HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-2022 City Council Packet EXPANDED AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Monday, October 10, 2022
***********
6:30 p.m.
(Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16)
City Council: Mayor Rafferty, Councilmembers Cavegn, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz
City Administrator: Sarah Cotton
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers (not televised)
1. Review Regular Agenda
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
Call to Order and Roll Call – Stoesz, Cavegn, Lyden, Ruhland, Rafferty were present;
Pledge of Allegiance
Open Mike / Public Comment (in person or received in writing prior to meeting)
There were no public comments
Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
The agenda was approved as presented
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Promotion to Police Sergeant: Matt Carlson and Dan Thill
Promotion to Fire Lieutenant: Brian Gustafson and Paul Kartman
Lino Lakes Ambassadors – Introduction of 2021-2022 Ambassadors
State of the District Presentation, Jeff Holmberg, Superintendent - Centennial School District
1. CONSENT AGENDA
A) Consider Approval of Expenditures for October 10, 2022 (Check No. 117274
through 117365) in the Amount of $740,401.77
B) Consider Approval of September 26, 2022 Work Session Minutes
C) Consider Approval of September 26, 2022 Council Meeting Minutes
D) Consider Approval of LG220 Exempt Gambling Permit for St. Joseph’s of the
Lakes Annual Scholarship Raffle
Action Taken: Motion by Ruhland, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Consent Agenda Items 1A through 1D, as presented, was adopted
2. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
No Report
Council Agenda -2-
3. ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT
No Report
4. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT
A) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 03-22, Enacting Ordinance Chapter 619
Regulating Edible Cannabinoid Products, John Swenson
Action Taken: Motion by Lyden, seconded by Ruhland, to approve
the 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 03-22 as presented, was adopted
5. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT
No Report
6. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
A) Consider Resolution No. 22-125, Approving Record of Decision, Robinson Farms,
EAW, Michael Grochala
Action Taken: Motion by Stoesz, seconded by Ruhland, to approve
Resolution No. 22-125 as presented, was adopted
B) Public Hearing, Consider Resolution No. 22-126, Approving Tax Increment
Financing Plan for District 1-14, Michael Grochala
Action Taken: Motion by Lyden, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Resolution No. 22-126 as presented, was adopted
C) 601 Apollo Drive Retail, Katie Larsen
i) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 04-22, Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
to Ordinance No. 03-05
Action Taken: Motion by Ruhland, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
the 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 03-05 as presented, was adopted
ii) Consider Resolution No. 22-115 Approving Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
for Site & Building Plans
Action Taken: Motion by Ruhland, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Resolution No. 22-115 as presented, was adopted
iii) Consider Resolution No. 22-116 Approving Site Improvement Performance
Agreement
Action Taken: Motion by Ruhland, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Resolution No. 22-116 as presented, was adopted
D) Consider Resolution No. 22-122, Approving 2023 Anoka County Residential
Recycling Program Agreement, Andy Nelson
Action Taken: Motion by Cavegn, seconded by Ruhland, to approve
Resolution No. 22-122 as presented, was adopted
E) Consider Resolution No. 22-123, Approving Anoka County Agreement for Organics
Enclosure, Andy Nelson
Council Agenda -3-
Action Taken: Motion by Cavegn, seconded by Ruhland, to approve
Resolution No. 22-123 as presented, was adopted
F) Public Hearing, Consider Resolution No. 22-127, Approving Amended and Restated
Street Reconstruction Plan, Michael Grochala
Action Taken: Motion by Lyden, seconded by Ruhland, to approve
Resolution No. 22-127 as presented, was adopted
G) 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project, Diane Hankee
i) Consider Resolution No. 22-120, Accepting bids, Awarding a
Construction Contract
Action Taken: Motion by Ruhland, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Resolution No. 22-120 as presented, was adopted
ii) Consider Resolution No. 22-121, Approving Construction Services
Contract with WSB & Associates
Action Taken: Motion by Stoesz, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Resolution No. 22-121 as presented, was adopted
H) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-117, Adopting Assessments, 2022 Individual
Properties, Diane Hankee
Action Taken: Motion by Ruhland, seconded by Stoesz, to approve
Resolution No. 22-117 as presented, was adopted
I) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-118, Adopting Assessments, Butler
Addition, Diane Hankee
Action Taken: Motion by Lyden, seconded by Cavegn, to approve
Resolution No. 22-118 as presented, was adopted
J) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-119, Adopting Assessments, Watermark
5th Addition, Diane Hankee
Action Taken: Motion by Cavegn, seconded by Ruhland, to approve
Resolution No. 22-119 as presented, was adopted
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
8. NEW BUSINESS
None
Adjournment
Motion by Stoesz, seconded by Cavegn, to adjourn at 8:22 p.m. was adopted
Economic Development Authority Meeting to follow the Regular City Council Meeting
(See separate agenda)
Community Calendar – A Look Ahead
October 10, 2022 through October 24, 2022
Council Agenda -4-
Wednesday, October 12 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Planning & Zoning Board
Wednesday, October 19 6:00 pm, Community Room Joint Council/P&Z Meeting
Monday, October 24 6:00 pm, Community Room Council Work Session
Monday, October 24 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Monday, October 10, 2022
***********
6:30 p.m.
(Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16)
City Council: Mayor Rafferty, Councilmembers Cavegn, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz
City Administrator: Sarah Cotton
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers (not televised)
1. Review Regular Agenda
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
Call to Order and Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
Open Mike / Public Comment (in person or received in writing prior to meeting)
Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Promotion to Police Sergeant: Matt Carlson and Dan Thill
Promotion to Fire Lieutenant: Brian Gustafson and Paul Kartman
Lino Lakes Ambassadors – Introduction of 2022-2023 Ambassadors
State of the District Presentation, Jeff Holmberg, Superintendent - Centennial School District
1. CONSENT AGENDA
A) Consider Approval of Expenditures for October 10, 2022 (Check No. 117274
through 117365) in the Amount of $740,401.77
B) Consider Approval of September 26, 2022 Work Session Minutes
C) Consider Approval of September 26, 2022 Council Meeting Minutes
D) Consider Approval of LG220 Exempt Gambling Permit for St. Joseph’s of the
Lakes Annual Scholarship Raffle
2. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
No Report
3. ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT
No Report
4. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT
A) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 03-22, Enacting Ordinance Chapter 619
Regulating Edible Cannabinoid Products, John Swenson
Council Agenda -2-
5. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT
No Report
6. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
A) Consider Resolution No.22-125, Approving Record of Decision, Robinson Farms,
EAW, Michael Grochala
B) Public Hearing, Consider Resolution No. 22-126, Approving Tax Increment
Financing Plan for District 1-14, Michael Grochala
C) 601 Apollo Drive Retail, Katie Larsen
i) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 04-22, Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
to Ordinance No. 03-05
ii) Consider Resolution No. 22-115 Approving Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
for Site & Building Plans
iii) Consider Resolution No. 22-116 Approving Site Improvement Performance
Agreement
D) Consider Resolution No. 22-122, Approving 2023 Anoka County Residential
Recycling Program Agreement, Andy Nelson
E) Consider Resolution No. 22-123, Approving Anoka County Agreement for Organics
Enclosure, Andy Nelson
F) Public Hearing, Consider Resolution No. 22-127, Approving Amended and Restated
Street Reconstruction Plan, Michael Grochala
G) 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project, Diane Hankee
i) Consider Resolution No. 22-120, Accepting bids, Awarding a
Construction Contract
ii) Consider Resolution No. 22-121, Approving Construction Services
Contract with WSB & Associates
H) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-117, Adopting Assessments, 2022 Individual
Properties, Diane Hankee
I) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-118, Adopting Assessments, Butler
Addition, Diane Hankee
J) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-119, Adopting Assessments, Watermark
5th Addition, Diane Hankee
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
8. NEW BUSINESS
None
Council Agenda -3-
Adjournment
Economic Development Authority Meeting to follow the Regular City Council Meeting
(See separate agenda)
Community Calendar – A Look Ahead
October 10, 2022 through October 24, 2022
Wednesday, October 12 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Planning & Zoning Board
Wednesday, October 19 6:00 pm, Community Room Joint Council/P&Z Meeting
Monday, October 24 6:00 pm, Community Room Council Work Session
Monday, October 24 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting
Centennial ISD 12
Honoring our Past, Creating our Future…
City Council Meeting
School District Update
Fall, 2022
Happy New (School) Year!
2
Honoring Our Past,
Creating our Future…
3
Centennial’s Mission:By
providing high quality educational
opportunities, emotional support, and
social development, Centennial
School District prepares learners for
excellence in their future.
Strategic Directions:
●Improving student
achievement and success
●Strengthen staff and student
experiences
●Supporting staff in professional
practice
●Increasing family engagement
●Efficiency and effectiveness in
district operations
Connecting. Achieving.
Preparing.
4
Core Values: Drivers of Our Words and Actions
●Connecting:Engaging students in meaningful
ways with their school community.
●Achieving:Student success through academic
excellence in learning and teaching while
supporting students in their growth and
achievement.
●Preparing:Provide opportunities for academic
excellence to prepare students for their future.
Creating our Future
Together: Vision
5
Vision: What We Intend to Create
Centennial School District is a welcoming environment
where all students, staff, and families belong and will:
●Provide innovative, personalized, rigorous, and
relevant educational opportunities for each students.
●Build and strengthen relationships and partnerships
with the community to offer educational programs and
opportunities for all.
Focus Groups, Meetings,
Surveys
Creating our Future
Together: Desired Daily
Experiences
8
Desired Daily Experiences: Student
●I enjoy flexible learning and activity choices that meet
my academic, emotional, and social needs.
●I have access to technology to support my educational
needs.
●I am comfortable during passing time, lunch, and other
times throughout the day.
●I enter a welcoming environment where I feel safe,
accepted, and belong at school.
●My race and preferences are respected, acknowledged,
and accepted.
●I have positive interactions and relationships with
students and staff.
Creating our Future
Together: Desired Daily
Experiences
9
Desired Daily Experiences: Families
●I receive consistent communication from my student's
teacher, school, and district to support my student's
education.
●My student has the appropriate materials, resources,
and technology.
●My student's school is welcoming, safe, and inclusive.
●I have opportunities to be involved in my student's
school community.
●Staff provide attention and support to meet my student's
needs.
●My student's school provides a relevant and rigorous
educational experience.
Creating our Future
Together: Desired Daily
Experiences
10
Desired Daily Experiences: Staff
●I receive cohesive and timely communication.
●I have a voice and my input matters.
●I receive the support necessary to be successful.
●I am a trusted, respected, and valued professional.
●I have the resources that allow me to meet all my
students' needs.
●I am connected and feel like I belong to the Centennial
community.
●I have a manageable workload and appropriate class
sizes.
●My mental health needs are recognized and addressed.
Creating our Future
Together
11
Honoring Our Past,
Creating our Future…
#CentennialProud
12
Discussion/Questions
+
Expenditures
October 10, 2022
Check #117274 to #117365
$740,401.77
Electronic Funds Transfer
MN Statute 471.38 Subd. 3
Council Meeting October 10, 2022 Transfer In/(Out)
9/21/2022 Transfer from FRB Money Market 1,500,000.00
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 (185,959.64)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 Federal Deposit (51,812.45)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 PERA (53,171.26)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 State (11,571.58)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 Child Support (856.06)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 H.S.A. Bank Pretax (3,694.88)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 TASC Pretax (1,248.22)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 ICMA 457 Def. Comp #301596 (2,945.00)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 ICMA Roth IRA #706155 (905.75)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 MSRS HCSP #98946-01 (2,139.23)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 MSRS Def. Comp #98945-01 (4,157.00)
9/30/2022 Payroll #20 MSRS Roth IRA #98945-01 (834.00)
9/1/2022 HSA Bank ER Contribution (6,249.84)
10/7/2022 Council #10 Payroll (3,486.69)
10/7/2022 Council #10 Federal Deposit (202.30)
10/7/2022 Council #10 PERA (387.16)
10/7/2022 Council #10 State (45.08)
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
DRAFT
1
CITY OF LINO LAKES 1
MINUTES 2
3
DATE : September 26, 2022 4
TIME STARTED : 6:00 p.m. 5
TIME ENDED : 6:25 p.m. 6
MEMBERS PRESENT : Councilmember Stoesz, Lyden, Ruhland, 7
Cavegn and Mayor Rafferty 8
MEMBERS ABSENT : 9
Staff members present: City Administrator Sarah Cotton; Finance Director Hannah 10
Lynch; City Planner Katie Larsen; Human Resources and Communications Manager Meg 11
Sawyer; Director of Public Safety John Swenson; Public Safety Captain William Owens; 12
City Engineer Diane Hankee; City Clerk Julie Bartell 13
1. Review Regular Agenda 14
Item 2A, 2B and 2C – Budget Resolutions – Finance Director Lynch reviewed 15
resolutions: a) adopting the preliminary budget (can be reduced but not increased prior to 16
final adoption in December); b) Setting the public hearing for adoption of the final 17
budget; c) canceling a debt levy that is not needed. 18
19
A budget book was given to the Council Members with a note that it will be needed for 20
next week’s work session but not the preliminary budget adoption. 21
22
Item 4A – Public Safety TZD Grant – Captain Owens noted the purpose of the grant 23
and the work required of the public safety department and the finance staff. Mayor 24
Rafferty remarked that administration of the grant is a duty that is passed through 25
benefiting cities on a three-year cycle. 26
27
Item 4B – Bicycle Donation – Public Safety Director Swenson explained the process 28
followed by the department prior to this recommendation to dispose of unneeded 29
bicycles. Donation to Bikes for Kids is recommended. 30
Item 6A – Kwik Trip – City Planner Larsen noted the council’s previous discussion and 31
postponement of this item. She will be giving a quick overview of the project. 32
33
Councilmember Lyden remarked that there are a number of things he’d like to discuss 34
with the council on this project. Mayor Rafferty replied that the council work session is 35
the most appropriate venue for a longer discussion. 36
37
Councilmember Lyden offered remarks regarding: 38
- Council Code of Conduct – council should look through a lens of what’s best for 39
the people of the City ; 40
- Community Need – this has not been identified; 41
- Need for Gas Station - many already in Lino Lakes; 42
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
DRAFT
2
- Pro-Business Responsibility – defined as supporting current businesses in Lino 43
Lakes; many gas stations are locally owned; 44
- Doesn’t feel like the right thing to do – good plan but bad idea; 45
- Gas Station as Polluters – vapors, benzene, spilling cause environmental damage; 46
- Pollution would be close to Rice Lake; 47
- Parcel is prime – showed picture of sunrise over Rice Lake shown. 48
49
Mayor Rafferty noted zoning of the property, the job of the Planning and Zoning Board. 50
51
Councilmember Ruhland noted that the City owns property across from this proposed 52
station site; what are the plans for that? Staff indicated that it isn’t developable. 53
Councilmember Ruhland asked about gas station pollution and mitigation and City 54
Engineer Hankee noted that the PCA has very strict guidelines on gas storage and this 55
development is new and would be subject to the highest level of regulation. 56
57
Councilmember Cavegn asked if there is a benefit to adding this facility to the City. 58
59
Mayor Rafferty remarked that the last gas station opened in the City was Bill’s Superette 60
and there’s a gas station across the street that has remained open and viable. 61
62
City Planner Larsen reviewed the process that brings this proposal forward and noted the 63
rights of property owners in the City to develop according to the guidance of the 64
Comprehensive Plan; it’s difficult to get to the end game and question the proposed use 65
when all the regulations have been met. 66
67
Councilmember Lyden noted the recent moratorium on storage facilities as an example of 68
needing to stop and take a look. 69
70
East Shadow Lake Road – Mayor Rafferty asked the City engineer for an update. 71
Engineer Hankee reviewed and will provide more information at the next work session. 72
2. Adjourn 73
74
The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m. 75
76
These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on 77
October 10, 2022. 78
79
80
81
82
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Rob Rafferty, Mayor 83
84
COUNCIL MINUTES
DRAFT
1
1
LINO LAKES CITY COUNCIL 2
REGULAR MEETING 3
MINUTES 4
5
DATE : September 26, 2022 6
TIME STARTED : 6:30 p.m. 7
TIME ENDED : 7:00 p.m. 8
MEMBERS PRESENT : Councilmember Stoesz, Lyden, 9
Ruhland, Cavegn and Mayor Rafferty 10
MEMBERS ABSENT : 11
Staff members present: City Administrator Sarah Cotton; Finance Director Hannah Lynch; Human 12
Resources and Communications Coordinator Meg Sawyer; Public Safety Captain William Owens; 13
City Planner Katie Larsen; City Engineer Diane Hankee; Director of Public Safety John Swenson; 14
City Clerk Julie Bartell 15
16
PUBLIC COMMENT 17
There were no public comments. 18
SETTING THE AGENDA 19
The agenda was approved as presented. 20
CONSENT AGENDA 21
Councilmember Lyden moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items 1A through 1E as presented. 22
Councilmember Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 23
24
ITEM ACTION 25
Consideration of Expenditures: 26
A) Consider Approval of Expenditures for September 26, 2022 27
(Check No. 117202 through 117273) in the Amount of 28
$1,332,070.15 Approved 29
B) Consider Approval of September 6, 2022 Council 30
Work Session Minutes Approved 31
C) Consider Approval of September 12, 2022 Council 32
Minutes Approved 33
D) Consider Approval of September 12, 2022 Council 34
Work Session Minutes Approved 35
E) Consider Approval of September 6, 2022 Closed Council 36
Minutes Approved 37
F) Consider Approval of Appointment of Rookery Part-Time Staff Approved 38
G) Consider Approval of Acceptance of 2022 BWC Audit Report Approved 39
COUNCIL MINUTES
DRAFT
2
H) Consider Approval of Resolution No. 22-114, Appointing Election 40
Judges for the November 8, 2022 General Election Approved 41
FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT 42
2A) Consider Resolution No. 22-110, Adopting the Preliminary 2022 Tax Levy, Collectible in 43
2023 – Finance Director Lynch noted the resolution that includes the preliminary levy amount. She 44
noted an increase in the levy relating mainly to no use of fund reserves, the increased cost of supplies, 45
parks and trails maintenance, street maintenance increases, etc.). 46
Staff is requesting aodption of the preliminary levy which can be decreased with further discussion but 47
cannot inccreased. 48
Councilmember Stoesz moved to approved Resolution No. 22-110 as presented. Councilmember 49
Cavegn seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 50
2B) Consider Resolution No. 22-111, Setting the Date and Time for a Public Hearing for the 51
Proposed 2023 Operating Budget and 2022 Tax Levy, Collectible in 2023– Finance Director 52
Lynch explained that the City is required to hold a public hearing to hear public input on the proposed 53
budget. A date and time in December is recommended and would be approved with adoption of this 54
resoution 55
Councilmember Stoesz moved to approved Resolution No. 22-111 as presented. Councilmember 56
Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 57
2C) Consider Resolution No. 22-112, Canceling the 2022/2023 Debt Service Tax Levy for 58
G.O. Capital Note, Series 2016A – Finance Director Lynch noted the recommendation to cancel a 59
debt levy. This note has off-setting revenue to pay for this debt. 60
Councilmember Ruhland moved to approved Resolution No. 22-112 as presented. Councilmember 61
Stoesz seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 62
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT 63
3A) Consider Appointment of Part-Time Firefighter – Human Resources Director Sawyer 64
reviewed the written staff report outlining the qualifications of Will Ricci and recommending his 65
appointment. 66
Councilmember Lyden moved to approve the appointment of Will Ricci as recommended. 67
Councilmember Cavegn seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 68
3B) Consider Appointment of Part-Time Firefighter – Human Resources Director Sawyer 69
reviewed the written report outlining the qualifications of Matthew Jesson Olson and recommending 70
his appointment. 71
Councilmember Cavegn moved to approve the appointment of Matthew Jessen Olson as 72
recommended. Councilmember Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 73
.3A) Consider Appointment of Police Officer – Human Resources Director Sawyer noted that 74
there is one open police officer position and staff is recommending the appointment of Isaac Simon, 75
contingent upon his passing exam requirements. 76
Councilmember Lyden moved to approve the appointment of Isaac Simon as recommended. 77
Councilmember Cavegn seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 78
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT 79
COUNCIL MINUTES
DRAFT
3
4A) Consider Acceptance of 2023 TZD Grant – Captain Owens reviewed the written staff 80
report. Staff is seeking authorization to accept this annual grant. The program itself works toward a 81
common goal of reducing and eventually eliminating preventable traffic deaths on Minnesota 82
roadways. In Anoka County, participating departments come together to provide certain services 83
related to the goals. Currently the City of Lino Lakes is acting as administrator for the program 84
which is handled on a rotating schedule. 85
Councilmember Cavegn moved to approve the acceptance of the grant funds as recommended. 86
Councilmember Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 87
4B) Consider Donation of Bicycles – Public Safety Director Swenson noted that the department 88
has several unclaimed and unneeded bicycles which they would like to donate to Bikes for Kids, a 89
charitable organization. 90
Councilmember Lyden moved to approve the donation as recommended. Councilmember Stoesz 91
seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 92
PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT 93
There was no report from the Public Services Department. 94
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT 95
6A) Kwik Trip: i. Consider Resolution No. 22-94 Approving Conditional Use Permit for Motor 96
Fuel Station; ii. Consider Resolution No. 22-95 Approving Conditional Use Permit for 97
Commercial Car Wash; iii. Consider Resolution No. 22-96 Approving Site Improvement 98
Performance Agreement – City Planner Larsen reviewed a presentation that included information on 99
the following: 100
- Land Use Application – commercial retail convenience store; 101
- Site – Location and conditions; 102
- Site Plan – building, access, car wash hours limited; fuel dispenser location, trail extension; 103
- Architectural; Canopy; 104
- Planning and Zoning Board - review and approval; 105
- Council action requested. 106
Councilmember Stoesz asked if there will be limitations imposed on delivery hours. Ms. Larsen 107
remarked that there are no formal limitations but staff would anticipate standard delivery hours. 108
Councilmemer Lyden noted that he will be a dissenting vote on this. He feels the need to represent 109
the citizens of the City and he doesn’t think a gas station is needed. Also pro-business means 110
primarily supporting current businesses (two of the area gas stations are family run businesses that fear 111
they will not survive if this facility opens), gas stations are polluters and that will be the case with this 112
development (articles shown that support that premise). He also noted that Rice Lake is very close 113
and could be impacted. He’d rather wait five years to have the right business at this site than to have 114
the wrong one that will exist for 60 years. He thinks this is a terrible idea. 115
116
Mayor Rafferty said he appreciates Councilmember Lyden comments. 117
COUNCIL MINUTES
DRAFT
4
118
Councilmember Lyden moved to deny. Motion lost for lack of a second. 119
Councilmember Stoesz moved to approve Resolution No. 22-94, Resolution No. 22-95, and 120
Resolution No. 22-96 as presented. Councilmember Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion 121
carried on a voice vote; Councilmember Lyden voted no. 122
6B) Consider Resolution 22-113, Approving Payment No. 4 and Final, 2021 Surface Water 123
Maintenance Project – City Engineer Hankee noted that the project was approved and completed. 124
She noted the amount charged by the contractor, a portion of which was withheld pending completion 125
of two areas of the project. Staff recommends that the remainder now be paid. 126
127
Mayor Rafferty asked if this was a situation where supply chain delays caused the project delay and 128
Ms. Hankee said no, it is seasonal work. 129
Councilmember Lyden moved to approved Resolution No. 22-113 as presented. Councilmember 130
Ruhland seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 131
UNFINISHED BUSINESS 132
There was no Unfinished Business. 133
134
NEW BUSINESS 135
There was no New Business. 136
137
COMMUNITY EVENTS 138
October 1 – American Legion Octoberfest. 139
Grand Opening of The Rookery – was held on September 25. 140
COMMUNITY CALENDAR 141
Community Calendar – A Look Ahead 142
September 26, 2022 through October 10, 2022 143
Monday, October 3 6:00 pm, Community Room Council Work Session 144
Wednesday, October 5 6:00 pm, Council Chambers Park Board 145
Thursday, October 6 8:00 am, Community Room EDAC 146
Monday, October 10 6:00 pm, Community Room Council Work Session 147
Monday, October 10 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting 148
149
ADJOURN 150
151
There being no further business, Councilmember Lyden moved to adjourn at 7:00 p.m. 152
Councilmember Cavegn seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. 153
154
These minutes were considered and approved at the regular Council Meeting on October 10, 2022 155
156
157
158
159
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Rob Rafferty, Mayor 160
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 1D
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Julie Bartell, City Clerk
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider Approving Exempt Gambling Permit for St.
Joseph’s Catholic Church Scholarship Raffle
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 Vote
INTRODUCTION
St. Joseph’s Catholic Church has applied for a LG220 Application for Exempt Permit to conduct
their annual scholarship raffle to be held on November 22, 2022. The proceeds from this raffle
will be used to award college scholarships to members of St. Joseph Catholic Church.
BACKGROUND
Non-profit organizations are allowed, under the State Gambling Statutes, to apply for an
exemption from a gambling license if they conduct five (5) or fewer gambling occasions per
calendar year. St. Joseph Catholic Church conducts five (5) or less per calendar and, therefore,
remains exempt from requiring a gambling license.
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 349, Section 349.166, Subd. 2 does, however, require that the non-
profit organizations applying for the exemption permit, notify the city that they are applying for
the exemption and receive local approval.
The application and background materials are on file in City Clerk’s office.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion approving the application for exemption with no waiting period.
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 4A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: John Swenson, Public Safety Director
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 03-22, Enacting Ordinance
Regulating Edible Cannabinoid Products
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is being asked to consider the 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 03-22, Enacting
Ordinance Regulating Edible Cannabinoid Products by adding a new Chapter 619 to the Lino
Lakes Code of Ordinances, entitled Edible Cannabinoid Products.
BACKGROUND
During the 2022 Minnesota Legislative Session, Minnesota Statute 151.72 was changed
regarding the sale of certain cannabinoid (CBD) products. This law took effect on July 1, 2022.
The new law amends the scope of sale of any product that contains cannabinoids extracted from
hemp and that is an edible cannabinoid product or is intended for human or animal consumption.
Previously adopted MN law authorized a product containing non-intoxicating cannabinoids to be
sold, but the authority to sell edible CBD products was unclear. The new law expands the
authority to include non-intoxicating cannabinoids, including edible cannabinoid products,
provided they do not contain more than 0.3% of any THC. An edible cannabinoid product also
cannot exceed more than five milligrams of any THC in a single serving, or more than a total of
50 milligrams of any THC per package.
Staff has researched the recently enacted MN Statute 151.72, reviewed ordinances enacted in
other Cities, participated in meetings and discussion through League of Minnesota Cities and
worked with City Attorney Jay Squires to develop this ordinance. Staff is recommending that
Council add Ordinance 619 Regulating Edible Cannabinoid Products in the City of Lino Lakes.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends consideration of the 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 619 Regulating Edible
Cannabinoid Products in the City of Lino Lakes.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance No. 03-22
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ORDINANCE NO. 03-22
REGULATING EDIBLE CANNABINOID PRODUCTS BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 619 TO
THE LINO LAKES CODE OF ORDINANCEs, ENTITLED EDIBLE CANNABINIOD
PRODUCTS
The City Council of Lino Lakes ordains:
Section 1. That Section 600 of the Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances be amended by adding a new
Chapter 619 to read as follows:
CHAPTER 619. EDIBLE CANNABINOID PRODUCTS.
619.01. Purpose. The City of Lino Lakes recognizes that many persons under the age of 21 years
purchase or otherwise obtain, possess, and use Edible Cannabinoid Products. Sales, possession, and use
of Edible Cannabinoid Products by persons under 21 is a violation of State and Federal Laws. Further,
the City of Lino Lakes recognizes the consumption of Edible Cannabinoid Products preceding the
operation of a motor vehicle results in a danger to public safety in the form of intoxicated drivers. This
Chapter is intended to regulate the sales and possession of Edible Cannabinoid Products by persons under
21 and limit the impact on public safety from intoxicated individuals.
619.02. Application of Chapter 601. The provisions of Chapter 601 shall apply to the issuance
of licenses hereunder.
619.03. Definitions. Except as other provided or clearly implied by context all terms shall be
given their commonly accepted definitions. Within this Chapter, the following terms shall have the
definitions given to them:
CONVICTED. Any disposition of a criminal charge that is not a dismissal or acquittal.
EDIBLE CANNABINOID PRODUCT. A product that is intended to be eaten or consumed as a
beverage by humans and contains a cannabinoid in combination with food ingredients and comports with
all of the requirements of Minnesota Statute 151.72 or its progeny.
PRIMARY PLACE OF BUSINESS. The physical location where the edible cannabinoid product
will be sold; the primary place of business must be a permanent building with a mailing address.
SCHOOL. A public or nonpublic elementary or secondary school.
SELL. Sell, give away, barter, deliver, exchange, distribute or dispose of to another or to offer or
agree to perform any of the aforementioned.
VENDING MACHINE. Any mechanical, electric or electronic, or other type of device which
dispenses a product upon the insertion of money, tokens, or other form of payment directly into the
machine by the person seeking to purchase the product.
PERSON. Individuals, partnerships, corporations, or any other legal entity.
619.04. License Required. No person shall directly or indirectly deal in, sell, or offer for sale
any Edible Cannabinoid Product in the City without first obtaining a license under this Chapter and
paying the associated fees.
