time due
to low Dissolved Oxygen (DO). Due to the fact that both Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs ) are
intrinsically linked, this TMDL study encompasses both impairments. The TMDL study entailed analysis
of existing data, intensive synoptic water quality and biological surveys of the creek, completion of the
stressor identification process, watershed modeling, and the development of implementation strategies to
meet the goals of the TMDLs. Approximately 4% of the 16,000 acres drainage area lies within Lino
Lakes
Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake TMDL
The Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake TMDL address nutrient impairments in Pe ltier Lake and
Centerville Lake. The November 2011 dra ft TMDL report states that nutrient load reductions of about
37% are needed for Centerville Lake and reductions of 79% to 85% are needed for Peltier Lake.
Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes TMDL
The Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes TMDL addresses nutrient impairments i n George Watch Lake, Marshan
Lake, Reshanau Lake, Rice Lake and Baldwin Lake. The November 2011 draft TMDL report states that
nutrient load reductions ranging from 65% to 85% are needed to meet state standards. The report further
states that to achieve s tate water quality standards in this chain of lakes, Peltier Lake must also meet its
water quality goals .
Bald Eagle Lake TMDL
The Bald Eagle Lake TMDL addresses nutrient impairments of Bald Eagle Lake. The TMDL report
indicates that nutrient load reductions of 38% to 91% are required for the lake to meet state standards.
The public comment period for the Bald Eagle Lake TMDL en ded on March 30, 2011; it has not yet been
approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Vadnais Lake Area WMO TMDL
The Vadnais Lake Area WMO Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and Protection Study addresses
nutrient impairments of Wilkinson Lake a mong four other lakes within VLAWMO as well as the
bacterial impairment of a creek in VLAWMO. A draft TMDL report posted October 2012 to the
VLAWMO website provides a draft wasteload allocation for the City of Lino Lakes with respect to
Wilkinson Lake.
Rice Creek Watershed District WMP
The Rice Creek Watershed District Watershed Management Plan was last updated in 2010. The plan
provides the guidance and implementation for the RCWD to manage the water and natural resources of
the district into the fore seeable future extending through 2020. The Watershed Management Plan
incorporates and builds on the previous district plans as well as numerous studies, inventories and
assessments that have been completed in recent history. The plan is organize d around eight management
categories including: 1) Education, Data and Information; 2) Lakes; 3) Wetlands; 4) Drainage Systems
and Waterways; 5) Excess Runoff; 6) District Facilities; 7) Open Space; and 8) Groundwater. The
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 5
management categories provide the guide f or plan implementation and district expenditures. The
identified goals and polices established by the plan are implemented in part by the established R ules. The
RCWD adopted Rule RMP –3, which governs approximately 95% of Lino Lakes, in 2009 . This Rule i s
specifically focused on improving wetland functions and water quality through the District’s permitting
process.
Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization WMP
The Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) Watershed Management Plan
describes how the VLAWMO will address water management over the next 10 years. VLAWMO was
organized by a Joint Powers Agreement in 1983 in response to the Minnesota Metropolitan Surface Water
Act of 1982 (Minnesota Statutes {M.S.} Section 473.875 to 473.883). The first VLAWMO Watershed
Management Plan was prepared, approved, and adopted in 1987. The second generation plan was
prepared and adopted in 1995. That plan expired in 2006. This current Plan represents a third generation
plan and will be effe ctive from 2007 to 2016. In addition to complying with the aforementioned laws, this
Plan meets the requirement of Minnesota Rules 8410, 8420, and 8750. The Plan includes management
standards and procedures for addressing surface water, wetland, and ground water issues.
RCWD Resource Management Plan and Rule RMP -3
The Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) came about through a partnership between the Rice
Creek Watershed District (RCWD) and the City of Lino Lakes. The RMP examines natural resources on
a watershed basis to create a planning and regulatory framework that will protect and enhance those
resources in the context of development pressures within the watershed. The RMP was developed in
close coordination with state and federal permitting author ities and has been prepared to be consistent
with both state and federal wetland regulations. The plan incorporates continuing maintenance of
capacity within the public drainage systems in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103E by
reducing runoff volumes conveyed through the system . It constitutes a Comprehensive Wetland
Management Plan under Minnesota Statutes §103G.2243 and was approved by the Minnesota Board of
Water and Soil Resources in 2008. The RMP is intended that components of the plan be incorporated
into Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit evaluations. The RMP also provided guidance to the
City of Lino Lakes for ecologically -based land use decisions during their Comprehensive Plan and storm
water management plan update process.
The purpose of Rule RMP -3 is to implement the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) adopted
by the Rice Creek Watershed District in 2008. This Rule regulates activity both in wetland and on upland
within the RMP area. It comprehensively addresses wetla nd and other water resource protection concerns
and therefore replaces permit review under individual District Rules C (Stormwater Management) and F
(Wetland Alteration).
JD4 Resource Management Plan and RMP -2
The Judicial Ditch 4 (JD4) RMP provides a wa tershed -based approach to wetland management that is
consistent with RCWD goals. The approach uniquely addresses management in the context of wetland
functions and the effects of anticipated future land use. The RMP was developed in close coordination
wit h state and federal permitting authorities, and has been prepared to be consistent with both state and
federal wetland regulations. It is intended that components of the plan be incorporated into CWA Section
404 permit evaluations. The approach is unique a s a means to develop a comprehensive wetland
management plan according to the State of Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, because it not only
provides existing wetland functions and values, but forecasts future functions in light of anticipated land
use, and watershed -based approaches for no net loss of wetland function.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 6
The RMP serves as a companion to adoption of the JD4 RMP Rule. The Rule RMP -2 provides standards
intended to avoid land use effects that degrade wetland and aquatic resource quality. It a lso establishes the
conditions for the RCWD to implement wetland permitting, wetland banking and volume banking
programs in the JD4 RMP area. The stormwater volume banking program is a critical tool in meeting
downstream TMDL goals and reducing flooding fo r this volume -constrained drainage system.
Lino Lakes Special Area Management Plan and Programmatic General Permit
The City of Lino Lakes and the RCWD have prepared a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the
subwatersheds within the City. The Army Corp s of Engineers St. Paul District (Corps) intends to use the
SAMP in its Clean Water Act (CWA). The purpose of the SAMP is to provide a watershed -based and
conservation -based framework for aquatic resource management, particularly as development and
redev elopment occur within the City. The SAMP addresses future water quality, quantity, flow rates and
wetland function and condition in light of forecasted development and potential changes to surface and
groundwater characteristics. As a result of the SAMP t he CWA Section 404 regulated wetland alterations
and impacts within the City of Lino Lakes will be covered by a Programmatic General Permit that
streamlines the federal, state and local permitting process.
City of Lino Lakes Storm Water Pollution Preventi on Program (SWPPP)
The City of Lino Lakes, as a municipal separate storm sewer system is required to implement and enforce
a SWPPP as a part of compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES ) Phase
II program. The SWPPP is designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the City to the “maximum
extent practicable” to protect water quality. The SWPPP must include Best Management Practices
(BMP) that address six minimum control measures.
Wellhead Protection Plan
The City of Lino Lakes along with the Minnesota Department of Health and Anoka County developed a
Wellhead Protection Plan that delineates drinking water supply management areas and wellhead
protection areas. The Wellhead Protection Plan was approved by the Minnesota Dep artment of Health in
2005.
2.3. Plan Objectives & Summary
The Plan defines goals and actions to guide the management of the City’s lakes , wetlands, streams and
natural resources. The Plan is intended to fulfill the requirements for a Local Surface Water Manag ement
Plan under MN Statute 103B and MN Rule 8410 and to address the Rice Creek Watershed District and
Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization requirements for Local Plans. The Plan
summarizes available information about the City’s water and n atural resources, defines goals and policies,
and outlines an implementation plan.
Based on the City’s commitment to collaborative planning this Plan articulates the future of water
resource management in Lino Lakes. The City is fortunate to have investe d in the science needed to
determine sound resource management actions . In addition, the City established a civic engagement
process to gain public support and developed strong civic leadership to implement the necessary
regulatory mechanisms to ensure water resources are protected now and into the future.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 7
3.0 Land & Water Resource Assessment
3.1. History
Dakota Indians lived in what would later be called Centerville Township in the 1600s and 1700s. At that
time, the area was covered with dense woodlands and many square miles of marshes, lakes and
waterways. The natural habitat provided the Dakota with an abundant food supply, including wild rice
and a wide variety of game and fish. They traveled the waterways by canoe, reaching the St. Croix River
to the east and the Mississippi River to the west. The Dakotas abandoned their settlement in the late
1700s, but returned annually to harvest wild rice.
The abundance of wil dlife attracted many trappers and hunters in the early 1800s. The western part of the
Township was known as the "German" settlement and was first settled in 1850, by F.W. Travis and was
followed five years later by Henry Wenzel. The eastern part of the Tow nship was known as the "French"
settlement and its first settlers in 1852 were: Francis Lamott, F.X. LaVallee, Peter Cardinal, Charles
Peltier, Joseph Houle, A. Gervais, Oliver Dupre, Joseph Forcier, Paul and Oliver Peltier, Stephen Ward
and L. Burkard.
T he downtown area of what came to be the City of Centerville was originally established as a “French”
settlement in the middle part of the 1800s. In 1854, Charles Peltier built a sawmill on Clearwater Creek
near the village. In the same year, settlers Pelti er, LaValle and LaMotte laid out and platted the Town.
They chose the name Centerville because of its central location from St. Paul, Stillwater, and Anoka. The
City was officially established on August 11, 1857, when Minnesota was still a territory.
In the 1950s, neighboring villages started annexing land away from Centerville Township. By 1955, to
protect the boundaries and allow for the financing of public improvements, a committee of the Centerville
Town Board began proceedings for incorporation from all of Centerville Township, except the Cities of
Centerville and Circle Pines. They took the historic name Lino and because of the ten lakes within the
area added Lakes and came up with the name Lino Lakes. On May 11, 1955, the new Village of Lino
Lakes w as incorporated. At incorporation, the new Village was comprised of 21,000 acres of land and
1,800 citizens. In 1972, the State Legislature passed a law changing all Minnesota villages to cities, hence
the current status of the City of Lino Lakes. Today, t he City has a population of over 20,216 people and is
rapidly developing . The current City location is shown in Figure 1 .
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 8
Figure 1 . City of Lino Lakes Location Map [from SAMP]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 9
3.2. Resource Management Framework
The City of Lino Lakes laid out a framework in the Comprehensive Plan for th e management of the
resources within the City. The framework provides a unified systems approach to natural resource
management that brings together the following major components:
The City’s Surface Water Management Plan
The Rice Creek Watershed District /Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP)
The City’s Parks, Natural Open Space/Greenways, and Trail System Plan
The framework is organized around a number of subwatershed -based resource management units
(RMUs). The RMP divided the city into 15 distinct RMUs . These units provide specific resource
management strategies that address the unique conditions of each area (Figure 2 ). The intent of
implementing the RMU recomm endations is to achieve the aquatic resource management goals of the
RMP and achieve a watershed -based approach to flood control and protecting high quality wetlands.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 10
Figure 2 . Resource Management Units [from Comprehensive Plan]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 11
3.3. Climate & Precipitation
The climate of Lino Lakes is similar to the climate for the overall Seven County Metropolitan Area which
exhibits the typical characteristics of continental climates. Areas with continental climates have winters
with at least one month below 32° F and at least three months of temp eratures above 50° F. Regions with
continental climates are characterized by winter temperatures cold enough to support snow cover from
late fall to early spring, and relatively moderate precipitation that occurs mostly in the summer months.
Climate d ata w as collected by the National Weather Service Cooperative at the Minneapolis -St. Paul
International Airport (Station 215435) and supplemented with data from the St. Paul station (station
217377) to fill gaps in the snowfall record . The data summary of prec ipitation, snowfall, and temperature
presented in Table 1 covers the 30 years between 1981 and 2010. The average annual temperature is 46.2
degrees F. Average annual precipitation is 30.6 inches, including approximately 5 1.6 inches of snowfall
(Table 1 ). Daily climate data and other climate summaries are available on the Minnesot a Climatology
Working Group website at climate.umn.ed u.
Table 1 . Monthly Averages, 1981 -2010
Mean Monthly Precipitation, 1981 -2010
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ANN
Precipitation [in] 0.90 0.76 1.89 2.66 3.36 4.25 4.04 4.29 3.07 2.43 1.76 1.15 3 0.6
Mean Monthly Snowfall, 1981 -2010
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ANN
Snowfall [in] 10.87 8.15 10.04 2.12 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.55 8.77 11.10 51.6
Mean Temperature, 1981 -2010
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec A NN
Max o F 23.4 29.6 41.5 57.1 69.8 78.7 82.8 80.2 71.1 58.2 39.5 26.5 54.9
Min o F 7.5 12.7 24.2 37.2 48.9 58.7 64.0 61.7 52.2 39.7 26.2 12.7 37.2
Mean o F 15.6 20.8 32.7 47.4 59.1 68.7 73.7 71.1 62.0 48.8 33.7 20.1 46.2
Table 2 illustrates the probability of a rainfall event occurring in any given year within the City of Lino
Lakes . The recurrence interval is a measure of the probability of occurrence of the storm event. For
example, a rainfall event of 5.9 inches has a 1% probability of occurring in any given year which is
expressed as once in every 100 years, the 3.6 inch rainfa ll event has a 20% probability of occurring in any
given year which is expressed as once in every 5 years.
These U.S. Precipitation Frequency Estimates for the Midwest are currently being updated by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Weather Service (NWS).
Once this study is complete, it is anticipated that the precipitation for the recurrence intervals illustrated in
Table 2 will be modified. This project is expected to be complete d in 2013 . Updated informat ion on
rainfall patterns and rainfall intensity may require modification of City ordinances and policies to ensure
that development and redevelopment account for the changes in rainfall patterns and the resulting water
management needs . Policies and ordin ances may also need modifications to ensure that affected natural
resources are properly protected.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 12
Table 2 . Design Storm Events
Recurrence Interval
(years)
24 Hour Rainfall
Amount (inches)
1 2.4
2 2.8
5 3.6
10 4.2
25 4.8
50 5.3
100 5.9
Source: U.S. Weather Bureau TP -40 (Hershfield, 1961)
3.4. Topography
The City’s hydrologic system includes streams, lakes and wetlands. The City is characterized by gently
rolling topography interspersed with lakes, streams, floodplains, various judicial and county ditches, and
wetlands that are primarily a result of glaciation. This is due to its location in the North Central Hardwood
Forest Eco -region that can be sub -divided into three geomorphic settings: the McGrath Till Plain, the
Twi n Cities Formation and the Anoka Sand Plain. This system is typical of a glaciated area with outwash
plains and terminal moraines. The thinly spread glacial drift is characterized by circular level -topped hills
with smooth side slopes averaging between 2 -3 % grades. Ground surface elevations range from 850 to
950 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Lacking a uniform drainage pattern, many small streams end in
lakes or depressions. Low -lying areas contain closed basins with numerous lakes and peat bogs. Water
ta ble levels normally occur within three to ten feet of the surface. All ground water levels vary seasonally.
3.5. Geology
Surficial Geology
The surficial geology of Lino Lakes is composed of 2 distinct areas. The City is divided almost evenly
between portions of the Anoka Sandplain and an area of loamy till typical of the Eastern Saint Croix
Moraine. Organic deposits are present throughout both areas (Figure 3 ).
The northwestern portion of the City is considered to be part of the Anoka Sandplain geomorphic area.
The Anoka Sandplain is an outwash plain formed during the retreat of the Grantsburg Lobe. The material
making up the plain is principally fine sand. Depre ssions are common in the plain and were formed when
isolated blocks of ice later melted. They are now filled with peat deposits or are marshes and lakes. The
landscape within the Anoka Sandplain is generally considered to be a gently undulating plain. Wate r
tables are near the surface in depressions and from 2 to 10 or more feet deep in rises.
The southeastern portion of the City is composed of New Ulm loamy till. This area was formed by the
Grantsburg sublobe of the Des Moines lobe and is characterized b y gently rolling terrain (Figure 3 ).
Bedrock Geology
Three bedrock layers exist beneath the study area; Mt. Simon -Jordan, Prairie Du Chien and St. P eter -
Platteville. The Mt. Simon -Jordan was formed during the Upper Cambrian and parallels the same extent
as the Anoka Sandplain. The Prairie Du Chien and St. Peter -Platteville areas are from the Ordovician
period and parallel the glacial till in the sou theast portion of the City (Figure 4 ).
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 13
Figure 3 . Surficial Geology
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 14
Figure 4 . Bedrock Geology
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 15
3.6. So ils
The City of Lino Lakes is located within the Anoka Sandplain ecological subsection of central Minnesota.
The Anoka Sandplain is a 1,875 square mile glacial outwash plain that includes portions of 13 Minnesota
counties, and is centered on most of Anoka, Isanti, and Sherburne counties. The Anoka Sandplain was
created and shaped by the last major glacial episode in Minnesota – the Wisconsin glaciation – between
35,000 and 10,000 years ago.
The City of Lino Lakes is located within the historic lake bottom of Glacial Lake Fridley which formed
from glacial ice -melt water circa 12,000 years ago. The release of glacial melt water from Glacial Lake
Fridley created deep, broad, irregular troughs within the glacial lake bottom. These troughs formed the
Rice Creek Chain of Lakes and associated wetland complexes of present day, as well as numerous other
lake chains to the northwest and southeast of Lino Lakes. The glacial history of Lino Lakes resulted in
complex patterns of surficial geology, hydrology, and soil ass ociations that remain as important
influences on development, agricultural patterns, and natural resources conservation opportunities within
the City . The upland soils of Lino Lakes are typically sandy, moderately to well drained, and nutrient
poor. Wetlan d soils are typically shallow to deep organic peat deposits over sand or saturated sands,
which occur within complex networks of braided depressions throughout the City ’s landscape. The
southeastern most edge of the City includes a small portion of a glaci al till. The upland and wetland soils
of this landscape inclusion are comprised of fine -textured silt loams, loams, and cla ys that are poorly
drained. Topography throughout the City is generally flat to slightly undulating, and the regional
groundwater tab le is typically shallow below the soil surface.
Soil types commonly found in Lino Lakes have been grouped into categories (as illustrated in Figure 5 )
based on the H ydrologic S oil G roup (HSG), or runoff potential from precipitation. This classification
describes the hydrologic features of the soils and is derived from vegetation, soils composition, and slope.
Combined hydrologic soil groups (e.g. A/D, B/D, and C/D) r epresent soils that can be classified by two
labels depending on their drained status. The first letter indicates the soil’s properties in a drained setting
and the second letter indicates that same soil’s properties in an undrained area. Table 3 summarizes the
four hydrologic soil groups:
Table 3 . Soil hydrologic groups
Hydrologic Soil
Group (HSG) Description
A Soils having high infiltration rates when thoroughly wet (low runoff potential). Deep, well
drained to excessively drained sand or gravelly sand.
B Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Moderately deep or deep,
moderately well drained or well drained with moderately to moderately coarse texture.
C Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Soils have a layer that impedes
the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.
D
Soils having ve ry slow rates of infiltration when thoroughly wet (high runoff potential).
Soils consists of clays with high shrink -swell potential, soils have a permanent high water
table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface and soils that are shallow
over nearly impervious materials.
Urban Land Areas of development that are covered by asphalt, concrete, and buildings.
