HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-11-2020 Council Meeting MinutesCOUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
1 CITY OF LINO LAKES
2 LINO LAKES CITY COUNCIL
3 REGULAR MEETING
4 MINUTES
5
6 DATE May 11, 2020
7 TIME STARTED 6:30 p.m.
8 TIME ENDED 8*45 p.m.
9 MEMBERS PRESENT Council Member Stoesz, Lyden,
10 Ruhland, Cavegn and Mayor Rafferty (via
11 Zoom)
12 MEMBERS ABSENT
13
14 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Finance Director Sarah Cotton; Director of
15 Public Safety John Swenson; Community Development Director Michael Grochala; City Planner
16 Katie Larsen; and City Clerk Julie Bartell
17
18 The council meeting was held telephonically on the Zoom Meeting platform and as allowed by
19 Minnesota Statutes 13D.021.
20
21 PUBLIC COMMENT
22 Jamie Jensen, St. Clair Estates developer, asked for assistance in finalizing his accounts with the
23 City_
24 SETTING THE AGENDA
25 The agenda was approved as presented.
26 CONSENT AGENDA
27 Councilmember Stoesz moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items 1 A through 1 D as presented.
28 Councilmember Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none.
29 Councilmember Lyden asked for additional information on two items on the Expenditure List.
30 Finance Director Cotton noted that, for the Xcel Energy bill, there are characters missing due to the
31 restrictions of the print field. She advised Councilmember Lyden to review the full list. For
32 Wheeler Hardware, the expenditure relates to door hardware replacements at City Hall.
33
34 ITEM ACTION
35 Consideration of Expenditures:
36 A) May 11, 2020 (Check No. 112186 through 112241)
37 in the amount of $158,863.97 Approved
38 B) Consider Approval of April 27, 2020
39 Work Session Minutes Approved
40 C) Consider Approval of April 27, 2020
41 Council Meeting Minutes Approved
1
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
42 D) Consider Approval of May 4, 2020 Board of
43 Appeal Minutes
44 FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
45 There was no report from the Finance Department.
46 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT
Approved
47 3A) Consider Pro Rata Fee Refunds and Payment Schedule Amendment for Annual
48 Business Licenses — City Clerk Bartell addressed the council regarding business licenses and fees.
49 The City is currently in the process of renewing licenses and staff has heard from licenses holders
50 about the impact of not being able to operate and use their licenses. State law does allow cities to
51 refund fees under circumstances that are not controlled by the business owners. The options
52 presented are: a) to provide a fee refund on a monthly pro rata basis for months that businesses were
53 not able to operate; and b) allow businesses to pay one half of their fee upon application and the
54 other half midway into their license period. Ms. Bartell noted the licenses involved.
55 Council Member Ruhland moved to approve the fee process changes as presented. Council
56 Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none
57 4. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT
58 4A) Consider Resolution 20-45 Approving Allina Ambulance as the Primary Ambulance
59 Service for the City of Lino Lakes — Public Safety Director Swenson explained the need to
60 contract with a new ambulance provider for the city due to the merger of the current provider into
61 the M Health Fairview system. Staff has researched service information and found that the City is
62 included in an overlapping area and so there are two providers available. After meeting with both
63 providers, staff is now recommending a contract for services be executed with Allina Health
64 Services. He explained the terms that staff has reached for an agreement with Allina which
65 include training options for City staff and lease of Fire Station No. 1 for an ambulance and crew.
66 He reviewed the actions being recommended to the council. He noted Allina staff present to answer
67 questions.
68 Susan Long, Vice President of Operations for Allina EMS, and other Allina Operations
69 representatives (local and executive), announced that they are excited to work with the City. They
70 noted history in the area and their investment in technology that will provide good services. They
71 provided services within the area during last year's PGA event. A statement was read including
72 qualifications and accomplishments of Allina Ambulance Services.
73 Mayor Rafferty said that the City is grateful to be offered these services and he is thankful for the
74 very difficult work currently underway in the healthcare community. He looks forward to having
75 services operating from Fire Station No. 1.
76 Councilmember Lyden asked Director Swenson if he is supportive of this provider for a very
77 important service and is the contract in final format. Director Swenson confirmed that the contract
78 is in final order and he added that tonight's action is the culmination of about two years work in
79 deciding the City's future ambulance service. He is excited from meeting with Allina and also
80 from what he hears from other jurisdictions about the open communication and good services
81 they've experienced with Allina.