619.05. Ineligible for License. No license under this Chapter will be issued to or held by:
(1) Any person which holds a license under Chapter 700, entitled Liquor and Beer, except for a
license holder under that chapter that is a Brewer Taproom as defined by that chapter.
(2) Any person whose primary place of business will be within 1000 feet of a school or church.
(3) Any person manufacturing Edible Cannabinoid Product on the same premises as the retail
sales; unless retail sales are conducted in a separate area of the premises with a separate entrance/exit
from the manufacturing operation.
(4) Any person who does not have a primary place of business. No door to door sales or pop-up
vendors of Edible Cannabinoid Product is allowed.
(5) Any person who has been convicted of a violation of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 152.
(6) Any person who has been convicted of illegal acts involving alcohol, tobacco, or Minnesota
Statute 151.72.
(7) Any person under the age of 21.
619.06. Application for License. An application for a license under this chapter shall be made to
the City Clerk in writing on a form provided by the City.
(1) Application Form. The application must include the following:
(a) Applicant’s full name and date of birth.
(b) Applicant’s residence address and telephone number.
(c) Applicant’s primary place of business address and telephone number.
(d) Name of applicant’s business.
(e) Kind of business being conducted or to be conducted.
(f) Whether the applicant has been charged within the preceding five years of violating any
Federal, State, or local laws relating to the sale of tobacco, vaping products, alcohol, or THC products
and the circumstances which lead to any charge.
(g) Such other information as required by the City.
(h) Proof of liability insurance.
(2) Application Fee. The license fee shall be paid in full before the application for a license is
accepted. All fees shall be paid into the general fund of the City. Upon rejection of any application for a
license or withdrawal of the application for approval, the fee shall be refunded to the applicant, less costs
for processing.
619.07. Fee. Application and license fees for licenses issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be
established from time to time by ordinance of the City Council. Fees shall be sufficient to cover the costs
of investigating and issuing a license and the anticipated expenses and costs of enforcing this Chapter.
Fees shall be prorated on a monthly basis and the commencement of a license period may be stayed until
the purpose for which the license is granted begins.
619.08. Issuance. The City Council may either approve or deny the license, or it may delay
action for a reasonable period of time as necessary to complete any investigation of the application or the
applicant it deems necessary. If the City Council shall approve the license, the City Clerk shall issue the
license to the applicant.
619.09. Term of License. Each license shall be issued for a period of one year, except, that if the
application is made during the license year, a license may be issued for the remainder of the year for a
pro-rata fee with any unexpired fraction of a month being counted as one month. Every license shall
expire on the last day of June.
619.10. Renewals. The request for a renewal shall be made at least 30 days, but no more than 60
days, before the expiration of the current license. The issuance of a license pursuant to this Chapter shall
be considered a privilege and not an absolute right of the applicant and shall not entitle the holder to an
automatic renewal of the license.
619.11. Prohibited Acts. A license holder or anyone acting under the license holders’ authority,
express or implied, may not do the following:
(1) Sell an Edible Cannabinoid Product to any individual who is not at least 21 years of age.
(2) Allow an Edible Cannabinoid Product to be consumed at their primary place of business.
(3) Sell any product which does not comply with Minnesota Statute 151.72 or its progeny.
(4) Allow any person under the age of 18 to sell an Edible Cannabinoid Product.
(5) Sell an Edible Cannabinoid Product through any vending machine.
(6) Provide delivery services for an Edible Cannabinoid Product.
(7) Sell Edible Cannabinoid Product’s through internet sales.
619.12. Compliance Checks. All licensed premises shall be open to inspection by the City
Police or other authorized City official during regular business hours. From time to time, but at least once
per year, the City shall conduct compliance checks by engaging persons at least 17 years of age, but less
than 21 years of age, to enter each licensed premises to attempt to purchase Edible Cannabinoid Products.
Prior written consent from a parent or guardian is required for any person under the age of 18 to
participate in a compliance check. Persons used for the purpose of compliance checks shall be supervised
by City designated law enforcement officers or other designated City personnel. No persons used in
compliance checks shall attempt to use a false identification misrepresenting the person's age, and all
persons lawfully engaged in a compliance check shall answer all questions about the person's age asked
by the licensee or his or her employee and shall produce any identification, if any exists, for which he or
she is asked. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit compliance checks authorized by State or Federal laws
for educational, research, training purposes or required for enforcement of a particular State or Federal
law.
619.13. Licensee Responsibility. All licensees under this Chapter shall be responsible for the
actions of their employees in regard to the sale of Edible Cannabinoid Products on the licensed premises,
and the sale of such an item by an employee shall be considered a sale by the license holder. Nothing in
this Section shall be construed as prohibiting the City from also subjecting the clerk to whatever penalties
are appropriate under this Chapter, State or Federal law, or other applicable law or regulation. Licensees
must comply with all other state and local laws and ordinances.
619.14. Days and Hours. No sale of Edible Cannabinoid Products may be made:
(1) On Sundays, except between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
(2) Before 8:00 a.m. on Monday through Saturday;
(3) After 10:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday;
(4) On Thanksgiving Day;
(5) On December 25;
(6) After 8:00 p.m. on December 24.
619.15. Violations and Penalty.
(1) Administrative Civil Penalties—Individuals. If a person who is not a licensee is found to have
violated this article, the person shall be charged an administrative penalty as follows:
(a) First Violation. The Council shall impose a civil fine not to exceed $50.00.
(b) Second Violation within 12 months. The Council shall impose a civil fine not to
exceed $100.00.
(c) Third Violation within 12 months. The Council shall impose a civil fine not to exceed
$150.00.
(2) Same—Licensee. If a licensee or an employee of a licensee is found to have violated this
article, the licensee shall be charged an administrative penalty as follows:
(a) First Violation. The Council shall impose a civil fine of $500.00 and suspend the
license for not less than 1 day.
(b) Second Violation within 36 Months. The Council shall impose a civil fine of
$1,000.00 and suspend the license for not less than 3 consecutive days.
(c) Third Violation within 36 Months. The Council shall impose a civil fine of $2,000.00
and suspend the license for not less than 10 consecutive days.
(d) Fourth Violation within 36 Months. The Council shall revoke the license for at least
one year.
(3) Administrative Penalty Procedures. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this section:
(a) Any of the administrative civil penalties set forth in this section that may be imposed
by the Council,
(b) If one of the foregoing penalties is imposed by an action of the Council, no penalty
shall take effect until the licensee or person has received notice (served personally or by mail) of
the alleged violation and of the opportunity for a hearing before the Council, and such notice
must be in writing and must provide that a right to a hearing before the Council must be requested
within 10 business days of receipt of the notice or such right shall terminate.
(4) Misdemeanor Prosecution. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the City from seeking
prosecution as a misdemeanor for any alleged violation of this article.
Section 2. That Section 601.05, Subdivision 2, of the Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances entitled
Background Checks be amended as follows:
(2) Criminal history license background investigations. The Lino Lakes Police Department is
hereby required, as the exclusive entity within the city, to do a criminal history background investigation
on the applicants for the following licenses within the city:
(a) Liquor;
(b) Tobacco;
(c) Cabaret;
(d) Lawful gambling;
(e) Special event;
(f) Peddler, solicitor, transient merchant;
(g) Taxicab;
(h) Pawnbroker, precious metal dealers, secondhand good dealers;
(i) Adult uses (sexually-oriented businesses);
(j) Massage therapists and therapeutic massage businesses; and
(k) Edible Cannabinoid Products.
Section 3. Amendment of Fee Schedule Approved
Pursuant to § 404.04 Ordinance No. 07-20 (The 2022 Fee Schedule) is hereby amended to
include the following rates effective January 1, 2022:
Business & Miscellaneous
Cannabinoid Product Sales $ 200 per year
Section 4. Effective Date
This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to
the Lino Lakes City Charter.
Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was introduced by Councilmember
and was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken
thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 22-125, Approving Record of Decision
and Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for an
Environmental Impact Statement, Robinson Sod Farm EAW
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting City Council consideration to adopt the Record of Decision and Making a
Negative Declaration on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement.
BACKGROUND
The Robinson Sod Farm Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was approved for
distribution by the City Council on August 8, 2022. The document was filed with the Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and circulated for review and comments to the required
EAW distribution list. A Notice of Availability was published in the EQB Monitor on Tuesday,
August 16, 2022. Notice was also provided to properties within 600 feet of the proposed project.
The thirty day comment period closed on September 15, 2022. The City received a number of
written comments from agencies and citizens. The City must respond to every substantive
comment. Substantive comments are comments that address the accuracy and completeness of
the materials contained in the EAW, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation
before the project is commenced, and the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on
the proposed project.
The City’s response to substantive comments received during the comment period are included
in the attached draft Record of Decision document.
The EAW is not meant to approve or disapprove a project, but is simply a source of information
to guide other approvals and permitting decisions. Minnesota Rule 4410.177, Subpart 2 requires
the City to make either a negative declaration or a positive declaration on the need for an EIS.
The City shall base its decision regarding the need for an EIS on the information gathered during
the EAW process and the comments received on the EAW. In doing so, the City must prepare a
record of decision that includes the information supporting the decision.
Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp. 7 lists four criteria that shall be considered in deciding
whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects. Those criteria are:
A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects;
B. Cumulative potential effects. The RGU shall consider the following factors:
whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution
from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions
to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with
approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative
potential effect; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from
the project;
C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by
ongoing public regulatory authority. The RGU may rely only on mitigation
measures that are specific and that can be reasonably expected to effectively
mitigate the identified environmental impacts of the project; and
D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or
the project proposer, including other EISs.
Section 5. Findings of Fact of the attached response document provides the City’s findings of
fact and addresses each of the above referenced criteria. Section 6. Record of Decision
concludes that an EIS is not required.
Environmental Board
The Environmental Board reviewed the document at its October 5, 2022 meeting. The board
requested clarification and explanation on document responses regarding flood plain impacts,
Blandin’s turtles, stormwater management, and soil contamination. The board also questioned
what additional information an EIS would provide.
The Environmental Board also provide opportunity for the public to request any clarification to
the responses provided.
• The city’s response to comment 4.2.8. was questioned regarding soil and groundwater
contamination from agricultural fertilizers and pesticides.
Staff responded that the developer is completing a Phase II Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA) that will document site contamination and next steps. If contaminated
soils are present that do not meet residential reuse requirements they will be hauled
offsite and disposed of per MPCA guidelines. Dust BMPs will be in place during
construction to minimize the potential for dust. The response to comment 14 has been
updated accordingly.
•Residents questioned the impacts to the Floodplain and Drainage.
Staff responded that City and RCWD rules do not allow for impacts to offsite properties
and the site design will be required to meet volume and rate control onsite. The site will
go through a formal process to evaluate floodplain and ensure proposed homes meet
freeboard and separation requirements. Floodplain impacts are required to be mitigated
for and will not be allowed to change offsite.
•Residents had general questions regarding Traffic.
Staff responded that a detailed traffic study was provided that evaluated impacts both
with and without the connection of Carl Street. The results show that traffic from this
development, with mitigation measures, will not cause intersection operations to become
unacceptable. No formal decisions have been made regarding the Carl Street connection
and this will be evaluated further when the developer submits a formal plan for review.
•Residents expressed concerns regarding the aquifer/groundwater/wells.
Staff responded that the existing agricultural irrigation well on site will be required to be
capped with the project. No additional wells will be installed with the project. Water will
be provided via the city’s system, so no impacts to the groundwater or adjacent
property’s wells is expected.
Based on the information provided with the understanding that additional information will be
obtained and reviewed during the permitting process, the Environmental Board recommended
accepting the record of decision and making a negative declaration on the need for an
Environmental Impact Statement
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is of the opinion that no additional information is necessary in addition to what is already
provided or required and that any potential impacts and mitigation will be addressed through the
city and other public regulatory permitting processes.
Based on the information contained in the EAW, comment letters, and Findings of Fact, staff is
recommending adoption of Resolution No.22-125.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Resolution No. 22-125
2.Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision, dated October 7, 2022
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-125
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RECORD OF DECISION AND MAKING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR THE ROBINSON SOD FARM
WHEREAS, MN Rules 4410 establishes the requirements for the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW); and
WHEREAS, the City initiated an environmental review to determine if the proposed Robinson
Sod Farm development has the potential for significant environmental effects, as required by MN
Rules, Chapter 4410.4300, Subpart 14;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes finds
that:
1. The EAW was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act and the Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700
(2015);
2. The EAW satisfactorily addressed the issues for which existing information could have
been reasonably obtained;
3. The City has reviewed comments on the EAW and has prepared responses to these
comments, included in the Response to Comments, Findings of Fact and Record of
Decision document, dated October 7, 2022, and made a part hereof;
4. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, the project does not have
the potential for significant environmental effects;
5. The City makes a “Negative Declaration”, and
6. An EIS is not required.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Councilmember
_______________and was duly seconded by Councilmember ________________ and upon vote
being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
_______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
0
October 7, 2022
Robinson Sod Farm
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF
DECISION
Responsible Government Unit (RGU)
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55104
linolakes.us
CITY: LINO LAKES
COUNTY: ANOKA
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ..................................................................................................... i
Tables .................................................................................................................... iii
Appendices ............................................................................................................ iii
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
2. EAW NOTIFICATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND COMMENT PERIOD.......................... 1
3. COMMENTS RECEIVED ..................................................................................... 1
4. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ............................................................................... 2
4.1 COMMENTS FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ................................................................. 2
4.1.1 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) – September 9, 2022 ......... 2
4.1.2 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) – September 13, 2022 .................... 3
4.1.3 Metropolitan Council – September 13, 2022 .......................................................... 5
4.1.4 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources – September 15, 2022 ................... 6
4.2 COMMENTS FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC ..................................................................... 10
4.2.1 Nicki Roland Ecker – August 25, 2022 ................................................................... 10
4.2.2 Anna Jungbauer – August 25, 2022 ....................................................................... 10
4.2.3 Morgan C – August 25, 2022 .................................................................................. 11
4.2.4 Justin Carver – August 26, 2022 ............................................................................. 11
4.2.5 Mike Trudeau – August 30, 2022 ........................................................................... 11
4.2.6 Mara Lipinski – September 5, 2022 ....................................................................... 11
4.2.7 Greg and Sarah Austin – September 10, 2022 ...................................................... 12
4.2.8 Carl Street Residents – September 12, 2022 ......................................................... 13
4.2.9 Ann Rudie – September 12, 2022 .......................................................................... 18
4.2.10 Doug and Cindy Hansen – September 12, 2022 .................................................... 18
4.2.11 Steven Anderson – September 12, 2022 ............................................................... 19
4.2.12 Scott Zbikowski – September 13, 2022 ................................................................. 20
4.2.13 Lisa and Ernst Olsen – September 14, 2022 .......................................................... 21
4.2.14 Kevin and Tammy Dunrud – September 14, 2022 ................................................ 21
ii
4.2.15 Reilly Anderson – September 15, 2022 ................................................................. 22
5. FINDINGS OF FACT .......................................................................................... 23
5.1 Project description ......................................................................................................... 23
5.1.1 Proposed Project ..................................................................................................... 23
5.1.2 Site Description and Existing Conditions ................................................................ 24
5.1.3 Decision Regarding the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects ................ 24
A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects .......................................... 24
B. Cumulative Potential Effects ...................................................................................... 27
C. Extent to Which Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation ............................ 28
D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled ............. 29
6. RECORD OF DECISION ..................................................................................... 30
iii
Tables
Table 4 (in EAW). Required Permits and Approvals for the Proposed Project ............................. 28
Appendices
Appendix A. Agency and Public Comments Submitted to the City of Lino Lakes
Appendix B. City of Lino Lakes Resolution Finding of No Need for EIS
1
1. INTRODUCTION
The Robinson project is a proposed low, medium, and high density residential development on
an existing 158-acre agricultural area in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota that is
located to the southeast of Sunset Avenue and 125th Ave NE (Main Street, CSAH 14). Two site
plan alternatives have been developed for the project which include the PUD Concept Plan
expected to consist of 557 dwelling units and the Yield Plan that is expected to consist of 707
dwelling units. These plans include single family detached homes, townhomes, and multi-family
units. The project will include new roads, stormwater features, and the installation of municipal
sewer and water systems.
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared pursuant to Minnesota Rules
Part 4410.4430, Subp. 19. Residential Development. The EAW and the respective comments
have been reviewed in accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 to determine if the project
has potential for significant environmental effects. This document includes responses to
comments received by the City of Lino Lakes, the Findings of Fact supporting the decision, and
the Record of Decision indicating an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary for
this project.
2. EAW NOTIFICATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND COMMENT
PERIOD
In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1500, the EAW was completed and distributed to
persons and agencies on the office of Environmental Quality Board (EQB) distribution list. The
notification was published in the EQB Monitor on August 16, 2022, initiating the 30-day public
comment period. A public notice and press release was submitted to the Quad newspaper, the
local newspaper. The comment period ended on September 15, 2022.
3. COMMENTS RECEIVED
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES:
The City received comment letters from four government agencies. These include:
• Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) – September 9, 2022
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) – September 13, 2022
• Metropolitan Council – September 13, 2022
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources – September 15, 2022
None of the comments recommended the preparation of an EIS.
2
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
In addition to the government agencies, the City received 15 emails from the public. These
include:
• Nicki Roland Ecker – August 25, 2022
• Anna Jungbauer – August 25, 2022
• Morgan C – August 25, 2022
• Justin Carver – August 26, 2022
• Mike Trudeau – August 30, 2022
• Mara Lipinski – September 5, 2022
• Greg and Sarah Austin – September 10, 2022
• Carl Street Residents – September 12, 2022
• Ann Rudie – September 12, 2022
• Doug and Cindy Hansen – September 12, 2022
• Steven Anderson – September 12, 2022
• Scott Zbikowski – September 13, 2022
• Lisa and Ernst Olsen – September 14, 2022
• Kevin and Tammy Dunrud – September 14, 2022
• Reilly Anderson – September 15, 2022
4. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
This document responds to comments individually. It includes summaries of comments
followed by responses. The complete comment letters and emails are included in Appendix A.
Responses to comments are generally confined to substantive issues that “address the accuracy
and completeness of the material contained in the EAW, potential impacts that may warrant
further investigation before the project is commenced, and the need for an EIS on the proposed
project.” (MN Rules 4410.1600). Some of the comments included general remarks or
recommendations. Such comments are noted for the record and further detail of the
statements or recommendations is included in Appendix A.
4.1 COMMENTS FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
4.1.1 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) – September 9, 2022
Comment: The Minnesota SHPO concludes that there are no properties listed in the National or
State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological resources located
in the area that will be affected by this project.
Response: This comment has been noted for the record. The SHPO was contacted as
part of the EAW process and their response is included in Appendix E of the EAW.
3
4.1.2 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) – September 13, 2022
Permits and Approvals (Item 8)
Comment: In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, the Project should include the MPCA as a
regulator of all surface waters as defined by Minn. Stat. § 115.01, subd. 22 Waters of the state.
Even though there may be surface waters that are determined to be US Army Corps of
Engineers non-jurisdictional or exempt from the Wetland Conservation Act, all surface waters
are regulated by the MPCA, and any surface water impact needs to be described in the
application and may require mitigation.
The scope of a Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification is limited to assuring that a discharge
from a federally licensed or permitted activity will comply with water quality requirements. In
addition, the applicant must also submit to the MPCA the Antidegradation Assessment in
accordance with water quality standards Minn. R. 7050.0265 and should review the
Antidegradation requirements in 7050.0285.
The 401 Water Quality Certification becomes an enforceable component of the associated
federal license or permit, issued under either Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The scope of a Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification is
limited to assuring that a discharge from a federally licensed or permitted activity will comply
with water quality requirements. For further information about the 401 Water Quality
Certification process, please contact Bill Wilde at 651-757-2825 or william.wilde@state.mn.us.
Response: As noted in the permit table of the EAW (Table 5) all necessary permits,
including the Section 401 Certification, will be received prior to development of this
project.
Water Resources (Item 11)
Stormwater
Comment:
• The EAW states the proposed 158-acre residential development is in a 100-year floodplain.
The EAW indicates that soil remediation for the construction will be required due to
predominately hydric soils on the site and stormwater ponds will be constructed in lieu of
infiltrating stormwater to meet volume reduction requirements.
• The EAW should consider climate risks associated with increased rainfall regarding the
proposed development that could result in the potential for increased flood risk. Filling of
wetlands at the site and adding large areas of impervious surfaces is likely to alter the
natural hydrology and increase this risk. Efforts to reduce stormwater volume and provide
more climate resiliency should be considered. The Project proposer is strongly encouraged
to utilize Low Impact Development strategies such as reducing impervious surfaces through
use of narrower streets and sidewalks, stormwater reuse and green infrastructure practices
4
to promote retention of stormwater on the site while also providing other environmental
benefits.
Response: Low Impact Development strategies will be used to the extent practicable.
The PUD process allows for flexibility in pavement widths and requires higher levels of
open space than conventional development. A stormwater reuse system for irrigation
will be evaluated as part of the development review process and used where possible.
• During construction, the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State
Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater Permit (CSW Permit) requires
preservation of the existing 50 feet of natural buffer to wetlands on the site. If the existing
buffer must be encroached to complete the construction, then redundant (double) down
gradient sediment controls must be utilized to protect the wetlands. Questions regarding
Construction Stormwater Permit requirements should be directed to Roberta Getman at
507-206-2629 or Roberta.Getman@state.mn.us.
Response: The project proposer will be designing the stormwater basins and on-site
floodplain mitigation in accordance with the City and Rice Creek Watershed District
requirements to account for flood risk on site. The development will obtain an
NPDES/SDS CSW permit and follow the wetland buffer requirements around preserved
wetlands on site.
Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes (Item 12)
Comment: Please be aware that farmsteads have the potential for releases or threatened
releases of agricultural chemicals. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) is the
regulatory agency charged with managing the response and cleanup of fertilizers and
pesticides. Information regarding the MDA is available on the website at:
https://www.mda.state.mn.us/pesticide-fertilizer/spills-cleanup. For questions regarding
agricultural chemicals, please contact Cathy Villas-Horns with the MDA at 651-201-6697. For
questions regarding waste pesticide containers, please contact Jane Boerboom with the MDA at
651-201-6540.
Response: As part of the EAW process, the MDA’s What’s In My Neighborhood was
reviewed as part of Item 12 – Contaminated/Hazardous Materials and did not indicate
that there are any known and potential sources of agriculture chemical soil and ground
water contamination on site. Additionally, a Phase I Environmental Assessment was
completed as part of the developer’s due diligence of the site.
Other Potential Environmental Effects (Item 20)
Comment: Please note that chloride (salt) is a growing issue for lakes, streams, and
groundwater around the state. Chloride can come from both de-icing salt and water softener
salt. For the proposed Project, the MPCA recommends smart salting practices for de-icing
streets and driveways during the winter weather months and water softening best practices be
5
used year-round. Additional resources are available at: https:// www.pca.state.mn.us/business-
with-us/statewide-chloride-resources.
Response: The City of Lino Lakes will use smart salting practices on the roadways
throughout the development. Residents will be encouraged to implement smart salting
practices on their driveways and use best salt management practices with their water
softeners should they have one in their home. The project proposer can include the
factsheet on Residential water softening for homeowners in the proposed development
that is available on the MPCA’s statewide chloride resources website located here:
Microsoft Word - UMNResidentialBMPs_Final.docx. The City provides education
resources related to chloride use on its website and newsletter.
4.1.3 Metropolitan Council – September 13, 2022
Item 6 – Project Description - Forecasts
Comment: Met Council indicates either of the two scenarios presented in the EAW could yield
development beyond previous expectations and that allocation of the forecast to sub city zones
can be revised as needed. Met Council indicates that should the subject development proceed,
several hundreds of excess households would result. City staff can request a Transportation
Analysis Zone allocation adjustment by contacting Council Research staff.
Response: Both of the two scenarios presented are consistent with the City’s 2040 Land
Use Plan and Utility Staging Plan and the projected number of households for the area.
The City of Lino Lakes staff will request a Transportation Analysis Zone allocation
adjustment from Met Council if this is necessary.
Item 6 – Project Description - Housing
Comment: Met Council states that any changes to guiding land use, including changes to
percent residential and minimum allowable density, may create inconsistency with regional
housing policy and impact the City’s ability to participate in Livable Communities Act Programs.
Response: No change to the guiding land use is proposed. The proposed development
density and land use is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and consistent
with the Metropolitan Council’s guidance for “emerging suburban edge communities”.
The proposed development will provide “Lifecycle” housing choices consistent with the
City’s housing goals.
Item 9 – Land Use – Regional Parks and Trails
Comment: A planned unit of the Regional Park System – the Central Anoka County Regional
trail – is immediately adjacent to the Project Site. Council encourages Integrate Properties, LLC
and the City of Lino Lakes to coordinate with Anoka County prior to and during any future
construction activities to ensure there are no permanent impacts to the planned regional trail
as a result of either of the two site plan alternatives.
6
Response: The project proposer and the City of Lino Lakes will coordinate with Anoka
County to ensure that the Central Anoka County Regional Trail is provided for with the
development. The City anticipates construction of the trail along Main Street, from
Sunset Avenue to the eastern project limits, concurrent with the proposed
development.
Item 11i – Water Resources - Groundwater
Comment: The Project Site is located in the North and East Groundwater Management Area
(https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/gwmp/area-ne.html) designated by the Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources. Given the range of water supply challenges (quantity and quality) that
exist in this part of the metro, the Council encourages the City to collaborate with state
partners and/or neighboring communities when expanding or developing new water supplies in
this area.
Response: The City will collaborate with state partners and/or neighboring communities
when expanding new water supplies in the area. The City participates as a member on
the North and East Groundwater Management Area task force
Item 11bii – Water Resources - Stormwater
Comment: This appears to be a difficult site for intensive development due to a predominance
of hydric soils, high water table, wetlands, presence of county and private ditches, and location
in the 100-year flood plain. Many of the soil associations listed for the site have severe
limitations for dwellings with basements and roadways. The EAW states that the project will
result in 50-60 acres of impervious surface and runoff will be treated with stormwater basins.
Taken together, these conditions indicate that the site is a poor candidate for the proposed
development. If the proposer is determined to pursue this project, they should work closely
with the City and Rice Creek Watershed District to address all these concerns before
proceeding.
Response: The project proposer has been working closely with the City of Lino Lakes
and Rice Creek Watershed District to address the environmental concerns of the site
including the high-water table, wetlands, county and private ditches, and the 100-year
floodplain. The project proposer will be subject to the regulations regarding these
environmental issues and will need to obtain the appropriate permit approval prior to
development of the site.
4.1.4 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources – September 15, 2022
Page 6, Permits and Approvals
Comment: Please include a DNR Permit to Take in the list of required permits and approvals.
Protected state-listed species have been identified in the project vicinity. The need for a Permit
to Take will be determined as the proposer works through the rare plant survey process.
7
Response: This has been added to the required permits and approvals table found in
Section 5. Findings of Fact, C. Extent to Which Environmental Effect Area Subject to
Mitigation.
Page 12, Wastewater
Comment. The proposed plan to add 557 and even up to 707 residential units would
presumably add a comparable number of residential water softeners due to the water hardness
levels of the City of Lino Lakes municipal water supply. Many Minnesota municipalities are
wrestling with high chloride levels in their wastewater (See this recent study (link in letter in
Appendix A) on sources of chloride in Minnesota). Chloride is one of the components of salt,
which is used in forms such as sodium chloride (table salt), calcium chloride and magnesium
chloride (road salts). Sodium chloride is commonly used in home water softeners and by water
treatment plants to treat “hard” water. Minnesota generally has groundwater with high levels
of calcium and magnesium that must be removed through softening in order to improve taste
and prevent lime scale buildup in appliances, pipes and water fixtures. The majority of home
water softeners use sodium chloride (NaCl) in a softening process that replaces calcium and
magnesium ions with sodium, while the chloride ions are discharged in the wastewater and
eventually end up in the environment.
Each community needs to determine which tool is appropriate for their situation. This factsheet
(link in letter in Appendix A) suggests ways for homeowners to optimize their water softener
salt use, while this link (link in letter in Appendix A) provides resources for cities and examples
of how other communities in Minnesota are addressing their high chloride levels. We suggest
that as this development moves forward, the City of Lino Lakes consider what strategies can be
used to minimize chloride use.
Response: The City of Lino Lakes recognizes the importance of reducing chloride use. The
City of Lino Lakes will encourage residents to implement best management practices with
their water softeners. The project proposer can include the factsheet on Residential water
softening for homeowners in the proposed development that is available on the MPCA’s
statewide chloride resources website located here: Microsoft Word -
UMNResidentialBMPs_Final.docx. The City provides education resources related to
chloride use on its website and newsletter.
Page 13, Post-Construction Runoff
Comment. Blanding’s turtles, a protected state-listed threatened species, have been
documented within the Project Site. Stormwater features may be colonized by Blanding’s
turtles in the area, therefore we recommend incorporating measures to avoid impacting this
species into stormwater management. In years when the stormwater features will be dredged
to remove excess sediment, please draw down water levels by September 15th in order to
allow turtles to find overwintering habitat elsewhere.