Data from Natural Resource Conservation Service , 1977.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 16
Figure 5 . Hydrologic Soil Group
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 17
In 2003, the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) completed a study that identified the i nfiltration
p otential within the watershed. Figure 6 provides a general categorization into five levels of infiltration
potential, ranging from high to low. These levels were assigned by assessing soils, make -up of the sub -
surface geology, est imated content of fine material in the soil profil e, and d epths to seasonally high water
table. The City of Lino Lakes is identified as having high infiltration potential in the western portion of
the City with medium to low infiltration potential in the eastern portion of the City.
Figure 6 . Infiltration Potential within the Rice Creek Watershed District [from RCWD, 2003 Infiltration
Implementation Study]
Approximate
City of Lino Lakes
Boundary
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 18
3.7. Groundwater Resources
The City is located over very substantial ground water reserves. The major aquifers include: glacial sand
and gravel, the Prairie -du -Chien/Jordan aquifer, and the Mt. Simon -Hinckley aquifer. The Prairie -du -
Chien/Jordan aquifer supplies much of the ground w ater pumped in the Twin City metropolitan area,
while the Mt. Simon -Hinckley aquifer provides a smaller portion . Bedrock ground water in the northern
portion of the Watershed District generally flows toward the west; in the southern portion, the ground
wat er flows to the southwest. Ground water recharge areas are not well known in the Rice Creek
Watershed District (RCWD ). Glacial sand and gravel aquifers are generally recharged locally. The Mt.
Simon -Hinckley aquifer is recharged outside the w atershed. It h as generally been documented that the
Prairie -du -Chien aquifer does recharge within the w atershed. Additional information on groundwater
resources is available for Anoka County in their Water Resources Management Report (2009). In
addition, the Department of Natural Resources’ Minnesota Geologic Survey prepared a Regional
Hydrogeologic Assessment for the Anoka Sandplain (1993), an area which includes Lino Lakes, and is
working on an Anoka County Geologic Atlas.
In 2009 the RCWD completed a Groundwater P lanning & Management Program; the report identifies
information such as groundwater contours, recharge and discharge areas, groundwater dependent natural
resources, and areas where infiltration is not recommended. The report indicates that groundwater flo ws
from the southeast and northwest toward the lakes in the center of the City (Figure 7 ) and similarly that
the Chain of Lakes are groundwater discharge points with surrounding areas of recharge (Figure 8 ). The
identified groundwater dependent natural resources include areas around Rondeau and Peltier Lakes
(Figure 9 ). In addition, a few locations within Lino Lakes are identified as areas where infiltration is not
recommended unless precautions are taken to protect the City’s drinking water supply . These areas are
located around public well fields.
The City’s Wellhead Protection Plan includes Wellhead Protection Area s , Drinking Water Supply
Management Area s , a Vulnerability Assessment, Potential Contaminant Source Management Strategy, an
Evaluation Program and an Alternative Water Supply/Contingency Plan . The Drinking Water Supply
Management Area includes guidelines related to stormwater infiltration.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA ) has an active ground water monitoring system in and
near the City. The purpose of the MPCA monitoring progra m is to characterize the physical, chemical,
bacteriological, and organic properties of each water source. Data is available to the public through the
MPCA ’s Environme ntal Data Access system .
The Metropolitan Council Water Supply Plan (2010) indicates that with expected population growth, the
aquifers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area will show lower aquifer water levels, but will still have the
water supply and r echarge capability needed to meet expected water uses. The model completed for the
study indicates that aquifer water levels may decrease by about 100 feet in outer ring suburbs, especially
in the south metro. The Anoka County Water Resources Management Report (2009) summarizes a 2007
Metropolitan Council report and indicates that surface water features in Anoka County are more likely to
be impacted by groundwater drawdown than in other areas.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 19
Figure 7 . Groundwater contours [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Management Program]
Approximate
City of Lino Lakes
Boundary
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 20
Figure 8 . Groundwater recharge and discharge areas [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt.
Program]
Approximate
City of Lino Lakes
Boundary
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 21
Figure 9 . Groundwater dependent resources [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program]
Approximate
City of Lino Lakes
Boundary
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 22
Figure 10 . Areas not recommended for infiltration [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt.
Program]
Approximate
City of Lino Lakes
Boundary
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 23
3.8. Surface W ater R esource s
Open water features are a significant land cover type in the City, totaling over 3,000 acres, or roughly
14% of the surface area. The largest portion of this cover type (96%) is represented by the large, natural
ice block lakes forming the Chain of Lakes a nd other outlier lakes, along with smaller natural ponds. A
number of streams and creeks also flow through the City.
Within the municipal boundary of the City of Lino Lakes, seven lakes within the Chain of Lakes
(Baldwin, Centerville, George Watch, Marsh an, Peltier, Reshanau, and Rice), Bald Eagle Lake, and two
creek reaches (Clearwater and Hardwood) are currently listed on the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency’s 2010 Draft 303d list of impaired waters (Table 4 , Figure 11 ). The eight lakes are listed for
nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators affecting aquatic recreation u ses, Clearwater and Hardwood
Creeks are listed for fish and/or aquatic macroinvertebrate bioassessments affecting aquatic life, and
Hardwood Creek is also listed for dissolved oxygen affecting aquatic life. There are also three lakes that
h ave fish consump tion impairments due to high mercury concentrations in fish : Peltier Lake, Otter Lake,
and Bald Eagle Lake . In 2009, the MPCA completed a plan to address this mercury impairment. With
substantial stakeholder input, the MPCA prepared a plan to reduce mercur y releases in Minnesota. This
plan, the Implementation Plan for Minnesota’s Statewide Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load , describes
actions Minnesota will take to meet water -quality standards for mercury.
Draft TMDL reports have been written for the eight impaired lakes with nutrient impairments. The public
comment period for the Bald Eagle Lake TMDL ended on March 30, 2011; it has not yet been approved
by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The publ ic comment period for the TMDL reports for
the other seven lakes is from January 30, 2012 through February 29, 2012 . The implementation plans for
these impairments will be completed after the EPA approves the TMDLs.
The TMDL for the Clearwater Creek impa irment has not yet been started. It will be part of a future
Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan, to be completed by the MPCA in conjunction with local
partners. The TMDL for the two impairments on Hardwood Creek is complete and was approved by the
E PA on July 10, 2009 (Hardwood Creek Impaired Biota (Fish) and Dissolved Oxygen TMDL can be
found on MPCA’s website ). The implementation plan for these two impairments is also complete and was
approved by the MPCA in 2009.
There is a TMDL study under way f or bacteria (E. coli and fecal coliform) impairments along portions of
the Upper Mississippi River and its tributaries, including Rice Creek. Lino Lakes will be part of that
TMDL study. There is also a TMDL underway for Wilkinson Lake as part of the Vadn ais Lakes Area
WMO TMDL and Protection Study.
The City of Lino Lakes will receive wasteload allocations (WLA) for one or more of the TMDLs listed
above. When the WLAs are approved by the EPA, the City will need to demonstrate progress towards
meeting the WLAs. The MPCA is in the process of reissuing the General Permit for Small MS4s, which
will identify the process for demonstrating progress towards meeting a WLA.
Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 24
Table 4 . Impaired Waters in Lino Lakes
Impaired Water Lake or
River ID Affected use Pollutant or Stressor List
Date
Bald Eagle Lake* 62 -0002 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2002
Bald Eagle Lake* 62 -0002 -00 Aquatic
Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue 1998
Baldwin Lake 02 -0013 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2010
Centerville Lake 02 -0006 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2002
George Watch Lake 02 -0005 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2002
Marshan Lake 02 -0007 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2002
Otter Lake 02 -0003 -00 Aquatic
Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue 2010
Peltier Lake 02 -0004 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2002
Peltier Lake 02 -0004 -00 Aquatic
Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue 1998
Reshanau Lake 02 -0009 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2006
Rice Lake 02 -0008 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2010
Wilkinson Lake 62 -0043 -00 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophication
Biological Indicators 2010
Clearwater Creek
(Bald Eagle Lake to Peltier Lake)
07010206 -
519 Aquatic Life Fish and Aquatic Macro -
invertebrate Bioassessments
2002
2006
Hardwood Creek
(Hwy 61 to Peltier Lake)
07010206 -
596 Aquatic Life Fish Bioassessment 2002
Hardwood Creek
(Hwy 61 to Peltier Lake)
07010206 -
596 Aquatic Life Dissolved Oxygen 2004
Note: Impairments from the MPCA 2010 Draft 303d List of Impaired Waters.
*Only a small sliver of Bald Eagle Lake is within the City of Lino Lakes
Lakes
The City contains all or part of 15 lakes (Figure 11 ). Of the City’s lakes, nine of them (Baldwin,
Centerville, George Watch, Marshan, Peltier, Reshanau, Rice, Sherman, and Ward ) are located within or
abutting the Chain of Lakes Regional Park. The City lakes generally fall into three shoreland management
categories: Natural Environment , Recreational and General Development . The Natural Environment lakes
are primarily located in the Chain of Lakes area and include Peltier, George Watch, Marshan, Rice, Ward,
Sherman, Cedar, Amelia, Rondeau and Wilkinson . Recreational lakes include Otter, Centerville,
Reshanau, and Baldwin . Bald Eagle Lake is a General Development Lake . They are used for a variety of
recreational uses such as swimming, boating, fis hing and water skiing. Centerville, Bald Eagle, Peltier
and Reshanau Lakes are considered game fishing lakes.
A metric used to evaluate lake water quality is the level of eutrophication, the enrichment of lakes due to
excess nutrients such as phosphorus. Although phosphorus is the dominant factor, as both phosphorus and
nitrogen concentrations increase in lake water, algae blooms increase. In the extreme, blue -green or scum -
forming algae can render a lake unusable for recreation . The degree of eutrophicat ion is characterized by
gradations of oligotrophic and eutrophic levels. Oligotrophic lakes have very low nutrient levels, high
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 25
oxygen concentrations, little algae growth, and clear water. Eutrophic lakes have high nutrient levels, low
oxygen concentration s, high algae growth, and murky water.
Sources of phosphorus to lakes include the atmosphere, stormwater runoff, and internal cycling. The
atmosphere contains phosphorus in dust and other particles transported into it by wind and re -deposited
by rain a nd snow events. Stormwater runoff also carries phosphorus. Generally, as land use intensifies
and the percentage of hard (impervious) surfaces increase, the amount of phosphorus in runoff also
increases. Internal cycling is an important factor in most lak es. This is the process where phosphorus that
had settled to the lake bottom seeps back into the water during the summer, the time when nuisance algae
are problematic.
A summary of available data from the 2010 Rice Creek Watershed District Watershed Manag ement Plan
for each lake is provided below. Where noted, additional data was presented from the Department of
Natural Resources’ LakeFinder and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Environmental Data
Access system.
Rondeau Lake
Rondeau Lake ha s a surface area of 275 acre s, a watershed area of 3,448 acres, and a maximum depth of
7 feet. Rondeau is classified as a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive
recreational uses. Rondeau is not listed as an impaired water body.
Peltier Lake
Peltie r Lake has a surface area of 483 acres, a watershed area of 65,989 acres, and a maximum depth of
16 feet. Peltier is classified as a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive
recreational uses. Peltier was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2002.
Centerville Lake
Centerville Lake has a surface area of 495 acres, a watershed area of 799 acres, and a maximum depth of
19 feet. Centerville is a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and recreational uses such as
boating and swimming. Centerville was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological
indicators in 2002.
George Watch Lake
George Watch Lake has a surface area of 528 acres, a watershed area of 69,639 acres, and a ma ximum
depth of 5 feet. George Watch is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance
passive recreational uses. George Watch was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological
indicators in 2002.
Marshan Lake
Marshan Lake ha s a surface area of 312 acres and a maximum depth of 5 feet. Marshan is a shallow lake
and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Marshan was listed as
impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2002.
Reshanau Lake
Reshanau Lake has a surface area of 342 acres, a watershed area of 4,264 acres, and a maximum depth of
10 feet. Reshanau is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive
recreational uses. Reshanau was listed as im paired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in
2006.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 26
Rice Lake
Rice Lake has a surface area of 598 acres, a watershed area of 79,673 acres, and a maximum depth of 4.8
feet. Rice is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and e nhance passive recreational uses.
Rice was recently listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2010.
Baldwin Lake
Baldwin Lake has a surface area of 220 acres, a watershed area of 81,485 acres, and a maximum depth of
4.5 feet. Baldwin is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive
recreational uses. Baldwin was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2010.
Otter Lake
Otter Lake has a surface area of 332 acres, a wat ershed area of 1,179 acres, and a maximum depth of 21
feet. Otter is a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and recreational uses such as boating and
swimming. Otter is not listed as an impaired water body
Amelia Lake
Amelia Lake is located in the boundaries of the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization
and out flows to the south . Amelia has a surface area of 217 acres and a maximum depth of 2 feet. Amelia
is not listed as an impaired water body.
Ced ar Lake
Cedar Lake is a small lake located east of Reshanau Lake. Lake surface area, watershed area, and
maximum depth are unknown. Cedar is not listed as an impaired water body.
Wards Lake
Wards Lake has a surface area of 211 acres and a watershed area of 3,722 acres. Maximum depth is
unknown. Wards is not listed as an impaired water body.
Sherman Lake
Sherman Lake has a surface area of 33 acres and maximum depth of 5 feet (DNR Lake Finder). The
watershed area is unknown. Sherman is not listed as an impaired water body.
Bald Eagle Lake
Bald Eagle Lake has a surface area of 1,046 acres, a watershed area of 19,688 acres, and a maximum
depth of 39 feet. Only a small portion of Bald Eagle Lake is located within the City of Lino Lakes
municipal boundary. Bald Eagle is a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and recreational
uses such as boating and swimming. Bald Eagle was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication
biological indicators in 2002.
Wilkinson Lake
Lake Wilkinson is a 250 acre water body with a maximum depth of 1 foot. The lake is located at the
south end of the city and was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2010.
At its ordinary high water level, it extends into the City of Lino Lakes.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 27
Figure 11 . Impaired Lakes within the City of Lino Lakes
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 28
Surface Water and Groundwater Appropriations
St. Paul Water Utility
The St. Paul Water Department plays a significant role in the management of the water resources of the
City. Peltier, Centerville, Bald Eagle, and Otter Lakes are all capable of being directly affected by
withdrawals for the purpose of supplying water to the St. Paul system.
The first water supply system to serve the City of St. Paul was constructed by a private company in 1868 -
70. The co mpany operated under a State of Minnesota Charter dated 1857, and was known as the St. Paul
Water Company. In 1884, a 72 -inch brick conduit was constructed to deliver water from Vadnais Lake.
Shortly thereafter, connection was made to Sucker Lake and Pleas ant Lake, which are a short distance
north of Vadnais Lake. In 1889, the source of supply was extended to Baldwin Lake.
In 1894, extensions were made to Otter Lake. Arrangements were made to receive the overflow from
Bald Eagle Lake. In 1914 -1915, a dam w as constructed at the north end of Bald Eagle to impound
additional water. Some water is available from the overflow from Bald Eagle Lake during high water
periods. Bald Eagle Lake has a surface area of approximately 1,040 acres. When water in Bald Eagle
L ake is higher than the culvert inverts at the north end of the lake, water overflows into Clearwater Creek,
which drains into the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes . During normal periods of high water levels, water is
taken from Otter Lake and by gravity flow is c onveyed through a concrete conduit to the Centerville
conduit and thence to Deep Lake. A pumping station was constructed in 1896, at Centerville Lake, to
pump water from this source into the Chain of Lakes System. Over the years a number of deep wells were
drilled to meet emergency conditions, but have since been abandoned. In 1902, a 150 -foot wide dam was
built across Rice Creek at the outlet of Peltier Lake. A conduit connects Peltier Lake to Centerville Lake.
Water from the Mississippi River was first taken to augment the supply in 1925, by means of an intake
and pumping station on the river in Fridley.
Approximately 75% of the water source is from the Mississippi River and is pumped into the Vadnais
Chain of Lakes . Wells drawing from the Prairie du C hien -Jordan are used to augment flows to the water
treatment plant when needed. The Rice Creek Chain of Lakes and Otter and Bald Eagle Lakes are used as
a reserve supply. The St. Paul Water Utility Water Inflow System is depicted on Figure 12 .
City of Lino Lakes
The City of Lino Lakes has five municipal wells in the city to provide a public water supply. The City’s
wellhead protection and drinking water supply mana gement area plans outline protections for the wells
and the water supply area.
Other Appropriations
There are 10 other active water appropriations permitted by the DNR within the City of Lino Lakes.
These include crop irrigation, sod farms, athletic fields, nursery, and institutional uses of groundwater and
surface water.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 29
Figure 12 . St. Paul Water Utility Area [from 2005 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 30
Creeks
The City’s river and str eam resources are charac terized by three major stream systems : Rice Creek, and
two of its tributaries , Hardwood Creek and Clearwater Creek . A network of d itches and stormsewer drain
to these streams; the ditch and stormsewer system is discussed in Section 3.7.
Rice Creek , Hardwood Creek and Clearwater Creek join at Peltier Lake with a combined drainage area of
70 square miles (44,800 acres). Hardwood Creek, with a total drainage area of 28 square miles, originates
in Washington County’s Rice Lake at a normal lake elevation of 920 feet and flows to Peltier Lake at an
approximate elevation of 884 feet . Clearwater Creek originates in White Bear Lake and flows into Bald
Eagle Lake, which has a normal elevation of about 884 feet . From there, it proceeds to Centerville Lake
and t hen to Peltier Lake.
Two creek reaches are listed in the 2010 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Draft 303d list of impaired
waters. The reach of Clearwater Creek between Bald Eagle Lake and Peltier Lake was listed in 2002 for
fish bioassessments, and in 2006 for aquatic macroinvertebrate assessments. A TMDL for these
assessments will be conducted during 2013 -2016 to determine the stressors for these impairments. The
reach of Hardwood Creek between Hwy 61 and Peltier Lake was listed in 2002 for fish bioass essments.
Based on a TMDL started in 2003, this listing was updated as a dissolved oxygen stressor on aquatic life
in 2004.
Wetlands
Wetlands are habitats where water saturation is the primary controlling factor of the environment and
associated plant a nd animal life. Wetlands occur between upland and aquatic environments where the
water table is at or near the surface of the land, or where the land is covered by shallow water that may be
up to six feet deep . The single feature that most wetlands share i s soil or substrate that is at least
periodically saturated with or covered by water. This saturation creates physiological conditions requiring
special adaptations by plants and animals for life in an oxygen -d eprived (anaerobic) environment . Lino
Lakes’ w etlands are widespread and these areas often help mitigate excess storm water runoff peak flows.
Wetland s provide numerous direct benefits depending on the type of wetland and the season. Examples
of such benefits are :
- Floodwater storage and retention. S nowmelt or storm water may be temporarily stored in wetlands.
This, in turn, slows the rate of water outflow from the wetland compared to inflow to the wetland by
extending lower outflow flow rates over a longer period of time.
- Nutrient assimilation. Wetla nd plants absorb nutrients during their growth and development that
results in cleaner water leaving the wetland than came into it.
- Sediment entrapment. Sediments have time to settle out when the flow of water is slowed down, as
previously described.
- Grou nd water recharge. Some wetlands collect and retain surface waters in ground water recharge
areas.
- Low flow augmentation. A benefit of flow attenuation is that the steadier water outflow rates can
reduce the impacts of short -term precipitation deficiencie s in downstream rivers and streams.
- Shoreland anchoring and erosion control. Wetland vegetation can reduce shoreline and bank erosion
by anchoring the soil from the forces of wave action.
- Fish and wildlife habitat. Many species of fish and wildlife spend part or all of their life cycle in
wetland habitats used for breeding, feeding, cover protection, or brood rearing.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 31
- Aesthetics and recreation. This includes scenic value in urban and suburban environments. Wetlands
also provide a place for people to obse rve nature. Hunters, birders, and fisherman frequent wetlands.