2
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
82 Councilmem Der Stoesz noted Section 5 of the Lease Agreement, regarding maintenance. It seems
83 pretty loose since there are no specifics on finances. Director Swenson explained that the City
84 provides all maintenance for the building.
85 Director Swenson confirmed that the contract length is three years and there is no review of
86 language planned during that period.
87 Mayor Rafferty noted the decrease in lease revenue and wonders how that relates to the space.
88 Director Swenson explained that North Memorial was leasing at two stations so in effect was paying
89 $600 per station.
90 Council Member Lyden moved to approve Resolution No. 2045, authorizing execution of the
91 medical/training agreement and lease agreement as presented. Council Member Ruhland seconded
92 the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none
93 5. PUBLIC 'SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT
94 There was no report from the Public Services Department.
95 6. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
96 6A) Nadeau Acres, Katie Larsen -
97 i. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 02-20 Rezoning Property from R, Rural to R-I, Single
98 Family Residential
99 City Planner Larsen and City Engineer Diane Hankee reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file)
100 including information on the proposed project, including:
101 - Rezoning and Preliminary Plat (as reviewed at March 2nd work session);
102 - The development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and compliant with zoning and
103 subdivision ordinances;
104 - The original preliminary plat;
105 - The original stormwater management plan (three retention ponds);
106 - Option 1 of the originial stormwater plan (noting pond 100 with a underground pipe); Vicker
107 property did not provide necessary easement;
108 - Developer has revised plans to address council, Rice Creek Watershed District (RC)vVD) and
109 resident comments; those plans were reviewed at the May 4th work session;
110 - Revised preliminary plat (one less property and one less outlot); Pond 100 was enlarged;
i 11 - Future park plan (park will service a larger area that just this development); Option for a
112 temporary park was reviewed and found not viable;
113 - Option 2 of the reviewed stormwater plan; plunge pool energy dissipator added, pipe
114 eliminated, no easement from property owner required;
115 - Activity since last work session includes meeting with adjacent property owners (Vickers)
116 regarding the stormwater outlet; staff heard concerns about erosion and ongoing maintenance;
117 - the Vickers prefer a piped outlet with a dissipater that is maintained by the City; staff
118 recommends both those options and a direct pipe outlet without a plunge pool;
3
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
119 City Engineer Hankee noted that she has met with the Vickers and they reviewed the plans on site.
120 She understands that their preference would be for a piped option including the dissipater. With the
121 direct pipe option, they have added storage to the pond which changes factors that concerned the
122 Vickers. She showed charts indicating discharge and velocity (both with easement). With a plunge
123 pool option, reduction in run off rate is possible. She reviewed direct outlet verses plunge pool
124 considerations. Looking at the view of Pond 100, Ms. Hankee explained the new proposal includes a
125 more significant outlet dissipation system, dug in place so elevations would not change (a concern of
126 the Vickers). That is the staff recommendation. She also reviewed a plunge pool option (concerns are
127 added maintenance and the direct pipe option eliminates erosion concern).
128 Ms. Larsen noted conversation about a Great River Energy easement and the Vickers' desire to
129 understand their approval. Staff has obtained an email confirmation from Great River.
130 - Josephine Lane and a utility extension was reviewed (Vickers concerned about street, sewer and
131 water extention to their property) due to tax valuation; staff has been informed by the assessor
132 that the development will increase valuation not street/utilities addition; also noted implications
133 of not doing improvements now;
134 - 6709 20t' Avenue (Weber property) was reviewed as well as implications to their property; Ms.
135 Larsen noted that she spoke with Mr. Weber today and specifics related to the right turn lane
1 I 6close to their property, driveway location, utility pole location and construction access (prefer
137 not just Red Oak). Mayor Rafferty asked about the road north of Red Oak and if the plans
138 indicate no change to the right side of the roadway. Ms. Larsen noted that there would be
139 expansion on both sides of the roadway (confirmed by WSB engineer).
140 - Findings of fact included in report;
141 - Advisory board actions (P&Z and Environmental Board approval);
142 - Actions requested of the council this evening.