8
Response: The avoidance measures outlined in the NHIS letter that is included in
Appendix C of the EAW will be forwarded to the project proposer and incorporated into
construction notes to avoid any potential impacts to the Blanding’s turtle.
Page 13, Post-Construction Runoff
Comment. We recommend that BWSR-approved, weed-free, native seed mixes be used to the
greatest degree possible in stormwater features in order to provide pollinator habitat.
Response: The proposed stormwater features on site will utilize BWSR approved, weed-
free, native seed mixes.
Page 13, Post-Construction Runoff
Comment. The planned increase in impervious surfaces will also increase the amount of road
salt used in the Project Site. Chloride released into local lakes and streams does not break
down, and instead accumulates in the environment, potentially reaching levels that are toxic to
aquatic wildlife and plants. Consider promoting local business and city participation in the
Smart Salting Training offered through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. There are a
variety of classes available for road applicators, sidewalk applicators, and property managers.
More information and resources can be found at this website. Many winter maintenance staff
who have attended the Smart Salting training — both from cities and counties and from private
companies — have used their knowledge to reduce salt use and save money for their
organizations.
We also encourage cities and counties to consider how they may participate in the Statewide
Chloride Management Plan and provide public outreach to reduce the overuse of chloride. Here
are some educational resources for residents as well as a sample ordinance regarding chloride
use (link in letter in Appendix A).
Response: The City of Lino Lakes will use smart salting practices on the roadways
throughout the development. The City annually provides educational resources for
residents on its website and in City newsletters.
Page 20, Rare Features
Comment. This section of the EAW lists the rare species identified in the DNR Natural Heritage
Review, but does not include or discuss DNR requirements regarding these species. The
statement that, “There are no state listed species within the project site” is incorrect. The
Natural Heritage Review letter has concerns about two state-listed species that may occur
within the site. The lack of known occurrences within the project boundary does not mean that
these species do not use the area. Minnesota’s Endangered Species Statute
(Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800
to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the take of threatened or endangered species without a
permit.
9
• Swamp Blackberry (Rubus semisetosus), a state-listed endangered species, has been
documented in the vicinity of the project. A qualified surveyor needs to conduct a
botanical survey if any shrub removal is associated with the proposed project. Surveys
must be conducted by a DNR approved surveyor (see attached list) and follow the
standards contained in the Rare Species Survey Process and Rare Plant Guidance.
Project planning should take into account that any botanical survey needs to be
conducted during the appropriate time of the year, which may be limited. Please consult
with the NH Review Team (Reports.NHIS@state.mn.us) regarding this process.
• Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state-listed threatened species, have been
documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. As such, the following avoidance
measures are required:
o Avoid wetland impacts during hibernation season, between October 15th and
April 15th, unless the area is unsuitable for hibernation.
o The use of erosion control blanket shall be limited to ‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural-
netting’ types, and specifically not products containing plastic mesh netting or
other plastic components.
Also, be aware that hydro-mulch products may contain small synthetic
(plastic) fibers to aid in their matrix strength. These loose fibers could
potentially re-suspend and make their way into Public Waters. As such,
please review mulch products and not allow any materials with synthetic
(plastic) fiber additives in areas that drain to Public Waters.
o Areas where there will be construction should be checked for turtles before the
use of heavy equipment or any ground disturbance.
o The Blanding’s turtle flyer must be given to all contractors working in the area.
o Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR
Nongame Specialist, Erica Hoaglund (Erica.Hoaglund@state.mn.us).
o If turtles are in imminent danger they must be moved by hand out of harm’s
way, otherwise, they are to be left undisturbed.
• If the above avoidance measures are not possible, please contact Samantha Bump
(Samantha.Bump@state.mn.us) as further action may be needed.
• For additional information, see the Blanding’s turtle fact sheet, which describes the
habitat use and life history of this species. The fact sheet also provides two lists of
recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to this rare turtle. Please refer to
both lists of recommendations and apply those that are relevant to your project. For
further assistance regarding the Blanding’s turtle, please contact the DNR Regional
Nongame Specialist, Erica Hoaglund.
Response: The NHIS letter from the DNR is included in Appendix C of the EAW and states
the information stated above about the Swamp Blackberry and Blanding’s turtles. The
need for a botanical survey of Swamp Blackberry will be evaluated if shrub removal is
necessary for the project and the avoidance measures will be required, forwarded to the
project proposer and incorporated into construction notes to avoid any potential impacts
10
to the Blanding’s turtle. The permit for the take of endangered or threatened species has
been added to the required permits and approvals table as shown below in the 5. Findings
of Fact, Part C.
Page 25, Dust and Odors
Comment. If water for dust control is taken from a lake, river, or stream in volumes that exceed
10,000 gallons per day, or one million gallons per year, then a DNR Water Appropriations
Permit will be required.
Response: The water appropriations permit is called out in the Required Permits and
Approvals of the Proposed Project (Table 5) table for construction dewatering. This
comment will be forwarded onto the project proposer should water from a lake, river, or
stream be used for dust control.
4.2 COMMENTS FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC
4.2.1 Nicki Roland Ecker – August 25, 2022
Comment: Nicki states that she wants to know the best way to stay informed on the
development. Nicki states that this development would be a devasting addition to the already
under-supported schools and infrastructure.
Response: The City of Lino Lakes meets with the school districts annually to discuss
potential development proposals so the school districts can plan accordingly. The
project is also spread across two different school districts.
4.2.2 Anna Jungbauer – August 25, 2022
Comment: Anna states that she is curious how to find out how the proposed development will
impact all the city resources including roads, schools, and public safety resources. She is
concerned that this massive development will impact residents currenting living in the area
with issues such as school levy money and increased property taxes.
Response: The City of Lino Lakes (Katie Larsen) followed up with Anna in an email on
8/25/2022 and let her know where to stay informed about the development as well as
the next steps the developer may take after Council reviews the EAW in October.
The impact to the existing roadways this development connects to has been extensively
studied with the Traffic Study located in Appendix F of the EAW and has been reviewed
by the City. Traffic impacts will be analyzed during the City re zoning and preliminary
plat review process. Any traffic mitigation identified in the review will be implemented
with project construction. This will include both vehicular and pedestrian
improvements.
Regarding schools and school levy money, the City of Lino Lakes meets with the school
districts annually to discuss potential development proposals so the school districts can
plan accordingly. The project is also spread across two different school districts.
11
Additionally, the county assesses property taxes on a regular basis and there is no
evidence that this proposed development will impact property taxes.
4.2.3 Morgan C – August 25, 2022
Comment: Morgan expressed concern about adding 707 units to the sod field when there are
two new developments located near the elementary school and across from the sod field.
Morgan is concerned that this will cause overcrowding and poses the question if there has been
any thought that this could cause an increase to classroom sizes at the elementary school.
Additionally, she states that the only way she would support this if there are less units
proposed and a pool added that Morgan’s HOA could have access to.
Response: The City of Lino Lakes meets with the school districts annually to discuss
potential development proposals so the school districts can plan accordingly. The
project is also spread across two different school districts.
4.2.4 Justin Carver – August 26, 2022
Comment: Justin states in an email that he has many questions and concerns with the
development and wants to discuss this with Katie Larsen on the phone.
Response: The City of Lino Lakes (Katie Larsen) followed up with Justin in an email on
8/29/2022 and let him know where to stay informed about the development as well as
the next steps the developer may take after Council reviews the EAW in October.
4.2.5 Mike Trudeau – August 30, 2022
Comment: Mike wants to know where the single family and townhome/higher density units will
be proposed for the development as he is concerned about townhome/higher density units
impacting his property value. Mike lives along Robinson Drive that borders the proposed
development to the south.
Response: Katie Larsen addressed Mr. Trudeau’s concerns in an email exchange
between August 29th and August 30th. Katie states that per the EAW, Figure 2. PUD
Concept Plan shows a 557 unit development with single family homes behind Robinson
Drive. Figure 3. Yield Plan shows a 707 unit development with single family homes and
townhomes behind Robinson Drive. There are no apartments proposed behind
Robinson Drive. Additionally, she says that as the project moves forward, the developer
will submit a PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat that will better define the
project. Public hearings will be held and notices will be sent again to property owners in
the area for additional comments.
4.2.6 Mara Lipinski – September 5, 2022
Comment: Mara has concern that such a large development is not wise to construct since the
City of Lino Lakes has a difficult time keeping up with maintaining the current small
developments in the area. Specifically, Mara is concerned that the City of Lino Lakes does not
12
mow the boulevard as often as they should, they do not maintain all trails, they don’t replace
dead trees, and they rarely snow blow in the winter.
Response: The City makes every effort to maintain infrastructure and open areas.
Unimproved park areas and trails, such as those along Robinson Drive, are maintained
on a limited basis during both summer and winter. Development of the Robinson sod
farm will lead to completion of the Century Farm North Park and trail system. Increased
maintenance of these areas will result from those improvements.
4.2.7 Greg and Sarah Austin – September 10, 2022
Comment: The Austin’s explained in their letter that they have concerns regarding the
proposed development. These include:
• There is concern that adding this development into a drainage system that already has a
problem will only amplify the drainage issues. Specifically, the Austin’s are concerned
that the project could conceivably change the flood status of the area and threaten
existing homes, buildings, and properties in the area.
• The Austin’s state that the sod farm and the surrounding wetlands and ditches are
major nesting/rearing grounds for many species of migratory and local waterfowl,
songbirds, deer, and predators from raptors to coyotes. They argue that the threat to
their local treasures, the Rice Creek and lakes would be threatened by increased
herbicide, pesticide, and salt runoff from the new development. They strongly
recommend that the sod farm become an extension of the Carlos Avery wildlife area, or
some other special green space or park, which are lacking and being diminished in
Anoka County
• There is concern about the amount of traffic added to Century Trail, Robinson Trail, and
Sunset Road. The added traffic to these roads is a safety concern as this development
has the potential to turn these streets into high-speed thoroughfares and become
dangerous to bicycles and pedestrians.
Response:
• The public drainage system and most of the private drainage system on site will remain
the same. The proposed development is required to meet the stormwater runoff quality
and quantity requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and
the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge and State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS).
Therefore, the stormwater basins on site will be designed to meet these requirements.
Additionally, since the site falls within the 100 year floodplain, the development is
required to follow the City and Rice Creek Watershed District floodplain mitigation
requirements and implement on-site floodplain mitigation. These requirements will aide
in controlling drainage on site to avoid impacts to the surrounding area.
• The current conditions of the site include the use of agriculture fertilizers, a
monoculture of sod grass, and a private and public drainage system. The proposed
13
development is expected to add open water features that currently do not exist on site
and to plant native vegetation throughout the site. The open water areas can provide fly
over habitat for migratory and local waterfowl and the native vegetation can provide
additional wildlife habitat that currently does not exist. Thus, there is not expected to be
a significant impact to wildlife species with this development. The City will require
protective buffers adjacent to all water features.
• A Traffic Impact Study located in Appendix F of the report extensively modeled the
impact of the proposed development on the surrounding roadways. and found that the
proposed development is expected to have limited impact on the study area traffic
operations with no significant side-street delay or queuing issues. Traffic impacts will be
further analyzed during the City rezoning and preliminary plat review process. Any
traffic mitigation identified in the review will be implemented with project construction.
This will include both vehicular and pedestrian improvements.
4.2.8 Carl Street Residents – September 12, 2022
Comment 1. During the morning traffic rush there may be over 1,000 vehicles using the Carl
Street and 4th Avenue intersection, per the EAW projections. Did the traffic study take into
consideration the potential intersection density at 4th Avenue and Carl Street?
Response:
• Under forecast Year 2040 build conditions, daily traffic volumes along Carl Street are
projected as follows (See Figures 11-14 in the Traffic Study in Appendix F of the EAW):
• Approximately 180 daily vehicles with no proposed development connection to Carl
Street
• Approximately 1,480 daily vehicles with a proposed development connection to Carl
Street under the PUD Concept Plan
o Peak hour traffic volumes along Carl Street are expected to be significantly lower
than this anticipated daily traffic volume
• Approximately 1,780 daily vehicles with a proposed development connection to Carl
Street under the Yield Plan
o Peak hour traffic volumes along Carl Street are expected to be significantly lower
than this anticipated daily traffic volume (see example below)
Peak Hour Example: Under forecast Year 2040 build conditions, the Yield Plan peak hour
traffic volumes along Carl Street are projected as follows (See Figure 14 in the Traffic
Study in Appendix F of the EAW):
• Slightly more than 150 vehicles are projected along Carl Street during the AM peak hour
• Slightly more than 180 vehicles are projected along Carl Street during the PM peak hour
Yes, the Traffic Impact Study in Appendix F accounts for projected traffic density with
respect to intersection capacity. Under all forecast year 2025 and year 2040 build
models, the 4th Avenue/Carl Street intersection is expected to function with minimal
14
delay (Level of Service A) (See Tables 8-15 in the Traffic Study in Appendix F of the
EAW). Level of Service A is in compliance with industry standard practice for acceptable
traffic mobility performance.
Comment 2. Was a comprehensive traffic impact study conducted to evaluate the potential
traffic backup on Carl Street during the busy morning and evening hours?
Response: Yes, the Traffic Impact Study in Appendix F of the EAW accounts for
projected vehicle queuing during the AM & PM peak hours. Under all forecast year 2025
and year 2040 build models, the industry standard 95th percentile queue (length of
queue with only a five percent probability of being exceeded) on the Carl Street
approach to 4th Avenue is expected to be less than 55 feet (the equivalent of 2-3
vehicles). (See the 95th percentile queues in the tables of Appendix A in the Traffic
Impact Study located in Appendix F of the EAW).
Comment 3. Do the Anoka County traffic projections and studies align with those from Alliant
Engineering?
Response: Annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes forecast in the Anoka County
Year 2040 Transportation Plan Update are comparable to daily volumes forecast under
Year 2040 Build Conditions in the Traffic Impact Study.
Comment 4. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering take into consideration the current
aquifer depletion issue taking place on the Lino Lakes border in Blaine?
Response: The drawdown issue referred to is related to new high production municipal
wells located in the City of Blaine and is most pronounced during the relatively
infrequent condition that multiple wells are pumping simultaneously during maximum
day water demand. The Robinson development area will be served by Lino Lakes
municipal water system which draws water from a different aquifer on the south side of
Lino Lakes. The deep irrigation well that currently serves to irrigate the sod farm will be
removed with the project.
Comment 5. Does the City of Lino Lakes plan to warrant the costs of the wells for current
property owners near the potential project?
Response: No. The City does not anticipate any impacts to offsite wells.
Comment 6. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering investigate the possibility for
flooding due to the high-water table and the redistribution of water?
Response: Alliant Engineering has prepared the required floodplain calculations and
models for the proposed floodplain mitigation on site per Rice Creek Watershed
requirements and submitted this to Rice Creek Watershed District for review and
approval. Additionally, Alliant has prepared the required stormwater calculations for the
site per Rice Creek Watershed District regulations. This has been sent to Rice Creek
Watershed District for review and approval. All stormwater and floodplain calculations
15
and design will be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, consistent with
City requirements, as part of the rezoning and preliminary plat review.
Comment 7. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering initiate a study to determine if
“Quiet Enjoyment of Life” would be impacted or violated by the proposed street connection?
Response: No. There is no established City requirement or standard related to “Quiet
Enjoyment of Life”. The proposed development is subject to to existing City Code
requirements. The residential use of the site will be required to adhere to the city’s
noise ordinances. After construction, noise levels are expected to be at or near existing
levels.
Comment 8. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering consult Anoka County to
determine property value losses if the cul-de-sac is removed?
Response: A property value study is not part of the environmental assessment review.
Comment 9. Does Anoka County plan to reassess property value losses and adjust home values
and taxes accordingly if Carl Street is connected.
Response: Anoka County assesses property on a regular basis, regardless of
development. There is no information that suggests a loss in property value.
Comment 10. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering consult with Rice Creek
Watershed District on the disruption to the waterways, ditches, and wetlands within the impact
area?
Response: Yes, the developer has hired a consultant to conduct the wetland delineation
and wetland impact permit application of the site per the Wetland Conservation Act,
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulations. Rice Creek Watershed District is the
Local Government Unit that administers the Wetland Conservation Act and has been
working closely with the consultant on reviewing any waterway, ditch, and wetland
impacts from the proposed development. The wetland delineation report and permit
application will need to be formally reviewed and approved by Rice Creek Watershed
District, the Board of Soil and Water Resources, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
any other regulatory authority on the Technical Evaluation Panel.
Comment 11. Many pedestrians, dog walkers, and bicyclists use the path at the end of the cul-
de-sac because they feel safe on Carl Street. Children cannot bike or walk on Lilac or 4th St
because they both are busy with traffic speeds far over the posted limits. Has this been taken
into consideration and are the proposed traffic areas in compliance with the Local Road
Research Board (LRRB)?
Response: Any proposed improvements to Carl Street would include off-street
pedestrian facilities. This would be evaluated as part of future land use approvals. The
Local Road Research Board does not establish transportation engineering standards.
Comment 12. How will the ACD-10-22 main trunk and BR2 be preserved and protected?
16
Response: The ACD-10-22 main trunk and BR2 will be protected with a minimum 20’
easement that extends out from the top of the ditch bank. Additional buffer and
easement width will be evaluated as part of the rezoning and preliminary plat review.
Comment 13. How will the vegetation and water conservation be enhanced in the disturbed
waterways in the project boundaries?
Response: The private ditches within the Project Site will have a minimum 10’ vegetated
no mow buffer around them and the public drainage ditches on site will have a
mimimum 20’ easement around them to protect them. A series of stormwater basins
are proposed on site that are subject to stormwater requirements from the City of Lino
Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge and
State Disposal System to pre-treat water running off from the surrounding development
before it is discharged into any receiving waters. This will improve the water quality of
the ditches since they currently receive direct runoff from the sod farm without any pre-
treatment.
Comment 14. Where in the EAW report can we find information from the MN Dept of
Agriculture, the Dept of Hydrogeology or Climatology regarding the sequela of years of
accumulation of fertilizers and pesticides from the sod farm land upon our disturbed soil,
ground water, and well water?
Response: The EAW’s purpose is to focus on the environmental impacts of the proposed
development. The existing condition of the property as a sod farm is in compliance with
the MN Department of Agriculture guidelines and regulations. The MN Department of
Agriculture would be the regulatory agency to contact for this information.
In addition, the developer is completing a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)
that will document site contamination and next steps. If contaminated soils are present
that do not meet residential reuse requirements they will be hauled offsite and
disposed of per MPCA guidelines. Dust BMPs will be in place during construction to
minimize the potential for dust
Comment 15. In 1977 the Carl Street residents were assured there would be no Carl St
connection and the cul-de-sac would remain. In 1986, 2006, and now, despite the developer’s
original concept plan where Carl Street is not mentioned as a variable, would you please clarify
as to why Carl Street is repeatedly targeted for change, negatively affecting our property
values, safety, well-being, wildlife, creek, and vegetation?
Response: The Carl Street connection will be a policy decision from the City Council
based on sound engineering judgment. The Carl Street connection has been identified as
a through connection in several planning documents (2040 Comprehensive Plan Future
Roadway System Figure 6-13, Lino Lakes 2030 Transportation Comprehensive Plan
Future Roadway System Figure 6-12, 2001 Lino Lakes Transportation Plan) and right of
way was platted from 4th Avenue to Sunset Avenue originally in 1977.
17
Comment 16. The trajectory of land development leads to increased noise, cutting down of
trees, causing damage and instability to wildlife, clean water, vegetation, pollinator insects, soil
and other ecosystems. Will this result in the formation of “heat islands” caused by those losses
and the absorption of more heat by impervious pavement including sidewalks, parking areas
and adverse effects on our climate, air and water quality?
Response: The current conditions of the Robinson Sod Farm include an existing sod farm
agriculture area that consists of a monoculture of sod farm grass and a minimal amount
of trees. Additionally, the site is currently not subject to pre-treating water through
stormwater basins before the water enters the private and public drainage ditches on
site. The proposed residential development will add impervious pavement areas;
however, the development will be subject to the local, state, and federal water quality
regulations. Among these will be to include stormwater basins to pre-treat water before
it enters into any receiving waters on site thus improving water quality leaving the site,
including floodplain mitigation on site, and adding landscaping including native
vegetation and landscape trees to off-set the potential formation of a “heat island.”
In addition the City requires placement of boulevard trees to off-set heat island effects.
The City also requires tree and shrubs to be planted within all open space areas.
Comment 17. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering consult with the FAA regarding
traffic proximity to the Lino Air Park airstrip?
Response: No, and there is no requirement for that.
Comment 18. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering conduct a traffic analysis
relevant to headlight penetration onto the Lino Air Park airstrip as this can cause temporary
flash blindness? This will be a safety hazard to pilots.
Response: This is not evaluated as part of the environmental process. The city does not
anticipate that traffic generated by the project would create any safety hazards to the
private air strip . Residential development currently abuts the airpark.
Comment 19. Has the risk of increased traffic on Carl Street in proximity to the Lino Air Park
been considered secondary to vehicle drivers being distracted while watching airplanes take off
and land, thus not watching our children playing or residents walking or biking down Carl
Street?
Response: This is not evaluated as part of the environmental process. Traffic is
evaluated as part of the land use approvals and uses sound engineering judgment to
make decisions.
Comment 20. How was a 2-day traffic study on Carl Street “valid” both in methodology and
analysis assuring “statistical significance levels?”
Response: The traffic data collection time periods and dates are in compliance with
industry standard best practices for traffic impact studies.
18
Comment 21. When is the Planning & Zoning commission conducting a hearing and vote on
changing the Robinson property zoning from agricultural to residential?
Response: The meeting will be scheduled upon the receipt of a complete land use
application, which has not yet been received.
4.2.9 Ann Rudie – September 12, 2022
Comment. Ann lives in the Century Farm neighborhood and has concerns about the safety of
young children in the neighborhood with Robinson becoming a thru street to the new
development. She states that she is opposed to the project because of the traffic volume
increase here. She has proposed three questions about the development:
• What has the city done to study the impact of this increase in traffic?
• How will the city address the ongoing water quality problem with a project of this size and
will new residents be made aware of the manganese issues?
• Is there a demonstrated need for more housing?
Response:
• As part of the EAW, a Traffic Impact Study was conducted to assess the increase in
traffic in the area and is included in Appendix F of the EAW. This study was reviewed
and approved by the City of Lino Lakes before it was distributed in the EAW.
• The City will continue to work on seeking solutions for the high manganese levels in
the drinking water and educating the public through the online “Public Water
Advisory” section of the City’s website about any updates to the current water quality
situation. The City is currently preparing plans and specifications for construction of a
water treatment plant that will resolve the manganese issue.
• Property owners have a right to development their property in accordance with the
City’s Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances. The City of Lino Lake’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan provides projections for the future land use of the City and has
split the site into four planned land uses. These include Low Density Residential for the
west and south portions of the project and then a mix of Medium Density Residential,
High Density Residential, and Planned Residential/Commercial for the central and
northern parts of the project. This is based on the future projected population growth
of the City and the City’s goals to provide more mixed use housing.
4.2.10 Doug and Cindy Hansen – September 12, 2022
Comment. The Hansen’s live along Carl Street and have proposed the following concerns about
the development. These include:
• The Robinson Sod Farm development will add to the already stressed municipal sewer and
water systems. They are concerned that a negative water management outcome could
occur as a result of rapid development in the City.
19
o The Hansen’s would like assurance from the City of Lino Lakes and Council to have a
prudent approach including an aggressive water management plan that can handle
this addition.
• This resident states they were told by the City Engineer of Lino Lakes that when they
purchased their property back in 2013, there was no intention of connecting any future
residential developments from the sod farm to Carl Street.
o Carl Street has also been used as a main walking and bike path since it is not a main
thoroughfare and the traffic is limited. Additionally, there is a nature path used daily
by Carl Street residents and residents from the surrounding developments. The
residents are concerned that a street connection from the Robinson Sod Farm to
Carl Street will destroy the nature path and traffic will endanger the humans and
wildlife that utilize this area for recreation and habitat.
Response:
• The City of Lino Lakes requires that developers adhere to the local, state, and
federal regulations related to water management. The project developer will need
to obtain the necessary permits and approvals from these regulatory authorities
prior to development of the site.
• The Carl Street connection will be a policy decision from the City Council based on
sound engineering judgment. The Carl Street connection has been identified as a
through connection in several planning documents (2040 Comprehensive Plan
Future Roadway System Figure 6-13, Lino Lakes 2030 Transportation
Comprehensive Plan Future Roadway System Figure 6-12, 2001 Lino Lakes
Transportation Plan) and right of way was platted from 4th Avenue to Sunset
Avenue originally in 1977.
4.2.11 Steven Anderson – September 12, 2022
Comment. Steven states that he has concerns about the proposed development. These
concerns include:
• The proposed housing development will negatively impact local residents and their
properties due to the drainage restructuring required for this housing proposal with
buildings, paved streets, driveways, and patios. Without the water retention of the sod farm
and increase runoff and potential for flooding, the project could conceivably change the
flood status of the area, and threaten existing homes, buildings, and properties.
• Strongly recommends that the sod farm become an extension of the Carlos Avery Wildlife
area, or some other special green space or park because the proposed development will
likely cause irreparable damage to wildlife in the area due to increase herbicide, pesticide,
and salt runoff from the new development.
• There is a current traffic problem that will evolve from the proposed project.
Response:
20
• The public drainage system and most of the private drainage system on site will remain
the same. The proposed development is required to meet the stormwater runoff quality
and quantity requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and
the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge and State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS).
Therefore, the stormwater basins on site will be designed to meet these requirements.
Additionally, since the site falls within the 100 year floodplain, the development is
required to follow the Rice Creek Watershed District floodplain mitigation requirements
and implement on-site floodplain mitigation. These requirements will aide in controlling
drainage on site to avoid impacts to the surrounding area.
• The current conditions of the site include the use of agriculture fertilizers, a
monoculture of sod grass, and a private and public drainage system. The proposed
development is expected to add open water features that currently do not exist on site
and to plant native vegetation throughout the site. The open water areas can provide fly
over habitat for migratory and local waterfowl and the native vegetation can provide
additional wildlife habitat that currently does not exist. Thus, there is not expected to be
a significant impact to wildlife species with this development.
• A Traffic Impact Study located in Appendix F of the report extensively modeled the
impact of the proposed development on the surrounding roadways and found that the
proposed development is expected to have limited impact on the study area traffic
operations with no significant side-street delay or queuing issues. Traffic impacts will be
further analyzed during the City rezoning and preliminary plat review process. Any
traffic mitigation identified in the review will be implemented with project construction.
This will include both vehicular and pedestrian improvements.
4.2.12 Scott Zbikowski – September 13, 2022
Comment. Scott lives a half a block south of the proposed development and states that he has
three main concerns:
• The impact of the deletion or natural drainage/absorption into the soil since the proposed
development has a relatively low elevation with poor drainage. There is great concern
about the stress to drainage ditch ACD 10-22-32 since it was not designed for high density
housing. The square feet of housing, driveways, streets, and sidewalks greatly effects the
natural absorption of natural rainfall
• The additional traffic impact this development will have on the surrounding streets. There is
concern about the traffic volume onto Sunset Road and 4th Street from the development as
both roads are two lanes with no sidewalks. There is a concern about safety unless these
roads and those they connect to are improved prior to the development of the proposed
development.
• There is a safety concern that a Carl Street connection would impact the airpark by adding
traffic to this area.
Response:
21
• The public drainage system and most of the private drainage system on site will remain
the same. The proposed development is required to meet the stormwater runoff quality
and quantity requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and
the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge and State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS).
Therefore, the stormwater basins on site will be designed to meet these requirements.
Additionally, since the site falls within the 100 year floodplain, the development is
required to follow the Rice Creek Watershed District floodplain mitigation requirements
and implement on-site floodplain mitigation. These requirements will aide in controlling
drainage on site to avoid impacts to the surrounding area.
• A Traffic Impact Study located in Appendix F of the report extensively modeled the
impact of the proposed development on the surrounding roadways and found that the
proposed development is expected to have limited impact on the study area traffic
operations with no significant side-street delay or queuing issues. Traffic impacts will be
further analyzed during the City rezoning and preliminary plat review process. Any
traffic mitigation identified in the review will be implemented with project construction.
This will include both vehicular and pedestrian improvements.
• The city does not anticipate that traffic generated by the project would create any
safety hazards to the private air strip and any potential changes would be evaluated as
part of future land use approval reviews.
4.2.13 Lisa and Ernst Olsen – September 14, 2022
Comment. Lisa and Ernst provided an email and comments throughout the EAW document.
There main concerns are that extending to Carl Street will destroy their existing neighborhood
by adding addition traffic to their road and threatening the safety of pedestrians and wildlife.
Additionally, they are concerned that their wells and mound system will be destroyed by the
proposed development.
• Response: The Carl Street connection will be a policy decision from the City Council
based on sound engineering judgment. The Carl Street connection has been identified as
a through connection in several planning documents (2040 Comprehensive Plan Future
Roadway System Figure 6-13, Lino Lakes 2030 Transportation Comprehensive Plan
Future Roadway System Figure 6-12, 2001 Lino Lakes Transportation Plan) and right of
way was platted from 4th Avenue to Sunset Avenue originally in 1977. The City does not
anticipate any impacts to the surrounding resident’s wells and mound system.