- Education. Wetlands provide an outdoor classroom for learning.
A number of comprehensive wetland studies have been conducted to guide the management of wetlands
and their benefits within Lin o Lakes. The two key studies are the Lino Lakes Special Area Management
Plan (SAMP, 2010) and the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP, 2008). These two studies
provide the foundation for the management of wetlands, surface water, floodplains, and gr eenway
resources within the City of Lino Lakes. The SAMP and RMP establish Resource Management Units and
standards to support the wetland resources of the City under future development in a manner that
integrates with floodplain management, stormwater man agement, and greenway management. A few key
points from the plans are highlighted below:
The City’s wetlands may be impacted by nutrient loading, however, standards for assessing nutrient
impairment of wetlands have not yet been fully established by fede ral or state agencies. Nutrient load
modeling developed for the TMDL projects generated qualitative ranking of subcatchment nutrient
loading (high, medium, or low). The results of the vegetation quality ranking and nutrient ranking are
shown in Figure 13 . There is no relationship between vegetation quality and catchment phosphorus
loading. The phosphorus loading may be indirectly related to the vegetative quality. The loading
information is useful for setting priorities on protecting wetland condition in Lino Lakes. It is important to
know which areas are under the greatest stress from nutrient loading, because even without a direct
relationship between vegetative integ rity and phosphorus, the wetland stressors may be indirectly related
to phosphorus loading. Any wetland restoration plan, regardless of location, examines the contributing
catchments for their specific loading (both nitrogen and phosphorus), the loading so urces, and the
vegetation quality.
The City contains numerous fully and partially drained wetlands that provide the greatest opportunity for
wetland restoration activities. Wetland restoration projects function to retain and treat stormwater and at
the sa me time enhance natural resources, all of which were determined to be of highest priority for the
citizens of Lino Lakes according to a wetland values survey. As specified by the Minnesota Routine
Assessment Methodology (MNRAM), the factors evaluated when considering a wetland for restoration
include the number of nearby wetlands, hydrologic restoration potential without flooding structures,
number of landowners involved, size, potential for a naturalized buffer, and restoration design
complexity. Wetlands ranked high and medium are considered high priority for restoration (Figure 14 ,
also see Appendix A, RMP, Figure 9 – Partially Drained or Impaired Wetlands). Local we tland values
such as Lino Lakes’ interest in Tamarack Swamp restoration was also used in the evaluation.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 32
Figure 13 . Nutrient Loading to Wetlands [from SAMP]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 33
Figure 14 . Wetland Restoration Potential based on MnRAM Evaluation [from SAMP]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 34
Floodplain
Figure 15 shows the areas identified within the 100 -year flood zone according to the National Flood
Insurance Progr am maps dated May 17, 1982 . T he City has a Floodplain Ordinance in accordance with
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA ) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR )
requirements to minimize potential losses due to periodic flooding along these areas. F EMA is currently
updating the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the Lino Lakes area.
Hydrologic and hydraulic modeling has been conducted throughout the City for many previous efforts
(Appendix A ). The most recent and detailed modeling is occurr ing in 2012 b y RCWD. This updated
hydrologic and hydraulic model was provided to FEMA to assist in floodplain studies. A previous XP -
SWMM (Storm Water Management Model) model update was completed in 2007 in support of the Lino
Lakes R esource M anagement P lan (RMP ). This model is capable of completing multi -year continuous
simulation for the years 1999 -2003 or event simulation depending on the needs of the user. Most ponds,
water bodies, and wetlands within Lino Lakes have been explicitly modeled as a live storage volume with
an outlet allowing a high resolution of results and analysis. The hydrologic inputs to the model were
based on 2 -foot contours, s atellite -based estimation of impervious surface area and Green -Ampt
infiltration methodology. The majority of th e channels and ponds were surveyed with some use of as -
built drawings on newer developments. Upstream inputs from major tributaries were input directly into
the XP -SWMM model using the regional HydroCAD model for event based simulations and a water
balanc e approach for continuous simulation for the years 1999 -2003. The model can be used for the
simulation of any synthetic rainfall/runoff event up to the 100 -year 24 -hour event. Larger events are
possible but have not been tested.
The RMP identifies spec ific areas of flooding concern under a full buildout scenario and implementation
of RMP 2.8 -inch infiltration standards. The study identified areas where the road would be overtopped,
where less than 1 foot of freeboard is expected, and where a pond overf lows under a 100 -year event
(Figure 16 ). In addition, the RMP identifies flooding concerns by Resource Management Unit (Table 5 ).
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 35
Figure 15 . FEMA Floodplain
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 36
Table 5 . Summary of Flooding Concerns by Resource Management Unit
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 37
Figure 16 . Points of Flooding Concern identified in Lino Lakes RMP (2008) [from Lino Lakes RMP]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 38
3.9. Stormwater M anagement S ystem
Hydrologic boundaries do not stop at the municipal border s and orderly coordination between related
municipaliti es is addressed in the Lino Lakes R esource M anagement P lan (RMP). Hydrologic boundary
based, Resource Management Units (RMU) identified in the RMP are the basis for neighbor community
coordination of shared water resources. The hydrologic modeling encompas ses true watershed catchments
even where the boundaries are outside the municipal boundaries. The modeling covers small portions of
land area within North Oaks, Hugo, and Blaine, as well as all of Centerville.
Ditches
The State of Minnesota has establish ed a set of rules to provide an opportunity for individual landowners
to obtain drainage and to minimize the effects to downstream landowners. There are a variety of County
Ditches (Nos. 8, 10, 22, 25, 32, 47, and 55) and one Judicial Ditch (No. 3) that ru n through the City. Both
County and Judical Ditches are managed the same way. The naming is different because the systems
were established under different protocols. The majority of the drainage system was constructed during
the late 1800’s and early 190 0’s. Over the decades, much of the system was minimally maintained by
different ditch authorities. Today, many ditches function as straightened creeks within a partially or
marginally drained wetland slough or riparian corridor.
The major public ditch systems in Lino Lakes are:
Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10 -22 -32
ACD 25
ACD 55
ACD 72
Counties have authority for managing drainage systems (under Minnesota Statute §106A) within a
County, or a Joint County Drainage Authority for drainage systems that are wit hin two or more counties.
Counties have the option to delegate authority over drainage systems to watershed districts, where they
exist. Counties, when acting as the drainage authority, may establish, improve or repair drainage systems
and similar activiti es related to drainage. However, these authorities are regulated by a variety of Federal
and State agencies. In Lino Lakes, Anoka and Ramsey Counties have delegated the jurisdiction over all
public ditches to the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD ). Thus, the RCWD is the ditch authority for
the purposes of implementing Minnesota Statute §103E (Drainage Law). The VLAWMO is a ditch
authority for Ramsey County Ditches 13 and 14, however, the VLAWMO manages the ditch system as a
stormwater system under Minnes ota Statute §10 3B.227, subdivision 7, not as a ditch system under
Minnesota Statute §103E .
There are three different types of drainage projects: establishment, improvements and repairs. An
establishment refers to the original construction of the drainage ditch. An improvement will institute a
change from the original construction, which usually means expanding the ditches’ capacity. Repairs are
intended to maintain a drainage ditch to its original construction or as subsequently improved. State law
has established extensive procedures to manage these activities.
Projects are begun by a petition brought forward by landowners wishing either a ditch be established,
improved or repaired. Counties can initiate repairs if an inspection reveals that work is ne cessary. State
law requires an annual inspection of each drainage system, public hearings, appointing of "viewers" to
determine benefits and damages of the proposed project, and engineering reports.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 39
If the project is determined to be feasible and to have greater benefits than damages, it can be allowed to
proceed to construction. The costs of the project are assessed to landowners, within the drainage area of
the ditch, who are determined to benefit from the project.
The public ditch systems are an integr al part of the RMP, and the RMP serves as the ditch repair
alternative for each system. Updated ditch maps and system data were developed based on field surveys
and historic records (see Appendix A, RMP, Figure 3). Profile and repair reports have been comp leted for
all of these ditch systems, and the Resource Management Unit (RMU) recommendations integrate ditch
repair implementation projects.
Stormsewer and Stormwater Treatment Features
The C ity’s stormsewer network and catalogued treatment devices and st ructures, as available in GIS , are
included in the summary map for reference. The C ity is also actively updating their infrastructure
database and will be adding information, such as pond normal water levels (NWL) and high water levels
(HWL) in the future , but was not comprehensively available at this time. The RCWD also has hydrologic
and hydraulic information available for the system and should be contacted if that information is needed.
The numbering system and level of resolution of the RCWD data and modeling was not consistent with
City information, so the RCWD information should be obtained directly from the RCWD.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 40
Figure 17 . Ditch Systems in the City of Lino Lakes [from SAMP]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 41
3.10. Land Use
The City of Lino Lakes Comprehensi ve Plan outlines existing and planned future land use for the City.
The Comprehensive Plan indicates that t he City anticipates growth in upcoming years. The expected
growth has the potential to impact water and natural resources within the City. The City has anticipated
these changes and developed the Lino Lakes Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) (2010) and the
Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) to evaluate and respond to the changes. The Land Use
Plan additionally incorporates the City ’s Parks, and the Natural Open Space/Greenways and Trail System
Plan to manage and protect community resources.
Growth in Lino Lakes is shaped by a variety of community features, including the Rice Creek Chain of
Lakes Regional Park Reserve, Interstates I -35W and I -35E, regional sewer interceptors, and an abundance
of wetlands and other natural resource areas scatte red throughout the City . The Rice Creek Chain of
Lakes Regional Park Reserve runs the entire length of the City , from the southwest to the northeast
corner. This area provides important ecological and recreational benefits to the community. However; it
als o divides the City in half. C onnectivity between the eastern and western areas of the City is an issue.
The p ark r eserve will shape growth, as it represents a large portion of the City’s land area that will be
permanently preserved as open space. Additionally, because the p ark r eserve divides the City in two
halves, development patterns and growth pressure may differ on either side of the p ark r eserve. In
addition to the p ark r eserve, the presence of Interstates I -35W and I -35E will also affect the City ’s
growth, as demand for available commercial and industrial land with convenient transportation access
increases. In particular, a potential future interchange on I -35E will facilitate development in the northeast
quadrant of the City .
Growth in Lino Lakes will also be shaped by the location of regional sewer interceptors. The City
contains three general growth areas b ased on sewer interceptors in the northwest, northeast, and southern
half of the City . Development patterns extend from each growth area. Lastly, the large number of
wetlands within the City will shape growth by limiting the amount of developable land with in the City .
Protection and management of these resources was a critical component of the comprehensive plan
process.
The Comprehensive Plan provides additional background information on the development of the Land
Use Plan.
Existing Land Use
As summariz ed in the Comprehensive Plan, Lino Lakes contains a variety of uses including several
business parks and commercial areas, large agricultural tracts, suburban and rural residential
development, the Town Center, and a large park reserve. The City also conta ins many wetlands and
upland natural areas distributed across the City, and the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes. Despite its proximity
to the Minneapolis -St. Paul Central Business District and the presence of two interstate highways, the
City maintains a vast am ount of agriculture and rural areas. Nearly 50 percent of the City’s existing land
use consists of agriculture or rural residential areas. These areas will capture a majority of new growth in
the City, and have been guided in the future land use plan to ac commodate future development. The
existing land uses in the City are displayed in Figure 18 .
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 42
Figure 18 . Existing Land Use [from Comprehen sive Plan]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 43
Future Land Use
Lino Lakes is expected to add a significant number of households by 2030. As part of the metropolitan
region, the City is required to accommodate a portion of the region’s forecasted growth. As Lino Lakes
grows, it is anticipat ed that development patterns will change in many areas of the City.
As summarized in the Comprehensive Plan, a key component of developing the future land use plan was
analysis of a wide variety of natural resource information . This included the locatio n of high priority
wetlands and other natural resource areas, drainage patterns, and soil suitability information, to identify
environmentally sensitive areas and areas most suitable for development. This natural resource
information was used to guide deci sions regarding future land uses and intensities in Lino Lakes. Based
on the development suitability information, a full build -out future land use plan was developed (Figure
19 ). The Metropolitan Council requires that communities plan for growth up to 2030 in their current
comprehensive plans. Areas that will not be developed until after 2030 are designated on the 2030 future
land use map as Urban Reserve (Figure 20 ). Although the 2030 Future Land Use Plan (Figure 20 ) will
serve as the City’s official Future Land Us e Plan to regulate future development, the full build -out plan is
also provided for reference to guide future land use decisions regarding 2030 Urban Reserve areas.
The City’s goals and strategies relating to natural resources were also considered through out the
development of the plan. Providing for higher density uses on some sites with scenic natural amenities
such as wetland areas or along the shores of Peltier Lake also promotes accessibility to key community
features and natural amenities, which is a nother community goal, for residents of higher density housing.
Identifying higher density options in these areas also addresses the community’s goal and related
strategies to sustain Lino Lakes’ natural resources by promoting more flexible development in these
areas. Accommodating higher density in these areas provides for more site plan flexibility, as
development can be concentrated on areas of the site more suitable for development while environmental
features are preserved as open space.
As Lino Lakes develops, protection of its valuable natural resources will continue to play an important
role in guiding growth and shaping future development. Growth and economic development objectives
should be balanced with managing natural resource systems. Natural resource protection strategies are
also an essential component of a growth management plan to ensure that the community’s resources are
preserved. The City has several tools to protect natural areas while also managing future growth. These
tools are furthe r outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and include Parks, Natural Open Space, and Trail
System Plan (2004), Rare Wildlife and Plant Habitat Models, Suitability Analysis, Handbook for
Environmental Planning and Conservation Development (published in December 1999), Planned Unit
Development (PUD) to promote Low Impact Design/Conservation Development Principles, Ordinances,
Rice Creek Watershed District Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan.
Additional information on Future Land Use is available in the City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 44
Figure 19 . Full Build Out Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 45
Figure 20 . 2030 Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 46
3.11. Unique Natural Features
Biological Resource
The City’s Biological Resources are primarily a function of its l akes and n atural h abitat a reas, much of
which is located within its parks.
Beginning in 1945, a colony of hundreds of great blue herons nested on Rice Lake, south of Lake Peltier.
These birds were displaced in the early 1990s by residential development and the opening of a nearby
golf course. A second heron colony inhabited Howard Lake, north of Lake Peltier, and once numbered
550 nests. The Howard Lake colony suffered severe losses during a wind storm in 1987, which downed
nest trees and killed many young birds. The colony never recovered from the storm's devastation and has
since relocated to Lake Peltier. Before 1998 there was an estimated 1100 nests with 1000 to 2000 birds
(great blue herons, night herons and great white egrets) or more on Peltier island. The Black -crowned
night herons left in 1998. During 2000 and 2001 there was total abandonment of nests of all species on
the island. In 2002 a slow no -wake zone was establishe d around the island. In 2004 Andy Von Duyke
under the Conservation Biology Graduate Program at the University of Minnesota studied the island
rookery through 2004. Conclusions were that the island rookery was heavily predated by raccoons.
Citizen volunt eers and the City of Lino Lakes have been monitoring the rookery since then and are using
tree flashing on nesting trees to keep the raccoons from predating the nests. This seems to be successful.
The colony is slowly recovering and in 2011 City staff co unted about 57 nests and also observed great
white egrets.
A research project published by Custer and Galli in 2002 1 , concludes that 47% of the great blue herons
nesting in the rookery utilize Peltier Lake for food foraging and most herons travel distanc es less than 10
miles. Great white egrets tend to travel slightly farther distances and prefer less wet habitat for foraging
than do the great blue herons.
The area’s mix of plant community types provide s diverse habitat for amphibians, reptiles, and mam mals
as well as numerous species of birds found in multiple habitat niches . The most recent known bird
surveys conducted in the mid 1970’s for Lino Lakes and Anoka County documented well over 200
species occurring in the immediate vicinity. The shoreline and shallows north of the island serve as a
spawning area for Northern pike and walleye, and as a resting area for terns, black crown night herons,
and other waterfowl. The north arm of the lake is one of the few remaining places in the metro area with
hea lthy native vegetation, including water willow, which is considered a species of special concern.
The City has a notable number of rare biological resources. See Table 6 below. As the R esource
M anagement Plan (RMP) was developed, these rare features and habitats that support rare species were
prioritized for protection and incorporation into the Wetland Preservation Corridor. These important
natural resource areas were carried forward into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and identified as part of
the Multi -Functional Greenway Corridor. In general the rare plant species are found along the upland -
wetland transitional zones. Extensive botanical survey work h as occurred within the City to document
locations of these rare plant species. The City has also invested resources in identifying and protecting
Blanding’s turtle habitat. The critical habitat areas were identified and incorporated into the Wetland
Preservation Co rridor and Greenway Corridor.
1 Custer and Galli. 2002. Feeding Habitat Selection by Great Blue Herons and Great White Egrets Nesting in East
Central Minnesota, Waterbirds 25(1): 115 -124,
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 47
Table 6 . Documented Rare Features in Lino Lakes
Scientific Name Common Name Number of Records
Plant Community
Northern Poor Fen Class Northern Poor Fen 1
Tamarack Swamp (Southern) Type Tamarack Swamp (Southern) 2
Plants
Agalinis purpurea Purple Gerardia 4
Decodon verticillatus Waterwillow 1
Fimbristylis autumnalis Autumn Fimbristylis 5
Platanthera flava var. herbiola Tubercled Rein -orchid 1
Polygala cruciata Cross -leaved Milkwort 2
Potamogeton bicupulatus Snailseed Pondweed 1
Rotala ramosior Tooth -cup 3
Scirpus clintonii Clinton's Bulrush 1
Viola lanceolata Lance -leaved Violet 7
Xyris torta Twisted Yellow -eyed Grass 1
Birds
Bartramia longicauda Upland Sandpiper 1
Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter Swan 1
Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane 1
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle 7
Sterna forsteri Forster's Tern 4
Colonial Waterbird Nesting Area Colonial Waterbird Nesting Site 3
Reptiles
Emydoidea blandingii Blanding's Turtle 10
Mammals
Pipistrellus subflavus Eastern Pipistrelle 1
Presettlement Vegetation
Native vegetation patterns of Lino Lakes were described at the time of Minnesota’s Original Land Survey
(circa 1850), and prior to European settlement of Minnesota. Native vegetation communities within the
City prior to European settlement were primarily comprised of oak barrens and savannas, aspen/oak
forests and woodlands, dry, mesic, and wet prairies, rich fens, poor fens, bogs, ta marack swamps, a
network of shallow lakes and associated marshes, and inclusions of mesic hardwood forest (Figure 21 ).
Large -scale natural processes dramatically infl uenced the formation, establishment, and succession of
natural vegetation patterns and natural communities within the landscape over thousands of years prior to
European settlement. These natural processes include: surface and sub -surface hydrology, floodi ng,
drought, herbivory, wildlife migration, plant dispersal, plant community succession, and occasional to
frequent wildfires. Over the past 150 years, the natural landscape and associated landscape processes have
been widely altered to accommodate agricul tural land uses, development, and other anthropocentric uses
of the landscape. The original land survey of the Lino Lakes area was conducted in the middle 1800s. It
provides good information about vegetation in and around the City of Lino Lakes prior to E uro -American
settlement (U.S. General Land Office, 1853). Interpretation of surveyor's notes indicated the presence of
floodplains along large lakes, wetlands, savannas, and mesic forests in protected lakeshores and on
islands.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 48
Figure 21 . Presettlement Vegetation [from Comprehensive Plan]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 49
3.12. Pollutant Sources
Point Sources
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is charged with regulating businesses that have
applied for and received different types of environmental permits and registrations from the MPCA. The
MPCA has also been tracking potentially contaminated sites since the early 1980s when major federal and
state cleanup programs were created. Figure 22 depicts the locations of properties that have active
environmental permits or have a record related to a potential environmental hazard. Data shown in Figure
23 is provided by the MPCA. Additional information of specific sites can be found through the “What’s
in My Neighborhood” feature on the MPCA website. Potential environmental hazards vary from
properties where a spill or problem has already been cleaned up, to those currently being investigated or
cleaned up. In addition, some sit es depicted in Figure 22 have no record of known spills or problems; but
rather mark locations where hazardous materials or wastes are used or generated. The most common types
of sites in Lino Lakes are small to minimal quantity hazardous waste generators, multiple activity sites ,
and tank sites (Table 7 ). The following descriptions are intended to elucidate sites illustrated in Figure 22
and provide the description given by the MPCA for each site type listed in the figures legend.