143 Mayor Rafferty noted that he and other councilmembers have talked with the Vickers. He is thankful
144 that staff has facilitated some movements that are appropriate.
145 Councilmember Cavegn asked to hear from the Vickers. He believes there is a difference in
146 understanding of tax value (increased value).
147 Linda Broussard and Dave Vicker, Centerville, offered thanks for the time and consideration shown by
148 city officials and staff. She has received two plans from the City Engineer and they have a couple
149 questions. They have also received some easement language that they are reviewing. She believes
150 they are feeling much better about the drainage. Regarding valuation, on the north side of their
151 property, they had a situation with a Centerville development that included stubbing in a road. They
152 ended up with a tax valuation change. When stubbing happens they cannot be considered agricultural
153 land for tax purposes anymore and that's a tax increase. The county assessor did reverse the increase
154 after some discussion. There is the matter of "development pressure" that the county assessor now
155 speaks of that driving up valuation. They would like to maintain their agricultural value consideration.
156 They also have continuing concern about people using their property (ATVs and snowmobiles) with a
157 road stubbed in.
158 Councilmember Lyden noted tree preservation. It is noted in the staff report that there are 750
159 significant trees that will be reduced to 252 trees, mitigated by 29 trees to be put in (not good odds for
160 the trees). Also he is still concerned that public water is being moved to a private ditch. The impact of
161 the development will be staged but he'd like to extend an easement to the City for volume of water
4
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
162 going into the ditch and future development that will be served by that ditch; it merits a discussion
163 about the ditch becoming a City ditch. Also he has questions about traffic. There is already a traffic
164 issue at County Road J and this development will increase traffic in that direction. The staff report says
165 the traffic generated is outside of the scope of the project, however, it will impact people. There are
166 traffic improvements planned in the area of County Road J and 35E in the future but he wonders about
167 an upgrade sooner. He would like to see conversations with Anoka County about an additional lane on
168 Centerville approaching County Road J. Mayor Rafferty remarked that he's aware of discussion at the
169 state level to plan and implement improvements in that area. Ms. Hankee noted that the 2020
170 construction season will include addition of temporary signals at the County Road J ramp; there are
171 discussions about long term improvements as well. Mayor Rafferty concurred that the situation is very
172 difficult at rush hour, noting a freeway back up in the evening.
173 Councilmember Lyden remarked that his main concern is the water in the ditch and he'd like to know
174 how the Vickers feel. Ms. Broussard said she believes they will be okay with one of the three plans,
175 with the understanding that the City will be involved with maintenance and can respond to problems.
176 Councilmember Ruhland asked if this will be precast concrete (Ms. Hankee confirmed) and how far
177 does the easement go? Ms. Hankee noted on a map a 20-30 foot wide parallel to the pipe. He asked if
178 the erosion concern is resolved and Ms. Hankee noted a few things that will provide redundancy to
179 address the concern. He has also viewed the property; are there plans for a barricade since there is
180 paving up to their property line? Ms. Hankee explained what barricades are added to the end of the
181 road ("this road will extend in the future") He asked that a "No ATV" advisory be added; Ms. Hankee
182 said she'd check. He asked if the really cool oak tree will be saved? Larry Olson, developer, said he
183 doesn't believe that, with the grading that is necessary, the tree will be saved.
184 Councilmember Stoesz asked if disruption to field the would be addressed by the developer if
185 necessary. Mr. Olson said they typically cut through the tiles and they cease to function at some point.
186 Councilmember Stoesz received confirmation that hydrants will be moved and that the move will
187 actually make them closer to the Weber's house.
188 Councilmember Lyden asked if the individual lots are drained to lot lines? If so, would a fence still be
189 allowed on those lines since there will be easements. Ms. Larsen said fences are allowed with
190 easement encroachment agreements.
191 Mayor Rafferty asked if there will be an HOA and the developer said no because there are no elements
192 that would require it. The mayor asked if there be signage identifying the development and Mr. Olson
193 said no there is no room for signage.
194 The Nadeau's and Weber's were also on line. The Nadeau's indicated that they appreciate that
195 everyone spent the tune and dealt with the area residents' concerns. Ms. Weber said that since they
196 bought their property, there was a lane added to the roadway and now another lane is being added; the
197 road is getting really close to their house and they are concerned for their children (people drive really
198 fast on 20th); also they planned to build a shed and the driveway relocation may impact that; also the
199 power lines are possibly a concern.