4.2.14 Kevin and Tammy Dunrud – September 14, 2022
Comment. Kevin and Tammy state in their letter that they are concerned about the following
items:
• Concerned that the alteration to 100 plus year drainage complexes in the area will
negatively impact the established 100 year floodplain. Currently, the sod farm and
22
surrounding drainage ditches can handle the water drainage and runoff, but with this huge
development and the potential rise in the water table, will this continue to be true?
• Concerned that their wood foundation home will incur water damage. Has the City of Lino
Lakes or Alliant Engineering contacted the Corps of Engineers or the appropriate governing
body to determine how the established 100 year floodplain will be impacted by massive
water redistribution?
Response:
• The public drainage system and most of the private drainage system on site will remain
the same. The proposed development is required to meet the stormwater runoff quality
and quantity requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and
the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge and State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS).
Therefore, the stormwater basins on site will be designed to meet these requirements.
Additionally, since the site falls within the 100 year floodplain, the development is
required to follow the Rice Creek Watershed District floodplain mitigation requirements
and implement on-site floodplain mitigation. These requirements will aide in controlling
drainage on site to avoid impacts to the surrounding area.
• Alliant Engineering has prepared the required floodplain calculations and models for the
proposed floodplain mitigation on site per Rice Creek Watershed requirements and
submitted this to Rice Creek Watershed District for review and approval. Additionally,
Alliant has prepared the required stormwater calculations for the site per Rice Creek
Watershed District regulations. This has been sent to Rice Creek Watershed District for
review and approval. All stormwater and floodplain calculations and design will be
subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, consistent with City requirements,
as part of the rezoning and preliminary plat review.
4.2.15 Reilly Anderson – September 15, 2022
Comment. Reilly states that he has concern and is opposed to the proposed development.
These concerns include:
• The proposed housing development threatens to further fragment the habitats of birds and
other wildlife within Anoka County and will add new stressors to the local environment.
• As summer weather becomes increasingly extreme and unpredictable, newly constructed
impervious surfaces will further stress the local aging drainage systems, threatening the
homes and properties of existing area residents with flooding, many of which were built
many years ago.
• There is concern that the proposed new roads and feeder routes will be ineffective in
mitigating the existing traffic issues in the area. The addition of the proposed high density
housing will add a critical amount of new motor traffic that will exceed the local
infrastructure’s ability to provide safe streets.
23
Response:
• The current conditions of the site include the use of agriculture fertilizers, a
monoculture of sod grass, and a private and public drainage system. The proposed
development is expected to add open water features that currently do not exist on site
and to plant native vegetation throughout the site. The open water areas can provide fly
over habitat for migratory and local waterfowl and the native vegetation can provide
additional wildlife habitat that currently does not exist. Thus, there is not expected to be
a significant impact to wildlife species with this development.
• The public drainage system and most of the private drainage system on site will remain
the same. The proposed development is required to meet the stormwater runoff quality
and quantity requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and
the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge and State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS).
Therefore, the stormwater basins on site will be designed to meet these requirements.
Additionally, since the site falls within the 100 year floodplain, the development is
required to follow the Rice Creek Watershed District floodplain mitigation requirements
and implement on-site floodplain mitigation. These requirements will aide in controlling
drainage on site to avoid impacts to the surrounding area.
• A Traffic Impact Study located in Appendix F of the report extensively modeled the
impact of the proposed development on the surrounding roadways and found that the
proposed development is expected to have limited impact on the study area traffic
operations with no significant side-street delay or queuing issues. Traffic impacts will be
further analyzed during the City rezoning and preliminary plat review process. Any
traffic mitigation identified in the review will be implemented with project construction.
This will include both vehicular and pedestrian improvements.
5. FINDINGS OF FACT
5.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
5.1.1 Proposed Project
The Robinson project is a proposed low, medium, and high density residential development on
an existing 158-acre agricultural area in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. Two
site plan alternatives have been developed for the project:
• PUD Concept Plan – The PUD concept plan is expected to consist of 557 dwelling units of
the following types:
o 242 single family detached homes
o 315 townhomes
24
• Yield Plan – The yield plan, considered close to the maximum density allowed under future
year 2040 land use plans, is expected to consist of 707 dwelling units of the following types:
o 263 single family detached homes
o 164 townhomes
o 280 multi-family units
The project is located to the southeast of Sunset Avenue and 125th Ave NE (Main Street, CSAH
14). The project will include new roads, stormwater features, and the installation of municipal
sewer and water systems.
5.1.2 Site Description and Existing Conditions
The existing conditions present on site include sod farm agriculture that consists of a series of
public and private drainage ways. The site has been used for agriculture production for
decades. The majority of the site occurs in predominately hydric soil.
5.1.3 Decision Regarding the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects
Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp. 7 lists four criteria that shall be considered in deciding
whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects. Those criteria and the
City’s findings are presented below.
A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects
Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp (A) indicates the first factor that the City must consider is the
“type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects.” The City’s findings are set forth
below.
1. Cover Types
The project will convert an approximately 158-acre site consisting predominately of sod
farm agriculture land to low, medium, and high density residential development,
stormwater infrastructure, lawn/landscaping, and an internal roadway network.
2. Shorelands and Floodplains
The majority of the site falls within the 100 year FEMA floodplain area and Rice Creek
Watershed District floodplain area. The project is not within or adjacent to a wild and
scenic river, critical area, agricultural preserve, or shoreland overlay district. The
development is required to follow the Rice Creek Watershed District floodplain
mitigation requirements and implement on-site floodplain mitigation.
3. Land Use
The project is compatible with surrounding land uses and the City of Lino Lake’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan shows the planned land use
for the Project Site to be a mix of low, medium, and high residential density.
4. Geology and Soils
25
The grading operations will disturb approximately 158 acres and require an estimated
600,000 cubic yards of grading on-site. Grading activities will construct new roads,
building residential pads, and stormwater features.
5. Water Quality
Compliance with stormwater requirements will minimize and mitigate potential adverse
effects on receiving waters. Project construction will add impervious surface to the site
which consists of streets, residential homes, and driveways. Stormwater rate and
volume controls will limit increases in runoff volume and associated pollutant transport.
Stormwater basins are expected to mitigate potential adverse effects on water quality.
6. Wetlands and Surface Waters
The wetland delineation survey was conducted in the summer of 2022 and delineated
wetlands and public and private drainage ways on site. The wetland delineation report is
currently under review with the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) which consists of Rice
Creek Watershed District, the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), Anoka County
Conservation District, and the Army Corps of Engineers. If any of these delineated
features is impacted on site, the project proponent will need to obtain a Minnesota
Wetland Conservation Act and Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act permit, and
Section 401 Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification.
7. Wastewater
The project is expected to produce normal domestic wastewater that will be typical of
residential developments and will be designed within the limitations of the existing
sanitary sewer system.
8. Hazardous Materials
Review of the MPCA and MDA’s “What’s in my Neighborhood” (WIMN) interactive
website identified 1 inactive brownfield on the Project Site and one petroleum tank
release immediately to the north of the site.
A Phase I and Phase II Site Assessment was conducted to analyze contamination on site
and the MPCA has reviewed the site. The MPCA has issued a no action letter stating that
the extent and magnitude of the release has been defined and does not pose a risk to
human health or the environment.
In addition to these two areas, there are 10 sites within 0.5 miles of the proposed
Project Site as shown in the MPCA’s database. The MPCA’s website indicates that these
sites have been properly investigated and managed. Therefore, these sites are not
expected to adversely impact the Project Site.
Prior to the demolition of the existing farmstead buildings, an asbestos and regulated
materials (ARM) assessment will be completed and the MPCA will be notified if asbestos
containing material (ACM) are identified during the ARM assessment.
26
9. Ecological Resources
The project is expected to convert approximately 158-acres of agriculture into a
residential development. The project may disperse less mobile wildlife species during
the construction of the residential development, however, changes in wildlife
abundance are not expected to be regionally significant. If a threatened and endangered
species survey is necessary for the project, it will be completed prior to construction to
ensure no species are impacted. As part of the development protective buffers will be
created along waterways and open space will be reestablished with native vegetation
and trees, creating addition ecological benefits.
10. Historic Resources
A search of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structures Inventory
did not identify archaeological sites or historic structures known to exist in the project
vicinity. Additionally, the State Historic Preservations Office confirmed no resources
present on the site.
11. Visual Resources
There are no scenic views or vistas on or adjacent to the Project Site. Substantial effects
on visual resources are not anticipated in conjunction with the project development.
12. Noise
Local noise levels are expected to increase temporarily during project construction and
will impact the nearest sensitive noise receptors including the single family residential
homes that border the site to the south.
Construction noise can be mitigated by restricting construction work to daytime hours.
Contractors will be required to minimize noise impacts by maintaining equipment
properly, including noise controls as specified by manufactures. The project will adhere
to the City of Lino Lake’s noise rules and standards that indicates noise should occur
within specified levels depending on land use and time of day.
After construction, noise levels are expected to be at or near existing levels. Noise
associated with the project will be related to residential vehicle noise. A combination of
berms, landscaping, and fencing will be used to provide noise mitigation for the adjacent
residential developments. Similar to construction noise, the residential use of the
property will adhere to the City’s noise rules and standards. A noise study will be prepared
detailing noise mitigation for the site and submitted with the preliminary plat submittal
for the development.
13. Transportation
A Traffic Study was completed in 2022 to analyze the PUD Concept Plan and Yield Plan.
Generally, the proposed development is expected to have minimal impact on study area
27
traffic operations. Thus, no geometric or traffic control improvements are required from
an operations perspective. Traffic impacts will be further analyzed during the City
rezoning and preliminary plat review process. Any traffic mitigation identified in the
review will be implemented with project construction. This will include both vehicular
and pedestrian improvements.
Operations analysis results identify a Level of Service (LOS) which indicates the quality of
traffic flow through an intersection. Intersections are given a ranking from LOS A
through LOS F. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation with vehicles experiencing
minimal delays. LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity, or a
breakdown of traffic flow. For through/stop intersections, a key measure of operational
effectiveness is side-street LOS. The second component of the traffic operations analysis
is a study of vehicular queuing, or the lineup of vehicles waiting to pass through an
intersection.
Based on the traffic analysis for the site, each study intersection currently operates at
overall LOS B during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In addition, no significant
side-street delay or queuing issues were observed in the field or in traffic simulations.
While roadway improvements are not required from a traffic operations or regional
transportation system perspective, recommendations have been provided to improve
the flow of traffic throughout the development and onto the main connecting streets.
B. Cumulative Potential Effects
Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, Subp. 7 (B) indicates that the second factor the City must consider
is whether the proposed project has potentially significant cumulative effects. This includes
“whether the cumulative potential effect is significant, whether the contribution from the
project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative
potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures
specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the project
proposer to minimize the contributions from the project.” The City’s findings are described
below.
The potential cumulative effects on public infrastructure would include impacts to the
municipal water supply systems, sanitary sewer conveyance and treatment systems,
stormwater management, and traffic and transportation. The City of Lino Lakes has planned for
the growth and increased capacity to address these cumulative impacts as outlined in their
2040 Comprehensive Plan. Thus the cumulative effects on public infrastructure is not expected
to be significant.
Cumulative impacts on natural resources include the loss of agricultural land, loss of wetlands,
floodplain alteration, and loss of habitat for wildlife that uses the existing sod farm. Surface
28
water runoff from the site will be discharged prior to discharge into any receiving waters.
Additionally, the site is subject to floodplain mitigation requirements due to the alteration of
the 100 year floodplain. Stormwater regulations, floodplain mitigation on site, and water
quality BMPs are expected to minimize cumulative impacts of post-development runoff on
receiving waters.
C. Extent to Which Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation
Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, Subp 7 (C) indicates that a third factor the City must consider is the
“extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory
authority.” The City’s findings are described in Table 1 below.
Environmental effects on water quality, wetlands, and traffic are subject to additional approvals
and/or mitigation through requirements of local, state, and federal regulations, ordinances,
management plans, and permitting processes. Potential environmental effects associated with
this project will be mitigated in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. The following
permits and approvals are required for the project addressed under the EAW.
Table 4 (in EAW). Required Permits and Approvals for the Proposed Project
Unit of Government Types of Application Status
Federal
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit To be submitted
State
Minnesota Department of
Health (MDH) Watermain Extension Permit To be submitted
Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (MN DNR)
Water Appropriation Permit (Construction
Dewatering) To be submitted
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) To be submitted, if
necessary
Permit for the Take of Endangered or
Threatened Species If needed
Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA)
National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES)/State Disposal System (SDS)
General Permit
To be submitted
Sanitary Sewer Extension Approval To be submitted
Section 401 Water Quality Certification or
Waiver To be submitted
10-day Demolition Notification If needed
Local
Rice Creek Watershed District
Wetland Conservation Act Delineation
Boundary Concurrence To be submitted
29
Unit of Government Types of Application Status
Federal
Wetland Impact and Replacement Plan To be submitted
Stormwater Management Plan To be submitted
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan To be submitted
Floodplain Alteration Permit To be submitted
Public Drainage System Permit To be submitted
Anoka County Access Permit(s) To be submitted
Right-of-Way Permit To be submitted
City of Lino Lakes Rezoning and Preliminary Plat To be submitted
Final Plat Approval To be submitted
Municipal Water Connection Permit To be submitted
Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit To be submitted
Grading Permit To be submitted
Building Permit To be submitted
D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled
Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp 7 (D) indicates the final factor the City must consider is the
“extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other
environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other
EISs.” The City’s findings are set forth below.
1. The proposed project design, plans, EAW, related studies, and mitigation measures
apply knowledge, approaches, standards, and best management practices gained from
previous experience and projects that have, in general, successfully mitigated potential
offsite environmental effects.
2. The EAW, in conjunction with this document, contains or references the known studies
that provide information or guidance regarding environmental effects that can be
anticipated and controlled.
3. Other project studies under environmental reviews in Minnesota have included studies
and mitigation measures comparable to those included in this EAW.
4. There are no elements of the project that pose the potential for significant
environmental effects that cannot be addressed by the project design, assessment,
permitting, and development processes, and by ensuring conformance with regional
and local plans.
5. The environmental effects of this development can be anticipated and controlled by the
permit application and review processes of the City, Watershed District, and others.
30
6. The City of Lino Lakes finds that the environmental effects of the project can be
adequately anticipated and controlled given the results of the environmental review and
permitting process.
6. RECORD OF DECISION
Based on the EAW, the response to comments, and the Findings of Fact, the City of Lino Lakes,
the RGU for this environmental review, concludes the following:
1. The EAW was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700 (2015);
2. The EAW satisfactorily addressed the issues for which existing information could have
been reasonably obtained;
3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, the project does not
have the potential for significant environmental effects;
4. The City makes a “Negative Declaration,” and
5. An EIS is not required.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Wozniak South Residential Development
PAGE 31
Appendix A
AGENCY AND PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED TO
THE CITY OF LINO LAKES
MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
50 Sherburne Avenue ▪ Administration Building 203 ▪ Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 ▪ 651-201-3287
mn.gov/admin/shpo ▪ mnshpo@state.mn.us
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND SERVICE PROVIDER
September 9, 2022
Katie Larsen, City Planner
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
RE: EAW – Robinson Sod Farm
T31 R22 S7, Lino Lakes, Anoka County
SHPO Number: 2022-2393
Dear Katie Larsen:
Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for
the above-referenced project.
Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed in the
National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological resources
located in the area that will be affected by this project.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36 CFR § 800. If this project is considered for federal financial
assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, then review and consultation with our office will need
to be initiated by the lead federal agency. Be advised that comments and recommendations provided by
our office for this state-level review may differ from findings and determinations made by the federal
agency as part of review and consultation under Section 106.
Please contact Kelly Gragg-Johnson, Environmental Review Program Specialist, at
kelly.graggjohnson@state.mn.us if you have any questions regarding our review of this project.
Sincerely,
Sarah J. Beimers
Environmental Review Program Manager
September 13, 2022
Katie Larsen
City Planner
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Re: Robinson Sod Farm Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Dear Katie Larsen:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) for the Robinson Sod Farm project (Project) located in Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. The
Project consists of a new residential development. Regarding matters for which the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) has regulatory responsibility and other interests, the MPCA staff has the
following comments for your consideration.
Permits and Approvals (Item 8)
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, the Project should include the MPCA as a regulator of all surface
waters as defined by Minn. Stat. § 115.01, subd. 22 Waters of the state. Even though there may be
surface waters that are determined to be US Army Corps of Engineers non-jurisdictional or exempt from
the Wetland Conservation Act, all surface waters are regulated by the MPCA, and any surface water
impact needs to be described in the application and may require mitigation.
The scope of a Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification is limited to assuring that a discharge from a
federally licensed or permitted activity will comply with water quality requirements. In addition, the
applicant must also submit to the MPCA the Antidegradation Assessment in accordance with water
quality standards Minn. R. 7050.0265 and should review the Antidegradation requirements in
7050.0285.
The 401 Water Quality Certification becomes an enforceable component of the associated federal
license or permit, issued under either Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act. The scope of a Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification is limited to assuring that a
discharge from a federally licensed or permitted activity will comply with water quality requirements.
For further information about the 401 Water Quality Certification process, please contact Bill Wilde at
651-757-2825 or william.wilde@state.mn.us.
Water Resources (Item 11)
Stormwater
• The EAW states the proposed 158-acre residential development is in a 100-year floodplain. The EAW
indicates that soil remediation for the construction will be required due to predominately hydric
soils on the site and stormwater ponds will be constructed in lieu of infiltrating stormwater to meet
volume reduction requirements.
Katie Larsen
Page 2
September 13, 2022
• The EAW should consider climate risks associated with increased rainfall regarding the proposed
development that could result in the potential for increased flood risk. Filling of wetlands at the site
and adding large areas of impervious surfaces is likely to alter the natural hydrology and increase
this risk. Efforts to reduce stormwater volume and provide more climate resiliency should be
considered. The Project proposer is strongly encouraged to utilize Low Impact Development
strategies such as reducing impervious surfaces through use of narrower streets and sidewalks,
stormwater reuse and green infrastructure practices to promote retention of stormwater on the site
while also providing other environmental benefits.
• During construction, the MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal
System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater Permit (CSW Permit) requires preservation of the
existing 50 feet of natural buffer to wetlands on the site. If the existing buffer must be encroached
to complete the construction, then redundant (double) down gradient sediment controls must be
utilized to protect the wetlands. Questions regarding Construction Stormwater Permit requirements
should be directed to Roberta Getman at 507-206-2629 or Roberta.Getman@state.mn.us.
Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes (Item 12)
Please be aware that farmsteads have the potential for releases or threatened releases of agricultural
chemicals. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) is the regulatory agency charged with
managing the response and cleanup of fertilizers and pesticides. Information regarding the MDA is
available on the website at: https://www.mda.state.mn.us/pesticide-fertilizer/spills-cleanup. For
questions regarding agricultural chemicals, please contact Cathy Villas-Horns with the MDA at
651-201-6697. For questions regarding waste pesticide containers, please contact Jane Boerboom with
the MDA at 651-201-6540.
Other Potential Environmental Effects (Item 20)
Please note that chloride (salt) is a growing issue for lakes, streams, and groundwater around the state.
Chloride can come from both de-icing salt and water softener salt. For the proposed Project, the MPCA
recommends smart salting practices for de-icing streets and driveways during the winter weather
months and water softening best practices be used year-round. Additional resources are available at:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/business-with-us/statewide-chloride-resources.
Katie Larsen
Page 3
September 13, 2022
We appreciate the opportunity to review this Project. Please provide your specific responses to our
comments and notice of decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Please be aware
that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the
purpose of pending or future permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the
Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If
you have any questions concerning our review of this EAW, please contact me by email at
Karen.kromar@state.mn.us or by telephone at 651-757-2508.
Sincerely,
Karen Kromar
This document has been electronically signed.
Karen Kromar
Planner Principal
Environmental Review Unit
Resource Management and Assistance Division
KK:rs
cc: Dan Card, MPCA, St. Paul
Roberta Getman, MPCA, Rochester
Bill Wilde, MPCA, St. Paul
Cathy Villas-Horns, MDA, St. Paul
Jane Boerboom, MDA, St. Paul
Metropolitan Council (Regional Office & Environmental Services)
390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805
P 651.602.1000 | F 651.602.1550 | TTY 651.291.0904
metrocouncil.org
An Equal Opportunity Employer
September 13, 2022
Katie Larsen, City Planner
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
RE: City of Lino Lakes – Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) – Robinson Sod Farm
Metropolitan Council Review No. 22797-1
Metropolitan Council District No. 11
Dear Katie Larsen:
The Metropolitan Council received the EAW for the Robinson Sod Farm project in the City of Lino Lakes
on August 9, 2022. The proposed development consists of 158 acres with a mix of low, medium, and
high density residential development located southeast of Sunset Avenue and 125th Avenue NE (CSAH
14). The EAW addresses two potential site plans for the project: the PUD Concept Plan and the Yield
Plan. The PUD Concept Plan is expected to consist of 557 units with 242 single family lots and 315
townhomes and the Yield Plan is expected to consist of 707 units with 263 single family lots, 164
townhomes, and 280 multi-family units.
The staff review finds that the EAW is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and does
not raise major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional
purposes.
We offer the following comments for your consideration.
Item 6 – Project Description – Forecasts (Todd Graham, 651-602-1322)
Either of the two scenarios presented could yield development beyond previous expectations. The
communitywide forecast for Lino Lakes continues to offer growing room. However, the allocation
of the forecast to sub city zones can be revised as needed.
The EAW site is the northern half of Transportation Analysis Zone #182. At this time, the City’s
2040 Comprehensive Plan expects TAZ #182 to gain +340 households and +853 population
during 2020-2040. Should the subject development proceed, several hundreds of excess
households would result. City staff can request a TAZ allocation adjustment by contacting Council
Research staff.
Item 6 – Project Description – Housing (Hilary Lovelace, 651-602-1555)
Council staff note that any changes to guiding land use, including changes to percent residential
and minimum allowable density, may create inconsistency with regional housing policy and impact
the City’s ability to participate in Livable Communities Act Programs. Please contact Council staff
with any questions.
Page - 2 | September 13, 2022 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Item 9 – Land Use – Regional Parks and Trails (Colin Kelly, 651-602-1361)
A planned unit of the Regional Parks System – the Central Anoka County Regional Trail – is
immediately adjacent to the project site. Council staff encourages Integrate Properties, LLC and
the City of Lino Lakes to coordinate with Anoka County prior to and during any future construction
activities to ensure there are no permanent impacts to the planned regional trail as a result of
either of the two site plan alternatives discussed.
Item 11aii – Water Resources – Groundwater (Lanya Ross, 651-602-1803)
The project site is located in the North and East Groundwater Management Area
(https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/gwmp/area-ne.html) designated by the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources. Given the range of water supply challenges (quantity and quality) that exist in
this part of the metro, the Council encourages the City to collaborate with state partners and/or
neighboring communities when expanding or developing new water supplies in this area.
Item 11bii – Water Resources – Stormwater (Joe Mulcahy, 651-602-1104)
This appears to be a difficult site for intensive development due to a predominance of hydric soils,
high water table, wetlands, presence of county and private ditches, and location in the 100-year
flood plain. Many of the soil associations listed for the site have severe limitations for dwellings
with basements and roadways. The EAW states that the project will result in 50-60 acres of
impervious surface and runoff will be treated with stormwater basins.
Taken together, these conditions indicate that the site is a poor candidate for the proposed
development. If the proposer is determined to pursue this project, they should work closely with
the City and Rice Creek Watershed District to address all these concerns before proceeding.
This concludes the Council’s review of the EAW. The Council will not take formal action on the EAW. If
you have any questions or need further information, please contact Katelyn Champoux, Principal
Reviewer, at 651-602-1831 or via email at katelyn.champoux@metc.state.mn.us. As always, you can
also contact your Sector Representative, Patrick Boylan, at 651-602-1438 or via email at
patrick.boylan@metc.state.mn.us.
Sincerely,
Angela R. Torres, AICP, Senior Manager
Local Planning Assistance
CC: Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division
Susan Vento, Metropolitan Council District 11
Patrick Boylan, Sector Representative
Katelyn Champoux, Principal Reviewer
Reviews Coordinator
N:\CommDev\LPA\Communities\Lino Lakes\Letters\Lino Lakes 2022 Robinson Sod Farm EAW 22797-1.docx
1
Division of Ecological and Water Resources Transmitted by Email
Region 3 Headquarters
1200 Warner Road
Saint Paul, MN 55106
September 15, 2022
Katie Larsen, City Planner
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Dear Katie Larsen,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Robinson Sod Farm Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) in Anoka County. The DNR respectfully submits the following comments for your consideration:
1. Page 6, Permits and Approvals. Please include a DNR Permit to Take in the list of required
permits and approvals. Protected state-listed species have been identified in the project
vicinity. The need for a Permit to Take will be determined as the proposer works through the
rare plant survey process.
2. Page 12, Wastewater. The proposed plan to add 557 and even up to 707 residential units
would presumably add a comparable number of residential water softeners due to the water
hardness levels of the City of Lino Lakes municipal water supply. Many Minnesota
municipalities are wrestling with high chloride levels in their wa stewater (See this recent study
on sources of chloride in Minnesota). Chloride is one of the components of salt, which is used in
forms such as sodium chloride (table salt), calcium chloride and magnesium chloride (road
salts). Sodium chloride is commonly used in home water softeners and by water treatment
plants to treat “hard” water. Minnesota generally has groundwater with high levels of calcium
and magnesium that must be removed through softening in order to improve taste and prevent
lime scale buildup in appliances, pipes and water fixtures. The majority of home water
softeners use sodium chloride (NaCl) in a softening process that replaces calcium and
magnesium ions with sodium, while the chloride ions are discharged in the wastewater and
eventually end up in the environment.
Each community needs to determine which tool is appropriate for their situation. This factsheet
suggests ways for homeowners to optimize their water softener salt use, while this link
provides resources for cities and examples of how other communities in Minnesota are
addressing their high chloride levels. We suggest that as this development moves forward, the
City of Lino Lakes consider what strategies can be used to minimize chloride use.
2
3. Page 13, Post-Construction Runoff. Blanding’s turtles, a protected state-listed threatened
species, have been documented within the project area. Stormwater features may be colonized
by Blanding’s turtles in the area, therefore we recommend incorporating measures to avoid
impacting this species into stormwater management. In years when the stormwater features
will be dredged to remove excess sediment, please draw down water levels by September 15th
in order to allow turtles to find overwintering habitat elsewhere.
4. Page 13, Post-Construction Runoff. We recommend that BWSR-approved, weed-free, native
seed mixes be used to the greatest degree possible in stormwater features in order to provide
pollinator habitat.
5. Page 13, Post-Construction Runoff. The planned increase in impervious surfaces will also
increase the amount of road salt used in the project area . Chloride released into local lakes and
streams does not break down, and instead accumulates in the environment, potentially
reaching levels that are toxic to aquatic wildlife and plants. Consider promoting local business
and city participation in the Smart Salting Training offered through the Minn esota Pollution
Control Agency. There are a variety of classes available for road applicators, sidewalk
applicators, and property managers. More information and resources can be found at this
website. Many winter maintenance staff who have attended the Smart Salting training — both
from cities and counties and from private companies — have used their knowledge to reduce
salt use and save money for their organizations.
We also encourage cities and counties to consider how they may participate in the Statewide
Chloride Management Plan and provide public outreach to reduce the overuse of chloride. Here
are some educational resources for residents as well as a sample ordinance regarding chloride
use.
6. Page 20, Rare Features. This section of the EAW lists the rare species identified in the DNR
Natural Heritage Review, but does not include or discuss DNR requirements regarding these
species. The statement that, “There are no state listed species within the project site” is
incorrect. The Natural Heritage Review letter has concerns about two state-listed species that
may occur within the site. The lack of known occurrences within the project boundary does not
mean that these species do not use the area. Minnesota’s Endangered Species Statute
(Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800
to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the take of threatened or endangered species without a
permit.
Swamp Blackberry (Rubus semisetosus), a state-listed endangered species, has been
documented in the vicinity of the project. A qualified surveyor needs to conduct a
botanical survey if any shrub removal is associated with the proposed project . Surveys
must be conducted by a DNR approved surveyor (see attached list) and follow the standards
contained in the Rare Species Survey Process and Rare Plant Guidance. Project planning
should take into account that any botanical survey needs to be conducted during the
appropriate time of the year, which may be limited. Please consult with the NH Review
Team (Reports.NHIS@state.mn.us) regarding this process.
3
Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state-listed threatened species, have been
documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. As such, the following avoidance
measures are required:
o Avoid wetland impacts during hibernation season, between October 15th and April
15th, unless the area is unsuitable for hibernation.
o The use of erosion control blanket shall be limited to ‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural-
netting’ types, and specifically not products containing plastic mesh netting or other
plastic components.
Also, be aware that hydro-mulch products may contain small synthetic
(plastic) fibers to aid in their matrix strength. These loose fibers could
potentially re-suspend and make their way into Public Waters. As such,
please review mulch products and not allow any materials with synthetic
(plastic) fiber additives in areas that drain to Public Waters.
o Areas where there will be construction should be checked for turtles before the use
of heavy equipment or any ground disturbance.
o The Blanding’s turtle flyer must be given to all contractors working in the area.
o Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR
Nongame Specialist, Erica Hoaglund (Erica.Hoaglund@state.mn.us).
o If turtles are in imminent danger they must be moved by hand out of harm’s way,
otherwise, they are to be left undisturbed.