CERCLIS : CERCLIS sites are places that are listed in the federal Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Information System. This means that they are or were
suspected of being contaminated. The CERCLIS database contains information on preliminary
assessments, site inspections, and cleanup activities for these sites. After CERCLIS sites are
investig ated, they may be elevated to state or federal Superfund lists, or it may be determined that
no action is necessary.
Superfund Projects : Superfund projects occur where known or suspected environmental
contamination threatens public health, welfare or the e nvironment. The Superfund Program
identifies, investigates and determines appropriate cleanup plans for these sites. Superfund
projects often occur at abandoned or uncontrolled sites, for instance, where the business that
polluted a site no longer exists. Federal Superfund sites are on the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s (EPA) National Priority List (NPL), while State Superfund sites are on Minnesota’s
Permanent List of Priorities (PLP). Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff may work
with E PA staff or other state agencies to investigate and clean up these sites. In Minnesota, sites
which may have been contaminated by agricultural chemicals are managed by the Minnesota
Department of Agriculture (MDA).
State Assessment Site : State Assessment sites are places that the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) Site Assessment staff have investigated because of suspected contamination.
The sites investigated include abandoned industrial properties, small commercial businesses and
publicly -owned l and (note that petroleum -contaminated sites are investigated by MPCA Tanks
and Leaks staff). These sites may be referred to the Site Assessment program by the Voluntary
Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program, the Petroleum Remediation program, Minnesota D uty
Officer R eports or citizen complaints. Site Assessment staff do an initial assessment, and then
determine if further action is needed. If a site poses a threat to human health or the environment,
it is referred to CERCLIS, Superfund, RCRA Cleanup or VI C.
Unpermitted Dump Site : Unpermitted dump sites are landfills that never held a valid permit
from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Generally, these dumps existed prior to
the permitting program established with the creation of the MPCA in 1 967. These dumps are not
restricted to any type of waste, but were often old farm or municipal disposal sites that accepted
household waste. State assessment staff have investigated many of these dump sites.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 50
Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC) Site : T he Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup
(VIC) Program is a non -petroleum brownfield program. VIC provides technical assistance to
buyers, sellers, developers or local governments seeking to voluntarily investigate or clean up
contaminated land. Properties o ften enter the VIC program in preparation for sale, financing or
redevelopment. Voluntary parties that complete investigation and / or cleanup activities under
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) oversight can receive liability assurances that
protec t them from future Superfund liability. In some cases, the MPCA may use institutional
controls as part of the overall site remedy and notify interested parties of any property use
conditions or restrictions.
Landfill, Open : Open landfills are landfills th at are still accepting waste. This includes facilities
that accept household garbage, industrial waste, and debris from construction or demolition. The
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requires that landfills are designed to bury this
garbage in a controlled manner and reduce potential impacts on the environment. Many landfills
have wells installed so that groundwater can be monitored for any contaminants that might leak
into the ground.
Landfill, Closed : Closed landfills are landfills that are no longer accepting waste. This includes
landfills that are privately owned and managed, as well as those that are owned or managed by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and are part of the formal Closed Landfill
Program. The Closed Landfill Progr am manages qualified closed landfills throughout Minnesota,
and conducts cleanup work and maintenance at those sites. At some of these landfills, landfill
gasses may be captured and used to create energy.
Landfill, Permitted by Rule : A landfill that is pe rmitted by rule is not required to obtain an
individual solid waste permit if it meets certain eligibility criteria. However, it must comply with
waste management rules and regulations. Landfills may be permitted by rule if they have a small
capacity and/o r operate for a short period of time. Some yard waste composting facilities,
recycling facilities and energy recovery facilities are also permitted by rule.
Contaminated Soil Treatment Facilities : Contaminated soil treatment facilities are places that
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has approved or permitted to take petroleum -
contaminated soils from leak sites and provide treatment through a number of different processes.
The processes include thermal treatment (usually by roasting soils at h igh temperatures),
composting, or thin -spreading soils and allowing natural microorganisms to biodegrade the
petroleum.
Leak Site : Leak sites are locations where a release of petroleum products has occurred from a
tank system. Leak sites can occur from ab oveground or underground tank systems as well as from
spills at tank facilities. A leak can result from an accident or from activities that occur over a long
time. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Petroleum Remediation Program staff
investigat es potential leaks and work to minimize or clean up contamination at those sites.
Petroleum Brownfield : Petroleum Brownfield sites are places that may have been contaminated
with petroleum due to a past or current leak. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Petroleum
Brownfields program staff assess the risk associated with petroleum contamination at these sites
and then provide technical assistance to help get the site cleaned up, developed, and / or
transferred to a new owner.
Tank Site : A tank site is a p lace with an underground or aboveground storage tank of a certain
size on the premises. One tank site may have multiple tanks, and these tanks may contain food
products, petroleum products, or other substances. Tank sites include gas stations, bus companie s
and trucking companies, as well as factories that process sugar beets, ethanol, pulp and paper, or
chemicals. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requires monitoring and
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 51
maintenance at these sites, which helps to ensure that tanks do not cause environmental
contamination.
Industrial Stormwater Permit : At industrial sites such as factories, salvage yards and airports,
stormwater may come into contact with harmful pollutants, including toxic metals, oil, grease, de -
icing salts and other chemicals . Industrial stormwater permits are designed to limit the amount of
these contaminants that reaches surface water and groundwater, by requiring good practices for
storing and handling materials. Facilities with these permits must prepare a Stormwater Pollu tion
Prevention Plan, detailing the practices they will use to limit stormwater pollution.
Wastewater Dischargers : A wastewater discharger is a facility that generates or treats
wastewater for discharge onto land or into water. Wastewater dischargers incl ude sewage
treatment plants, as well as ships with ballast water permits, and some manufacturers. Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) permits may require treatment and monitoring, and limit the
amount of contaminants that a facility can release into the environment. Wastewater permits may
be classified as SDS or NPDES/SDS. SDS stands for State Disposal System, and indicates that
the facility needs to follow Minnesota rules and regulations for wastewater. NPDES is the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimi nation System, and indicates that the facility is also subject to
the regulations of the federal Clean Water Act.
Feedlots : Feedlots may be small farms or large -scale commercial livestock operations. They are
places where animals are confined for feeding, breeding or holding. The Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) and its county partners place requirements on how manure is managed
at feedlots, so that it does not contaminate nearby surface water and groundwater. Most feedlots
in Minnesota are only r equired to register with the MPCA, but larger feedlots may be required to
obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This means that they
must submit plans for how they will reduce their impact on the environment, including th eir plans
to manage manure and control air pollution from the feedlot.
Hazardous Waste, LQG : A large quantity generator (LQG) is a facility that generates at least
1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of hazardous waste or 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of acutely
haz ardous waste per calendar month. A Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) permit is
not required for a large quantity generator, but the facility must have a current hazardous waste
license. This means that they must tell the MPCA what kinds of waste th ey generate, how much
waste they generate, and how they dispose of the waste.
Hazardous Waste, Small to Minimal Quantity Generator : A small to minimal quantity
generator is a facility that generates less than 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of hazardous wa ste
or 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of acutely hazardous waste per calendar month. These facilities have
less stringent rules than large quantity generators. This group includes Small Quantity Generators
(SQGs), which produce 100 - 1000 kg of hazardous waste pe r month; Very Small Quantity
Generators (VSQGs), which produce less than 100 kg of hazardous waste per month; and
Conditionally Exempt Generators, which produce less than 100 kg or 10 gallons of hazardous
waste per year. Like large quantity generators, SQG s and VSQGs must have current hazardous
waste licenses.
Multiple Activities : Multiple Activity sites are locations where there are multiple Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) activities occurring. These sites vary from facilities with a
wastewater permit and an air quality permit to cleanup sites with more than one permit.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 52
Table 7 . Number of Potential Environmental Hazard Sites in City of Lino Lakes
Site Type Number in City
Hazardous Waste, Small to Minimal QG 62
Multiple Activities 31
Tank Site 14
Leak Site 3
Industrial Stormwater Permit 2
Unpermitted Dump Site 2
Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC) 2
Landfill, Permitted By Rule 1
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 53
Figure 22 . Potential Environmental Hazards
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 54
Nonpoint Sources
Nonpoint source pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. R unoff
picks up and carries away natural and human -made pollutants, finally depositing them into lakes, rivers,
wetlands, coastal waters and gr ound waters. Because of the nutrient (phosphorus) impairments of the
Chain of Lakes, phosphorus is the most important nonpoint source pollutant in Lino Lakes. Figure 23
shows the phosphorus loading by subwatershed for existing conditions (2005) and a F ull B uild -out
S cenario (FBO) in Lino Lakes as modeled for the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP ) usin g
PLOAD (pollutant loading model).
PLOAD uses a combination of precipitation and anticipated runoff from the land cover by subwatershed
to approximate the volume of water delivered to the waterbody in question. A gridded surface was
developed in a Geogr aphic Information System (GIS) based on the MN Hydrology Guide (SCS, 1992) to
determine the annual precipitation, evaporation, and runoff by watershed. Each land use was assigned an
event mean concentration (EMC), which serves to estimate the loading rate of phosphorus from runoff.
Using this data, the total phosphorus loading by subwatershed can be estimated.
Additionally, t he Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD ) has created a P8 (Program for Predicting
Polluting Particle Passage through Pits, Puddles and Ponds) model for the entire City . This model was
created during the development of the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP ) and contains a
great deal more detail than the PLOAD model. This model was used to assess nutrient loading to
wetlands (Figure 13 ) and for the Lino Lakes Chain of La kes Nutrient TMDL (Figure 24 ). This model
could also be used to evaluate future water quality projects and development. P8 model inputs are
defined by a series of w atersheds and devices that can be used to describe ponds, infiltration basins and
other BMPs. Watershed areas, imperviousness and curve number s in the P8 model were defined based
on the XP -SWMM H ydrologic and H ydraulic model created in 2007 for the RMP (see also Floodplain
portion of Section 3.8 ). Additionally, device inputs such as storage and outlet configurations were created
from data in the XP -SWMM model. Fu ture water quality modeling efforts should utilize the P8 model to
the greatest extent possible.
The current total phosphorus budgets for the C hain of L akes are identified in the Lino Lakes Chain of
Lakes Nutrient TMDL (Draft, in process). The draft report includes phosphorus budgets that are based on
an average of the data for growing seasons for 2002 -2004.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 55
Figure 23 . Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in PLOAD.
[Reproduced from LL RMP]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 56
Figure 24 . Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in P8. [from Lino
Lakes Chain of Lakes Draft TMDL]
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 57
3.13. Water Resource Related Agreements
T he Cities of Lino Lakes and Centerville have entered into a Joint Powers Agreement for regulating water
for which the two Cities have jointly adopted and enforce ordinance requirements.
4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies
Issues, goals and policies were developed for this Plan through a process of compiling issues and goals
identified in plans and studies previously completed by the City and other local agencies. Primary sources
of information were the previous Surface Water Management Plan, the City’s Comprehensive Plan,
r esource m anagement p lans, and w atershed m anagement p lans of the Rice Creek Watershed District and
Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization. The compiled goals and policies were refined
by c ity s taff and c onsultants for review by the City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board (whose purpose is
to advise the city council in the use and management of its natural resources).
Issues, goals and policies have been identified under the following categories:
4.1 Water Rate & Quantity
4.2 Water Quality
4.3 Wetland Management
4.4 Floodplain Man agement
4.5 Public Ditch System
4.6 Groundwater Management
4.7 Natural Resources
4.8 Erosion and Sediment Control
4.9 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting
4.10 Monitoring, Maintenance and Inspection
4.11 Public Participation, Information and Education
4.12 Financing
4.1. Water Rate & Quantity
Issues
Within the City of Lino Lakes, streams, lakes, and wetlands have been subjected to increased surface
water runoff rates and volumes . Increased discharge rates and volumes have caused serious down -cutting
and stream bank erosion in some areas. Incre ased runoff rates and volumes also contribute to flooding
concerns and water quality concerns.
These issues are likely to intensify in the future. The Metropolitan Council prepared and adopted a
regional growth strategy that anticipates further urbaniza tion of the City. In addition, transportation
improvements in or near the City will facilitate and precipitate urbanization. Without mitigation, the
inevitable impacts will be increased volume and increased peak flows of surface water runoff. Sediment
load s, and with it pollutants and contaminants, would also increase.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 58
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.1.1 : Use the natural characteristics of the City’s watersheds in combination with development
standards and projects, to reduce present and future runoff rates and volumes (see also Natural Resources
and Wetlands goals and policies ).
Policy 4.1.1A: Continue to enforce standards for storm water runoff quantity from new and re -
developments consistent with RCWD, VLAWMO and NPDES Phase II requirements. The City is
entir ely within the legal jurisdiction of RCWD and VLAWMO, which have water resource
permitting programs. The City will remain under RCWD and VLAWMO permitting jurisdiction.
The City will coordinate its NPDES Phase II responsibility with the RCWD and VLAWMO
per mitting programs while understanding that ultimate responsibility for implementation of such
a program remains with the City.
Policy 4.1.1B: Implement volume control practices to address areas of identified rate and volume
concern.
Policy 4.1.1C: Support implementation of the RCWD program allowing banking of stormwater
volume credits.
Policy 4.1.1D: Recognize the potential uncertainty associated with managing water resources and
understand the implications of emerging issues including climate chan ge, and use Adaptive
Management when appropriate.
Policy 4.1.1E: Promote “Better Site Design” development techniques in developing and
redeveloping areas to minimize runoff volumes.
Policy 4.1.1F: Promote the use of agricultural conservation and manageme nt practices to reduce
the rate and volume of runoff.
Policy 4.1.1G: Promote the use of regional Best Management Practices where appropriate to
reduce the rate and volume of runoff.
4.2. Water Quality
Issues
Current data indicate that water bodies located wi thin the City have water quality issues. Several City
lakes , such as Bald Eagle, Peltier, George Watch, Marshan and Centerville, Reshanau, Baldwin and Rice
Lakes are included in the MPCA’s impaired waters list. In addition, both Clearwater and Hardwood
Cre eks are also included on the 303(d) TMDL list due to biotic impairments .
Runoff carrying nutrient -rich sediment, road salts, and hydrocarbon -based contaminants is detrimental to
the water quality of the City’s lakes, streams, rivers, and wetlands. Current water quality conditions
present a potential stress to the diversity and populat ion of fish and aquatic invertebrates and impact
human uses of the resources. Improvement of these waters will require a watershed wide solution because
in many cases much of the drainage area originates upstream of the City. Additionally it has been found
that internal loading sources of phosphorus derived from the lake bed sediments in Peltier Lake are
affecting the water quality of downstream water bodies.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 59
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.2.1: Protect and improve water quality and the scenic and ecologic values of City lakes, wetlands
and other aquatic assets (see also Natural Resources and Wetlands goals and policies ).
Policy 4.2.1A: Encourage “Better Site Design” development techniques in developing and
redeveloping areas to maintain water quality.
Policy 4.2 .1B: Develop specific management plans for each Resource Management Unit as
necessary recognizing varying ecological, physical and cultural differences between each
Resource Management Unit.
Policy 4.2.1C: Establish a surface water management system consistent with the Resource
Management Plans.
Policy 4.2.1D: Apply the Resource Management Unit recommendations from the RMP to meet
RMP goals for aquatic resource protection and management.
Policy 4.2.1E: Preserve and improve the recreational resources associated with water.
Policy 4.2.1F: Continue to enforce City water standards for storm water runoff quality from new
and re -developments.
Policy 4.2.1G: Incorporate TMDL limits, when determined, into the City’s Surface Water
Management requirements t o reduce degradation and improve the quality of the City’s and
region’s lakes, waterways and other aquatic resources.
Policy 4.2.1H: Manage city -owned facilities subject to Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
(MS4) program requirements consistent with p ermit conditions.
Policy 4.2.1I: Manage city -owned facilities in accordance with the original design purposes,
periodically review these purposes, and modify operation in consideration of current resource
management objectives.
Policy 4.2.1J: Implement a nd enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges in
accordance with the City’s MS4 requirements.
Policy 4.2.1K: Manage septic systems in conformance with state standards to protect the quality
of water and natural resources.
Goal 4.2.2: In itiate and continue vigorous collaborations to address, restore, and preserve the water
quality of the region’s lakes, wetlands and other aquatic assets.
Policy 4.2.2A: Work with and partner with the RCWD, VLAWMO and adjacent local
governments to protect high quality resources.
Policy 4.2.2B: Collaborate with adjacent jurisdictions and agencies to meet TMDL goals and
remove impaired water bodies from the impaired waters list.
Policy 4.2.2C: Partner with the RCWD on the implementation of Resource Managem ent Plans.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 60
Policy 4.2.2D: Facilitate data sharing among public entities that have jurisdiction or facilities
within the City.
4.3. Wetland Management
Issues
Benefits attributed to wetlands include floodwater storage and retention, nutrient assimilation, sediment
entrapment, ground water recharge, low flow augmentation, shoreland anchoring and erosion control,
aesthetics, recreation, and education. Accordingly , the loss of wetland acres, function and value will have
a direct negative effect on the City and its water resources.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.3.1: Maintain and enhance, where possible, the functions and services of existing wetlands and
associated hab itats with the City.
Policy 4.3.1A: Continue to support the administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA )
requirements within the City by the RCWD and VLAWMO.
Policy 4.3.1B: Avoid impacts to upland natural communities that are critical to wetland wildlife
habitat function and incorporate these into the wetland preservation corridors/buffer zones.
Policy 4.3.1C: Integrate parcel - or project -based wetland replacement with watershed -based
restoration and enhancement locations
Policy 4.3.1D: Manag e wetland resources using the flexibility afforded by state and federal rules,
through the implementation of the Resource Management Plan and Special Area Management
Plan.
Policy 4.3.1E: Consider p rovid ing incentives to private landowners to avoid wetland impact,
minimize wetland impact, and restore wetlands, while acknowledging that wetland management
and the monetary value of wetlands can be based upon differing value systems.
Policy 4.3.1F: Require wetland functional assessments, based on accepted meth odology, on new
development projects to ensure wetland function and services are preserved to the extent possible.
4.4. Floodplain Management
Issues
Given the physical characteristics, high water table, and number of water bodies and flood prone areas,
floodp lain management is an important consideration to minimize future flooding events. In addition, a
number of areas of current flooding concern have been identified through studies by the City and RCWD.
Future flooding could also be a concern if development is not conducted in a manner that reduces runoff
rates and volumes and if changes in rainfall and snowmelt patterns overwhelm existing infrastructure.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.4.1 : Provide adequate storage and conveyance of runoff to protect the public safety and minimize
property damage.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 61
Policy 4.4.1A: Preserve and manage the storage associated with the 100 -year floodplain along
and within water -bodies to minimize the frequency an d severity of flooding caused by high water.