200 Ms. Hankee responded that there is a 60 foot right of way on 20th Avenue on their lot for this purpose.
201 The road cannot be shifted to the east because of alignment and drainage. This is something that has
202 been planned and why the right of way was obtained from new owners in the area. As far as driveway
203 relocation, that can be discussed and she believes relocated. The traffic should also be slower.
5
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
204 Mayor Rafferty noted the history of development in the City and that some family land has long been
205 planned for development for that family's future financial needs. There is a basic right to put the land
206 up for sale and for a developer to be interested in moving forward on it. He added that there is also a
207 value to land that will be set up for utilities.
208 Council Member Lyden moved to deny. Motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Cavegn
209 confirmed that the motion relates only to the rezoning.
210 Councilmember Stoesz moved to approve the First Reading of Ordinance No. 02-20 as presented.
211 Council Member Cavegn seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 4; Nays, 1; as follows: Yeas,
212 Stoesz, Cavegn, Ruhland, Rafferty; Nays, Lyden
213 Consider Resolution No. 20-20, Approving Preliminary Plat and Opening Sub -District 3C & 3D of
214 Utility Staging Area 2A (2020-2025)
215 Councilmember Cavegn requested the removal of the extension to the Vicker's property; it's not
216 necessary to the plat and that could provide savings to the Vickers. Community Development
217 Director Grochala added that it could be pulled back away but he'd recommend that it be stubbed
218 far enough from the intersection that, if it were to be added in the future, the street wouldn't have to
219 be dug up; there would be a dollar savings to the developer. Mr. Olson said they don't need the stub
220 down the street but obviously it would provide utility access to another property in the future; from
221 a development standpoint it's also important to complete roads to a certain extent to ensure a curb
222 line for the new properties. Mayor Rafferty clarified that it's the stub and not the street.
223 Councilmember Ruhland asked about the cost of extending utilities and wouldn't that reduce the
224 future value overall (more than the current tax implications) when considering future marketability.
225 Councilmember Cavegn clarified that the Vickers have indicated that they are concerned about a tax
226 value increase of more than $1,000 per year. Ms. Broussard explained the value implications and
227 how the taxes will escalate and indicated that they do understand the future real estate value
228 implications; it's also a matter of not inviting people onto the farm land by having a road there. Ms.
229 Broussard added that they will deal with the road if they have to and barricades may be helpful.
230 Mayor Rafferty remarked that the road is a need and there's an obligation to proceed. The
231 developer is attempting to address the concerns and the Vickers seem to be accepting diversion
232 techniques on the roadway.
233 Councilmember Lyden asked. everyone to keep in mind that this is being approved without having a
234 park included. Mayor Rafferty said he appreciates the issue.
235 Councilmember Stoesz asked if the Heritage roadway will be stubbed out all the way and Ms.
236 Larsen said yes. Councilmember Stoesz wondered about the consistency of treating that roadway
237 the same. Community Development Director Grochala remarked that staff follows the direction of
238 the comprehensive plan and not connecting roads and not stubbing utilities creates a situation of
239 someone's problem in the future; he added that efficiency of development is a goal.
240 Councilmember Stoesz clarified that he supports the staff recommendation.
241 Councilmember Cavegn asked for clarification of what is planned for Josephine. Community
242 Development Director Grochala explained that the intent is to improve the road and utility stubs and
243 he explained how they manage installation so that the roadway doesn't have to be dug up if utilities
244 are connected to the stub in the future.
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
245 Councilmember Cavegn asked about the possibility of running a continuous curb along Red Oak
246 and leave it as a green space for the area. Ms. Hankee suggested that would not be a huge cost and
247 compromise.
248 Councilmember Lyden noted one odd sized lot in the plat and suggested eliminating development of
249 that lot to improve the neighborhood.
250 Mayor Rafferty noted that he fears the council is attempting to craft the development and that can
251 come at a large cost to the developer.
252 Mr. Olson explained that the lots have all been reviewed and odd shaped lots are not unusual. He's
253 been doing this for over forty years and, in his experience, those odd lots seem to be the first to sell.