If the above avoidance measures are not possible, please contact Samantha Bump
(Samantha.Bump@state.mn.us) as further action may be needed.
For additional information, see the Blanding’s turtle fact sheet, which describes the habitat
use and life history of this species. The fact sheet also provides two lists of
recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to this rare turtle. Please refer to
both lists of recommendations and apply those that are relevant to your project. For
further assistance regarding the Blanding’s turtle, please contact the DNR Regional
Nongame Specialist, Erica Hoaglund.
For additional information, see the Blanding’s turtle fact sheet, which describes the habitat use
and life history of this species. The fact sheet also provides two lists of recommendations for
avoiding and minimizing impacts to this rare turtle. Please refer to both lists of
recommendations for your project.
7. Page 25, Dust and Odors. If water for dust control is taken from a lake, river, or stream in
volumes that exceed 10,000 gallons per day, or one million gallons per year, then a DNR Water
Appropriations Permit will be required.
Thank you again for the opportunity to review this document. Please let me know if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
4
Melissa Collins
Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist | Ecological and Water Resources
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Phone: 651-259-5755
Email: melissa.collins@state.mn.us
CC: Ian Peterson, Integrate Properties
Equal Opportunity Employer
From:Katie Larsen
To:Nicki Roland Ecker
Subject:RE: Main/Sunset Development
Attachments:image002.jpg
Hi Nicki,
Thank you for your comments. You can learn more about the proposed Robinson Sod Farm
development by reviewing the Environment Assessment Worksheet on the City’s website at
https://linolakes.us/459/Public-Review-Documents. After Council review of the EAW in October, the
developer may proceed forward with preliminary plat and development plans. Formal public
hearings will be held during the preliminary plat process. I don’t have a schedule for that yet as it
will depend on when the developer submits their application.
Thank you,
Katie A. Larsen, AICP
City Planner
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Direct 651-982-2426 Fax 651-982-2499
klarsen@linolakes.us
logo transparent copy
From: Nicki Roland Ecker <nicole.r.roland@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2022 11:29 AM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Subject: Main/Sunset Development
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Hi Katie, how are you?
I saw this article and am wondering how to stay informed about it? This would be a devastating
addition to our already under-supported schools and infrastructures. We already have too fast much
traffic (ie Birch. Main Main Street), a hodge podge high school building and large class sizes.
We don’t want to be the next Woodbury.
The houses in Northpoint (houses stacked on top of another), overcrowded CVE are exactly what we
don’t want. We want land, green space and to be away from the crowded cities we moved away
from.
https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/news/2022/08/24/integrate-homes-lino-lakes-eden-
prairie.html
Thanks for your insight & consideration in keeping Lino Lakes a desirable community for those who
already live here.
Nicki
From:Katie Larsen
To:Anna J
Subject:RE: Robinson Development
Attachments:image003.jpg
Hi Anna,
Thank you for your comments. You can learn more about the proposed Robinson Sod Farm
development by reviewing the Environment Assessment Worksheet on the City’s website at
https://linolakes.us/459/Public-Review-Documents. After Council review of the EAW in October, the
developer may proceed forward with preliminary plat and development plans. Formal public
hearings will be held during the preliminary plat process. I don’t have a schedule for that yet as it
will depend on when the developer submits their application.
Thank you,
Katie A. Larsen, AICP
City Planner
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Direct 651-982-2426 Fax 651-982-2499
klarsen@linolakes.us
logo transparent copy
From: Anna J <atjungbauer@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2022 11:40 AM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Subject: Robinson Development
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Hi Katie,
I am a Lino Lakes citizen and just read in the business journal about the Robinson development. I am
curious how to find out how this will impact all of our city resources adding that many homes and
people.
Roads, schools, public safety resources etc.
Can you point me in the right direction to learn more? I hit a pay wall in the article but if I read it
right there is still opportunities for this to go to public hearing and city council must approve it.
Myself and some neighbors are concerned with these massive developments being put in, without
the builders being on the hook for the schools for the families their developments bring and the
current citizens will only have to then battle over school levy $ and increased property taxes.
Thanks,
Anna
From:Katie Larsen
To:Justin Carver
Subject:RE: Robinson Sod Farm (EAW)
Attachments:image003.jpg
Morning Justin,
You can learn more about the proposed Robinson Sod Farm development by reviewing the
Environment Assessment Worksheet on the City’s website at https://linolakes.us/459/Public-Review-
Documents. After Council review of the EAW in October, the developer may proceed forward with
preliminary plat and development plans. Formal public hearings will be held during the preliminary
plat process. I don’t have a schedule for that yet as it will depend on when the developer submits
their application.
If you have additional questions, certainly feel free to give me a call.
Thank you,
Katie A. Larsen, AICP
City Planner
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Direct 651-982-2426 Fax 651-982-2499
klarsen@linolakes.us
logo transparent copy
From: Justin Carver <justcarve20@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 9:09 PM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Subject: Robinson Sod Farm (EAW)
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Hello Katie,
My friends that live down the street from me have showed me the letter they received from The City
of Lino Lakes referencing the potential new build of 707 units on the Robinson Sod Farm. I did not
receive such notice.
My address is 65 Century Trail.
I have many questions and concerns with what I've read in this letter.
Can you please call me to discuss when you're available.
Justin Carver
651-307-8183
Thank you!
From:Morgan C.
To:Katie Larsen
Cc:Nick Lahood
Subject:Robison Sod Farm
Date:Thursday, August 25, 2022 6:45:36 PM
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Hi Katie,
I live over on Stallion Lane. I think adding 707 units to that sod field is just outrageous when there was just 2 new
developments placed by the elementary and just across the sod field. This will cause overcrowding, and has there
been any thought that this could cause an increase into classroom sizes at the elementary school?
The only way I would support this is if there is less units placed and a pool is added which our HOA could have
access to.
Thanks,
Morgan and Nicholas LaHood
165 Stallion Lane
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Sent from my iPhone
From:Mike Trudeau
To:Katie Larsen
Subject:RE: Robinson Sod farm development question
Date:Tuesday, August 30, 2022 6:27:10 PM
Attachments:image001.gif
image002.jpg
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Thanks Katie – that is very helpful! does not look like townhomes going in behind me, but perhaps I
am reading it wrong. With increased traffic perhaps they will need another exit to the north onto
main. Otherwise Robinson Drive will become a mini-highway!
Thanks for your direction – appreciate it! MT
Michael G Trudeau, CFP®, FIC
Wealth Advisor
Northstar Advisor Group
Edgewater Team
CA License: 4150818
6776 Lake Dr Ste 160
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
O 1-651-288-7580
C 1-651-402-9578
F 1-651-288-7599
Book a meeting with Michael G Trudeau
Zoom
From: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 9:20 AM
To: Mike Trudeau <Mike.Trudeau@Thrivent.com>
Subject: RE: Robinson Sod farm development question
Morning Mike,
The letter referenced the City website. https://linolakes.us/459/Public-Review-Documents. It’s a 438
page documents but don’t be intimidated! About 400 pages are the appendices. See page 37 and
38 for the maps.
Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks,
Katie A. Larsen, AICP
City Planner
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Direct 651-982-2426 Fax 651-982-2499
klarsen@linolakes.us
logo transparent copy
From: Mike Trudeau <Mike.Trudeau@Thrivent.com>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 5:37 PM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Subject: RE: Robinson Sod farm development question
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Thank you Katie for your insight!
Can you point me to where I can find the PDFs for the EAW/PUD? I would love to see the figures you
are referencing below.
Thanks again! Mike
Michael G Trudeau, CFP®, FIC
Wealth Advisor
Northstar Advisor Group
Edgewater Team
CA License: 4150818
6776 Lake Dr Ste 160
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
O 1-651-288-7580
C 1-651-402-9578
F 1-651-288-7599
Book a meeting with Michael G Trudeau
Zoom
From: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 2:36 PM
To: Mike Trudeau <Mike.Trudeau@Thrivent.com>
Subject: RE: Robinson Sod farm development question
Hi Mike,
Per the EAW, Figure 2. PUD Concept Plan shows a 557 unit development with single family homes
behind your Robinson Drive single family homes. Figure 3. Yield Plan shows a 707 unit development
with single family homes and townhomes behind Robinson Drive. There are no apartments
proposed behind Robinson Drive. Take a look at the EAW concepts and you’ll get an idea as to what
is being contemplated. As the project moves forward, the developer will submit a PUD Development
Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat that will better define the project. Public hearings will be held and
notices will be sent again to property owners in the area for additional comments.
Certainly let me know if you have any more questions. Your new building seems to be coming along
nicely and is looking good!
Thanks,
Katie A. Larsen, AICP
City Planner
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Direct 651-982-2426 Fax 651-982-2499
klarsen@linolakes.us
logo transparent copy
From: Mike Trudeau <Mike.Trudeau@Thrivent.com>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 1:40 PM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Cc: Mike Trudeau <Mike.Trudeau@Thrivent.com>
Subject: Robinson Sod farm development question
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Hi Katie,
Thank you for your help with our project off Hodgson. I know it was a lot to develop such a small
parcel, but appreciate your work on it. The building is coming along nicely!
So, I guess I can’t be one to complain about a development…right?
I live at 87 Robinson Dr., and got the recent letter RE development of 707 units on the Robinson sod
farms (right behind my house).
My question is – will the plans be to include single family housing on the west side of the property,
and put the town homes/higher density units on the east side? This would align with having single
family abut to single family. Which would likely not harm my property value. However, if an
apartment went in behind my home, I would think that would very much hurt my value. Can you
give me any insight as to where in the parcel would be anticipated locations of single
family/townhomes/apartments?
We built in 2017 knowing this eventually would happen…but there was great concern when we got
the letter, to think that an apartment could be behind us vs more nice single family homes. I would
strongly encourage the city to put the single family units abutting to the single family that is
currently there, and keep the higher density stuff over where the current town homes are, if that is
possible.
Let me know what you think, thanks so much! Mike Trudeau
Michael G Trudeau, CFP®, FIC
Wealth Advisor
Northstar Advisor Group
Edgewater Team
CA License: 4150818
6776 Lake Dr Ste 160
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
O 1-651-288-7580
C 1-651-402-9578
F 1-651-288-7599
Book a meeting with Michael G Trudeau
Zoom
Please do not use email to request, authorize, or affect the purchase or sale of any security or insurance product or service,
to send fund transfer instructions, or to effect any other transactions, as we are not authorized to accept these requests in an
electronic format. Any such requests, orders, or instructions that you send will not be accepted and will not be processed. If
you need immediate assistance with your brokerage account, please call 800-THRIVENT, and say "Securities Brokerage
Services."
Thrivent is the marketing name for Thrivent Financial for Lutherans. Insurance products issued by Thrivent. Not available in
all states. Securities and investment advisory services offered through Thrivent Investment Management Inc., a registered
investment adviser, member FINRA and SIPC, and a subsidiary of Thrivent. Licensed agent/producer of Thrivent. Registered
representative of Thrivent Investment Management Inc. Advisory services available through investment adviser
representatives only. Thrivent.com/disclosures.
Thrivent Investment Management Inc. outgoing and incoming email is electronically archived and recorded and is subject to
review, monitoring and/or disclosure to someone other than the recipient.
ThriventDisclaimer1299457
1
Keara Fehr
From:Mara Lipinski <megror04@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, September 5, 2022 7:07 PM
To:Katie Larsen
Subject:Robinson Sod Farm
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Hello Katie,
I have a few comments regarding the potential development of the Robinson Sod Farm. I don't think it would be wise to
create such a large development when the city of Lino Lakes has a hard time keeping up with maintaining the current
small development. In fact, the city has point blank told us that they have so many trails to maintain that they forget
about ours. They don't mow the boulevard as often as they should (subsection 904 states this should be less than 8
inches), they have trail over hang that isn't cut back, they don't replace dead trees (which we were informed this
summer is the city's job), and they rarely snow blow in the winter (subsection 907.03, public nuisances affecting peace
and safety-snow must be removed 12 hours after snowfall has stopped, the city has never done this). The pictures below
are only a sampling and does not include all.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Thank you,
Current resident
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From:Cindy Hansen
To:Katie Larsen
Subject:Robinson Sod Farm EAW
Date:Tuesday, September 13, 2022 2:40:02 PM
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Doug and Cindy Hansen
296 Carl Street
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
September 12, 2022
Katie Larsen
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Dear Ms. Larsen,
Please accept this as public comment in response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for
the proposed Robinson Sod Farm development.
In review, the proposal is for approximately 700 municipal sewer and water systems in this
development. In Lino Lakes, we already are prohibited from watering 6:00 am to 6:00 pm - 365 days
a year and even tighter restrictions are in place from May through September. Just recently, the DNR
gave notice to the City requesting that Lino Lakes implement a total irrigation ban. Due to high levels
of manganese found in its wells, Lino Lakes was forced to shut one down and operate two wells at a
lower pumping rate to service our city. With the Robinson Sod Farm development, over 700 units
will be added to this already stressed system.
We would like assurance that the City of Lino Lakes and Council have a prudent approach including
an aggressive water management plan that can handle this addition. We were shocked to discover
that Lino Lakes, as a city of this size, is just in the preliminary phase of a water treatment plant.
The City of Blaine is experiencing the results of rapid development, dealing with well interference
and may incurred the cost of replacing well pumps and/or drilling new wells in Blaine and Ham Lake
for private well owners. We would hate to see the same outcome for the Lino Lakes taxpayers.
Another Environmental Impact that must be considered is the nature path that is used daily not only
by Carl Street residents but, also residents from surrounding developments. Carl Street has been a
main walking and bike path for decades for people of all ages along with their pets. It is a safe zone
since it is not a main thoroughfare and traffic is limited. The alternative is Lilac Street which does not
have a continuous sidewalk or a bike path. Children have to ride their bikes with traffic - which is
posted at 50 mph - to cross from one development to another.
With the Robinson development, there is the proposed access to Carl Street and in one plan the
distruction of two well established cul-de-sacs on Carl Street and making it a main thoroughfare. In
developments where the City of Lino Lakes has planned for a road to be continued, they have posted
signs to indicate their intent. This has not been the case on the two Carl Street cul-de-sacs. The only
posted signage was put up only a few years ago with concerns of pet waste and prohibiting
motorized vehicles.
People are not the only ones using the Carl Street walking path. Two sets of Sandhill Cranes literally
walk side by side down the middle of Carl Street and continue on the path while a pair of Bald Eagles
watch from our Cottonwood tree. Endangered Monarch butterflies, bees, and hummingbirds have
been thriving in my gardens and down the path as they have pollinated this area spreading
milkweed, bee balm and their other favorites. Hawks circle above hunting the inhabitants of the area
between the two cul-de-sacs and overflow pond. The five deer that surrounded our car on Christmas
Eve surprised us all!
The residents of Carl Street are aware of these activities and drive accordingly and very cautiously. If
Carl Street is connected with the Robinson development or is forced to have two cul-de-sacs
removed and the street connected, this path will be destroyed and traffic, including heavy trucks,
will be going 50 mph endangering all living things. It has been proven that even if posted 30 mph,
vehicles will be going closer to 50 mph as in the other cases in Lino Lakes. If the City forces the
connection of the Robinson development with Carl Street, we can only pray that a child riding a bike
or a vehicle driver will not be distracted or looking at a plane instead of watching where they are
going and there is a fatality.
It is our understanding that there was only a 2 day study of Carl Street. This neighborhood has data
for for over 30 years. As Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes are aware, this is a designated Air
Park.
This is a serious safety and environmental concern. If Carl Street access is granted, it will have a
detrimental impact on the existing surrounding residential developments. As it is now, it is a nature
walk. Three neighbors each mow three different areas including the path and the North side of Carl
Street. We planted 5- 5 foot pine trees on the south side of the path to add to the aesthetics of this
nature walkway 9 years ago. Prior to purchasing our property in 2013, the City Engineer told us that
the City of Lino Lakes had no intentions of connecting any future residential development from the
sod farm to Carl Street. He said that the intent was to come out directly to 4th as the 2010 posted
plan showed.
We continue to maintain this path without any reimbursement from the City of Lino Lakes or Anoka
County. We do it for our community. We do it for those who also live outside of our Carl Street
development to enjoy as they use this walking path daily. This is an “Environmental Impact” that is
immeasurable and will be taken away from all if Carl Street is used as any type of access for the
Robinson Sod Farm development.
Acknowledgement of receiving this email would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Doug and Cindy Hansen
September 12, 2022
Katie Larsen, City Planner
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Dear Ms. Larsen,
Below please see our questions in response to the Robinson Sod Farm Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) dated August 23, 2022.
1. During the morning traffic rush there may be over 1,000 vehicles using the Carl Street and 4 th
Avenue intersection, per the EAW projections. Did the traffic study take into consideration the
potential intersection density at 4th Avenue and Carl Street?
2. Was a comprehensive traffic impact study conducted to evaluate the potential traffic backup on
Carl Street during the busy morning and evening hours?
3. Do the Anoka County traffic projections and studies align with those from Alliant Engineering?
4. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering take into consideration the current aquifer
depletion issue taking place on the Lino Lakes border in Blaine?
5. Does the City of Lino Lakes plan to warrant the costs of the wells for current property owners
near the potential project?
6. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering investigate the possibility for flooding due to the
high-water table and the redistribution of water?
7. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering initiate a study to determine if “Quiet Enjoyment
of Life” would be impacted or violated by the proposed street connection?
8. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering consult Anoka County to determine property
value losses if the cul-de-sac is removed?
9. Does Anoka County plan to reassess property value losses and adjust home values and taxes
accordingly if Carl Street is connected.
10. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering consult with Rice Creek Watershed District on
the disruption to the waterways, ditches, and wetlands within the impact area?
11. Many pedestrians, dog walkers, and bicyclists use the path at the end of the cul-de-sac because
they feel safe on Carl Street. Children cannot bike or walk on Lilac or 4 th St because they both
are busy with traffic speeds far over the posted limits. Has this been taken into consideration
and are the proposed traffic areas in compliance with the Local Road Research Board (LRRB)?
12. How will the ACD-10-22 main trunk and BR2 be preserved and protected?
13. How will the vegetation and water conservation be enhanced in the disturbed waterways in the
project boundaries?
14. Where in the EAW report can we find information from the MN Dept of Agriculture, the Dept of
Hydrogeology or Climatology regarding the sequela of years of accumulation of fertilizers and
pesticides from the sod farm land upon our disturbed soil, ground water, and well water?
15. In 1977 the Carl Street residents were assured there would be no Carl St connection and the cul-
de-sac would remain. In 1986, 2006, and now, despite the developer’s original concept plan
where Carl Street is not mentioned as a variable, would you please clarify as to why Carl Street is
repeatedly targeted for change, negatively affecting our property values, safety, well-being,
wildlife, creek, and vegetation ?
16. The trajectory of land development leads to increased noise, cutting down of trees, causing
damage and instability to wildlife, clean water, vegetation, pollinator insects, soil and other
ecosystems. Will this result in the formation of “heat islands” caused by those losses and the
absorption of more heat by impervious pavement including sidewalks, parking areas and
adverse effects on our climate, air and water quality?
17. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering consult with the FAA regarding traffic proximity
to the Lino Air Park airstrip?
18. Did the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering conduct a traffic analysis relevant to headlight
penetration onto the Lino Air Park airstrip as this can cause temporary flash blindness? This will
be a safety hazard to pilots.
19. Has the risk of increased traffic on Carl Street in proximity to the Lino Air Park been considered
secondary to vehicle drivers being distracted while watching airplanes take off and land, thus
not watching our children playing or residents walking or biking down Carl Street?
20. How was a 2-day traffic study on Carl Street “valid” both in methodology and analysis assuring
“statistical significance levels?”
21. When is the Planning & Zoning commission conducting a hearing and vote on changing the
Robinson property zoning from agricultural to residential?
Please acknowledge that this letter is received in its entirety and entered into the record. Please
provide a timeline in which we can expect a response to our questions.
Regards,
Carl Street Families, Lino Lakes residents
From:Katie Larsen
To:Keara Fehr; Alison Harwood
Subject:FW: Robinson Sod Farm project
Date:Monday, September 12, 2022 4:25:12 PM
From: Ann Rudie <lukerudie@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 4:03 PM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Subject: Robinson Sod Farm project
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
I live in the Century Farm development and have concerns about the safety of the young children in
my neighborhood with Robinson becoming a thru street to the new development.
The quiet surroundings and variety of wildlife make this a great place to live. This will certainly
change with this massive project.
What has the city done to study the impact of this increase in traffic?
How will the city address the ongoing water quality problem with a project of this size and will new
residents be made aware of the manganese issue?
Lexington Cove, Nature's Refuge, Oakwood Ponds and the townhomes near the Kwik Trip on
Lexington south of County 14 are all new. Is there a demonstrated need for more housing? I'm
opposed to this project because of the traffic volume increase.
Ann Rudie
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
From:Cindy Hansen
To:Katie Larsen
Subject:Robinson Sod Farm EAW
Date:Tuesday, September 13, 2022 2:40:02 PM
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Doug and Cindy Hansen
296 Carl Street
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
September 12, 2022
Katie Larsen
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Dear Ms. Larsen,
Please accept this as public comment in response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for
the proposed Robinson Sod Farm development.
In review, the proposal is for approximately 700 municipal sewer and water systems in this
development. In Lino Lakes, we already are prohibited from watering 6:00 am to 6:00 pm - 365 days
a year and even tighter restrictions are in place from May through September. Just recently, the DNR
gave notice to the City requesting that Lino Lakes implement a total irrigation ban. Due to high levels
of manganese found in its wells, Lino Lakes was forced to shut one down and operate two wells at a
lower pumping rate to service our city. With the Robinson Sod Farm development, over 700 units
will be added to this already stressed system.
We would like assurance that the City of Lino Lakes and Council have a prudent approach including
an aggressive water management plan that can handle this addition. We were shocked to discover
that Lino Lakes, as a city of this size, is just in the preliminary phase of a water treatment plant.
The City of Blaine is experiencing the results of rapid development, dealing with well interference
and may incurred the cost of replacing well pumps and/or drilling new wells in Blaine and Ham Lake
for private well owners. We would hate to see the same outcome for the Lino Lakes taxpayers.
Another Environmental Impact that must be considered is the nature path that is used daily not only
by Carl Street residents but, also residents from surrounding developments. Carl Street has been a
main walking and bike path for decades for people of all ages along with their pets. It is a safe zone
since it is not a main thoroughfare and traffic is limited. The alternative is Lilac Street which does not
have a continuous sidewalk or a bike path. Children have to ride their bikes with traffic - which is
posted at 50 mph - to cross from one development to another.
With the Robinson development, there is the proposed access to Carl Street and in one plan the
distruction of two well established cul-de-sacs on Carl Street and making it a main thoroughfare. In
developments where the City of Lino Lakes has planned for a road to be continued, they have posted
signs to indicate their intent. This has not been the case on the two Carl Street cul-de-sacs. The only
posted signage was put up only a few years ago with concerns of pet waste and prohibiting
motorized vehicles.
People are not the only ones using the Carl Street walking path. Two sets of Sandhill Cranes literally
walk side by side down the middle of Carl Street and continue on the path while a pair of Bald Eagles
watch from our Cottonwood tree. Endangered Monarch butterflies, bees, and hummingbirds have
been thriving in my gardens and down the path as they have pollinated this area spreading
milkweed, bee balm and their other favorites. Hawks circle above hunting the inhabitants of the area
between the two cul-de-sacs and overflow pond. The five deer that surrounded our car on Christmas
Eve surprised us all!
The residents of Carl Street are aware of these activities and drive accordingly and very cautiously. If
Carl Street is connected with the Robinson development or is forced to have two cul-de-sacs
removed and the street connected, this path will be destroyed and traffic, including heavy trucks,
will be going 50 mph endangering all living things. It has been proven that even if posted 30 mph,
vehicles will be going closer to 50 mph as in the other cases in Lino Lakes. If the City forces the
connection of the Robinson development with Carl Street, we can only pray that a child riding a bike
or a vehicle driver will not be distracted or looking at a plane instead of watching where they are
going and there is a fatality.
It is our understanding that there was only a 2 day study of Carl Street. This neighborhood has data
for for over 30 years. As Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes are aware, this is a designated Air
Park.
This is a serious safety and environmental concern. If Carl Street access is granted, it will have a
detrimental impact on the existing surrounding residential developments. As it is now, it is a nature
walk. Three neighbors each mow three different areas including the path and the North side of Carl
Street. We planted 5- 5 foot pine trees on the south side of the path to add to the aesthetics of this
nature walkway 9 years ago. Prior to purchasing our property in 2013, the City Engineer told us that
the City of Lino Lakes had no intentions of connecting any future residential development from the
sod farm to Carl Street. He said that the intent was to come out directly to 4th as the 2010 posted
plan showed.
We continue to maintain this path without any reimbursement from the City of Lino Lakes or Anoka
County. We do it for our community. We do it for those who also live outside of our Carl Street
development to enjoy as they use this walking path daily. This is an “Environmental Impact” that is
immeasurable and will be taken away from all if Carl Street is used as any type of access for the
Robinson Sod Farm development.
Acknowledgement of receiving this email would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Doug and Cindy Hansen
September 12, 2022
Steven L Anderson
7795 Clydesdale Circle
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Re: Robinson Sod Farm EAW
To Whom It May Concern;
As a local resident who has witnessed the consequences of the overstressed drainage system
in the area (flooded yards and buildings, neighbor conflicts, expensive private drainage
systems, etc) I can attest to the fragility of this area in regards to development. The Carlos
Avery and its fragile and complex water system is close by, and our local ditch system was
designed many years ago to allow development on a limited scale. The drainage restructuring
required for this housing proposal with many buildings, paved streets, driveways, patios, etc
will negatively impact local residents and their properties. Without the water retention of the
sod farm and the increased runoff and potential for flooding, the project could conceivably
change the flood status of the area, and threaten existing homes, buildings and properties that
were built decades ago.
My second objection, but by no means the lesser, is the environmental impact. The sod farm
and the surrounding wetlands and ditches are major nesting/rearing grounds for many species
of migratory and local waterfowl, songbirds, deer and predators from raptors to coyotes. The
area has been a resting spot for migrating trumpeter and tundra swans, terns, bitterns and
more. The Audubon Society’s IBA (Important Bird Area) map of Carlos Avery includes the sod
farm and the entire Rice Creek Chain of Lakes as one of the most important bird sanctuaries in
the midwest. I also argue that our local treasures, Rice Creek and the chain of lakes would be
irreparably damaged by the increased herbicide, pesticide, and salt runoff from the new
development. Not only the quality of life of animals, but of the existing human residents will be
compromised. I strongly recommend that the sod farm become an extension of the Carlos
Avery, or some other special green space or park, which are sorely lacking and being
diminished at a rapid pace in Anoka county.
Lastly there is the traffic problem that has developed in recent years, and the one that will
evolve from the proposed project; from quiet neighborhoods our community streets have been
turned into high-speed thoroughfares too dangerous to allow bicycles and pedestrians. Other
than condemning property, removing sidewalks and widening these streets, there is no remedy
with the existing situation: never mind with hundreds more housing units on the way.
After careful thought and discussion, I remain deeply opposed to the proposed housing
development on the sod farm. Please consider utilizing this property as an investment in our
future, and keep it a community green space for all of us.
Thank you,
Steven L Anderson
Scott Zbikowski
7765 Clydesdale Circle
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Re: Robinson Sod Farm EAW
To Whom It May Concern;
I am located approximately one half block south of the proposed Robinson Sod Farm
Development. I have three main concerns over the proposed development as follows:
1. The impact of the deletion of natural drainage/absorption into the soil. Being that the
proposed development has a relatively low elevation with poor drainage. There is great
concern that drainage ditch ACD 10-22-32 will be greatly stressed. The Anoka County Rice
Creek Water Shed area, ditch ACD 10-22-32, including the proposed Robinson Sod Farm
Development is over 100 years old. It was not designed for high density housing. The square
feet of housing, driveways, streets and sidewalks greatly effects the natural absorption of
natural rainfall.
2. Additional traffic impact. The addition of 707 housing units using two automobiles per
household making only one trip per day adds a minimum of 2,828 (2 vehicles x 707 x out going
trip x incoming trip) vehicle movements per day onto our existing roadway system. Departing
to the north onto County Road 14 (Main Street) is a two lane road with no sidewalks.
Assuming that the majority of the traffic will be heading south each day from the development
toward the cities, the main roads to be used to exit the area will be County Rd 53, (Sunset
Road), or 4th Street. Both roads are two lane roads with no sidewalks. This is a great safety
concern for our area. Departing south (on the west side of development) on County Road 53
routes all the traffic through the already busy single lane rounabout to 109th to Lexington to
35W. South (on the east side) routes the traffic onto 4th street to CR 153 (Lilac St) to Apollo
Drive to Lake Drive to 35W. Three of these roads are 2 lane with no sidewalks. This is a
terrible safety concern unless all above roads are to be improved prior to the proposed
Robinson Sod Farm Development.