Policy 4.4.1B: Use the natural characteristics of the City’s watersheds (e.g., pond, swales ,
wetlands) in combination with development standards and projects, to reduce present and future
flood damage and enhan ce the quality of surface and ground water.
Policy 4.4.1C: Require that adequate drainage facilities and easements are provided with land
development activities.
Policy 4.4.1D: Continue to enforce floodplain regulations to ensure that new structures are
adequately elevated above identified flood elevations.
Policy 4.4.1E: Update the Floodplain Overlay Ordinance as required by FEMA and the
Minnesota DNR, or as needed, to ensure adequate protection for structures and eligibility for
flood insurance program s.
Policy 4.4.1F: Support efforts to restore and reestablish floodplain basins to improve their natural
function.
4.5. Public Ditch System
Issues
Several of the major drainageways in the City are public ditch systems managed by the Rice Creek
Watershed Distr ict. Some of the public drainage systems are located within completely urbanized areas,
have been totally or partially replaced by storm sewer pipe, and no longer serve agricultural land or
provide agricultural benefits. These systems function as the outl et for storm water runoff. Other public
drainage systems are comprised nearly entirely of undeveloped/agricultural areas that are primarily
forecasted for urban development. Public ditch systems need to be managed to provide the drainage
services suited t o the land contributing to the system.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.5.1 : Ensure the m anag ement and operat ion of drainage systems and use of waterways in a manner
which recognizes the origin of the system (e.g., constructed vs. natural), the interconnectedness of
resources, and present and future conveyance needs, while considering legally established rights.
Policy 4.5.1A: Work with the RCWD to facilitate effective management of the public ditch
system, as needed, to support the recognized functions of these systems.
4.6. Groundwater Management
Issues
The City of Lino Lakes relies solely on groundwater as its water supply source. The Prairie du Chien -
Jordan aquifer serves as the City’s municipal water source. There is a growing concern that water
supplies may be depleting. The Master Water Supply Pla n by the Metropolitan Council indicates the
potential for a significant decline in aquifer water levels, up to a 50% decline in available head by 2030.
This will affect not only the drinking water supplies, but al so resources that may depend on groundwater ,
such as wetlands, lakes and streams.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 62
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.6.1 : Incorporate ground water considerations into the decision making process through
recognizing the interconnectedness of surface water and ground water supply and groundwater -dependent
natu ral resources.
Policy 4.6.1A: Preserve ground water recharge areas in cooperation with Anoka County.
Policy 4.6.1B: Promote infiltration of stormwater to result in groundwater recharge where it is
feasible and does not pose a threat to groundwater qualit y.
Policy 4.6.1C: Continue to implement the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan.
Policy 4.6.1D : Participate in the Anoka County Wellhead Protection Group in implementing joint
projects that benefit the City of Lino Lakes .
4.7. Natural Resources
Issues
Lino Lake s is rich in unique and rare natural resources. These resources are most often hydrologically
dependent on natural water systems. Reduced quality and variances of water levels stemming from land
use changes may have critical impacts to the sustainability of these resources. Preserving and enhancing
quality natural resources within the City can have a positive effect on surface and ground water.
Extensive development or misuse of the natural areas within the City can have deleterious affects on
water res ources.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.7.1: Identify, protect and preserve the desirable natural areas and ecological and aquatic resources
of the community.
Policy 4.7.1A: Pursue a well -defined natural resource restoration and management plan
consistent wit h the RCWD/Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP).
Policy 4.7.1B: Maintain the partnership of Lino Lakes and Rice Creek Watershed District and
other groups such as Anoka County to maintain, restore, and manage the aquatic, aquatic
dependent (Such as the Blue Heron Rookery on Peltier Lake) and upland areas of the City.
Policy 4.7.1C: Require natural space buffers, where appropriate, around wetlands to preserve
their function and value.
Goal 4.7.2: Ensure that well -planned, quality residential, comme rcial, industrial and institutional
development accommodate s the City’s projected growth needs and occurs in a manner that also conserves
and enhances the City’s natural resources and amenities.
Policy 4.7.2A: Encourage developers, where appropriate , to u se Open Space Design/Conservation
Development Model to implement the Resource Management System Plan.
Policy 4.7.2B: Define incentives to achieve Better Site Design to the extent feasible on all
development.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 63
Policy 4.7.2C: Continue to use the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process to
assess the impact of development on the City’s natural resources and infrastructure.
Goal 4.7.3: Capitalize on opportunities to enhance water quality, reduce runoff volume and flood damage,
and enhance ecological r esources by using open space and greenways.
Policy 4.7.3A: Encourage the use of open space in the design of City projects when multiple
benefits are realized.
Policy 4.7.3B: Capitalize on the efforts of others responsible for managing open space to enhan ce
their ongoing recreational programs, when these programs are related to the water and resource
management effort and are consistent with the City’s open space priorities.
Policy 4.7.3C: Seek opportunities to enhance habitat function and integrity, to b enefit water
resources and eco -systems.
4.8. Erosion & Sediment Control
Issues
Erosion prevention and sediment control is an important aspect in the effort to improve water quality and
protect and improve water and natural resources. Erosion is caused by run off over disturbed soils such as
on a construction site or along streambanks. This erosion can result in the transport of sediment into
water and natural resources. Sediment deposits and sediment transport can decrease water quality and
increase maintena nce efforts.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.8.1: Prevent erosion and minimize the conveyance of sediment into surface water systems through
enforcement of the City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Policy 4.8.1A: Require erosion control plans for all land disturbance activities in accordance with
the City ’s stormwater management ordinance.
Policy 4.8.1B: Continue to enforce the Illicit Discharge and Detection Elimination (IDDE)
Ordinance.
Policy 4.8.1C: Use best management practices (BMPs) at all construction sites per the MPCA
“Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas” and Minnesota Storm Water Manual as amended.
Policy 4.8.1D: Coordinate construction site inspections and enforcement with watershed
management organization inspection staff. E nforcement actions will be taken where warranted to
support protection of water resources.
Policy 4.8.1E: Implement and perform good housekeeping measures to minimize sediment
entering the drainage system.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 64
4.9. Regulations, Permitting and Reporting
Issues
T he City is regulated under a number of local, state, and/or federal programs that require the
implementation of ordinances, permitting, and/or reporting. In addition, the City implements ordinances
and permitting to attain the goal s outlined in this Plan.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.9.1: Implement the Resource Management System Plan through Resource Management Unit
Plan s .
Policy 4.9.1A: Develop and implement Resource Management Unit plans for each RMP.
Goal 4.9.2: Address regulatory requirements of local , state and federal programs through updated
ordinances, permitting, and ongoing reporting.
Policy 4.9.2A: Evaluate City’s existing ordinances and programs to facilitate implementation of
the Resource Management System Plan.
Policy 4.9.2B: Coordinate with the Rice Creek Watershed District and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to manage local wetland resources.
Policy 4.9.2C: Work with the Rice Creek Watershed District to implement the Resource
Management Plan.
Policy 4.9.2D: Implement programs, implem ent structural solutions, and complete reporting as
needed to meet MPCA’s requirements for MS4s.
Policy 4.9.2E: Support the implementation of the SAMP by the U.S. A rmy Corps of Engineers.
4.10. Monitoring, Maintenance & Inspection Issues
In order to protect i ts capital investments and provide an effective water management system, the City of
Lino Lakes needs to conduct monitoring, maintenance and inspection of City infrastructure in a timely
and cost -effective manner. Infrastructure needs to be monitored and maintained regularly to prevent
unnecessary reconstruction projects. This can only be accomplished if an effective inspection and regular
maintenance program is in place. A monitoring program verifies the effectiveness of the storm water
infrastructure.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.10.1: Maintain the function and effectiveness of stormwater management structures through
inspection, monitoring and maintenance.
Policy 4.10.1A: Implement the City’s plan for the regular inspection and maintenance of public
water resource infrastructure consistent with the requirements of the NPDES MS4 permit.
Policy 4.10.1B: Require Operation and Maintenance agreements for the inspection and
maintenance of privately constructed water resource infrastructure.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 65
Policy 4.10.1C: Imp lement and refine a training program to prevent or reduce pollutant runoff
resulting from City operations.
Policy 4.10.1D: Prepare an annual report in accordance with the NPDES MS4 permit and share
results with the public, City Council and Boards.
Policy 4.10.1E: Conduct monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of the City’s stormwater
management actions on the quality of water resources.
4.11. Public Participation, Information & Education
Issues
City residents, businesses and property owners need to have a clear understanding of basic stormwater
management, water quality, and natural resource protection concepts, policies and regulations to support
and implement stormwater management and natural resource protection efforts.
Goals & Policies
Goal 4.11.1: Inform and educate the public concerning urban stormwater management and the problems
pollutants cause if allowed to enter into our water resources.
Policy 4.11.1A: Identify and alert residents of potential ecological challenges and threats that can
affec t Lino Lakes and the property of residents.
Policy 4.11.1B: Plan and initiate cooperative efforts with the state and other local government
entities in programs that provide information to the public on how to effectively address and
manage ecological and water quality threats.
Policy 4.11.1C: Proactively educate the community and its residents of all ages about the specific
actions they can or may be asked to take in addressing ecological and water quality threats.
Goal 4.11.2: Offer programs, educatio nal opportunities and information that facilitate an understanding
of water resource issues in the City of Lino lakes.
Policy 4.11.2A: Continue to encourage and support programs that measure the effectiveness of
Best Management Practices.
Policy 4.11.2B: Actively develop and implement a community education program relating to
preserving and improving water quality consistent with the City’s MS4 permit requirements
and/or coordinate with regional education efforts.
Policy 4.11.2C: Share infrastructure i nformation developed through the Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) program for City -owned facilities to educate the public about how
water resources are managed, the programs and policies and projects of the City, and to
encourage public involvem ent.
Policy 4.11.2D: Utilize and engage citizens to promote sustainable stewardship of lakes.
Policy 4.11.2E: Continue to support and participate in the Rice Creek Watershed District’s
Stream Health Evaluation Program (SHEP)
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 66
4.12. Financing
Issues
The City needs to ensure that funding is available to implement the policies and actions identified in this
plan and to respond to future needs of development, operation and maintenance , and repairs. In order to
attain the goals identified in this plan, t he City will need to provide funding and staffing resources
adequate to address the goals of the plan. Current funding includes trunk stormwater improvement fees
and the general fund; however, other funding options may need to be considered.
Goals & Pol icies
Goal 4.12.1: Ensure that the costs of the surface water system are equitably distributed and sufficiently
funded to cover the liabilities.
Policy 4.12.1A: Update and apply area based charges so that the surface water related costs of
development c an be fairly borne by development.
Policy 4.12.1B: Consider funding options that will equitably distribute the costs of managing and
implementing the City’s surface water management plan, such as a stormwater utility or district -
based fees.
Goal 4.12.2: Leverage partnerships to cost -effectively manage the City’s surface water and natural
resource systems and attain the goals of this plan.
Policy 4.12.2A: Pursue grants, donations, and in -kind contributions to help fund stormwater
projects.
Policy 4.12 .2B: The City will coordinate local stormwater management issues with the member
watersheds and neighboring cities in order to leverage the watershed’s work and thus reducing
City expenditures.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 6 7
5.0 Implementation Activities
The implementation activities identified in this Section of the Plan were taken from previously conducted
planning and/or resource management documents or they are new activities developed as a result of a gap
analysis conducted as part of the planning pro cess.
The actions listed in Sections 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 (Tables 9 – 23 ) represent the ideal list of implementation
activities with full funding , which is currently beyond the city’s resources . As a means of prioritizing,
and aligning the efforts with a more attainable funding level, or until additional funding becomes
available, the activities identified in Tables 24 and 2 5 represent a synthesized and focused list of actions
for city implementation. The costs for the activities in Tables 24 and 25 are a lso organized by type of
activity (CIP, Program, and Study) to better reflect the city’s planning and budgeting process.
For a more detailed list of the acti vities identified for priority implementation and the costs a ssociated
with those, Appendix B prov ides a breakout and list of the proposed city -wide actions in the plan making
up the implementation cost table shown in Tables 24 . Appendix C includes a fully -funded, alternative
implementation summary for reference , in the event add itional funding could be leveraged .
Implementation activities are categorized as follows:
City Wide Actions - Includes implementation activities that apply on a broader scale (see Table
8 ).
RMU Specific Actions – Includes implementation activities that have been identified for the
three highest priority RMUs: Reshanau RMU, Marshan RMU and Clearwater Creek RMU (see
Tables 10 through 12 ).
Miscellaneous RMU Actions - Includes implementation activities that have been identified for
the remaining RMUs (see Tables 13 through 24 ).
5.1. City -Wide Actions
Within the City Wide Actions, the implementation activities are organized by the ma in Issue Category
presented in Section 4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies. These Issue Categories include:
4.1 Water Rate & Quantity
4.2 Water Quality
4.3 Wetland Management
4.4 Floodplain Management
4.5 Public Ditch System
4.6 Groundwater Management
4.7 Natural Resources
4.8 Er osion and Sediment Control
4.9 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting
4.10 Monitoring, Maintenance and Inspection
4.11 Public Participation, Information and Education
4.12 Financing
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 68
To illustrate the link between the issue, goal, policy and the corresponding implementation activity or
activities, the table of City Wide Actions also includes the specific goals and policies addressed by the
activity. In some cases, an implementation activity may add ress more than one Issue Category. As a
result, there is a column identifying the additional issue(s) addressed by the implementation activity.
The Implementation and Capital Improvement Plan presented at the end of this Section includes estimated
cost s, scheduling and project partners for the Issue Category. The City of Lino Lakes will determine
which specific implementation activities to implement as part of the annual budgeting process.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 69
Table 8 . City -Wide Actions
Actions identified by Issue Category
Additional
Issue(s)
Addressed
Goals
Addressed
Policies
Addressed
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Implement Better Site design (BSD) techniques for new
development
Water Quality,
Natural
Resources
4.1.1,
4.2.1,
4.7.2
4.1.1E,
4.2.1A,
4.7.2B
Develop a green infrastructure program to:
Protect high priority wetlands, their biological
condition, and their function as high quality habitat;
Enhance groundwater hydrology and protect
groundwater -dependent natural resources;
Provide natural flood reduction; and
Integrate water quality improvement components in
the landscape.
Water Quality,
Wetland
Management,
Floodplain
Management,
Natural
Resources
4.2.1,
4.3.1,
4.4.1,
4.7.4,
4.2.1C,
4.3.1C,
4.4.1B,
4.7.4A,
WATER QUALITY
Implement water quality improvements via the Subwatershed
Plans for each RMU specific to the waterbodies of the area
and upcoming regulations (ex. TMDLs).
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
4.2.1,
4.9.1
4.2.1B,
4.2.1D,
4.9.1A
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Establish Wetland Bank in cooperation with RCWD and
VLAWMO. NA 4.3.1 4.3.1A
Provide for wetland impact replacement credit in cooperation
with RCWD and VLAWMO NA 4.3.1
4.3.1C,
4.3.1D,
4.3.1E
Conduct annual meeting with the RCWD to review wetland
mitigation permits to ensure wetland functions are being
preserved.
NA 4.3.1 4 -1E
Coordinate with MnDOT and County Transportation officials
on projects that propose to disturb wetlands within their R OW
by holding annual meeting to discuss future road plans and
wetland mitigation banking.
NA 4.3.1 4.3.1A
Work with RCWD and VLAWMO to establish watershed -based
approaches to maintaining or restoring wetland functions. NA 4.3.1 4.3.1D
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Review existing watershed models and work with the RCWD
and VLAWMO to address flow constraints in the system. NA 4.4.1 4.4.1B
PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM
Work with the Rice Creek Watershed District on the ditch
abandonment process for public subsurface (drain tile)
systems and explore partial abandonment for surface (ditch)
systems, in cases where the public drainage system requires
redesign to implement the Multi -Functional Greenway
Corridor,
NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A
Support the RCWD in the RCWD’s implementation of ditch
activities and Resource Management Plans by providing input
where it impacts the city’s drainage system and development
plans by encouraging :
Integrating management of ditch systems and
adjacent wetland and upland systems;
Maintaini ng ditch systems being used for agricultural
benefit;
Using branch maintenance in rural areas, retrofits in
urbanizing areas and master planned communities
with greenways and open space to reduce
downstream flooding and retain and reuse water in
NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 70
Actions identified by Issue Category
Additional
Issue(s)
Addressed
Goals
Addressed
Policies
Addressed
the local catchments;
Minimizing future ditch maintenance costs by
developing a self -sustaining design.
Work with private landowners to retrofit/implement multi -
functional greenway corridor, for those parcels that are not
part of a Master Plan or are already developed.
NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
Implement the wellhead protection plan to protect the
groundwater source from contamination. NA 4.6.1 4.6.1C
Continue to implement the City’s Water Conservation
Management Plan NA 4.6.1 4.6.1A
Continue to work with Anoka County and other participating
agencies on the Geologic Atlas Project.
Wetland
Management
4.6.1,
4.3.1
4.6.1A,
4.3.1D
NATURAL RESOURCES
Partner with RCWD, VLAWMO and Mn/DNR to e stablish
program to educate residents on the means to identify and
eradicate invasive species.
NA 4.7.1 4.7.1A
Continue to manage and protect heron rookery and other
important plant and animal communities. NA 4.7.1 4.7.1B
Develop, distribute and present public with information
regarding the importance of shoreland buffers. NA 4.7.3 4.7.3C
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Continue to implement the City’s SWPPP and enforce
regulatory requirements. NA 4.8.1 4.8.1A -E
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Implement Resource Management System Plan through
development of subwatershed management plans. The Plan
will establish a clear vision of the multi -functional greenway
corridor for City Staff and developers and will be used as a tool
early in the land development process.
Wa ter Rate &
Quantity, Water
Quality,
Wetland
Management,
Floodplain
Management,
Natural
Resources
4.9.1,
4.1.1,
4.2.1,
4.3.1,
4.4.1,
4.7.1,
4.9.1A,
4.1.1A,
4.2.1D,
4.3.1D,
4.4.1B,
4.7.1A,
Complete subwatershed management plans for the three
highest priority RMUs:
Reshanau RMU
Marshan RMU
Clearwater Creek RMU
Natural
Resources
4.9.1,
4.7.1
4.9.1A,
4.7.1A
Develop subwatershed management plans for the remaining
RMUs in the following order:
1. Peltier RMU
2. Wilkinson RMU
3. Amelia RMU
4. Hardwood Creek RMU
5. Rice Lake RMU
If need arises and resources allow:
Rondeau RMU
Upper Rice Creek RMU
Centerville RMU
Sherman RMU
Baldwin RMU
Middle Rice Creek RMU
Natural
Resources
4.9.1,
4.7.1
4.9.1A,
4.7.1A
Evaluate the need to modify existing ordinances to ensure Water Rate & 4.9.2, 4.9.2A,
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 71
Actions identified by Issue Category
Additional
Issue(s)
Addressed
Goals
Addressed
Policies
Addressed
implementation of all components of the multi -functional
greenway corridor.
Quantity 4.1.1 4.1.1A
Incorporate neighborhood stormwater planning and education
into street reconstruction program.
Water Rate &
Quantity
4.9.2,
4.1.1
4.9.2A ,
4.1.1E
Evaluate Revisions to Road Design Standards including:
Reducing minimum pavement widths
Ribbon curbs and curb cuts, with roadside swales,
infiltration, and biofiltration
Use of pervious pavements
Water Rate &
Quantity
4.9.2,
4.1.1
4.9.2A,
4.1.1A
Provide guidance for staff, City Boards, and City Council
regarding Better Site Design (BSD).
