HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-22-2021 Council Work Session Minutes CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
APPROVED
i CITY OF LINO LAKES
2 MINUTES
3
4 DATE : November 22,2021
5 TIME STARTED : 5:30 p.m.
6 TIME ENDED : 6:25 p.m.
7 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Stoesz,Lyden,Ruhland,
8 Cavegn and Mayor Rafferty
9 MEMBERS ABSENT : None
10 Staff members present: City Administrator Sarah Cotton; Finance Director Hannah
11 Lynch; Human Resources Coordinator Meg Sawyer; Communications Specialist Andrea
12 Turner; Public Services Director Rick DeGardner; Community Development Director
13 Michael Grochala; City Planner Katie Larsen; Director of Public Safety John Swenson;
14 City Clerk Julie Bartell
15
16 1. Update on Lino Lakes Activity Center Branding—Regular Agenda Item 5A
17 —Consultants Marc Morgan, Managing Partner of GameDay Sports, and Ryan Delwiche,
18 WSB &Associates,presented four suggestions for branding/logo. Mr. Morgan reviewed
19 discussions to this point and the basis for the proposed branding(blue heron background).
20
21 Logo concepts were presented(slides shown). One logo/brand was recommended and
22 Councilmember Lyden expressed support. The consultants explained uses of a logo and
23 possibilities for a color scheme.
24
25 Councilmember Ruhland asked why the words"Activity Center"are recommended on
26 the logo; other name connections were discussed. Mr. Morgan explained the
27 community connection they are trying to create. The name "Community Center"feels
28 older to him. Councilmember Ruhland noted that it's important that people understand
29 what the facility offers.
30
31 Councilmember Stoesz asked several questions about the logo specifics. He expressed
32 support for the recommendation.
33
34 Councilmember Cavegn noted that he likes the logo. However, he did do some
35 homework(searched on line)regarding the"rookery"name and got some definitions that
36 he feels are not what the City would want for identification. Mr. Morgan suggested that
37 they haven't heard the negative definitions mentioned. Mr. Delwiche suggested that
38 there are ways to make sure the rookery facility website shows up first on searches;
39 Councilmember Cavegn noted that is an expensive proposition. The consultants
40 defended the name based on the unique community connection that it makes; people in
41 the community know about the herons.
42
43 Mayor Rafferty noted that there is definitely a story behind the name and that's a story
44 that needs to be told.
1
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
APPROVED
45
46 Councilmember Lyden said he had reservations about the name but when he learned
47 about the focus to the community and the narrower audience,he sees it would work. Mr.
48 Morgan remarked that it's an opportunity to educate.
49
50 Mayor Rafferty said he can see the logo working well, understanding that there will be
51 people who like or dislike it throughout the process.
52
53 Director DeGardner remarked that if other definitions aren't lost in the campaign to
54 educate about this facility,then the City isn't doing the job. Staff is looking for
55 something unique but if the council wants "Lino Lakes Activity Center"that is fine
56 because staff needs to move ahead with the process.
57
58 Councilmember Stoesz asked for clarification of including the word"the"as that could
59 cause confusion when searching or identifying the facility. The consultants said they
60 support the word"the"as it denotes it as a place.
61
62 Mayor Rafferty spoke in favor of"The Rookery"name. He can envision the name in
63 lights and that it would be quite nice.
64
65 There is an item on the agenda for action related to this subject. Councilmember Lyden
66 remarked that it would be great if everyone on the council supports moving forward.
67
68 Based on a council approval, staff would move forward in development of the logo and
69 bring forward more information on logo/branding and other steps moving toward
70 opening.
71 2. Double Garage Interpretation—City Planner Larsen explained that the council
72 requested a discussion of this subject. Ms. Larsen reviewed the history of a building
73 request involving a double garage door. A building permit was denied in that case
74 because it didn't meet staff's interpretation of a"double garage". City code requires a
75 double garage and includes a definition of a garage but no definition of double garage.
76 She explained staff s developed definition(that would allow for two cars to enter and
77 exit). Staff is interested in understanding the council's definition. A definition would, of
78 course, apply to all properties in the city and not just the property that brings this question
79 forward. Questions to the council are outlined in the staff report.
80
81 Councilmember Cavegn remarked that, if the council wishes, adding language defining a
82 double garage would be appropriate. However the situation that brings this up should be
83 judged on current language, not what the language becomes.
84
85 Councilmember Lyden said he understands the discussion about impact on
86 neighborhoods. This location is an older neighborhood. The ten foot door doesn't
87 bother him in this location. He is open to allowing people to use their garage property the
88 way they see fit.
2
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
APPROVED
89 The council will consider approval of a definition as a new item under New Business on
90 the council agenda.
91 3. Review Regular Agenda—There were no changes to the regular agenda.
92
93 The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
94
95 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on
96 December 13, 2021.
97
98
99
100
101 Via e Bartell, City Jerk b Rafferty,Mayor
102
3