3. I am a member of the Lino Lakes Airpark Association located approximately 1 block to the
south of the proposed development. The airpark has been here since the 1950’s. It was
improved in the late 70’s and again improved in 2005/2006. It is an active runway in what was
and is in a rural area. Carl Street and ditch ACD 10-22-32 has served as a low density boundary
on the north side of our airpark. There must be no access from the development onto Carl
Street. Carl Street has two dead ends and must remain that way to minimize traffic next to the
airpark. No connection to Carl Street and no connection of east to west dead ends of Carl
Street. This is a must for safety concerns of our airpark.
Please take into consideration the above drainage and safety concerns of the existing area.
Thank you,
Scott Zbikowski
From:Katie Larsen
To:Keara Fehr; Alison Harwood
Cc:Michael Grochala
Subject:FW: EAW Sod Farm
Date:Wednesday, September 14, 2022 4:53:39 PM
Attachments:Final-EAW_Robinson-Sod-Farm_892022.pdf
From: Lisa Olsen <olsenlisa@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2022 4:48 PM
To: Katie Larsen <KLarsen@linolakes.us>
Subject: EAW Sod Farm
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Dear Katie,
I’ve made some comments on the EAW that I am attaching. Also, I wanted you to please add Ernie
and Lisa Olsen to the signatures that were sent previously by the residents of Carl Street. We were a
little late in responding to them so our names didn’t get added to the list.
We feel strongly that extending Carl Street will absolutely destroy our existing neighborhood and
does not seem like a responsible thing for the city to do to the residents currently living here. We
currently get about 2 or 3 cars a day on our end of Carl Street – imagine going to 2500 trips per day.
This road means a lot to the people living here as well as residents on the other side of 4th Avenue
who walk here daily with their children and pets. Also, there’s an abundance of wildlife that crosses
the road. Please don’t destroy our neighborhood.
We are also concerned about our wells and mound system being destroyed. This is a mostly retired
neighborhood and we can’t afford the cost if our wells and mounds are ruined. Please take extra
caution in this.
Again, please don’t extend Carl Street.
Respectfully,
Lisa and Ernest Olsen
306 Carl Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 2
4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (Check One)
Required Discretionary ☐EIS Scoping ☐Citizen petition ☒Mandatory EAW ☐RGU discretion
☐Proposer initiated
If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s):
4410.4300 Subp 19. Residential Development
5. Project Location
County: Anoka
City/Township: Lino Lakes
PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section,
Township, Range):
NE ¼ and NW ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22;
NW ¼ and SW ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 7, Township 31, Range 22
Watershed (81 major watershed
scale): Mississippi River – Twin Cities
GPS Coordinates: Approximately 45⁰ 11’ 39.82”N, 93⁰ 07’ 57.33”W
Property ID: 07-31-22-22-0001, 07-31-22-21-0001, 07-31-22-12-0001,
07-31-22-13-0001, 07-31-22-22-0002
6. Project Description
a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50 words).
The Robinson project is a proposed low, medium, and high density residential development on an
existing 158-acre agricultural area in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. Two site plan
alternatives have been developed for the project:
• PUD Concept Plan – The PUD concept plan is expected to consist of 557 dwelling units of the
following types:
o 242 single family detached homes
o 315 townhomes
• Yield Plan – The yield plan, considered close to the maximum density allowed under future
year 2040 land use plans, is expected to consist of 707 dwelling units of the following types:
o 263 single family detached homes
o 164 townhomes
o 280 multi-family units
See Appendix A, Figures 2 and 3 for the PUD concept plan and yield plan.
12
3
45
Summary of Comments on Title
Page: 5
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 3 Author: Subject: Highlight Date: Indeterminate Number: 4 Author: Date: Indeterminate
This many multi-family units will make this area into
a high crime zone. Please don't do this! Number: 5 Author: Date: Indeterminate
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 3
The project is located to the southeast of Sunset Avenue and 125th Ave NE (Main Street, CSAH 14).
The project will include new roads, stormwater features, and the installation of municipal sewer and
water systems (Appendix A, Figure 1).
b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction, including
infrastructure needs. If the project is an expansion include a description of the existing facility.
Emphasize: 1) construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of
the environment or will produce wastes, 2) modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes,
3) significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures, and 4) timing and duration of
construction activities.
The proposed project includes the construction of a new single-family and multi-family residential
housing development. This includes a range in units from the PUD concept plan of 557 units to the
Yield plan of 707 units which are made up of single-family lots (55’, 65’, and 75’ wide), row
townhomes, rowhomes, and structured multi-family housing that will be associated with public
access roads and private driveways. The proposed unit count on the site falls within the density range
for the property provided in the City of Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
The project site is comprised of five parcels which are summarized below (Table 1).
Table 1. Parcels within the Project Site for Residential Development
Parcel ID Parcel Size (Acres) Current Use Project Details
07-31-22-22-0001 37.51 Agriculture No existing infrastructure
07-31-22-21-0001 39.84 Agriculture No existing infrastructure
07-31-22-12-0001 39.79 Agriculture Existing farmstead to be removed
07-31-22-13-0001 39.91 Agriculture No existing infrastructure
07-31-22-22-0002 1.44 Residential Existing residence to remain
Roadway access into the development will occur through Main Street and Sunset Ave as dictated by
Anoka County. Other roadway access points have been provided to the property through the Century
Farm development to the south at Cardinal Way, Robinson Drive, Century Trail, and Carl Street.
Additionally, a pedestrian trail has been stubbed to the property from Century Farm Addition to the
south, just west of the Cardinal Way Street connection to encourage recreational use.
The development will create substantial stormwater basin areas that will be an amenity to the
various housing types proposed within the project. The main Anoka County ditch system (ACD-10-22-
23 Main Trunk and Br2) will be preserved and protected while the newly created stormwater basins
will provide for stormwater management goals and infrastructure improvements.
The entire site will be mass graded in one phase to allow for the creation of the stormwater basins.
Development of the neighborhood clusters with utilities and streets will be completed in multiple
phases based on market demand. The developer will be responsible for site grading, utilities, sanitary
sewer, water supply, roadway infrastructure, stormwater, and erosion control. Management of the
site will fall to the individual owners and homeowner’s association once construction is completed on
site.
Please don't make
Carl Street into an access point. This will absolutely destroy our neighborhood. This is currently
a rural road.
1
23
4
Page: 6
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Please don't make
Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Carl Street into an access point. This will absolutely destroy our neighborhood. This is currently
a rural road. Number: 4 Author: Date: Indeterminate
This is going to destroy the water table and impact our well and mound systems.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 4
Mass grading is anticipated to begin winter 2023 with the first phase of utilities and streets
completed by July 2023. Home construction is anticipated to begin July 2023 with a full build out of
the community taking place over four to five years depending on market conditions.
c. Project magnitude:
Table 2a. Project Magnitude Data – PUD Concept Plan (557 Units)
Total Project Acreage 158 acres
Linear project length 16,000 linear feet public roadway
6,800 linear feet private roadway
Number and type of residential units:
PUD Concept Plan
45 75-feet wide Single Family Lots
117 65-feet wide Single Family Lots
80 55-feet wide Single Family Lots
191 Row Townhomes
124 Back-to-back & Row Townhomes
557 total residential units
Commercial building area (in square feet) N/A
Industrial building area (in square feet) N/A
Institutional building area (in square feet) N/A
Other uses – specify (in square feet) Stormwater ponds: 840,708
Lake: 270,072
Structure height(s) Back-to-back townhomes will be three stories tall
(2 stories above a garage). Row townhomes will
be two or three stories tall. Structured multi
family housing will be two stories tall. Single
Family Homes will be one or two stories tall.
Table 3b. Project Magnitude Data – Yield Plan (707 Units)
Total Project Acreage 158 acres
Linear project length 13,600 linear feet public roadway
14,700 linear feet private roadway
Number and type of residential units:
Yield Plan
148 80-feet wide Single Family Lots
386 Row Townhomes
172 Back-to-back & Row Townhomes
1 Existing Home on New Lot
707 total residential units
Commercial building area (in square feet) N/A
Industrial building area (in square feet) N/A
Institutional building area (in square feet) N/A
Other uses – specify (in square feet) Stormwater ponds: 932,184
Structure height(s) Back-to-back townhomes will be three stories tall
(2 stories above a garage). Row townhomes will
be two or three stories tall. Structured multi
family housing will be two stories tall. Single
Family Homes will be one or two stories tall.
3 story structures are going to make our one or one
and a half story homes look bad.
1
2
3
45
6
7
8
910
11
12
Page: 7
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 4 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 5 Author: Date: Indeterminate
3 story structures are going to make our one or one
and a half story homes look bad. Number: 6 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 7 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 8 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 9 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 10 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Multi-family not mentioned above in type of
residential units. Townhomes are bad enough;
don't add multi-family housing to this
neighborhood. Number: 11 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 12 Author: Date: Indeterminate
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 5
d. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need
for the project and identify its beneficiaries.
The purpose of the proposed project is to develop a residential neighborhood in the City of Lino
Lakes. Based on the City of Lino Lakes’ 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the City has designated this area of
the community for future residential growth to meet the projected housing demands of current and
future residents. It is the intent of the developer to create a low density, medium, and high
residential neighborhood that contributes to the city’s housing goals and objectives.
e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely
to happen? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for
environmental review.
There are no future stages of this development that are planned or likely to occur.
f. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review.
The project is not a subsequent stage of an earlier project.
7. Cover Types
Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development:
Table 4. Land Cover of the Project Site Before and After (Yield Plan) the Proposed Development
Land Cover Type Before (acres) After (acres) – Yield Plan
Cropland 130 0
Residential 0 74
Grassland 1 0
Stormwater basin 0 21
Wooded/forested 0 0
Wetlands1 16 8
Lawn/Landscaping2 2 34
Facility Operation 3 0
Road Right-of-Way 6 20
Public Trail 0 1
TOTAL 158 158
1 Wetlands are calculated from the National Wetland Inventory (NWI). A wetland delineation has not been conducted on site yet. The mapped
NWI features overlap with the private and public drainage features present on site.
2 The lawn/landscaping acreage after development does not reflect the lawn associated with each residential home. This is included in the
residential cover type
See Appendix A, Figures 4 and 5 for a graphic representation of this data.
Wildlife preserve should be considered
1 2
3 4 5
6
789 10
Page: 8
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 4 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 5 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 6 Author: Subject: Highlight Date: Indeterminate Number: 7 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 8 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 9 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 10 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Wildlife preserve should be considered
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 7
9. Land Use
a. Describe:
i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including parks, trails,
prime or unique farmlands.
The existing land use on site is sod farm agriculture. Anoka County Ditch 10-22-32’s main trunk
and branch 2 run through the site. The site is surrounded by agriculture, rural residential, single-
family residential, multi-family residential, and undeveloped land.
The closest parks to the project include:
• Parks less than 1 mile from the project site include:
o Century Farm North Park (undeveloped): 500 feet to the south
o Behm’s Park: 2000 feet to the south
o Highland Meadows Park: 0.5 mile to the east
• Parks within approximately 1 mile of the project include:
o Blaine’s Lochness Park: southwest
o Blaine Wetland Sanctuary: southwest
o Lino Park: east
o Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve: southeast
o Blaine Lexington Athletic Complex: southwest
There is a city trail that stubs into the south end of the property.
The majority of the site is not considered prime farmland or soils of statewide importance based
on the USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. Further discussion about soils within the project site is
provided in Item 10.
ii. Plans. Describe planned land use as identified in comprehensive plan (if available) and any other
applicable plan for land use, water, or resources management by a local, regional, state, or
federal agency.
The site is split up into four planned land uses based on the City of Lino Lake’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan. The planned land use for the west and south ends of the site is Low Density
Residential (1.6 – 3.0 units per acre). The planned land use for the central and northern end of the
project is a mix of Medium Density Residential (4.0 – 6.0 units per acre), High Density Residential
(6.0 – 8.0 units per acre), and Planned Residential / Commercial (8.0 – 10.0 units per acre) with
opportunities for neighborhood scale retail, service, and office uses (Appendix A, Figure 6; City of
Lino Lakes, 2020).
The site is required to meet the requirements of the surface water management plans of the City
of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and the MPCA NPDES General Permit. Stormwater
basins are incorporated throughout the development.
what assurance do we have that our wells and mound systems won't be affected?
Will this be developed?12
3
Page: 10
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Will this be developed? Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate
what assurance do we have that our wells and mound systems won't be affected?
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 11
The National Hydrography Map (NHD) identifies ditches throughout the property that correspond
with the NWI riverine features identified on site and the Anoka County ditch.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Impaired Waters Map does not identify any
impaired waterways or basins within the project site and within 1 mile of the project site.
ii. Groundwater – aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project is within a
MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby wells, including
unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known on site or nearby, explain
the methodology used to determine this.
Groundwater levels vary across the site. In the soil boring testing locations, groundwater ranged
from approximately 5 to 10 feet below the soil surface. However, it should be noted that the
observation periods for the borings were relatively short, and project planning can expect
groundwater levels to fluctuate based on seasonal and annual factors such as flooding, irrigation,
precipitation, freeze/thaw, and surface drainage modifications.
Based on the MN DNR Minnesota Spring Inventory, there are no springs or seeps located within
the project site.
The project site is not located within a MDH wellhead protection area. The project site is within
0.5 mile of the Minnesota correctional facility – Lino Lakes drinking water supply management
area (DWSMA) and within approximately 1.5 mile of the City of Blaine’s (East) DWSMA.
There are two wells located on site. Their unique well numbers are 231862 and 444819
(Appendix A, Figure 11; Appendix B). See Table 6 below for more information on the wells. On
site wells will be sealed in accordance with MDH requirements.
Table 7. Water Wells Located Within the Project Site
Well No. Surface
Elevation (ft) Use Depth (ft) Cased Depth (ft)
Depth to
Static Water
Level (ft)
Aquifer Within Project
Site?
231862 900 N/A 720 196 N/A Multiple Yes
444819 899 Domestic 200 185 45 Jordan Yes
* Data was taken from the MDH’s Well Index (https://mnwellindex.web.health.state.mn.us/)
b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate the
effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below.
i. Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and composition of all
sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site.
1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify any
pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added water and waste
loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal wastewater
infrastructure.
1
2
Page: 14
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Nearby wells on Carl Street are not mentioned, but are
definitely present and in jeopardy.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 15
Lino Lakes residential water demand from 2016 to 2020 was 65 gallons per person per day of
water. Based on a three person household, it is estimated that the PUD Concept Plan will use
approximately 108,615 gallons per day of water and the Yield Plan will use approximately 137,865
gallons per day of water.
Measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects of groundwater consumption
include many approaches that will result in a reduction of overall water demand. These include
utilization of smart irrigation technology, water conservation, water use efficiency improvements,
limitations on irrigation, stormwater reuse for irrigation, low water use landscaping, and use of
low flow fixtures.
iv. Surface Waters
1) Wetlands - Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features such as
draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and vegetative removal. Discuss direct and
indirect environmental effects from physical modification of wetlands, including the
anticipated effects that any proposed wetland alterations may have to the host watershed.
Identify measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that were considered), minimize, or
mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss whether any required compensatory
wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in the same minor or major
watershed, and identify those probable locations.
An on-site field wetland delineation has not been completed at this time, but will occur
during the summer of 2022.
Any wetlands identified within the project site are regulated at the state level by the Wetland
Conservation Act (WCA) which is administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil
Resources (BWSR). Rice Creek Watershed District is the WCA Local Government Unit (LGU)
where the project site is located. At the federal level, wetlands are regulated under Section
401/404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) that is administered by the MPCA (Section
401 Certification) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 Permit). There are no
MN DNR public waters, public water wetlands, or public watercourses within the project.
Thus, an MN DNR public waters permit will not be necessary for this project site.
Potential Impacts to Wetlands on Site
Based on the potential PUD and yield concept plans, it is possible that permanent wetland fill
could occur on site. The permanent wetland fill could potentially be eight acres in size;
however, this estimate is only based on desktop mapping from the Minnesota National
Wetland Inventory and is subject to change based on the wetland delineation that is still in
progress and needs to be approved. Based on the results of the field wetland delineation, the
concept plan may need to be altered to avoid and minimize wetland impact where feasible.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) will likely be obtained, if necessary, from the
Army Corps of Engineers once the delineation is finalized and impacts are known on site.
The sod farm currently has a lot of wildlife and migratory bird population. This needs to be
considered.
1
Page: 18
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate
The sod farm currently has a lot of wildlife and migratory bird population. This needs to be
considered.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 18
An asbestos and regulated materials (ARM) assessment will be completed prior to the demolition of
the farmstead and an a 10-day demolition notification will be made to the MPCA/MDH if asbestos
containing material (ACM) is identified during the ARM assessment. If ACM and/or other regulated
solid waste is identified during the ARM assessment requiring removal, generated solid waste will be
disposed of at an MPCA permitted landfill.
In addition to the brownfield and tank release identified, there are 10 sites within 0.5 miles of the
proposed project site as shown in the MPCA's database (Appendix A, Figure 12; Table 7). Six are
construction stormwater permits associated with residential development or drainage improvement,
and four are associated with petroleum tanks, hazardous waste, and underground tanks. Information
on the MPCA’s website indicates that these sites have been properly investigated and managed.
Therefore, these sites are not expected to adversely affect the project site.
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture’s (MDA) What’s in My Neighborhood database indicates
that there are no sites within 0.5 miles of the project site.
Table 8. What’s in My Neighborhood Sites within 0.5 Miles of the Project Site
Site ID Type Name Status Within Project Site
107252
Aboveground tanks,
underground tanks,
brownfields*
Robinson Landscaping Active, Inactive* Yes
226150 Construction stormwater Century Farm North 7th Active No, within 0.5 miles
157490 Construction stormwater Morell Borrow Pit Active No, within 0.5 miles
212682 Construction stormwater Century Farm North 6th Addition Active No, within 0.5 miles
141380 Construction stormwater Anoka County Ditch 10-22-32
Maintenance 3 Inactive No, within 0.5 miles
191075 Petroleum remediation,
leak site Caroll Busch Residence Inactive No, within 0.5 miles
107177 Underground tanks Goldade Richard J Inactive No, within 0.5 miles
21238
Hazardous waste
generator, minimal
quantity, petroleum
remediation*, leak site*
A & L Sod Inc Active, Inactive* No, within 0.5 miles
224787 Construction stormwater Level Street NE Improvement
project Inactive No, within 0.5 miles
228696 Construction stormwater CSAH 14 from Lexington to Opal
Street Active No, within 0.5 miles
139362 Hazardous waste Blaine House Demo Inactive No, within 0.5 miles
Source: MPCA’s “What’s in My Neighborhood” Database
https://pca-gis02.pca.state.mn.us/wimn2/index.html
1
2
3
Page: 21
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Subject: Highlight Date: Indeterminate Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 20
c. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes - Describe hazardous wastes
generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal.
Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling, storage, and disposal.
Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of
hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling.
During construction, the project will follow the NPDES permit requirements and city ordinances to
avoid and minimize effects from the storage of hazardous waste. Generation of small quantities of
household hazardous waste will occur when residents are living on the property. Anoka County
provides free recycling and disposal of hazardous wastes at the Household Hazardous Waste Facility
located in the nearby city of Blaine.
13. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive
Ecological Resources (Rare Features)
a. Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or in near the site.
The habitats and vegetation present on site primarily consist of agriculture. Parcel 1 of the project
site also consists of landscaped lawn and mature deciduous trees around the existing residential
property.
Based on desktop analysis, there are private and public ditches that run throughout the property.
Additionally, there are potentially farmed wetland features present on site. Therefore, there is
potential habitat available for fish species on the project site.
Due to the disturbed nature of the project site, common wildlife species adapted to agriculture and
suburban environments, such as white-tailed deer, songbirds, and small mammals (squirrels, rabbits,
raccoons), are likely to occur within the project site.
b. Describe rare features such as state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, native
plant communities, Minnesota County Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and other
sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site. Provide the license agreement
number (LA-____) and/or correspondence number (ERDB _____________) from which the data were
obtained and attach the Natural Heritage letter from the DNR. Indicate if any additional habitat or
species survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results.
State
The MN DNR NHIS database was queried (License agreement # 181676) to determine whether known
locations of rare plant, animal species, or other significant natural features are known to occur within
an approximate one-mile radius of the project site. A MN DNR NHIS concurrence request letter was
sent to the MN DNR to concur with the findings of the NHIS database query. The MN DNR issued
their NHIS review letter in May 2022 and their findings are described in Appendix C.
The NHIS review identified eight vegetation species and one reptile species occurring within one mile
of the site. There are no state listed species within the project site. These species include:
coyote, moles, fox, blue heron, sandhill crane, beaver,
woodchucks, turkey, skunk, eagles, turkey vulturesmuskrats, turtles, falcon, owls, crows, garter snake,
1
2
Page: 23
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate
coyote, moles, fox, blue heron, sandhill crane, beaver,
woodchucks, turkey, skunk, eagles, turkey vultures Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate
muskrats, turtles, falcon, owls, crows, garter snake,
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 24
15. Visual
a. Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related visual
effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual effects from the
project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects.
The existing views from the site include agriculture, residential development, wetlands, open field,
and forested areas.
This project will not create any unusual visual impacts. The visual effect will transition views from
predominately open flat agriculture land to single family homes and townhomes, public access roads,
and stormwater basins. The project will not include intense lighting that will cause glare and the
residential developments will not produce vapor plumes. The outdoor lighting along the streets will
be strategically placed to benefit the residents as they navigate the development and will not direct
any light towards sensitive areas.
Landscape plantings will be included in the development per the City of Lino Lakes landscape
ordinance. This will include tree and shrubs plantings along portions of the site’s perimeter. The
landscape plantings will help soften the visual transition between the open space and residential
developments adjacent to the site.
16. Air
a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions
from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any hazardous air pollutants, criteria
pollutants, and any greenhouse gases. Discuss effects to air quality including any sensitive receptors,
human health or applicable regulatory criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess the
project’s effect on air quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control equipment
and other measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from stationary
source emissions.
The proposed residential subdivision will generate small sources of stationary source emissions
through home heating and cooling through natural gas and electricity. This will result in direct and
indirect sources of stationary greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) at a small quantity. Emissions are
expected to be similar to those of the single-family and multi-family residential units adjacent to the
site.
The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) is currently working on a pilot program to
understand how to integrate GHG quantification and assessment into the Environmental Review
documents. However, the requirements and methods are not required for the document yet. Thus,
the GHG for this document will be qualitative.
The primary GHG’s are carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N20), methane (CH4), sulfur hexafluoride
(SF6), and two classes of compounds called hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs).
Carbon dioxide is the most abundant GHG and has the largest effect on the climate. Emissions are
reported as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) tons and are stated in terms that reflect their global
warming potential (GWP) (MPCA, 2021).
The visual effects from Carl Street will transition from seeing wildlife and
having a rural atmosphere to 3 story high buildings, totally devastating the
view
1
Page: 27
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate
The visual effects from Carl Street will transition from seeing wildlife and having a rural atmosphere to 3 story high buildings, totally devastating the view
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 26
17. Noise
Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project
construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the project including 1) existing
noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3) conformance to state noise standards,
and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of noise.
The existing noise levels and sources in the area are those typical of residential development and
agriculture farming. The nearest noise receptors to the site are single family residential homes and a
sod farm. The nearest noise receptors will experience noise levels during construction that are
elevated in comparison to existing noise levels. Grading and excavation activities on site will require
heavy construction equipment.
Noise levels will temporarily increase during construction of the site then return to existing levels
during operation consistent with the zoned residential purpose of the property. Noise levels on site
will vary depending on where construction is occurring on site, time of operation, and distance
between receptors and construction equipment.
Construction noise can be mitigated by restricting construction work to daytime hours. Contractors
will be required to minimize noise impacts by maintaining equipment properly, including noise
controls as specified by manufactures. The project will adhere to the City of Lino Lake’s noise rules
and standards that indicates noise should occur within specified levels depending on land use and
time of day.
After construction, noise levels are expected to be at or near existing levels. Noise associated with
the project will be related to residential vehicle noise. A combination of berms, landscaping, and
fencing will be used to provide noise mitigation for the adjacent residential developments. Similar to
construction noise, the residential use of the property will adhere to the City’s noise rules and
standards. A noise study will be prepared detailing noise mitigation for the site and submitted with
the preliminary plat submittal for the development.
18. Transportation
a. Describe traffic-related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing and
proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated, 3) estimated
maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate source of trip generation
rates used in the estimates, and 5) availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation
modes.
Alliant completed a Traffic Impact Study for the residential development (See Appendix F). The Traffic
Study analyzes the traffic impacts of the proposed development by estimating trips generated by the
project and evaluating the potential need for transportation or roadway improvements for the
development.
1) The majority of the proposed development site is currently undeveloped agricultural land with
no parking spaces, though one business is present with a limited supply of parking. The proposed
development will consist of approximately 707 residential dwelling units (149 single-family
If Carl Street is extended, noise and traffic levels will be untolerable for current Carl Street residents.1
2
3
Page: 29
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate
If Carl Street is extended, noise and traffic levels will be untolerable for current Carl Street residents. Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Traffic noise will be terrible if you extend
access to Carl Street.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 27
detached homes and 558 townhomes). Assuming two parking spaces per dwelling unit, the
proposed additional parking supply is approximately 1,400 spaces, primarily in the form of
attached garages.
2) The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 5,656 daily vehicle trips
when fully constructed and occupied.
3) The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 476 vehicle trips during the
daily peak hour when fully constructed and occupied. The daily peak hour is the p.m. peak hour,
which is expected to occur at some point within the 4:00-6:00 p.m. timeframe.
4) The Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, was used to
estimate the trip generation potential for the proposed development.
5) Currently, the project area is not served by scheduled transit routes. Metro Mobility and
Transit Link are shared-ride, curb-to-curb minibus or van services which do serve the project
area. Weekday express bus service to downtown Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota
campus currently originates from the 95th Avenue park-and-ride along I-35W in nearby Blaine.
Weekday express bus service is also available to downtown Saint Paul and currently originates
from the County Road 14 park-and-ride in eastern Lino Lakes. While these transit services will be
available to future residents of the proposed development, they are not expected to have a
significant impact on vehicular ingress and egress at the development site.
Connections to sidewalks and trails are available through the adjacent Century Farm North
residential neighborhood. Continued growth of the residential sidewalk and trail network will also
occur within the proposed development. Trails will be extended through the west and southeast
portions of the proposed development as well as along Robinson Drive and Century Trail. A
future trail is planned along Main Street.
b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements
necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system. If the
peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a traffic impact
study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Use the format and procedures described in the
Minnesota Department of Transportation’s Access Management Manual, Chapter 5 (available at:
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagement/resources.html) or a similar local guidance.
The anticipated vehicular trip generation for the proposed development exceeds 250 peak hour
trips and 2,500 daily trips. Therefore, a traffic impact study was prepared for the proposed
development.
• The Robinson Property residential development is proposed to be constructed on approximately
157 acres of agricultural land located in the southeast quadrant of the Main Street/Sunset
Avenue intersection in Lino Lakes, MN. The traffic impacts of proposed development trips on
surrounding study intersections were analyzed for year 2025 and year 2040 conditions. The
following conclusions are offered for consideration:
• Results of the existing traffic operations analysis indicate that all study intersections
currently operate at overall LOS A during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In
addition, no side-street delay or queuing issues were observed in the field or traffic
simulations.
Carl Street currently gets only about 10 vehicle trips per day -
this new level would be intolerable.
1
2
3
4
5
Page: 30
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Carl Street currently gets only about 10 vehicle trips per day -
this new level would be intolerable. Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 4 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 5 Author: Date: Indeterminate
Please don't include access to Carl Street - it will DESTROY our rural
neighborhood. It's impossible to comprehend going from 3 cars a day to 2500 a day.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET // Robinson Sod Farm
PAGE 28
• Results of the year 2025 and year 2040 no build traffic operations analysis indicate that
all study intersections are expected to operate at overall LOS A during the weekday a.m.
and p.m. peak hours. In addition, no side-street delay or queuing issues were observed in
traffic simulations.
• Results of the year 2025 and year 2040 build traffic operations analysis indicate that all
study intersections are expected to operate at overall LOS B or better during the
weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In addition, no side-street delay or queuing issues
were observed in traffic simulations.
• The proposed development is expected to have limited impact on study area traffic
operations or the regional transportation system. Therefore, no geometric or traffic
control improvements are required from an operations perspective.
c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects.
While roadway improvements are not required from a traffic operations or regional
transportation system perspective, the following recommendations should be considered:
• Dedicated eastbound right-turn and westbound left-turn lanes are proposed at the Main
Street/North Access (Century Trail) intersection. A dedicated northbound right-turn lane
is proposed at the Sunset Avenue/West Access intersection. A dedicated southbound
left-turn lane is proposed at the Sunset Avenue/Robinson Drive intersection. While these
turn lanes are not required from an operations perspective, they would be expected to
provide a safety benefit in minimizing the potential for rear-end crashes.
• Caution should be exercised when placing development signing and/or landscaping near
proposed site accesses so as to not create a new sight obstruction.
• Turning movements should be reviewed to ensure design vehicles such as school buses
and garbage trucks have adequate accommodations to negotiate internal proposed
development roadways.
• Establish appropriate traffic control at proposed development internal roadway
intersections consistent with local jurisdiction policies to minimize driver confusion and
the potential for conflicts.