Water Rate &
Quantity,
Natural
Resources
4.9.2,
4.1.1,
4.7.2
4.9.2A,
4.1.1E,
4.7.2B
Create design guidelines for new development to implement
the Resource Management System Plan (multi -functional
greenway corridor) through the use of Better Site Design
(BSD).
Natural
Resources
4.9.2,
4.7.2
4.9.2A,
4.7.2B
Continue to implement the RMP.
Create a wetland bank to provide replacement
opportunities for development or roadway projects.
Utilize the runoff volume credit and banking system in
collaboration with the RCWD.
Water Rate &
Quantity,
Wetlands
4.9.2,
4.1.1,
4.3.1
4.9.2C
4.1.1C,
4.3.1C,
4.3.1D,
4.3.1E
Continue to participate in pre -permit application meetings with
the RCWD and Army Corps of Engineers that support the
collaborative permitting process implemented through RCWD
Rule and the Corps’ Programmatic General Permit that
im plements the Special Area Management Plan.
Water Quality
4.9.2,
4.2.2
4.9.2B,
4.2.2C
Implement Construction BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Erosion &
Sediment
Control
4.9.2,
4.8.1
4.9.2D,
4.8.1D
Implement Post -Construction BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Water Rate &
Quantity,
Erosion &
Sediment
Control,
Maintenance &
Inspection
4.9.2,
4.1.1,
4.8.1,
4.10.1
4.9.2D,
4.1.1A,
4.8.1D,
4.10.1A
Implement Education and Outreach BMPs Identified in
SWPPP. Public
Participation,
Information &
Education
4.9.2,
4.11.1,
4.11.2
4.9.2D,
4.11.1A,
4.11.1B,
4.11.1C,
4.11.2B,
4.11.2C,
4.11.2D
Implement Pollution Prevention BMPs Identified in SWPPP
such as:
Bi annual street sweeping program
Pond and BMP inventory
Maintenance &
Inspection
4.9.2,
4.10.1
4.9.2D,
4.10.1A,
4.10.1B,
4.10.1C,
4.10.1D
MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION
Work with RCWD and VLAWMO to develop a long -term
monitoring program to accompany RMP implementation and to
evaluate quantitatively the strategy’s long -term environmental
and cost benefits.
NA 4.10.1 4.10.1E
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION
Participate with other public agencies and organizations on
education and outreach efforts. NA 4.11.1,
4.11.2
4.11.1A,
4.11.1B,
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 72
Actions identified by Issue Category
Additional
Issue(s)
Addressed
Goals
Addressed
Policies
Addressed
4.11.1C,
4.11.2B,
4.11.2C,
4.11.2D
FINANCING
Pursue grants through the RCWD’s Urban Stormwater
Remediation Program to assist in the funding of projects that
will reduce the impact of existing development on local water
resources.
NA 4.12.2 4.12.2A
Pursue funding support from VLAWMO for projects in the
Amelia Lake watershed. NA 4.12.2 4.12.2B
Review and evaluate funding sources for surface water
management including ad valorem taxes, development
charges, grants and user fees.
NA 4.12.1 4.12.1A,
4.1 2.1B
Update and continue to implement Trunk Surface Water
Management Fee System. NA 4.12.1 4.12.1A,
4.12.1B
Implement the updated Parks, Greenways and Trail System
Plan through (1) dedication of parks, greenways, open space
and trail corridors or (2) Park Dedication Fee. Review park
dedication fee annually to ensure adequate funding for parks,
greenways, open space and trail system development.
NA 4.12.1 4.12.1A,
4.12.1B
Pursue funding through Federal and State grant opportunities NA 4.12.2 4.12.2A
5.2. Priority RMU Specific Actions
This section includes implementation activities that have been identified for the three highest priority
Resource Management Units (RMUs ), or subwatersheds, in the City of Lino Lakes:
Reshanau RMU
Marshan RMU
Clearwater Creek RMU.
These RMUs have been identified as a higher priority for the City of Lino because they have the potential
for developing sooner than other portions of the City and have been more closely evaluated through the
Alternative Urban Area wide Review (AUAR) process or the development of other Master Plans.
Like Section 5.1 City -Wide Actions, this section includes RMU specific implementation activities
previously identified by the City or other entity (e.g. RCWD, VLAWMO, Anoka County, etc.) in past
planning efforts . However, this section does add a schematic to help visualize the multi -functional
greenway corridor using a general cross -section that the City can use to demonstrate its vision and goals
to developers early in the land develop ment process. The information provided in this section will form
the basis for the development of a more in -depth Subwatershed Plan s for each RMU which will clearly
lay the framework for how the City would like to see future development tie into the multi -functional
greenway corridor.
The use of RMU corridor plans is to maximize the value and benefit with efficient use of the corridors for
multiple public functions: flood control, conveyance infrastructure, water quality and volume treatment,
public trai l systems, and habitat corridor enhancement. Figure 26 below illustrates the variable cross
section configurations that implement the multifunctional greenway corridor. Each of the RMU’s would
have unique configurations due to the variable landscape sett ings of the major drainageways.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 73
The need to address water quality within the city is partially illustrated in the map showing the various
impaired lakes (Figure 12) which has regulatory implications that are still being developed. And wetland
impacts a re also a consideration (Figure 14). The natural landscape is different th roughout the city. To
visualize how the corridors would take shape, Figure 2 shows the city divided into the RMUs. The
drainage networks, often agricultural ditch systems, that ma ke up the backbone of the needed city
stormwater infrastructure are shown in Figure 18. Now comparing Figure 18 waterway locations with the
naturally low -lying, flood -prone wetland areas of Figure 15, it begins to take shape that each corridor will
have a unique characteristic. To illustrate this, one can look at the three priority RMUs.
Narrower corridors - Clearwater Creek RMU (Clearwater Creek, D itch 55, and Ditch 47)
and Marshan RMU (Ditch 10 -22 -32) corridors
Wider corridors - Reshanau (Ditch 25) co rridor
Both could have portions with occasional sections that are medium width. The wider corridors are due to
large low -lying areas and wetlands along the drainageway. The cross sections below provide a generic
illustration of how those various corrido rs can be organized when development comes to maximize their
public potential to serve the multiple functions and benefits within one area.
As shown below, “Setting Type A” illustrates a narrow corridor that does not include significant existing
natural f eature but still accomplishes the multifunctional goals. “Setting Type C” is a much wider section
that incorporates existing natural features with the recreational and stormwater conveyance components
easily included . In these ways, additional benefits are provided to the community and with small
additional costs and can be incorporated into the city process so they produce a direct outcome of the
development process.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 74
Figure 25 . C onceptual L ino Lakes Resource Management Unit (RMU) Corridor Configurations
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 75
5.2.1 Reshanau RMU Subwatershed
Table 9 . RMU Specific Actions: Reshanau RMU
Actions identified by Issue Category
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Work with RCWD to develop management plans (including outlet control structures and vegetation management)
for Wards Lake and Cedar Lake which are currently controlled by ditched outlets.
WATER QUALITY
Address pollutant loads to Reshanau Lake, Cedar Lake and Wards Lake as well as those smaller lakes
contributing to overall loads.
Work with RCWD to investigate water quality benefits of a control structure for Cedar lake.
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Incorporate interspersed upland areas into the greenway corridor of the wetland plant communities comprising the
backbone of the Ditch 25 system in order to increase habitat functioning of the wetlands and provide passive
recreation.
Work with RCWD to develop a restoration plan for partially drained wetlands o f the Ditch 25 system to attain
wetland restoration credit.
Implement Cedar Lake Restoration Project and explore options for wetland mitigation credit.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Address the three areas where road overtopping occurs in the RMU in conjunction with surrounding development
proposals.
PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM
Collaborate with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) to design the ACD -25 ditch corridor in a way that will
help mitigate the impacts of increased flows and volumes within the c orridor.
Minimize road crossings of ACD -25 in order to maintain a continuous corridor. It is also recommended that field
crossings be eliminated or converted into trail crossings as development occurs. In some cases these crossings
are serving as rate control features. At the time that they are proposed to be altered, downstream impacts would
need to be assessed and a mitigation strategy would need to be developed if needed.
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
No implementation activities identified.
NATURAL RESOURCES
No implementation activities identified.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Encourage property owners to restore their shoreline with native plants to reduce erosion, capture direct runoff,
and to limit removal of beneficial vegetation that is perceived to be a nuisance or undesirable.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Complete Subwatershed Management Plan.
MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION
No implementation activities identified.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION
No implementation activities identified.
FINANCING
No implementation activities identified.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 76
5.2.2 Marshan RMU Subwatershed
Table 10 . RMU Specific Actions: Marshan RMU
Actions identified by Issue Category
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Evaluate opportunities for volume reduction in key subwatersheds including MAR -0059, MAR -108 and MAR -110.
Ensure that development and redevelopment construct onsite volume controls to alleviate the potential flooding
without increasing downstream discharge of urban hydrology to Marshan Lake.
WATER QUALITY
Address impairments for Marshan Lake as identified in the TMDL study and in the implementation plan when this
effort is completed.
Maximize load reduction on city projects. Evaluate cost effective options to improve water quality treatment BMPs
for both development and redevelopment projects to increase treatment efficiency beyond the minimum required.
Promote the use of rain gardens, native plantings, and reforestation within existing development areas as a means
of increasing infiltration, evapotranspiration, and filt ration of runoff conveying pollutant loads to the lakes.
Investigate the potential for expanding storage and nutrient retention/removal from the existing loads (prior to
discharging to Marshan Lake adjacent to the lower branch of 10 -22 -32 between I -35W a nd Lake Drive
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Conduct wetland restoration projects for banking in the upper branches of the 10 -22 -32 ditch system and in the
large area in northwest Lino Lakes (the area generally located north of Carl Street and west of 4th Avenue) that is
primarily used for sod (MAR -0 97).
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Evaluate and address floodplain impacts with new and redevelopment proposals in accordance with watershed
and city requirements.
PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM
Collaborate with the RCWD to design culverts in catchments MAR -059, MAR -108, and MAR - 110 to resolve
capacity issues in Anoka County Ditch 10 -22 -32.
Review RCWD Consolidation Report for 10 -22 -32 to determine how much of a management plan the District has
developed to date.
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
No implementation activities identified.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Provide an open space connection between Columbus and Blaine as identified in the DNR Metro Greenways
corridor.
Address corridor gap caused by habitat fragmentation from existing and planned housing and roads. Address gap
through landscaping strategies, wildlife movement strategies, road design and minimal runoff, and homeowner
education.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Evaluation of current stream bank erosion sites on 10 -22 -32.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Complete Subwatershed Management Plan.
Coordinate with future developers to implement cross -sections for Penoc Branch, Branch 14 Lower, and Branch
15 Lower into Resource Management System plan.
MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION
No implementation activities identified.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION
No implementation activities identified.
FINANCING
No implementation activities identified.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 77
5.2.3 Clearwater Creek RMU Subwatershed
Table 11 . RMU Specific Actions: Clearwater Creek RMU
Actions identified by Issue Category
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Develop a stormwater runoff volume reduction plan for the Clearwater Creek RMU that emphasizes non -infiltration
based BMPs given the heavy hydric soils underlying the area.
WATER QUALITY
Integrate Clearwater Creek into district and site planning to preserve the natural amenities of this water course.
Address nutrient impairment of Bald Eagle Lake as identified in the TMDL study and in the implementation plan
when this effort is completed.
Address biological impairment of Clearwater Creek as identified in the TMDL study and implementation plan when
these efforts are completed.
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Restore drained wetlands associated with abandoned ditch 47 to provide wetland mitigation credit for use in a
bank and to establish a greenway corridor valuable for open space, water quality, and flood control.
Investigate the current and future effects of the pipe and pond drainage system from the urban area just east of I -
35E and south of Ce dar Street for effects on the condition of this wetland complex. The highly susceptible portion
of the wetland complex is a hardwood swamp adjacent to the city of Hugo.
.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Target wetland restoration projects in the northern drainage ditch of ACD 55 (a tile system) to alleviate flooding
problems and potentially generate mitigation credit.
Address the potential flooding concerns in the urban area just east of I35E and south of Cedar Street: there are
several ponds that are expected to overtop in a high rainfall event.
PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM
Coordinate with the RCWD in advance of repairs needed for ACD -55 (tile system). This system has been
identified as being ineffective at managing future runoff (potential pond flooding problems during high rain events)
which should be addressed via the mul ti -functional greenway corridor.
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
No implementation activities identified.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Work with RCWD and land developer to implement Clearwater Creek restoration project between 20 th Avenue and
35E.
Work with RCWD to Conduct Clearwater Creek instream habitat improvement for the biotic impairment TMDL.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
No implementation activities identified.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Complete Subwatershed Management Plan.
MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION
Monitor the wetland complex to the northwest of Bald Eagle Lake for signs of deterioration from the adjacent urban
drainage system.
Investigate the localized urban discharges into the wetland complex north of Otter and monitor the wetlands for
signs of stress.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION
No implementation activities identified.
FINANCING
No implementation activities identified.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 78
5.3. Other RMU Actions
This section includes implementation activities that have been identified for the remaining Resource
Management Units (RMUs ), or subwatersheds, in the City of Lino Lakes. Most of the area in these
RMUs lies outside of proposed development areas through 2030. Therefore, these actions generally have
a low priority for implementation. As this section illustrates, there are fewer implementation act ivities
identified for these RMUs because of their low priority relative to those presented in Section 5.2 RMU
Specific Actions. As a result, if the need arises to develop a subwatershed management plan or Resource
Management Plan for these RMUs, the leve l of effort required to develop that plan for these RMUs may
be greater than for the previously discussed RMUs.
5.3.1 George Watch RMU Subwatershed
Table 12 . RMU Specific Actions: George Watch RMU
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Im plement a network of BMPs in the conveyance area along Lake Drive NE to reduce stormwater discharges from
pond which currently outlets to a channel and ultimately enters stormwater -sensitive wetland complex (located
north of I -35W and south of Oak Lane).
Work with the commercial area north of George Watch Lake to implement stormwater retrofits (e.g. rain gardens
and pervious pavements) that will achieve volume control to mitigate loading to the large and highly susceptible
coniferous swamp located next to George Watch Lake.
WATER QUALITY
Develop source control plan, in conjunction with new development for areas in the George Watch RMU north of
Hwy 14 to prevent loading to wetlands along with source control retrofits in areas draining to groundwater
wetlan ds.
Implement watershed -based measures to reduce the inputs from the direct drainage area to George Watch Lake
once the nutrient reduction goal is established as part of the Chain of Lakes TMDL.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Address the area where there is less than 1 foot of freeboard on the road.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan.
5.3.2 Rondeau RMU Subwatershed
Table 13 . RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Employ Better Site Design (BSD) and volume control strategies to maintain recharge and avoid stormwater
discharges to Rondeau Lake. Bet
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Protect the large wetlands in the drainage area west of Rondeau Lake from stormwater input and from use for
stormwater treatment.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Resource Management System Plan.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 79
5.3.3 Peltier RMU Subwatershed
Table 14 . RMU Specific Actions: Peltier RMU
WATER QUALITY
Avoid discharges to Peltier Lake through implementation of infiltration BMPs on non -hydric soil upland areas and
implementation of small site storage and biofiltration BMPs on hydric soil areas that are developing.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Target wetland r estoration projects in the northern drainage ditch of ACD 55 (a tile system) to alleviate flooding
problems and potentially generate mitigation credit.
Address the two areas within the City of Lino Lakes where there is less than 1 foot of freeboard on t he road.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan utilizing the concepts already developed by the City for a large flow -
through wetland system.
5.3.4 Hardwood Creek RMU Subwatershed
Table 15 . RMU Specific Actions: Hardwood Creek RMU
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Protect and buffer the high priority wetlands in the Hardwood Creek RMU
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Ensure that existing culvert crossings will function under future conditions.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Address the wildlife barrier that exists as a result of the interstate and discuss options with MnDNOT to make
existing culvert a safer crossing for wildlife.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan.
5.3.5 Upper Rice Creek RMU Subwatershed
Table 16 . RMU Specific Actions: Upper Rice Creek RMU
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Conduct inspections and maintenance to prevent flooding of major roads in Upper Rice Creek RMU in areas
planned for industrial, commercial and medium density residential land use (URC_001 and URC_002 ).
Ensure that existing culvert crossings will function under future conditions.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan .
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 80
5.3.6 Rice Lake RMU Subwatershed
Table 17 . RMU Specific Actions: Rice Lake RMU
WATER RATE & QUANTITY
Conduct feasibility studies to quantify the potential for retrofit (in site volume control measures) projects in the
northwest portion of the Rice Lake RMU (an area with very sandy soils).
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Decrease stormwater flows to the sensitive w etlands located in catchment RLA -021 on the north side of Lake
Drive.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Implement urban retrofits (on -site volume control measures) to address the two sensitive water level points at
ponds in the south Rice Lake neighborhood. All wetlands in the neighborhood are already being used for
stormwater.
WATER QUALITY
Evaluate nutrient loading through stormsewer lines to area wetlands in the Rice Lake RMU.
Reduce nutrient loading by optimizing the wetland and channel interaction in the Rice Lake RMU.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan.
5.3.7 Centerville RMU Subwatershed
Table 18 . RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU
WATER QUALITY
Conduct a feasibility study for the Lamotte Water Quality Improvement Project in conjunction with street
reconstruction planning.
5.3.8 Sherman RMU Subwatershed
Table 19 . RMU Specific Actions: Sherman RMU
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Evaluate the potential to implement volume reduction practices in the catchments discharging to stormwater -
sensitive wetlands which are at risk under current conditions.
5.3.9 Amelia RMU Subwatershed
Table 20 . RMU Specific Action s: Amelia RMU
NATURAL RESOURCES
Work with MnDOT to evaluate wildlife crossings in future projects.
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Restore the wetland on the private ditch that enters the lake on the north side in catchments AME -004 and AME -
005 in the Amelia RMU.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan.
Work with the Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed Management Organization (VLAWMO) to evaluate the feasibility of
projects in the Amelia RMU.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 81
5.3.10 Baldwin RMU Subwatershed
Table 21 . RMU Specific Actions: Baldwin RMU
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Evaluate the potential to implement volume reduction practices in the catchments discharging to s tormwater -
sensitive wetlands which are at risk under current conditions .
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan .
5.3.11 Middle Rice Creek RMU Subwatershed
Table 22 . RMU Specific Actions: Middle Rice Creek RMU
NATURAL RESOURCES
Work with MnDOT to address corridor gaps and wildlife barriers in Middle Creek RMU.
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
Wetlands at risk from stormwater should be evaluated for reducing volume effects in the catchments.
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Resource Management System Plan.
5.3.12 Wilkinson RMU Subwatershed
Table 23 . RMU Specific Actions: Wilkinson RMU
REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING
Develop Subwatershed Management Plan.
5.4. Implementation Costs
The estimated costs for the City of Lino Lakes to implement the city -wide and RMU -specific actions
included in this implementation plan as defined in Section 5.1 are summarized in Table 24 . These actions
are broken down into 3 project types; 1) Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), 2) Programs , and 3)
Studies. Capital Improvement Projects include but are not limited to new stormwater capacity, quality or
volume control improvements as well as wetland mitigation or restoration activities. Programs include
ongoing education, inspection, maintenance, and pollution prevention activities that are necessary to
maintain the existing system and meet the requirements of the City’s NPDES permit. The Study category
includes projects necessary to evaluate the City’s system includ ing subwatershed drainage plans and
feasibil ity studies.