254 It may be hard to understand everything behind the planning but it's there.
255 Councilmember Stoesz moved to approve Resolution No. 20-20 as stated by staff, finishing the
256 roads. Council Member Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 3; Nays, 2, as
257 follows: Yeas, Ruhland, Stoesz, Rafferty; Nays, Cavegn, Lyden
258 6B) Lyngblomsten PUD Amendment #l,
259 City Planner Larsen reviewed a PowerPoint presentation including information on the following:
260 - Background on the project;
261 - Project history was reviewed at work session;
262 - Original grading plan included a certain stormwater plan but in order to meet requirements,
263 additional stormwater management is needed;
264 - Proposal is to enlarge the current pond and omit the club house;
265 - The developer proposes to increase the town center portion of the main building in lieu of
266 the clubhouse;
267 - Advisory board review and actions reviewed;
268 - Actions being requested of the council.
269 Councilmember Stoesz asked about the road connecting on the southern side of the development;
270 will that join to Shoreview. Ms. Larsen said that will be finally determined in final plan review but
271 currently it does connect.
272 i. Consider Resolution No. 2044 Approving PUD Development Stage Plan Amendment #1-
273 Site Plan and Grading & Drainage Plan
274 Council Member Lyden moved to approve Resolution No. 2044 as presented. Council Member
275 Stoesz seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none
276 6C) Watermark 3rd Addition.
277 City Planner Larsen reviewed a PowerPoint presentation including information on the following:
278 - Reviewed history of project at April work session;
279 - Site map;
280 - Final Plans and Final Plat are consistent with preliminary plans;
281 - Map showing full development plan shown;
7
COUNCIL MINUTES
APPROVED
282 - High architectural standards included;
283 - Three sections of trail will be constructed with this development;
284 - Standard development agreement (3Td Addition is broken into phases due to pandemic
285 situation);
Advisory board review and approval;
287 - Actions requested by the council.
288 Mayor Rafferty noted that he visited the area and he sees great progress and it looks as if it will be a
289 very nice development.
290 Councilmember Stoesz asked if this action will approve both Phase 3A and 3B of the 3rd Addition.
291 Ms. Larsen concurred that both would be approved.
292 Councilmember Lyden received information on the number of lots included in Phase 3. He noted
293 that with all the lots included in this phase of the development, there is not one odd sized one.
294 i. Consider Resolution No. 20-30, Approving PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
295 Council Member Cavegn moved to approve Resolution No. 20-30 as presented. Council Member
296 Stoesz seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none
297Consider Resolution No. 20-31, Approving Development Agreement
298 Council Member Cavegn moved to approve Resolution No. 20-31 as presented. Council Member
299 Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none
300
301 6D) Consider Resolution No. 2046, Approving I-35E AUAR Update
302 Community Development Director Grochala explained the document, which is environmental in
303 nature and covers a study area of 45 acres dating back to ZOOS. Updates have occurred. There
304 have been projects in the corridor (map shown). This AUAR set up a conservation design
305 framework in the area of 35E. He explained what is examined and reviewed as part of the AUAR.
306 Different scenarios are allowed and have been considered (three scenarios noted). He noted a
307 development in the area that was able to proceed without environmental review because it was
308 already done through this document. He explained how the plan has been updated. Comments are
309 sought and have been received and included in the Appendix; changes were incorporated where
310 applicable. The Environmental Board has recommended approval.
311 Councilmember Lyden asked, looking at land use, what is the opinion on business campus versus
312 industrial and is there flexibility. Also what makes up the greenways along the freeway? Mr.
313 Grochala noted that the business campus classification is new to the comp plan and it would be
314 business/industry related such as technology; they still try to cast a wide net. Mr. Grochala pointed
315 out that the comp plan will still guide development. The greenway could be different things —
316 trails, greenspace, stormwater, etc.
317 Councilmember Stoesz noted Appendix F; will that be too restrictive. Community Development
318 Director Grochala noted that the appendix is a required element and it identifies elements and what
319 how they should be handled.
320 Council Member Cavegn moved to approve Resolution No. 2046 as presented. Council Member
321 Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried: Yeas, 5; Nays none
322
8
COUNCIL MINUTES
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There was no Unfinished Business.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no New Business.
ADJOURN
There being no further business, the council adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
These minutes were considered and approved at the regular Council Meeting on May 26, 2020.
Julianne Bartell, City
7