See Appendix F for the Traffic Study.
There will be a huge impact to Carl Street residents if Carl Street is made accessible. It is currently a dead-end road.
What measures will be taken for Carl Street?
1
2
3
Page: 31
Number: 1 Author: Date: Indeterminate Number: 2 Author: Date: Indeterminate
There will be a huge impact to Carl Street residents if Carl Street is made accessible. It is currently a dead-end road. Number: 3 Author: Date: Indeterminate
What measures will be taken for Carl Street?
September 14, 2022
Katie Larsen, City Planner
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Dear Ms. Larsen,
We understand there has been an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) submitted for the
Robinson Sod Farm dated August 23, 2022. We are writing to express major concerns about this
environmental proposal from a personal property perspective. Our house located at 314 Carl Street is
directly across from the proposed development. In 2003, when the previous owners began building the
house, they installed a wood foundation which was approved by the Lino Lakes inspector. With a wood
foundation, you must be diligent to keep it dry and since 2003, there have been absolutely no issues
with the foundation in terms of moisture. Before we purchased the home in 2020, we hired a structural
engineer to go over the foundation with a fine tooth comb. He found NO issues which are documented
in our survey results, but he could not stress enough the importance of keeping water away from our
foundation.
Upon the review of the EAW and our wood foundation, we are bringing forth the following concerns:
We are concerned that the alteration of 100 plus year drainage complexes in the area will
negatively impact the established 100 year floodplain. In other words, right now, the sod farm
and surrounding drainage ditches can handle the water drainage and runoff, but with this huge
development and the potential rise in the water table, will that continue to be true?
We are concerned that our wood foundation home will incur water damage which would be
detrimental. We understand this has already happened to homes in Blaine with the new
development off of Lexington and 109th. There are also other homes with wood foundations
nearby. Along with moisture in the home comes potential health risks associated with black
mold. I am currently a cancer patient and I do not need any additional potential health risks in
my life. Has the City of Lino Lakes or Alliant Engineering contacted the Corp of Engineers or the
appropriate governing body to determine how the established 100 year floodplain will be
impacted by massive water redistribution?
Please acknowledge that this letter is received in its entirety and entered into the record. Please
provide a timeline in which we can expect a response to our questions.
Regards,
Kevin and Tammy Dunrud
314 Carl Street
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
September 15, 2022
Reilly S Anderson
7795 Clydesdale Circle
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Re: Robinson Sod Farm Development
To Whom It May Concern;
I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed Robinson Sod Farm Development. As
a local resident, I cherish the green spaces and wildlife the local area has to offer. I frequently see
migratory waterfowl, turtles, and predatory birds that use the sod farm as a habitat corridor and nesting
area. In fact, the sod farm is included in the Audobon Society’s Important Bird Map, and currently acts as
additional sanctuary for wildlife outside of Carlos Avery Wildlife Management Area. Going forward with
the proposed housing development threatens to further fragment the habitats of birds and other wildlife
within Anoka county, and will add new stressors to the local environment. As summer weather becomes
increasingly extreme and unpredictable, newly constructed impervious surfaces will further stress the
local aging drainage systems, threatening the homes and properties of existing area residents with
flooding, many of which were built many years ago.
Furthermore, the already out-of-control issue of high volume, high speed local traffic raises major
concerns as to how traffic will be managed in the area. This relatively quiet part of Lino Lakes is already
turning into a more hazardous and congested area, with commuters racing through the neighborhoods.
The proposed new roads and feeder routes will be ineffective in mitigating this problem. In recent years,
the neighborhood has become dangerous for bicyclists and pedestrians- a simple trip to the mailbox is
treacherous. The addition of this proposed high density housing will add a critical amount of new motor
traffic that will exceed the local infrastructure’s ability to provide safe streets.
After review of the EAW and careful discussion with others in the neighborhood, I am opposed to the
proposed development and believe that preserving the farm is in the best interest of the city, its residents
and the local environment. Please consider the needs of current residents near the Robinson Sod Farm and
oppose this development which will serve to benefit big money investors and realtors, instead of our
families and environment.
Sincerely,
Reilly Anderson
32
Appendix B
CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION
FINDING OF NO NEED FOR EIS
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 22-126, Approving Tax Increment
Financing Plan for District 1-14.
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting City Council consideration to approve the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
District 1-14.
BACKGROUND
Ryan Companies, US, Inc., recently entered into a purchase agreement to acquire 33 acres north
of Clearwater Creek, west of I-35E. Ryan is proposing construction of 3 buildings totaling
approximately 451,000 square feet of manufacturing, office and warehouse space with an
estimated market value of $31,000,000. The project, as proposed, addresses a number of City
goals related to this area and will significantly reshape the SW quadrant of the Main Street and
35E intersection. The public benefits include:
• Development of underutilized properties.
• Expansion of City tax base.
• Creation of new manufacturing, office and professional jobs.
• Extension of public street improvements to serve business park and surrounding uses.
The developer has submitted an application for public assistance to offset infrastructure, and site
development and construction costs related to the proposed buildings. The proposed public
assistance would be provided in the form of Tax Increment Financing (TIF).
The establishment of a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District requires the preparation of a TIF
plan and review by both the school district and county. To date, no comments have been
received from Centennial School District or Anoka County.
A public hearing must be held prior to City Council consideration to establish a district.
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan
The TIF plan provides the framework for the use of tax increment for development purposes.
The plan includes the statutory authorization, purpose and objectives of the district. The
City/EDA are proposing to establish an Economic Development district. The maximum duration
of an Economic Development district is 9 years – 8 years from the date of receipt of the first
increment.
The primarily purpose of the district is to aid in the construction of the proposed industrial
buildings and public infrastructure. Tax increment is intended to be used to offset costs related
to site improvements, building and infrastructure costs.
The plan includes the City’s findings that, in our opinion, due to extraordinary costs associated
with the project including soil corrections, utility relocation and infrastructure extensions and
building preparations, the project would not be reasonably expected to occur solely through
private investment.
The estimated public costs eligible for reimbursement from tax increment total $3,444,854. Tax
increment revenues generated from the development are expected to equal this amount.
Approval of the plan and determination of eligible costs does not obligate the City/EDA to any
specific district duration or amount of assistance.
The total amount of assistance proposed is $2,900,000.00. However approval of any specific
assistance package will be part of a separate contract for development.
Representatives from BakerTilly, the City’s financial consultant will be present at the meeting to
address any City Council questions.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 22-126.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-126
2. Tax Increment Financing Plan for District 1-14
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-126
RESOLUTION APPROVING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT) DISTRICT NO. 1-14
WHEREAS, the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota (the “City”) and the Lino Lakes Economic
Development Authority (the “Authority”) have established, and the Authority administers, Development
District No. 1 (the “Development District”) located within the City and have caused to be created a
Development Plan (the “Development Plan”) therefor, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090
through 469.1082, as amended; and
WHEREAS, within the Development District the City and the Authority have created certain tax
increment financing districts pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as
amended (the “TIF Act”); and
WHEREAS, the City and the Authority have determined to approve a tax increment financing plan
(the “TIF Plan”) relating to the creation of a new tax increment financing district within the Development
District designated as Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14 (the “TIF
District”), all as described in a plan document presented to the City Council of the City on the date hereof;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 469.175, subdivision 2 of the TIF Act, the proposed TIF Plan and
the estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the TIF Plan were presented to the Clerk of the
Board of Education of Independent School District No. 12 and to the Manager of Property Records and
Taxation, as the County Auditor, of Anoka County, Minnesota (the “County Auditor”) at least thirty (30)
days prior to the date hereof; and
WHEREAS, on the date hereof, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing relating
to the TIF Plan and the establishment of the TIF District, at which the views of all interested parties were
heard at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the contents of the TIF Plan; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes,
Minnesota that:
Section 1. Findings; Development Plan. It is hereby found and determined that the
Development Plan remains in full force and effect and that the goal of the Development Plan is to encourage
development and redevelopment in accordance with the general plan for development of the City as set forth
in the comprehensive municipal plan.
Section 2. Findings; TIF District.
2.01. It is found and determined that it is necessary and desirable for the sound and orderly
development of the Development District, and for the protection and preservation of the public health,
safety, and general welfare, that the authority of the TIF Act be exercised by the City to provide public
financial assistance to the TIF District and the Development District.
2
2.02. It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the City, that the
development proposed in the TIF Plan could not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private
investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and the increased market value of the site that could
reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase
in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of
the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan.
2.03. The proposed public improvements to be financed in part through tax increment financing
are necessary to permit the City to realize the full potential of the TIF District and the Development District
in terms of development intensity, employment opportunities, and tax base.
2.04. The TIF Plan conforms to the general plan for development of the City as a whole.
2.05. The TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City
as a whole, for the development of the TIF District and the Development District by private enterprise.
2.06. The TIF District is an economic development district under Section 469.174,
subdivision 12 of the TIF Act.
2.07. Reasons and facts supporting all the above findings are set forth in the TIF Plan and are
incorporated herein by reference. The City Council has also relied upon the reports and recommendations
of its staff and consultants, as well as the personal knowledge of members of the City Council, in reaching
its conclusions regarding the TIF Plan.
Section 3. Public Purpose. The adoption of the TIF Plan conforms in all respects to the
requirements of the TIF Act. The TIF Plan will help facilitate development and redevelopment of land in
the City, provide additional employment opportunities within the City, increase the tax base, and improve
the general economy. The City expressly finds that the tax increment assistance is provided solely to
make the development financially feasible and thus produce the public benefits described. Therefore, the
City finds that the public benefits of the TIF Plan exceed any private benefits.
Section 4. Approvals; Further Proceedings
4.01. The TIF Plan for the TIF District is hereby approved and adopted in substantially the form
on file at City Hall.
4.02. The City Council hereby transmits the TIF Plan to the Board of Commissioners of the
Authority (the “Board”) and recommends that the Board adopt the TIF Plan.
4.03. Upon approval of the TIF Plan by the Board, the Authority is authorized and directed to file
a request for certification of the TIF District with the County Auditor and to file a copy of the TIF Plan with
the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor as required by the TIF Act.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_______________ and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
3
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
LN140-128 (JAE)
826710v1
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC is a registered municipal advisor and wholly-owned subsidiary of Baker Tilly Virchow
Krause, LLP, an accounting firm. Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLP trading as Baker Tilly is a member of the global network of Baker
Tilly International Ltd., the members of which are separate and independent legal entities.
Tax Increment Financing Plan
for
Tax Increment Financing (Economic
Development) District No. 1-14
within
Development District No. 1
(Clearwater Creek Industrial Development Project)
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Prepared by
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC
Draft Dated: October 3, 2022
Anticipated Public Hearing: October 10, 2022
Anticipated Approval by City Council: October 10, 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page(s)
A. Definitions ................................................................................................................................... 1
B. Statutory Authorization ............................................................................................................... 1
C. Statement of Need and Public Purpose ..................................................................................... 1
D. Statement of Objectives ............................................................................................................. 2
E. Designation of Tax Increment Financing District as an
Economic Development District ............................................................................................... 2
F. Duration of the TIF District ......................................................................................................... 3
G. Property to be Included in the TIF District .................................................................................. 4
H. Property to be Acquired in the TIF District ................................................................................. 4
I. Specific Development Expected to Occur Within the TIF District .............................................. 4
J. Findings and Need for Tax Increment Financing ....................................................................... 5
K. Estimated Public Costs .............................................................................................................. 6
L. Estimated Sources of Revenue .................................................................................................. 7
M. Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness .............................................................................. 7
N. Original Net Tax Capacity .......................................................................................................... 8
O. Original Tax Capacity Rate ........................................................................................................ 8
P. Projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity and Projected Tax Increment ......................... 9
Q. Use of Tax Increment ................................................................................................................. 9
R. Excess Tax Increment ................................................................................................................ 10
S. Tax Increment Pooling and the Five-Year Rule ......................................................................... 10
T. Limitation on Administrative Expenses ...................................................................................... 11
U. Limitation on Property Not Subject to Improvements - Four Year Rule ..................................... 11
V. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ........................................................................ 12
W. Prior Planned Improvements ...................................................................................................... 12
X. Development Agreements .......................................................................................................... 13
Y. Assessment Agreements ........................................................................................................... 13
Z. Modifications of the Tax Increment Financing Plan ................................................................... 13
AA. Administration of the Tax Increment Financing Plan ................................................................. 14
AB. Financial Reporting and Disclosure Requirements .................................................................... 14
Map of the Tax Increment Financing District ........................................................................ EXHIBIT I
Assumptions Report .............................................................................................................. EXHIBIT II
Projected Tax Increment Report ........................................................................................... EXHIBIT III
Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Report ....................................................... EXHIBIT IV
Market Value Analysis Report ............................................................................................... EXHIBIT V
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 1
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT) DISTRICT NO. 1-14
Section A Definitions
The terms defined in this section have the meanings given herein, unless the context in which they are
used indicates a different meaning:
"Authority" means the Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority.
"City" means the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota; also referred to as a "Municipality".
"City Council" means the City Council of the City; also referred to as the "Governing Body".
"County" means Anoka County, Minnesota
"Development District" means Development District No. 1 in the City, which is described in the
corresponding Development Program.
"Development Program" means the Development Program for the Development District.
"Project Area" means the geographic area of the Development District.
"School District" means Independent School District No. 12, Minnesota.
"State" means the State of Minnesota.
"TIF Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, both inclusive.
"TIF District" means Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14.
"TIF Plan" means the tax increment financing plan for the TIF District (this document).
Section B Statutory Authorization
The Development District Act authorizes the City and Authority, upon certain public purpose findings by
the City Council, to establish and designate development districts within the City and to develop and
administer development programs therefore to meet the needs and accomplish the public purposes
specified in Section C. In accordance with the purposes set forth in Section 469.124 of the Development
District Act, the City Council and Authority have established the Development District comprising the area
described in Section E and have adopted this Development Program.
Section C Statement of Need and Public Purpose
The City Council and Authority have determined that there is a need for the City to take certain actions
they deem necessary in order to encourage, ensure and facilitate development and redevelopment by the
private sector of underutilized, inappropriately used and unused land located within the corporate limits of
the City. Such actions are necessary in order to provide additional employment opportunities for
residents of the City and the surrounding area; to improve the tax base of the City, the County and the
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 2
School District, thereby enabling them to better provide needed public services; and to improve the
general economy of the City, the County and the State.
Section D Statement of Objectives
The Authority seeks to achieve the following objectives through the establishment of TIF District No. 1-14:
1. redevelop blighted areas as identified
2. provide employment opportunities within the community.
3. improve the tax base of Lino Lakes and the general economy of the City and State;
4. implement relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Authority’s specific purpose in establishing TIF District No. 1-14 is to aid in the construction of 3 large
manufacturing/warehousing/distribution facilities that will collectively be approximately 451,000 total
square feet. The Authority intends to use increment generated by the new development to assist with
financing a portion of the extraordinary site improvements and soil correction costs and offsite
improvements that include streets, public utilities, and public improvements to gain access to the site and
maximize building size on the development parcels.
Section E Designation of Tax Increment Financing District as an
Economic Development District
Economic development districts are a type of tax increment financing district which consist of any project,
or portions of a project, which the Authority finds to be in the public interest because:
(1) it will discourage commerce, industry, or manufacturing from moving their
operations to another state or municipality;
(2) it will result in increased employment in the state; or
(3) it will result in preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the state; or
(4) it satisfies the requirements of a workforce housing project as defined
.
The TIF District qualifies as an economic development district in that the proposed development
described in this TIF Plan (see Section I) meets the criteria listed above in (2) and (3). Without
establishment of the TIF District, the proposed development would not occur within the City. The
proposed development will also result in increased employment and enhancement of the tax base in both
the City and the State.
Tax increments from an economic development district must be used to provide improvements, loans,
subsidies, grants, interest rate subsidies, or other assistance in which at least 85% of the square footage
of the facilities to be constructed are used for any of the following purposes:
(1) manufacturing, production, or processing of tangible personal property;
(2) warehousing, storage and distribution of tangible personal property, excluding retail
sales;
(3) research and development related to the activities listed in (1) or (2) above;
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 3
(4) telemarketing if that activity is the exclusive use of the property;
(5) tourism facilities (see M.S. Section 469.174, Subd. 22);
(6) space necessary for and related to the activities listed in (1) through (5) above;
(7) a workforce housing project that satisfies the requirements under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.176, subdivision 4c, paragraph (d).
Tax increments from the TIF District will be used to provide financial assistance to the proposed
development (see Section I), in which over 85% of the square footage of the facilities to be constructed
will be used for manufacturing, production, or processing of tangible personal property and warehousing,
storage and distribution of tangible personal property, excluding retail sales as listed in (1) and (2) above.
In addition, the parcels to be included within the district have qualified for inclusion under the provisions of
chapter 473H in the previous five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification only and
therefore the project must meet the following qualifications:
(1) a district in which 85 percent or more of the planned buildings and facilities (determined on the
basis of square footage) are a qualified manufacturing facility or a qualified distribution facility or a
combination of both; or
(2) a housing district.
A distribution facility means buildings and other improvements to real property that are used to conduct
activities in at least each of the following categories:
(i) to store or warehouse tangible personal property;
(ii) to take orders for shipment, mailing, or delivery;
(iii) to prepare personal property for shipment, mailing, or delivery; and
(iv) to ship, mail, or deliver property.
A manufacturing facility includes space used for manufacturing or producing tangible personal property,
including processing resulting in the change in condition of the property, and space necessary for and
related to the manufacturing activities.
To be a qualified facility, the owner or operator of a manufacturing or distribution facility must agree to pay
and pay 90 percent or more of the employees of the facility at a rate equal to or greater than 160 percent
of the federal minimum wage for individuals over the age of 20.
The proposed project will be a qualified manufacturing and distribution facility.
Section F Duration of the TIF District
Economic development districts may remain in existence 8 years from the date of receipt by the Authority
of the first tax increment. The Authority anticipates that the TIF District will remain in existence the
maximum duration allowed by law (projected to be through the year 2033, due to anticipated receipt of
first increment in 2025). Modifications of this plan (see Section AA) shall not extend these limitations.
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 4
Section G Property to be Included in the TIF District
The TIF District is an approximate 37-acre area of land comprising of the parcels listed below that are
located within the Project Area. A map showing the boundaries of the TIF District is shown in Exhibit I.
Parcel ID Number Legal Description
24-31-22-31-0004 Outlot A, Clearwater Creek Business Park
24-31-22-24-0009 Outlot A, Clearwater Creek Business Center
24-31-22-24-0008 Lot 2, Block 2, Clearwater Creek Business Center
24-31-22-24-0002 That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SE ¼ of NW ¼)
of Section 24, Township 31, Range 22, described as follows, to-wit:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of Northwest
Quarter (SE ¼ of NW ¼) of Section 24, thence running East along the South
line of said Southeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (SE ¼ of NW ¼) a
distance of 275 feet; thence running North parallel with the West line of said
Southeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (SE ¼ of NW ¼) a distance of 375
feet; thence West parallel with the South line of said Southeast Quarter of
Northwest Quarter (SW ¼ of NW ¼) a distance of 275 feet to the West line of
said Southeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (SE ¼ of NW ¼); thence
running South along the West line of said Southeast Quarter of Northwest
Quarter (SE ¼ of NW ¼) a distance of 375 feet to the point of beginning;
Anoka County, Minnesota.
* The parcels listed above are anticipated to be replatted and will be site upon which the new
industrial building development with 3 separate buildings will be built. The area encompassed by the
TIF District shall also include all street or utility right-of-ways located upon or adjacent to the property
described above.
Section H Property to be Acquired in the TIF District
The Authority may acquire and sell any or all of the property located within the TIF District. It will not be
acquiring any property at this time and will not be selling the property to facilitate development.
Section I Specific Development Expected to Occur Within the TIF District
The proposed project is anticipated to include the construction of approximately 451,000 square feet of
light industrial manufacturing, warehousing and distribution space to be constructed in 2 phases within 3
buildings – each building will be approximately 189,000, 147,000 and 115,000, respectively. Tax
increment is a financing tool the Authority is planning to use for financing of a portion of the eligible costs
associated with construction of the project to offset extraordinary costs. The square footage of the
completed buildings will comply with the requirements of an economic development district with at least
85% being used for a qualifying purpose (industrial warehousing, distribution, manufacturing project).
It is anticipated that the Authority will use the tax increment to finance a portion of the site development,
soils correction, infrastructure, public improvement and other related costs that are necessary for this
project to proceed. In addition, the city may use tax increment for related administrative expenses, and
any other eligible expenditures associated with development of the site that may include additional
necessary public improvements.
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 5
Construction of the project is expected to commence in 2023 and continue in 2024 and be 100%
assessed and on the tax rolls as of January 2, 2025, for taxes payable in 2026.
At the time this document was prepared there were no signed construction contracts with regards to the
above-described development.
Section J Findings and Need for Tax Increment Financing
In establishing the TIF District, the City makes the following findings:
(1) The TIF District qualifies as an economic development district.
See Section E of this document for the reasons and facts supporting this finding.
(2) The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected
to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and
the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without
the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value
estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of
the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF
Plan.
Factual basis:
Proposed development not expected to occur:
The project includes the development of new large industrial buildings comprising of
approximately 451,000 square feet in an undeveloped area of the City. The proposed developer
of the site has submitted information to the city demonstrating that the development of this site is
not financially feasible without the assistance provided in this TIF Plan.
The City has determined that the proposed development would not occur but for the financial
assistance provided in this TIF Plan because of the high cost of construction at the site due to the
need for significant site development, soils correction and public improvement infrastructure costs
necessary for development to occur. Specifically, soils correction/lime stabilization, aggregate
piers, site preparation and site fill, public utility relocation and offsite road extension to allow
maximum development on the site and area. Due to the high costs of investment for the
proposed project, including site improvements, public improvements, soil correction, and
infrastructure costs that would be incurred by the developer in conjunction with development of
the project, the developer has stated that the project as proposed would not occur without the
financial assistance provided by the City, as it would not be economically feasible without
financial assistance. The City finds the use of tax increment necessary to finance a portion of the
site improvement, public infrastructure, soil correction and infrastructure costs to facilitate
development of the project and developer investment. The City anticipates providing financial
assistance on a pay-as-you-go basis.
Therefore, the City has determined that the proposed development would not occur but for the
financial assistance provided in this TIF Plan because of the increased costs related to development
within the TIF District and construction of the project. The cost of construction of the project and
availability of revenues to support repayment of debt has created a financial gap that requires a level
of public assistance.
No higher market value expected:
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 6
The project to be constructed within TIF District No. 1-14 requires significant investment to be
financially feasible. To commence construction of the new industrial project, assistance with
financing a portion of those costs will be necessary. The financial assistance provided under this TIF
Plan will help offset the costs of the improvements. Given the nature of this project, there is no
reasonable expectation of any development occurring that would generate as much market value
increase as is estimated to be generated by the proposed development by the new business.
Therefore, the City has concluded that substantial development at this particular site--and hence
any significant increase in market value--is not reasonably expected to occur unless the City
provides tax increment assistance as described in this Tax Increment Plan.
To summarize the basis for the City’s findings regarding alternative market value, in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3(d), the City makes the following determinations:
a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the site will increase
without the use of tax increment financing is $0 (for the reasons described above), except
some unknown amount of appreciation.
b. If the proposed development to be assisted with tax increment occurs in the District,
the total increase in market value would be approximately $35,960,717, including the value
of the building (See Exhibit II).
c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of
the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $2,692,001 (See Exhibit V).
d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the
Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase
greater than $33,268,716 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax
increment assistance.
(3) The TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the
City as a whole, for development of the Project Area by private enterprise.
Factual basis: The proposed development is the construction of new large buildings that will be
a mix of warehousing, manufacturing and distribution in the Project Area that is expected to retain
existing jobs as well as create new jobs in the City, plus create new tax base for the City and the
State. The development meets the City’s economic development goals in terms of tax base
expansion, job retention, and wage levels.
(4) The TIF Plan conforms to general plans for development of the City as a whole.
Factual basis: The City Council has determined that the development proposed in the TIF Plan
conforms to the City comprehensive plan.
(5) The City is electing the method of tax increment computation set forth in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 3(b) (see Section P).
Section K Estimated Public Costs
The estimated public costs of the TIF District are listed in the table on the following page. Such costs are
eligible for reimbursement from tax increments of the TIF District.
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 7
Estimated Public Costs Estimated Amount
Land/Building acquisition $0
Site Improvements/Preparation costs $2,672,614
Utilities $0
Other public improvements $600,000
Construction of affordable housing $0
Administrative expenses $172,240
Total Estimated Public Costs $3,444,854
Interest expenses $0
Total Costs $3,444,854
The Authority reserves the right to administratively adjust the amount of any of the items listed above or
to incorporate additional eligible items, so long as the total estimated public costs ($3,444,854) do not
increase. The Authority also reserves the right to fund any of the identified costs with any other legally
available revenues, such as grants and/or loans, but anticipates that such costs will be primarily financed
with tax increments.
Section L Estimated Sources of Revenue
Estimated Sources of Revenue Estimated Amount
Tax Increment revenue $3,444,854
Interest on invested funds
Total $3,444,854
The Authority anticipates providing financial assistance to the proposed development through pay-as-you-
go financing in which the City will provide funding to the development. As revenues are collected from
the TIF District in future years, a portion will be retained by the City and the remaining funds will be
provided as reimbursement for certain identified costs as necessary within the TIF District to assist with
financing the public costs incurred (see Section K).
The City reserves the right to finance any or all public costs of the TIF District using pay-as-you-go
assistance, internal funding, general obligation or revenue debt, or any other financing mechanism
authorized by law. The Authority also reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally
applicable to the Project Area to pay for such costs including, but not limited to, special assessments,
utility revenues, federal or state funds, and investment income. The projected tax increment report is
included as Exhibit III.
Section M Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness
The maximum principal amount of bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or part with tax
increment from the TIF District is $3,444,854. The Authority currently plans to finance the public costs
through pay-as-you-go financing. The Authority reserves the right to issue an interfund loan or issue
bonds in any form, including without limitation any interfund loan with interest not to exceed the maximum
permitted under Section 469.178, subd. 7 of the TIF Act.
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 8
Section N Original Net Tax Capacity
The County Auditor shall certify the original net tax capacity of the TIF District. This value will be equal to
the total net tax capacity of all property in the TIF District as certified by the State Commissioner of
Revenue. For districts certified between January 1 and June 30, inclusive, this value is based on the
previous assessment year. For districts certified between July 1 and December 31, inclusive, this value is
based on the current assessment year.
The Estimated Market Value of all property within the TIF District as of January 2, 2022, for taxes payable
in 2023, is $699,300. Upon establishment of the TIF District, it is estimated that the original net tax
capacity of the TIF District will increase as a result of the property reclassifying as commercial-industrial.
Each year the County Auditor shall certify the amount that the original net tax capacity has increased or
decreased as a result of:
(1) changes in the tax-exempt status of property;
(2) reductions or enlargements of the geographic area of the TIF District;
(3) changes due to stipulation agreements or abatements; or
(4) changes in property classification rates.
Section O Original Tax Capacity Rate
The County Auditor shall also certify the original tax capacity rate of the TIF District. This rate shall be the
sum of all local tax rates that apply to property in the TIF District. This rate shall be for the same taxes
payable year as the original net tax capacity.
In future years, the amount of tax increment generated by the TIF District will be calculated using the
lesser of (a) the sum of the current local tax rates at that time or (b) the original tax capacity rate of the
TIF District.
It is anticipated the request for certification of the District will occur after June 30, 2023 and the local tax
rates for taxes levied in 2023 and payable in 2024 will apply. The payable 2024 rates are not available at
the time of drafting of the TIF Plan. For purposes of estimating the tax increment generated by the TIF
District, the sum of the local tax rates for taxes levied in 2021 and payable in 2022 of 105.106% have
been used and are shown below:
2021/2022
Taxing Jurisdiction Local Tax Rate
City of Lino Lakes 40.154%
Anoka County 29.605%
ISD 12 31.074%
Other 4.273%
Total 105.106%
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 9
Section P Projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity and
Projected Tax Increment
The Authority anticipates that the building construction will be completed by December 31, 2024, creating
a total tax capacity for TIF District No. 1-14 of $609,740 as of January 2, 2025. The captured tax capacity
as of that date is estimated to be $344,365 and the first full year of tax increment is estimated to be
$361,948 payable in 2026. A complete schedule of estimated tax increment from the TIF District is
shown in Exhibit III.
The estimates shown in this TIF plan assume that commercial class rates remain at 1.5% of the
estimated market value up to $150,000 and 2.0% of the estimated market value over $150,000 and
assume 2% annual increases in market values.
Each year the County Auditor shall determine the current net tax capacity of all property in the TIF
District. To the extent that this total exceeds the original net tax capacity, the difference shall be known
as the captured net tax capacity of the TIF District.
For communities affected by the fiscal disparity provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 473F and
Chapter 276A, the original net tax capacity of the TIF District shall be determined before the application of
fiscal disparity. In subsequent years, the current net tax capacity shall either (a) be determined before the
application of fiscal disparity or (b) exclude the product of any fiscal disparity increase in the TIF District
(since the original net tax capacity was certified) times the appropriate fiscal disparity ratio. The method
the Authority elects shall remain the same for the life of the TIF District, except that a single change may
be made at any time from method (a) to method (b) above. The Authority elects method (b), or M.S.