A ctions in the implementation plan as defined in Sections 5.2 and 5.3 are summarized in Table 25 . The
total estimated cost to implement this plan , including City -wide and all RMU Subwatershed Areas, is
$2,901,8 00 ov er 10 years, or approximately $290,18 0 per year. It should be noted, that some of the costs
should be recovered through surface water management impact fees collected in conju nction with
development . While there are some infrastructure costs included here, it is fairly minimal on
infrastructure projects . The majority of costs are related to maintenance of the existing system and
satisfying the programmatic requirements of the City’s NPDES permit. It is further assumed that once
the more detailed RMU Subwatershed Plans are completed, more of the infrastructure costs will be
defined so it can be included in developer fees for each area.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 82
Table 24 . Estimated Costs of City -Wide Actions in 2012 dollars
Project Type Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years
6 -10
Total
CIP $30,000 $20,000 $20,000 $200,000 $270,000
Program s $180,500 $176,700 $192,500 $177,700 $183,500 $845,900 $1,756,800
Stud ies $49,000 $15,000 $25,000 $25,000 $60,000 $174,000
Total $259,500 $191,700 $217,5 00 $197,7 00 $228,5 00 $1,105,900 $2,200,8 00
Table 25 . Estimated Costs of RMU -Specific Actions in 2012 dollars
RMU -Specific Actions
by RMU Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years
6 -10
Total
10 -year
Cost
Reshanau RMU
(Ditch 25) $5,000 $10,000 $250,000 $265,000
Marshan RMU
(Ditch 10 -22 -32) $25,000 $11,000 $151,000 $6,000 $75,000 $268 ,000
Clearwater Creek RMU
(Ditch 55) $15,000 $8,000 $65,000 $40,000 $128,000
George Watch RMU
Rondeau RMU
Peltier RMU
Hardwood Creek RMU
Upper Rice Creek RMU
Rice Lake RMU $40,000 $40,000
Centerville RMU
Sherman RMU
Amelia RMU
Baldwin RMU
Middle Rice Creek RMU
Wilkinson RMU
Total $40,000 $19,000 $156,000 $81,000 $405,000 $701 ,000
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 83
6.0 Administration
Administration of this plan includes coordination of activities with federal, state and regional agencies as
well as the coordination of activities within the City. This section outlines the activities needed to
administer this Plan.
6.1. Regulatory Coordination
Federal
Coordination with federal agencies on water issues for the City of Lino Lakes often is with the Army
Cor ps of Engineers, and sometimes also with the Environmental Protection Agency, the United States
Geological Survey, the United States Department of Agriculture, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The Army Corps of Engineers regulate activities in navigable waters and wetlands. Therefore,
coordination is required for activities that have the potential to affect w etland and lake systems in the City
of Lino Lakes. The Army Corps of Engineers issues perm its under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
and also allow for approval of permitting and replacement plans that meet the requirements of Section
404 on a regional basis. Lino Lakes has and approved Special Area Management (SAMP) with the Army
Corps of E ngineers. The SAMP is implemented through a Programmatic General Permit (PGP) that
includes special wetland regulatory conditions for the City of Lino Lakes. In summary, the PGP provides
mitigation flexibility for impacts that are consistent with the SAM P.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated many of its responsibilities within Minnesota
to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency including the administration and enforcement of National
Pollutant Discharge and Elimination (NPDES) permit s and the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
program.
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) collect data on stream flow, groundwater levels, and other
information which is useful to the City in evaluating its resources. The United States Department o f
Agriculture (USDA) oversees the National Resource Conservation Service and the Farm Service Agency
who provide technical services, conservation programs and funding to agricultural producers. In addition,
the soils and technical data collected by the NR CS is information used by the City. The Fish and Wildlife
Service works to conserve and improve fish and wildlife and their habitat. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), among other activities, collects weather and climate data.
S tate
On a state level, regulatory coordination related to water and natural resources includes addressing
impaired waters, managing stormsewer systems and construction sites, managing shorelines, and a
number of other areas. Agencies the City may coordina te with include the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, the Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and the
Minnesota Department of Health.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) oversees the programs addressing municipal separate
storm sewer systems (MS4s), construction site stormwater, industrial stormwater, impaired lakes and
streams, feedlots, soil and groundwater contamination, and wastewater treatment. A number of these
programs affect the City of Lino Lak es. The two main areas requiring coordination are the MS4 program
and addressing impaired waters.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 84
The City’s stormwater system is designated as a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4 ) by the
MPCA. The City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Prog ram (SWPPP) was developed to address the
requirements for MS4s. A permit re -issuance is expected in August 2012. The reissued permit may
require changes to the City’s SWPPP.
A number of Total Maximum Daily Load studies (TMDLs) are in process and others have been
completed. These studies establish daily load limits for certain compounds that were found to contribute
to the impairment. The City of Lino Lakes will likely have a wasteload allocation that establishes the
maximum allowed discharge of the reg ulated pollutant for each TMDL.
T he Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) will document progress towards achieving the load
reductions needed to meet the TMDL allocations for impaired water bodies within its jurisdiction. The
City of Lino Lakes will provid e information on a routine basis to the RCWD regarding new projects and
programs that lead to load reductions needed to meet a TMDL.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) leads programs that regulate shoreline and floodplain
development, groundwater use, and conducts various efforts to support water -based recreation and quality
fisheries. The City has a shoreline and floodplain ordinance that is in compliance with the DNR’s
standards.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) manages the st ate’s transportation system
including a number of highways in the City of Lino Lakes. Coordination with MnDOT is needed when
an activity may impact a state highway or its right of way. The Minnesota Department of Health works to
address a number of healt h issues, but the primary area of coordination for the City is with the protection
of drinking water resources including wellhead protection and drinking water treatment.
Regional
Regulatory coordination on a regional level involves coordination with the Metropolitan Council and with
watershed management organizations, particularly the Rice Creek Watershed District and the Vadnais
Lake Area Watershed Management Organization.
The City addresses the water -related concerns of the Metropolitan Council prim arily through the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and this Plan. The Comprehensive Plan frames how the city will address issues such
as housing and transportation along with water concerns noted by the Metropolitan Council.
The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) implements and enforces a set of rules related to stormwater
and natural resource management. In addition, the RCWD is the WCA Local Government Unit (LGU )
for a number of jurisdictions including Lino Lakes. The City works with the RCWD to protect a nd
manage the wetland and water resources of the City.
The Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization (VLAWMO) also works to protect and
improve water resources. VLAWMO is also the WCA LGU for a number of jurisdictions including those
portions o f Lino Lakes within their jurisdictional boundary .
6.2. City Administration of Surface Water Management Plan
The implementation of this Plan will be coordinated by staff with input from the Environmental Board.
The staff will coordinate with in the various de partments as needed to ensure implementation of this plan
over the next ten years.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 85
After this Plan is approved by the watershed organizations, the City of Lino Lakes will adopt and
implement the Plan within 120 days and will update and approve its ordinan ces and official controls to be
consistent with this Plan within 180 days.
6.3. Amendments to Surface Water Management Plan
The City of Lino Lakes intends that this Plan extend through 2021. The City may need to revise this Plan
prior to the next update for it to remain a useful long -term planning tool. Plan amendments will be
needed if significant changes are required involving goals, policies, administrative procedures, funding or
the capital improvement program, or if problems arise that are not addressed in the Plan. This Plan will
remain in full effect through 2021 unless an updated plan is approved prior to that date.
Technical information (i.e. from City -led studies and monitoring and new data from City partners) will
require frequent updating. Th e City intends to post this updated information on the City website.
Technical information that results in new action items will be incorporated into City operations through
implementation of the City’s programs, projects and watershed management strategi es as appropriate.
Generally, these technical updates and studies are considered part of the normal City operations consistent
with the intent of this Plan and will not trigger a Plan amendment. However, when the new technical
information or study findin gs result in a significant policy change, or the District intends to initiate a
program or construct a capital improvement not sufficiently identified in the Plan, a plan amendment will
be required.
All major amendments to the Plan that deviate from the existing Plan scope and direction will be
submitted to the Rice Creek Watershed District and the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management
Organization for review and approval. The review process is 60 days unless the City agrees to an
extension of the review period. The Plan amendment may also be submitted to the Metropolitan Council
for a 45 -day review to be incorporated into the review of the RCWD and VLAWMO.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 86
7.0 Financial Considerations
Plan implementation tasks are presented in two ways. First are city -wide costs for stormwater related
activities that would apply cit y -wide and are not specific to a certain subwatershed. Those costs are
further divided into the 12 Issue Categories ident ified during the planning process and reflected in the
City’s Local Surface Water Management Plan. For cost estimating, the 12 categories are listed
separately, but in the implementation of those activities from a practical stand point, there will be some
activities that can be coordinated to facilitate ease of implementation. There has been an effort NOT to
duplicate or create redundant funding in these costs estimates, so some efficiency of implementation is
included in the costs.
Secondly, implementat ion costs are also provided based on the s ubwatershed. The city contains 15
Subwatersheds of various sizes and complexity and therefore the needs of each will be unique. The
management at the Subwatershed level is to reinforce the City’s Comprehensive Pl an approach of
developing Resource Management Unit level planning and management at that Subwatershed scale. The
top 3 priority subwatersheds have the costs provided with more detail due to their higher likelihood of
experiencing growth and development. All the Subwatershed/RMUs will require a more detailed RMU
Plan be developed for them to better detail the trunk infrastructure costs needed. Those RMU Plan costs
are included in the cost estimate table for approximately half of the RMUs based on the expe cted need for
the plans and local issues arising (development, TMDLs, etc.)
Many of the items fall under past activities that have been typically included in the City’s budget for
stormwater infrastructure. The City currently has a Surface Water Manageme nt Charge that is updated
annually based on the Engineering News Record (ENR ) Index for new development to cover the cost of
administration, planning, and trunk/regional infrastructure. It is recommended that this fee, updated with
the new cost informatio n, will be used to fund the Subwatershed/RMU Plans. The costs identified in the
RMU studies would then be used to update the fee schedule in future years. With each RMU identified
individually, the City will have the opportunity to decide if they would l ike the fee schedules different for
the various RMUs or combined for a city -wide average.
The remainder of the stormwater funding comes from the general fund of the city which also covers some
of the stormwater planning and implementation needs. While th is is common practice in many
communities such as Lino Lakes, the more the specialized, user -fee type funds can be used, typically the
more stable and adequate the funding is. Other sources of funding and revenue are also worth
considering. The creation of a wetland bank as shown in the implementation plan, with time can be self -
funded since there is a need for wetland bank credits. Grant opportunities at the state and local (ex.
watershed) level can and should be leveraged to relieve local funding press ures and in some cases
accelerate implementation.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 87
8.0 Glossary & Acronyms
8.1. Glossary
Adaptive management
An iterative process of evaluating progress
toward stated goals and revising and refining
implementation actions to ensure that progress is
being made toward the goal.
Bacteria
Microorganisms that can live in a variety of
conditions, some types can cause illness in
humans. The quantity of E. coli, a specific type
of bacteria, is used as a metric to evaluate
potential fecal contamination in s urface water
resources.
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Methods used to control the speed and total
amount of stormwater that flows off a site after a
rainstorm and used to improve the quality of the
runoff water. Can also refer to practices for
control of sediment and erosion.
Climate change
A long -term change in climate measures such as
temperature and rainfall. Changes in climate
have a large impact on water quality as well as
lake and wetland water levels and stream and
river flows.
Eutrophication
The process of increased water body
productivity (growth of algae and aquatic
vegetation) caused by increasing nutrient input
to the water body.
Floodplain
The land adjacent to a water body that is
expected to be inundated with water after a large
rainfal l event.
Green infrastructure
A stormwater management approach that utilizes
natural landscape features and hydrologic
processes to treat stormwater by infiltration,
e vapotranspiration, and/or reuse of runoff. Green
infrastructure also achieves other envi ronmental
goals such as carbon sequestration, reductions in
urban heat island effect, improved air quality,
improved wildlife habitat and increased
opportunities for o utdoor recreation. (Definition
a dapted from US EPA )
Groundwater
Water located below grou nd in the spaces
present in soil and bedrock.
Groundwater recharge
Water moving through the soil surface and
deeper underground to become groundwater.
Hydrology
The movement of water. Often used in reference
to water movement as runoff over the soil afte r a
rainfall event as it contributes to surface water
bodies.
Illicit discharges
Any contribution to the storm sewer system that
isn't stormwater (i.e. illegal connections to the
storm sewer, dumping of materials in the storm
sewer).
Impervious surfaces
Surfaces that severely restrict the movement of
water through the surface of the earth and into
the soil below. Impervious surface typically
refers to manmade surfaces such as non -porous
asphalt or concrete roadways, buildings, and
heavily compacted soils.
Infiltration
The movement of water into the soil.
Mercury
A metal that cycles between land, air and water.
The primary source of mercury in water bodies
is air pollution. Mercury accumulates in fish and
often results in fish consumption advisories for
lakes and rivers. Mercury can have toxic effects
on the nervous system of animals, including
humans, that eat large quantities of fish.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 88
Metals
Metals dissolved in water. Typical metals
included in monitoring programs are cadmium,
chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc .
Nonpoint source pollution
Pollution, such as nutrients and sediment, that
are not from one distinct origin. For example,
soil can run off of land throughout the
watershed, it does not come from just one point.
Nutrient
Element essential for plant or animal growth.
Major nutrients include nitrogen, phosphorus,
carbon, oxygen, sulfur, and potassium. Within
surface water systems, nutrients such as
phosphorus and nitrogen can lead to the
excessive growth of algae.
Nutrient/Eutrophication B iological Indicators
A surface water impairment based on high levels
of nutrients that cause eutrophication and
changes in the biological community.
Outwash plain
A region of relatively flat to undulating
topography covered by sediment deposited by
the gl acier meltwater. Outwash is usually
composed of sand, sand and gravel, or fine sand
and silt.
Special Area Management Plan (SAMP)
The SAMP provides a watershed -based and
conservation -based framework for aquatic
resource management, particularly as
development and redevelopment occur within
the City. The SAMP addresses future water
quality, quantity, flow rates and wetland
function an d condition in light of forecasted
development and potential changes to surface
and groundwater characteristics. The Army
Corps of Engineers St. Paul District (Corps) uses
the SAMP in its Clean Water Act Section 404
permit evaluations within the area addre ssed by
the SAMP.
Stormwater/Stormwater runoff
The water that flows off a site after a rainstorm.
Subwatershed
A smaller geographic section of a larger
watershed unit with a drainage area of typically
between 2 and 15 square miles and whose
boundaries include all the land area draining to a
specified point.
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
The maximum quantity of a particular water
pollutant that can be discharged into a body of
water without violating a water quality standard.
TMDL also refers to the p rocess of allocating
pollutant loadings among point and nonpoint
sources.
Watershed
The geographic region within which water
drains into a particular river, stream, or body of
water.
Water Quality
Water quality is a term used to describe the
chemical, physical, and biological characteristics
of water, usually in respect to its suitability for a
particular use. In the case of surface waters, uses
are typically swimming and fishing.
Wetland Restoration
The re -establishment of a wetland functi ons in a
wetland area that had previously been altered
due to draining, filling or other means.
City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 89
8.2. Acronyms
ACD Anoka County Ditch
DNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation
MNRAM Minnesota Routine Assessment Method
MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
MS4 Municipal Separate Stormsewer System
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
RCWD Rice Creek Watershed District
RMP Resource Management Plan
RMU Resource Management Unit
SAMP Special Area Management Plan
SWMP Surface Water Management Plan
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
VLAWMO Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization
WCA Wetland Conservation Act
Area of Study
General
Purpose/Descripti
on of the Reason
Factors
Addressed
(code)1
Reference/Infor-mation
Source
Year of
Effort
Model
Used
Modeling Effort
Performed By…
Model
Found?
GIS
Subwatershed
Boundaries?
Modeled
Land Use
Conditions
Level of
Detail
Continue
to Use?
Proximity to
Lino Lakes
direct drainage area to Marshan Lake ditch repair analysis WSEL ACD 10-22-32 2007
XP-
SWMM EOR
See Lino
Lakes RMP
See Lino
Lakes RMP IN
JD 4 watershed ditch repair analysis WSEL JD 4/ACD 15 2007
XP-
SWMM EOR yes yes
Existing / Do
Nothing / Full
Repair / RMP
Medium /
High
No - CN's
not documented IN
ACD 25 watershed ditch repair analysis WSEL ACD 25 2007
XP-
SWMM EOR no no IN
area around Lino Lakes and Centerville
provide an analysis
of the current city
infrastructure and
identify areas of
concern WSEL Lino Lakes RMP 2008
XP-
SWMM EOR yes yes
Existing, Future
(Full Build Out),
Future RMP High
No - CN's
not
documented IN
area contributing to Hardwood Creek ditch repair analysis WSEL Hardwood Creek/JD 2 2004
XP-
SWMM EOR yes yes
Existing / Future
(2020)
Hydrology:
Low/
Medium
Hydraulics;
High
No - CN's
not documented IN
watershed district
watershed
management
VRO; Q_VEL;
WSEL RCWD HydroCAD model 1998
HydroCA
D
Montgomery-
Watson yes
No, but
delineated in
report Existing Low
Yes - for low
detail purposes IN/Upstream
Baldwin Lake
flood insurance
study WSEL Baldwin Lake 1980 HEC-2
Totz, Kind, Duvall,
Anderson and
Associates no no IN
Bald Eagle Lake lake water quality LOAD
Bald Eagle Lake
assessment 2005 MNLEAP ?no no IN
Chain of Lakes lake water quality LOAD Chain of Lakes ?P8 Wenck no no IN
Peltier Lake lake water quality LOAD Peltier Lake Assessment 2006 MNLEAP ?no no IN
Peltier and Centerville Lakes
lake water quality
impacts WQC; LKRM Peltier/Centerville TMDL ?
BATHTU
B EOR no no IN
Appendix A
Summary of Relevant Modeling
Appendix B
Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities – by Project Type
City - Wide
Project
Type
Project Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years
6 -10
Total
Financing Comments CIP Issue Category
CIP Construct water quality
improvements during
reconstruc tion projects or
complete stand -alone projects to
address TMDL requirements,
water quality or flooding issues.
$20,000 $20,000 $200,000 $240,000 SWMF This includes future, s pecific
projects (planning and
implementation) that come from
Subwatershed Plans.
X Water Quality
CIP Public Works Pond/Drainage
Improvements
$30,000 $30,000 General
Fund
X Water Quality
Program Establish Wetland Bank in
cooperation with RCWD and
VLAWMO - Assessing
feasibility of sites.
$5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 $50,000 SWMF Example - Wolan Park.
Potentially cost neutral with
future recover of funds via sale of
credits. See also RMU
Subwatershed Plans. Coordinate
with volume banking?
Wetland
Program Implement the wellhead
protection plan to protect the
groundwater source from
contamination.
$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000 $30,000 Water Utility Groundwater
Program Continue to implement the
City’s Water Conservation
Management Plan
$5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 $30,000 Water Utility Ex. Sprinkler kits, rain sensors Groundwater
Program Promote the use of rain gardens,
native plantings, and
reforestation within existing
development areas as a means of
increasing infiltration,
evapotranspiration, and filtration
of runoff conveying pollutant
loads to the lakes.
$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $12,000 General
Fund
Provide technical and financial
resources to support an
educational campaign with
RCWD to encourage BMP
Implementation
Water Quality
Program Continue water resource and
stormwater education program
(SWPPP)
$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000 $30,000 General
Fund
Staff time and coordination.
Mailers and printing costs
Natural Resources
Program Provide annual training for City
Staff on stormwater management
(SWPPP)
$1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $7,500 $15,000 General
Fund
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Continue to manage and protect
heron rookery and other
important plant and animal
communities.
$1,000 $200 $1,000 $200 $1,000 $3,400 $6,800 General
Fund
Staff time and coordination. Natural Resources
Program Construction Phase - Continue to
implement the City’s SWPPP
and enforce regulatory
requirements.
$- $- $- $- $- $- $- General
Fund
Staff time and coordination with
RCWD. See also Maintenance,
and Inspection
Erosion & Sediment
Control
Program Update and maintain the City's
website with stormwater
management information
$- $- $- $- $- $- $- General
Fund
Staff Time Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Appendix B
Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities – by Project Type
Program Update ordinances to reflect
policies identified in this plan
$- $4,000 $4,000 $- $- $- $8,000 General
Fund
Coordinate so it is after
development of the first RMU
Subwatershed Plan so specific
areas of ordinance changes are
known.
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Incorporate neighborhood
stormwater planning and
education into street
reconstruction program.
$- $- $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 $40,000 Potential
cost share
with RCWD.
Stormwater
utility could
help fund.
Planning & design work. Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Continue to participate in pre -
permit application meetings with
TEP (Technical Evaluation
Panel) including RCWD and
Army Corps of Engineers that
implements the Special Area
Management Plan.
$- $- $5,000 $- $- $5,000 $10,000 General
F und
Periodic audit of process and
follow through by wetland
specialist.
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Continue to update and maintain
GIS database and storm sewer
map (SWPPP)
$1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $7,500 $15,000 General
Fund
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Sweep Streets at least twice
annually (SWPPP)
$- $- $- $- $- $- $- General
Fund
City costs include staff time and
Equipment
Program Inspect 20% of stromwater
ponds and MS4 outfalls each
year (SWPPP)
$2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $12,500 $25,000 General
Fund
Staff time and consultant
Program Annually inspect and maintain
exposed stockpiles and storage
areas on City Property (SWPPP)
$- $- $- $- $- $- $- General
Fund
Staff time Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program SWPPP Updates and 5 -yr
Renewal.
$10,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 $55,000 General
Fund
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Maintain and submit annual
inspection r eports, maintenance
records, and other documentation
in conformance with the NPDES
permit (SWPPP)
$5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 $50,000 General
Fund
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Conduct annual maintenance on
sump catch basins, structural
treatment devices, and manholes,
ponds and other storm water
BMP's annually and keep
detailed record of work
performed (SWPPP)
$125,00
0
$125,00
0
$125,00
0
$125,00
0
$125,00
0
$575,000
$1,200,00
0
General
Fund
Maintenance &
Inspection
Program Complete a program for
inspecting and maintaining
existing ponds and other BMP's
$15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $75,000 $150,000 General
Fund
Staff time and coordination. Public Participation
Appendix B
Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities – by Project Type
Program Pursue grants: State, Federal,
Local. Ex. RCWD’s Urban
Stormwater Remediation
Program (retrofits), VLAWMO
for work in Amelia Lk
watershed.
$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000 $30,000 General
Fund
Staff time and coordination.
Occasional outside help on special
projects.
Financing
Program Update and continue to
implement TrunkSurface Water
Management Fee System.
$- General
Fund
Staff time Financing
Program Annually review mowing, road
salt application, fertilizing, and
herbicide practices within the
City and update practices as
feasible to protect water quality
$- $- $- $- $- $- $- General
Fund
Staff Time Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Program Continue to implement Elicit
Discharge and Eliminartion
Projgram including annual
training
$- $- $- $- $- $- $- General
Fund
Staff Time Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study Review and evaluate funding
sources for surface water
management including ad
valorem taxes, development
charges, grants and user fees.
$- $15,000 $- $- $- $- $15,000 SWMF for
Trunk
Improvement
s,
Staff time and coordination -
periodic (5 -yr) review of city's
funding approach. Feasibility
Study for funding options in Year
2
Financing
Study Review existing watershed
models and work with the
RCWD and VLAWMO to
address flow constraints in the
system.
$5,000 $5,000 SWMF Assumes no capital costs. See
also RMU Subwatershed Plans for
specific sites/areas.
Floodplain
Study Work with the Rice Creek
Watershed District on the ditch
abandonment process for public
subsurface (drain tile) systems
and explore partial abandonment
for surface (ditch) systems, in
cases where the public drainage
system requires redesign to
implement the Multi -Functional
Greenway Corridor,
$- General
Fund
See RMU Subwatershed Plans Public Ditch
Study Prepare Wellhead Protection
Plan, Part 1 Amendment
$17,000 $17,000 Water Utility Staff time and coordination. Groundwater
Study Complete subwatershed
management plans for the three
highest priority RMUs:
$- Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study Reshanau/Ditch 25 RMU $25,000 $25,000 SWMF Assumes mode ling by others. Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study Marshan/Ditch 10 -22 -32 RMU $25,000 $25,000 SWMF Assumes mode ling by others. Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Appendix B
Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities – by Project Type
Study Clearwater Creek/Ditch 55 RMU $22,000 $22,000 SWMF Assumes mode ling by others. Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study Develop subwatershed
management plans for the
remaining RMUs in the
following order:
$- SWMF Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study 1. Peltier RMU $30,000 $30,000 SWMF Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study 2. Wilkinson RMU $30,000 $30,000 SWMF Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study 3. Amelia RMU $- $- SWMF Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study 4. Hardwood Creek RMU $- $- SWMF Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study 5. Rice Lake RMU $- $- SWMF Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
Study Evaluate Revisions to Road
Design Standards including:
road w idths, infiltration BMPs,
pervio us pavements
$5,000 $5,000 General
Fund
Regulations,
Permitting and
Reporting
TOTAL $259,500 $191,700 $217,500 $197,700 $228,500 $1,105,900 $2,200,800
Annual
Avg.
City -Wide
Costs =
$220,080
RMUs
10 -yr
total=
$701 ,000
Annual
Avg.
RMUs
Costs=
$71,0 00
Total 10 -
yr Cost =
$2,901,800
Annual
Avg.
Cost=
$290,180
Appendix C
Fully -Funded Scenario Implementation Costs (if Additional Funding is Obtained) – By Issue
Category /Resource Management Unit (RMU)
City -Wide Actions by
Issue Category Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years
6 -10
Total
10 -year
Cost
Water Rate and Quantity $5 0,000 $1 00,000 $15 0,000
Water Quality - - - - - $200,000 $200,000
Wetland Management $9,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 $72,000
Floodplain Management $5,000 - - - - - $5,000
Public Ditch System $5,000 $50,000 - $50,000 $5,000 $50,000 $160,000
Groundwater
Management $8,000 $3,000 $8,000 $3,000 $8,000 $25,000 $55,000
Natural Resources $1,000 - $1,000 - $1,000 $3,000 $6,000
Erosion and Sediment
Control $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 $50,000
Regulations, Permitting
and Reporting $68,000 $32,000 $76,000 $42,000 $90,000 $151,000 $459,000
Monitoring,
Maintenance And
Inspection
$110,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $575,000 $1,145,000
Public Participation,
Information & Education $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 $20,000
Financing $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000 $33,000
Total $219,000 $217,000 $217,000 $227,000 $286,000 $1,189,000 $2,355 ,800
RMU -Specific Actions
by Subwatershed Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years
6 -10
Total
10 -year
Cost
Reshanau RMU
(Ditch 25) $8,000 $8,000 $200,000 $5,000 $20,000 $247,000 $488,000
Marshan RMU
(Ditch 10 -22 -32) $10,000 $13,000 $24,000 $14,000 $206,000 $190,000 $457,000
Clearwater Creek RMU
(Ditch 55) - $50,000 $8,000 $270,000 - $50,000 $378,000
George Watch RMU - - - - - - -
Rondeau RMU - - - - - - -
Peltier RMU - - - - - $65,000 $65,000
Hardwood Creek RMU - - - - - $13,000 $13,000
Upper Rice Creek RMU - - - - - - -
Rice Lake RMU - - - - - $85,000 $85,000
Centerville RMU - - - - - - -
Sherman RMU - - - - - - -
Amelia RMU - - - - - $95,000 $95,000
Baldwin RMU - - - - - - -
Middle Rice Creek RMU - - - - - - -
Wilkinson RMU - - - - - - -
Total $18,000 $71,000 $232,000 $289,000 $226,000 $745,000 $1,581,000
WS – Item # 3
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 3
Date: May 6, 2013
To: City Council
From: Michael Grochala
Re: Exterior Storage – 7309 Lake Drive
Background
On February 22, 2013 , following receipt of resident complaints , city staff issued a Cease
and Desist Order to Pinnacle Point, LLC, owner of property located at 7309 Lake Drive .
T he order required the discontinuance of t he use of property for the outdoor storage of
shipping containers. Upon further review , the property is also being used for the outdoor
storage of construction trailers. The containers and trailer s are being stacked three to four
high approximately 30 feet in height across the 5 acre parcel. Outdoor Storage is not
allowed a s the principal use of prope rty in the LI, Light Industrial District.
Following a brief discussi on with the property owner at the March 25, 2013 council work
session , the city council directed that the Cease and Desist Order b e stayed until further
discussion could be held on the issue .
Policy Review
The property in question is guided for industrial u se in the City ’s Comprehensive Plan.
The plan establishe s the goal to a ttract and encourage new light industrial, high tech,
business and professional services in the City. The plan also establishes a policy to
protect designated industrial areas from residential encroachment and marginal land uses
that will preclude the hig hest economic use of land available for commercial and light
industrial development.
T he City ’s Zoning Ordi n ance is the primary tool for implementing the comprehensive
plan. The City has two industrial zoning districts – LI, Light Industrial Di strict and the
GI, General Industrial District. As noted above , the parcel in question is located in the
LI, Light Industrial Distric t. The purpose of the LI District, as defined in the Zoning
Ordina nce , is as follows:
Purpose. These areas are intended to attract and encour age new light industrial,
high -tech business and professional services. These areas have the prerequisites
for industrial development, but because of proximity to residential areas or the
need to protect certain areas or uses from adverse influences, high development
standards will be necessary. LI uses include service industries and industries
which manufacture, fabricate, assemble or store, where the process is not likely to
create offensive noise, vibrations, dust, heat, smoke, odor, glare, or other
obje ctionable influences. Generally, these include wholesale, service and light
industries which are dependent upon raw materials refined elsewhere. No new
land shall be zoned LI, Light Industrial unless the site or area lies within the
City’s MUSA and sanitar y sewer and municipal water is available.
The existing container and trailer storage business represents an extreme departure from
this purpose . Outdoor storage as a principal use is common ly seen as the lowest form of
industrial use. I t is a low value use . S torage areas have little to no improvements and
therefore generate minimal tax value when compared to a typical industrial facility with
building improvements. They also have the effect of making surrounding areas less
valuable for development purposes. Once legally established , they are also extremely
difficult to eliminate. Staff does acknowledge that land allowed for outdoor storage is in
high demand. This is because most cities have eliminated or sev erely restricted the
allowance for outdoor storage in their ordi n ances for the reasons listed above. It is fairly
common for these types of uses to move to outer ring suburban and rural areas because of
lower land values and less restrictive requiremen ts.
In 2011 , the City Council initiated a review of our industrial district requirements
specifically related to outdoor storage. This review resulted in the amendment of the
zoning ordinance to allow additional flexibility for outdoo r storage as an accessory use
but stopped short of allowing it as a principal use.
T here was some discu ssion at the council work session that the property in question
would have little to no other alternative uses if the current container business is
disallowed. Staff disagrees with t his statement. The property can be used for any of the
uses permitted or allowed by conditional use in the LI, Light Industrial Districts (see
attachment). Public sanitary sewer and water utilities are available to service the site. In
this case , the property is in no different position than any ot her property located in the
City ’s industrial areas. The property may require additional investment , such as
connection to municip al servi c es, in order to be sold, but that should not be used as a
reason to relax zoning standards for the property.
Continued use of the property for outdoor container and trailer storage would require an
amendment to the Ci ty Zoning Ordinance. This type of use is not appropriate for the LI,
Light Industrial District and staff would not recommend consideration of such a proposal.
Requested Council Direction
Staff is requesting council directio n regarding ab atement of the nonconforming use of
property located at 7309 Lake Drive.
Attachments
1. General Vicinity Map
2. LI Zoning District Use s
1
LI, Light Industrial Zoning District.
Permitted Uses. Subject to applicable provisions of this Ordinance, the following are permitted
uses in the LI District.
1. Beverage production and bottling, including public tours of the facilities and gift shops
containing merchandise directly related to the facility.
2. Building material sales.
3. Carpet and rug cleaning.
4. Community gardens operated by the city.
5. Construction -related businesses, including shops and offices for plumbing, heating, glazi ng,
painting, paper hanging, roofing, ventilating, electrical,
carpentry, welding, landscaping, excavating, general contracting and similar uses, including
contractor storage of equipment and building materials if enclosed within a building, but not
stora ge yards.
6. Feed and seed sales.
7. Greenhouses, nurseries.
8. Laundry, dry cleaning or dying plant.
9. Manufacturing or assembly of a wide variety of products that produces no exterior noise,
glare, fumes, noxious products, by -products, or wastes , or creates other objectionable impact on
the environment, including the generation of large volumes of traffic.
10. Mass transit terminals.
11. Office business —clinic and general.
12. Radio and television stations.
13. Recreational business conta ined entirely within the principal building.
14. Research laboratories
15. Trade or Business schools.
16. Warehousing and distribution facilities, but not including truck freight trucking terminal or
mini self -storage facilities per Section 1, Subd. 2.B of this Ordinance.
17. Wholesale businesses/showrooms.
2
Conditional Uses. Subject to applicable provisions of this Ordinance, the following are
conditional uses in the LI District. These uses require a conditional use permit based on criteria
and pr ocedures outlined in Section 2, Subd. 2. of this Ordinance.
1. Automobile and truck repair provided that:
a. All painting must be conducted in an approved paint booth per Section 3, Subd. H.
b. All flammable materials, including liquids and rags, shal l conform with the applicable
provisions of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code.
c. All outside storage shall be prohibited except the storage of customer vehicles waiting for
repair.
2. Commercial and Public Radio and Television Transmitting Antennas, and Public Utility
Microwave Antennas greater than forty -five (45) feet in height and less than two hundred (200)
feet in height as regulated by Section 3, Subd. 14 of this Ordinance.
3. Commercial Kennels, provided that:
a. The applicable provisions of C hapter 503 are determined to be satisfied.
b. Cages, enclosures and housing facilities shall be at least five hundred (500) feet from
any residential property line.
c. An enclosed indoor or exterior exercise area shall be provided to accommodate the
per iodic exercising of animals boarded at the kennel. Exterior exercise areas shall be
enclosed by an eight (8) foot high solid fence.
d. All animals shall be housed indoors for overnight boarding.
4. Mini self -storage facilities provided that:
a. No si ngle building shall be greater than one hundred fifty (150) feet in length.
b. If an “on -premises” caretaker dwelling unit is provided on site, construction of said
dwelling unit shall conform to all design standard regulations for multiple family
dwelli ng units of the Minnesota State Building Code.
c. No retailing, wholesaling, manufacturing, repair, or other such activity other than
storage is to occur within the mini self -storage facility.
5. Open and outdoor storage (not outdoor sales lots) as an accessory use provided that:
3
a. The designated storage area shall comply with all building setback requirements for the
district. Outside storage is prohibited between the principal structure and any public
right -of -way.
b. The storage area is landscap ed and screened from view of adjacent uses and public
rights -of -way via a fence and greenbelt planting strip, in accordance with Section 3,
Subd. 4.Q.6 of this Ordinance.
c. The entire storage area is fenced and secured in an appropriate manner.
d. The storage area is blacktopped or concrete surfaced, unless an alternative wear -
resistant material is determined by the City Engineer to be suitable to control dust and
drainage and is specifically approved by the City Council.
e. The storage area does not take up parking space or loading space as required for
conformity to this Ordinance and is not located in the front yard.
f. The property shall not abut I -35W or I -35E.
g. The ratio of storage area to building footprint shall not exceed 2.5:1.
h. All parking, loading and truck staging activities shall occur on site. On -street parking
and loading associated with the use is prohibited.
i. Storage shall not include material considered hazardous under Federal or State
Environmental Law.
6. Veterinary Hospitals provided that:
a. All areas in which animals are confined are located indoors and are properly
soundproofed from adjacent properties.
b. Animal carcasses are properly disposed of in a manner not utilizing on -site garbage
facilities or incineration and the carcasses are properly refrigerated during periods
prior to disposal.
c. An indoor animal kennel is permitted as a use accessory to the veterinary hospital
provided that:
1) The number of animals boarded shall not exceed forty (40).
2) An enclosed indoor or exterior exercise area shall be provided to accommodate
the periodic exercising of animals boarded at the kennel. Exterior exercise areas
shall be limited to a maximum of twenty -five (25) percent of the gross floor area
of the principal use.
4
3) A ventilation system shall be designed so that no odors or organisms will
spread between wards or to the outside air and will be capable of completely
exchanging internal air at a rate of at least twice per hour. Air temperature must
be maintained between 6 0 and 75 degrees Fah renheit.
4 ) A room separate from the kennel area shall be provided of sufficient size to
adequately separate animals that are sick or injured from healthy animals.
5) Indoor animal kennel floors and walls shall be made of non -porous m aterials or
sealed concrete to make it non -porous.
6) Animal wastes shall be flushed down an existing sanitary sewer system or
enclosed in a container of sufficient construction to eliminate odors and
organisms and shall be properly disposed of at least once a day.
d. The appropriate license is obtained from the City and the conditions of Chapter 503
relating to the keeping of animals are satisfactorily met.
e. All State Health Department and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements for
such facil ities are met
WS – Item 4
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 4
Date: May 6 , 2013
To: City Council
From: Julie Bartell
Michael Grochala
Re: Off -Sale Liquor Licensing
Background
At several recent council work sessions , staff presented informatio n on off -sale liquor
restrictions in the city and surrounding communities. The information provided was a
sample of what some other cities in the area are doing to regulate the number of off -sale
liquor licenses within their borders. A map was also prese nted showing the location and
types of off -sale licenses within the city. S taff reported that the most common regulations
used by municipalities to restrict the number of off -sale lic enses are by proximity (how close
one license may be to another) or by p opulation.
The council requested that staff prepare an ordinance f or consideration that limits the number
of off -sale licenses in this city by the proximity of one -half mile (without consideration of
liquor stores outside the city limits ). Direction wa s also given to exclude from the
restriction s off -sale locations that are not liquor stores (on/off sale combination, 3.2 percent
off -sale, and off -sale growler). The council also asked for language to prevent licenses from
being held solely for the purp ose of value and not for operation of a store. Currently licensed
stores would be automatically exempt from the proximity regulation.
At the April work session, questions arose about the impact that proximity regulations
could have upon future economic d evelopment efforts. Based on that discussion, t he
council directed the Community Development Director to research and provide an option
for exempting certain area(s) of the city from proximit y regulation s. Based on staff’s
review the City Council may want to consider simply restricting the number of licenses
within a specified geographic area. For example rather than exempt an area the City
could limit the number of licenses issued within the GB, General Business District zoning
district lying north of 3 5W to the four currently issued licenses. Staff would need to
work with the City Attorney to develop this language further.
EDAC Review
The City’s Economic Development Advisory Committee reviewed the proposed
proximity provision at its April 4, 2013 me eting. The board recommended against the
proposed changes. The board felt that the City should let market forces dictate the
location of the proposed uses.
Requested Council Direction
If the council would like to modify the city’s current liquor regul ations, passage of an
ordinance would be required.
Attachments
none