Section 469.177, Subdivision 3(b).
The County Auditor shall certify to the Authority the amount of captured net tax capacity each year. The
Authority may choose to retain any or all of this amount. It is the Authority's intention to retain 100% of
the captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. Such amount shall be known as the retained captured
net tax capacity of the TIF District.
Exhibit II gives a listing of the various information and assumptions used in preparing a number of the
exhibits contained in this TIF Plan, including Exhibit III which shows the projected tax increment
generated over the anticipated life of the TIF District.
Section Q Use of Tax Increment
Each year the County Treasurer shall deduct 0.36% of the annual tax increment generated by the TIF
District and pay such amount to the State's General Fund. Such amounts will be appropriated to the
State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting and auditing of tax increment financing information
throughout the state. Exhibit III shows the projected deduction for this purpose over the anticipated life of
the TIF District.
The Authority has determined that it will use 100% of the remaining tax increment generated by the TIF
District for any of the following purposes:
(1) pay for the estimated public costs of the TIF District (see Section K) and County
administrative costs associated with the TIF District (see Section T);
(2) pay principal and interest on tax increment bonds or other bonds issued to finance the
estimated public costs of the TIF District;
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 10
(3) accumulate a reserve securing the payment of tax increment bonds or other bonds
issued to finance the estimated public costs of the TIF District;
(4) pay all or a portion of the county road costs as may be required by the County Board
under M.S. Section 469.175, Subdivision 1a; or
(5) return excess tax increments to the County Auditor for redistribution to the City, County
and School District.
Tax increments from property located in one county must be expended for the direct and primary benefit
of a project located within that county, unless both county boards involved waive this requirement. Tax
increments shall not be used to circumvent levy limitations applicable to the City.
Tax increment shall not be used to finance the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or
maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality,
county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the State or federal government, or for a
commons area used as a public park, or a facility used for social, recreational, or conference purposes.
This prohibition does not apply to the construction or renovation of a parking structure or of a privately-
owned facility for conference purposes.
If there exists any type of agreement or arrangement providing for the developer, or other beneficiary of
assistance, to repay all or a portion of the assistance that was paid or financed with tax increments, such
payments shall be subject to all of the restrictions imposed on the use of tax increments. Assistance
includes sale of property at less than the cost of acquisition or fair market value, grants, ground or other
leases at less then fair market rent, interest rate subsidies, utility service connections, roads, or other
similar assistance that would otherwise be paid for by the developer or beneficiary.
Section R Excess Tax Increment
In any year in which the tax increments from the TIF District exceed the amount necessary to pay the
estimated public costs authorized by the TIF Plan, the Authority shall use the excess tax increments to:
(1) prepay any outstanding tax increment bonds;
(2) discharge the pledge of tax increments thereof;
(3) pay amounts into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of the tax increment
bonds; or
(4) return excess tax increments to the County Auditor for redistribution to the City, County
and School District. The County Auditor must report to the Commissioner of Education
the amount of any excess tax increment redistributed to the School District within 30 days
of such redistribution.
Section S Tax Increment Pooling and the Five-Year Rule
At least 80% of the tax increments from the TIF District must be expended on activities within the district
or to pay for bonds used to finance the estimated public costs of the TIF District (see Section E for
additional restrictions). No more than 20% of the tax increments may be spent on costs outside of the
TIF District but within the boundaries of the Project Area, except to pay debt service on credit enhanced
bonds. All administrative expenses are considered to have been spent outside of the TIF District. Tax
increments are considered to have been spent within the TIF District if such amounts are:
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 11
(1) actually paid to a third party for activities performed within the TIF District within five
years after certification of the district;
(2) used to pay bonds that were issued and sold to a third party, the proceeds of which are
reasonably expected on the date of issuance to be spent within the later of the five-year
period or a reasonable temporary period or are deposited in a reasonably required
reserve or replacement fund.
(3) used to make payments or reimbursements to a third party under binding contracts for
activities performed within the TIF District, which were entered into within five years after
certification of the district; or
(4) used to reimburse a party for payment of eligible costs (including interest) incurred within
five years from certification of the district.
Beginning with the sixth year following certification of the TIF District, at least 80% of the tax increments
must be used to pay outstanding bonds or make contractual payments obligated within the first five years.
When outstanding bonds have been defeased and sufficient money has been set aside to pay for such
contractual obligations, the TIF District must be decertified.
The Authority anticipates that a portion of the tax increments may be spent outside of the TIF District
(including allowable administrative expenses); and the Authority reserves the right to allow for tax
increment pooling from the TIF District in the future.
Section T Limitation on Administrative Expenses
Administrative expenses are defined as all costs of the Authority other than:
(1) amounts paid for the purchase of land;
(2) amounts paid for materials and services, including architectural and engineering services
directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the project;
(3) relocation benefits paid to, or services provided for, persons residing or businesses
located in the project;
(4) amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount
bonds issued pursuant to section 469.178; or
(5) amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used
to finance costs described in clause (1) to (3).
Administrative expenses include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants,
planning or economic development consultants, and actual costs incurred by the County in administering
the TIF District. Tax increments may be used to pay administrative expenses of the TIF District up to the
lesser of (a) 10% of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or (b) 10% of the total
tax increments received by the TIF District.
Section U Limitation on Property Not Subject to Improvements - Four Year Rule
If after four years from certification of the TIF District no demolition, rehabilitation, renovation of property
or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of an adjacent street, has commenced on a
parcel located within the TIF District, then that parcel shall be excluded from the TIF District and the
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 12
original net tax capacity shall be adjusted accordingly. Qualified improvements of a street are limited to
construction or opening of a new street, relocation of a street, or substantial reconstruction or rebuilding
of an existing street. The Authority must submit to the County Auditor, by February 1 of the fifth year,
evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the TIF District.
If a parcel is excluded from the TIF District and the Authority or owner of the parcel subsequently
commences any of the above activities, the Authority shall certify to the County Auditor that such activity
has commenced, and the parcel shall once again be included in the TIF District. The County Auditor shall
certify the net tax capacity of the parcel, as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue, and
add such amount to the original net tax capacity of the TIF District.
Section V Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
Exhibit IV shows the estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions if the maximum projected retained
captured net tax capacity of the TIF District was hypothetically available to the other taxing jurisdictions.
The Authority believes that there will be no adverse impact on other taxing jurisdictions during the life of
the TIF District, since the proposed development would not have occurred without the establishment of
the TIF District and the provision of public assistance. A positive impact on other taxing jurisdictions will
occur when the TIF District is decertified, and the development therein becomes part of the general tax
base.
The fiscal and economic implications of the proposed tax increment financing district, as pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 2, are listed below.
1. The total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the district is estimated to
be $3,457,300.
2. To the extent the facility in the proposed TIF District generates any public cost impacts on city-
provided services such as police and fire protection, public infrastructure, and borrowing costs
attributable to the district, such costs will be levied upon the taxable net tax capacity of the City,
excluding that portion captured by the District. The City does not anticipate issuing tax increment
revenue bonds in conjunction with this project but reserves the right to issue bonds as necessary
to facilitate development.
3. The amount of tax increments over the life of the district that would be attributable to school
district levies, assuming the school district’s share of the total local tax rate for all taxing
jurisdictions remained the same, is estimated to be $1,022,131.
4. The amount of tax increments over the life of the district that would be attributable to county
levies, assuming the county’s share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained
the same is estimated to be $973,811.
5. No additional information has been requested by the county or school district that would enable it
to determine additional costs that will accrue to it due to the development proposed for the
district.
Section W Prior Planned Improvements
The City shall accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor (or notice of district
enlargement), with a listing of all properties within the TIF District for which building permits have been
issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan. The County Auditor shall
increase the original net tax capacity of the TIF District by the net tax capacity of each improvement for
which a building permit was issued.
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 13
There have been no building permits issued in the last 18 months in conjunction with any of the properties
within the TIF District.
Section X Development Agreements
If within a project containing an economic development district, more than 10% of the acreage of the
property to be acquired by the Authority is purchased with tax increment bonds proceeds (to which tax
increment from the property is pledged), then prior to such acquisition, the Authority must enter into an
agreement for the development of the property. Such agreement must provide recourse for the Authority
should the development not be completed.
The Authority anticipates entering into an agreement with the Developer relating to the project.
Section Y Assessment Agreements
The Authority may, upon entering into a development agreement, also enter into an assessment
agreement with the developer, which establishes a minimum market value of the land and improvements
for each year during the life of the TIF District.
The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County or City Assessor who shall review the plans
and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned
to the land, and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears to
be an accurate estimate, shall certify the assessment agreement as reasonable. The assessment
agreement shall be filed for record in the office of the County Recorder of each county where the property
is located. Any modification or premature termination of this agreement must first be approved by the
City, County and School District.
The Authority does not anticipate entering into an assessment agreement.
Section Z Modifications of the Tax Increment Financing Plan
Any reduction or enlargement in the geographic area of the Project Area or the TIF District; increase in
the amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; determination to capitalize interest on the debt if it
was not part of original plan; increase in that portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the
Authority; increase in the total estimated public costs; or designation of additional property to be acquired
by the Authority shall be approved only after satisfying all the necessary requirements for approval of the
original TIF Plan. This paragraph does not apply if:
(1) the only modification is elimination of parcels from the TIF District; and
(2) the current net tax capacity of the parcels eliminated equals or exceeds the net tax
capacity of those parcels in the TIF District's original net tax capacity, or the Authority
agrees that the TIF District's original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the
current net tax capacity of the parcels eliminated.
The Authority must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic
area of the TIF District. The geographic area of the TIF District may be reduced but not enlarged after
five years following the date of certification.
City of Lino Lakes and Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority
Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors, LLC Page 14
Section AA Administration of the Tax Increment Financing Plan
Upon adoption of the TIF Plan, the Authority shall submit a copy of such plan to the Minnesota
Department of Revenue. The Authority shall also request that the County Auditor certify the original net
tax capacity and net tax capacity rate of the TIF District. To assist the County Auditor in this process, the
Authority shall submit copies of the TIF Plan, the resolution establishing the TIF District and adopting the
TIF Plan, and a listing of any prior planned improvements. The Authority shall also send the County
Assessor any assessment agreement establishing the minimum market value of land and improvements
in the TIF District and shall request that the County Assessor review and certify this assessment
agreement as reasonable.
The County shall distribute to the Authority the amount of tax increment as it becomes available. The
amount of tax increment in any year represents the applicable property taxes generated by the retained
captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. The amount of tax increment may change due to
development anticipated by the TIF Plan, other development, inflation of property values, or changes in
property classification rates or formulas. In administering and implementing the TIF Plan, the following
actions should occur on an annual basis:
(1) prior to July 1, the Authority shall notify the County Assessor of any new development
that has occurred in the TIF District during the past year to ensure that the new value will
be recorded in a timely manner.
(2) if the County Auditor receives the request for certification of a new TIF District, or for
modification of an existing TIF District, before July 1, the request shall be recognized in
determining local tax rates for the current and subsequent levy years. Requests received
on or after July 1 shall be used to determine local tax rates in subsequent years.
(3) each year the County Auditor shall certify the amount of the original net tax capacity of
the TIF District. The amount certified shall reflect any changes that occur as a result of
the following:
(a) the value of property that changes from tax-exempt to taxable shall be added to
the original net tax capacity of the TIF District. The reverse shall also apply;
(b) the original net tax capacity may be modified by any approved enlargement or
reduction of the TIF District;
(c) if laws governing the classification of real property cause changes to the
percentage of estimated market value to be applied for property tax purposes,
then the resulting increase or decrease in net tax capacity shall be applied
proportionately to the original net tax capacity and the retained captured net tax
capacity of the TIF District.
The County Auditor shall notify the Authority of all changes made to the original net tax capacity of the
TIF District.
Section AB Filing TIF Plan, Financial Reporting and Disclosure Requirements
The Authority will file the TIF Plan, and any subsequent amendments thereto, with the Commissioner of
Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, subdivision
4A. The Authority will comply with all reporting requirements for the TIF District under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.175, subdivisions 5 and 6.
Exhibit I
Map of
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14
Proposed Tax Increment District
Clearwater Creek Business Park
0 300 600
Feet
1,200 Ü
9/7/2022
Exhibit II
Assumptions Report
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14
Clearwater Creek Business Park Project
Draft TIF Plan Exhibits: 451,000 SF 3 Bldgs valued at $70/SF
Type of Tax Increment Financing District Economic Development
Maximum Duration of TIF District 8 years from 1st increment
Projected Certification Request Date 01/07/23
Decertification Date 12/31/33 (9 Years of Increment)
2022/2023
Base Estimated Market Value * $699,300
PID: 24-31-22-31-0004
24-31-22-24-0009
24-31-22-24-0008
24-31-22-24-0002
Original Net Tax Capacity $13,986
Assessment/Collection Year
2023/2024 2024/2025 2025/2026 2026/2027
Base Estimated Market Value $699,300 $699,300 $699,300 $699,300
Increase in Estimated Market Value 0 18,116,700 29,637,020 31,853,746
Total Estimated Market Value 699,300 18,816,000 30,336,320 32,553,046
Total Net Tax Capacity $13,986 $375,570 $605,976 $650,311
City of Lino Lakes 40.154%
Anoka County 29.605%
ISD # 12 31.074%
Other (61 - 36012B) 4.273%
Local Tax Capacity Rate 105.106% Payable 2022
Anticipated Frozen Tax Capacity Rate 105.106%
Fiscal Disparities Contribution From TIF District 42.1968%
Administrative Retainage Percent (maximum = 10%) 5.00%
Pooling Percent 0.00%
Present Value Date & Rate 08/01/23 4.00% Net Amount to Developer 2,900,000
Notes
* Base market values for parcels within district. Tax capacity calculated at 1.5%/2% class rate.
Assume property will be classified as commercial/industrial upon project completion.
Projections assume no future changes to class rates or tax rates,
and include 2% annual market value inflator.
Development includes construction commencing in 2023 and complete in 2024
Exhibit III Projected Tax Increment Report City of Lino Lakes, MinnesotaTax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14Clearwater Creek Business Park ProjectDraft TIF Plan Exhibits: 451,000 SF 3 Bldgs valued at $70/SFLess: Less: Retained Times: Less: Annual Less: Less:Annual Total Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax Annual State Aud. Revenue Admin. Pooling AnnualPeriod Market Net Tax Net Tax Disp. @ Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Deduction Net of Retainage Retainage NetEnding Value * Capacity Capacity ** 42.1968% Capacity Rate *** Increment 0.360% OSA Deduction 5.00% 0.00% Revenue(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)12/31/23 699,300 13,986 13,986 0 0 105.106% 0 0 0 0 0 012/31/24 699,300 13,986 13,986 0 0 105.106% 0 0 0 0 0 012/31/25 18,816,000 375,570 13,986 152,577 209,007 105.106% 219,679 791 218,888 10,944 0 207,94412/31/26 30,336,320 605,976 13,986 249,801 342,189 105.106% 359,662 1,295 358,367 17,918 0 340,44912/31/27 32,553,046 650,311 13,986 268,509 367,816 105.106% 386,597 1,392 385,205 19,260 0 365,94512/31/28 33,204,107 663,332 13,986 274,003 375,343 105.106% 394,508 1,420 393,088 19,654 0 373,43412/31/29 33,868,189 676,614 13,986 279,608 383,020 105.106% 402,577 1,449 401,128 20,056 0 381,07212/31/30 34,545,553 690,161 13,986 285,324 390,851 105.106% 410,808 1,479 409,329 20,466 0 388,86312/31/31 35,236,464 703,979 13,986 291,155 398,838 105.106% 419,203 1,509 417,694 20,885 0 396,80912/31/32 35,941,194 718,074 13,986 297,103 406,985 105.106% 427,766 1,540 426,226 21,311 0 404,91512/31/33 36,660,017 732,450 13,986 303,169 415,295 105.106% 436,500 1,571 434,929 21,746 0 413,183$3,457,300 $12,446 $3,444,854 $172,240 $0 $3,272,614* Total Taxable Value based on new estimated land and building value of $70/square foot for 451,000 square feet between all buildings** Original net tax capacity based on existing taxable land value of one property and calculated based on reclassification to commercial-industrial class rates*** Total Combined Local Tax Capacity Rate of City, County, School District and other taxing jurisdictions for taxes payable 2022
Exhibit IV Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ReportCity of Lino Lakes, MinnesotaTax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14Clearwater Creek Business Park ProjectDraft TIF Plan Exhibits: 451,000 SF 3 Bldgs valued at $70/SFWithoutProject or TIF District With Project and TIF DistrictProjected Hypothetical2021/2022 2021/2022 Retained New Hypothetical Hypothetical Tax GeneratedTaxable 2021/2022 Taxable Captured Taxable Adjusted Decrease In by RetainedTaxing Net Tax Local Net Tax Net Tax Net Tax Local Local CapturedJurisdiction Capacity (1) Tax Rate Capacity (1) + Capacity = Capacity Tax Rate (*) Tax Rate (*) N.T.C. (*)City of Lino Lakes 29,439,929 40.154% 29,439,929 $415,295 29,855,224 39.595% 0.559% 164,438Anoka County 482,873,486 29.605% 482,873,486 415,295 483,288,781 29.580% 0.025% 122,843ISD # 12 47,053,418 31.074% 47,053,418 415,295 47,468,713 30.802% 0.272% 127,920 Other (2) --- 4.273% --- 415,295 --- 4.273% --- --- Totals 105.106% 104.250% 0.856% * Statement 1: If the projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District was hypothetically available to each ofthe taxing jurisdictions above, the result would be a lower local tax rate (see Hypothetical Adjusted Tax Rate above)which would produce the same amount of taxes for each taxing jurisdiction. In such a case, the total local tax ratewould decrease by 0.856% (see Hypothetical Decrease in Local Tax Rate above). The hypothetical tax that theRetained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District would generate is also shown above.Statement 2: Since the projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District is not available to the taxing jurisdictions,then there is no impact on taxes levied or local tax rates. (1) Taxable net tax capacity = total net tax capacity - captured TIF - fiscal disparity contribution, if applicable. (2) The impact on these taxing jurisdictions is negligible since they represent only 4.07% of the total tax rate.
Exhibit V
Market Value Analysis Report
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 1-14
Clearwater Creek Business Park Project
Draft TIF Plan Exhibits: 451,000 SF 3 Bldgs valued at $70/SF
Assumptions
Present Value Date 08/01/23
P.V. Rate - Gross T.I. 4.00%
Increase in EMV With TIF District $35,960,717
Less: P.V of Gross Tax Increment 2,692,001
Subtotal $33,268,716
Less: Increase in EMV Without TIF 0
Difference $33,268,716
Annual Present
Gross Tax Value @
Year Increment 4.00%
1 2025 219,679 201,782
2 2026 359,663 317,656
3 2027 386,598 328,312
4 2028 394,509 322,145
5 2029 402,578 316,090
6 2030 410,809 310,147
7 2031 419,204 304,313
8 2032 427,767 298,585
9 2033 436,501 292,963
$3,457,326 $2,692,001
1
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6C
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: 601 Apollo Drive Retail
i. Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 04-22,
Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
ii. Consider Resolution No. 22-115 Approving Marketplace
PDO Amendment #3 for Site & Building Plans
iii. Consider Resolution No. 22-116 Approving Site
Improvement Performance Agreement
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting consideration of the above noted ordinance and resolutions.
Complete Application Date: August 16, 2022
60-Day Review Deadline: October 15, 2022
Environmental Board Meeting: August 31, 2022
Park Board Meeting: N/A
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: September 14, 2022
City Council Work Session: October 3, 2022
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2022
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Java Lino Retail, LLC, submitted a Land Use Application for two (2) separate
commercial buildings (a 4,200 sf dental clinic and a 2,240 sf coffee shop) and a drive thru
ATM on one (1) lot located at 601 Apollo Drive. Per the Marketplace Planned Development
Overlay (PDO) Design Guidelines Ordinance No. 03-05 and site plan, this lot is to be
developed as a bank. An amendment to the ordinance is required to change the site use from a
bank to the proposed uses.
This staff report is based on the followings plan sets:
• ALTA Survey prepared by Design Tree dated April 18, 2022
• Site and Civil Plans prepared by Design Tree revision date September 21, 2022
2
• Final Stormwater Management Study prepared by Design Tree dated July 29, 2022
• Architectural Plans prepared by Lampert Architects revised September 28, 2022
• Landscape Plans prepared by Plan-Type revision date September 29, 2022
• Photometric Plan prepared by Viking Electric dated July 28, 2022
• Applicant Narrative prepared by Java Companies dated July 29, 2022
This Council staff report provides edits to the September 14, 2022 Planning & Zoning staff
report. Changes are either narratively described or shown as strikethrough (deletions) or
underline (additions).
ANALYSIS
History
Lino Lakes Marketplace is a master planned shopping/retail center approved in 2001. The
development includes Target and Kohl’s, the four (4) Apollo Drive retail buildings, Subway
and those commercial buildings and lots along Lake Drive. Ordinance No. 16-01 and amended
by Ordinance No. 03-05 regulates site plan and design guidelines for the development. The
design guidelines detail requirements for building composition, materials, lighting, signage,
landscaping and building elevations. Per the Marketplace Site Plan, the subject site is shown as
a future 4,500 sf bank.
Per the Marketplace Planned Development Overlay (PDO) Design Guidelines Ordinance No.
03-05, substantial departures from the approved plans require an amendment to the ordinance.
The following is a summary of Marketplace PDO amendments:
• Ordinance No. 16-01: Original PDO establishing Marketplace Design Guidelines
• Ordinance No. 03-05: PDO Amendment #1-Site Plan & Retail Architectural Standards
• Ordinance No. 03-20: PDO Amendment #2-Amend Building Plans for Retail B
Building (617 Apollo Drive)
• Ordinance No. 04-22: PDO Amendment #3-Amend Site Plan for 601 Apollo Drive
Zoning and Land Use
The subject site is zoned GB, General Business with a PDO, Planned Development Overlay as
established by Ordinance No. 16-01 and amended by Ordinance No. 03-05. The proposed
dental clinic, coffee shop, and drive-thru ATM are permitted commercial uses.
Current Zoning GB, General Business w/ PDO
Existing Land Use Vacant Commercial
Future Land Use per CP Commercial
Utility Staging Area 1A=2018-2025
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
3
Direction Zoning Existing Land Use Future Land Use
North GB-General
Business Commercial Commercial
East GB-General
Business Commercial Commercial
South GB-General
Business Commercial Commercial
West GB-General
Business Commercial Commercial
Subdivision Ordinance
The lot is an existing platted lot and is not being further subdivided.
Streets and Alleys
CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) is an A-Minor Reliever road and Apollo Drive and Market Place Drive
are local roads. One access to the site is off of the private street (also referred to as Market
Place Drive) and aligns with the private street between 609 Apollo Drive (Subway) and 617
Apollo Drive (Eagle Liquors & MC Tap).
Easements
A 10ft wide drainage and utility easement was dedicated on the Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd
Addition plat along the south and west lot lines. A 14ft wide drainage and utility easement was
also dedicated over the east lot line. The east lot line extends to the center of the private street.
Public Land Dedication
Park dedication fees were paid with the original Lino Lakes Market Place plat. No additional
public land dedication or fees are required.
Site and Building Plan Review
The Lino Lakes Marketplace PDO Design Guidelines are the regulating zoning and
performance standards for the subject site.
Existing ALTA Survey
The 1.32 acre site is legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd Addition.
The site has been graded and is pad ready. A private street provides access to the lot. There is a
15ft wide pedestrian and bicycle trail easement along CSAH 23/Lake Drive. The monument
sign for Target and Kohls is located in the southwest corner of the site. Sidewalk exists along
the south and east lot lines.
4
Several private Declarations and Operation and Easement Agreements encumber the property.
A Third Amendment to the Operation and Easement Agreement between Target, Prior Lake,
and Kohl’s has been drafted by the applicant and shall be recorded. The Amendment changes
the site plan to allow for the proposed retail buildings (dentist, coffee shop and ATM).
Site Plan
Per applicant’s narrative, “The Lino Retail project will consist of a 4,200 square foot dental
clinic, 2,240 square foot coffee shop and a drive thru ATM.” The two (2) buildings and drive
thru ATM are proposed on the one (1) lot. The parking lot is located north and east of the
buildings. A drive thru lane extends around the buildings and adjacent to CSAH 23 (Lake
Drive). The PDO, Planned Development Overlay zoning provides flexibility to allow for
multiple buildings on one (1) lot. The two (2) buildings have 10ft of separation. A small
outdoor dining/patio area is proposed to the east of the coffee shop.
Staff Comments:
1. All plan sheets shall be signed by licensed professional.
2. All one-way drive aisles and drive thru lanes shall be a minimum 12ft wide.
3. All two-way drive aisles and drive thru lanes shall be a minimum 24ft wide.
4. A sidewalk shall be stubbed from the east lot line to the parking lot.
5. The line shown between the buildings shall be removed to avoid confusion that it
appears to be a lot line.
6. The trash enclosure shall be located to the northeast corner of the site to be consistent
with 625 Apollo Drive (Dairy Queen) and 633 Apollo Drive (Discount Tire).
7. The building setback line along Apollo Drive shall be changed to 30ft.
8. An administrative permit is required for any accessory outdoor dining.
Overall, the proposed site plan meets the Marketplace Design Guidelines and performance
standard requirements unless otherwise noted.
Lot Size and Setbacks
MP Design
Guideline
Requirements
601 Apollo
Retail
Setbacks-Street Required Proposed
Principal Building-CSAH 23 (arterial) 40 ft 46 ft
Parking Lot 15 ft 15ft
Principal Building-Apollo Dr (local) 30 ft 65 ft
Parking Lot 15 ft 15 ft
Principal Building-Private Streeta 30 ft 100 ft
5
Parking Lota 15 ft 25 ft
Setbacks-North Lot Line Required Proposed
Principal Building 10 ft 160-200 ft
Accessory Building (attached trash enclosure) 5 ft TBD ft
Parking Lot/Driveway 10 ft 60 -210 ft
aSetbacks are measured from the lot line which is the centerline of the private street. This is consistent with the
Marketplace Design Guidelines.
Setback requirements are met.
Architectural Plans and Exterior Building Materials
Exterior materials and colors consist of matte black prefinished metal flashing, storm grey
EIFS, morning mist EIFS, glen-gery light grey brick accents, dark shadow and oak block and
awnings. Green awnings on the coffee shop provide brand identity. The color palette combines
the tan /beige colors of the existing Marketplace retail buildings with more modern grey and
dark colors, similar to 609 Apollo Drive (Subway).
City ordinance allows for stucco or EIFS on no more than 30% of the primary front building
elevation and no more than 60% of any side or rear building elevation. The Marketplace
Design Guidelines also allows for EIFS but does not specify %. The primary front elevations
face east and have 29.4% & 17.6& stucco. The rear west elevations face north towards Lake
Drive and both have 19.3% stucco. The south elevations have 21.1% and 35.4% stucco and the
north elevations have 24.8% and 35.4% stucco. The buildings have a 2ft high oak colored
block base. The two (2) different grey color EFIS bands create the building tops. The materials
and percentages are compliant with City zoning ordinance performance standards and the
Marketplace Design Guidelines.
The building height is 19’ 4” which is less than the maximum 45’ allowed.
The trash enclosure is 6’8” in height and has 8” rockface concrete block and color to match
building. The gate is constructed of vertical composite wood siding and swing gate with
minimum 80% opacity. The trash enclosure meet performance standards.
The mechanical equipment is located inside the buildings.
The building will be sprinkled for fire suppression.
Staff Comments
1. The buildings shall include a more defined cornice similar to Discount Tire or Dairy
Queen.
6
a. The Planning & Zoning Board did not recommend a more defined cornice.
Outdoor Lighting
Per Section 1007.043(6)(d), no light source shall exceed 1.0 foot candle onto right of way or
0.4 foot candle onto adjacent property. Page M, Photometric Site Plan shows all foot candle
measurements meet requirements.
Light fixtures on both the building and 20’ high light poles are down lit and cutoff as required
by city code.
Off-Street Parking Requirements
Per City Code Section 1007.044(6):
(l) Office Buildings, Veterinary Hospitals, Professional Offices and Medical Clinics.
Three (3) spaces plus at least one (1) space for each two hundred (200) square feet of floor area.
For the 4,200sf dentist office with 3,780sf floor area:
Three (3) spaces + (3,780/200) = 22 spaces required.
(r) Restaurants, Cafes, Private Clubs Serving Food and/or Drinks, Bars, On-Sale
Nightclubs. Ten (10) spaces for each one thousand (1,000) square feet of dining room, plus one
(1) space for each employee of the maximum work shift.
For the 2,240sf coffee shop with 1,120sf of dining room and 6 employees:
(10 spaces x (1,120/1,000)) + 6 = 17 spaces required.
A total of 39 spaces are required. The site has 41 spaces plus 2 ADA spaces for a total of 43
spaces. Parking requirements are met for both the dentist office and coffee shop.
Accessory Uses: Drive Through Service Facilities
Per City Code Section 1007.112(7):
(b) Drive-through service facilities:
1. Not less than one hundred twenty (120) feet of segregated automobile
stacking must be provided for the single service lane. Where multiple service
lanes are provided, the minimum automobile stacking may be reduced to sixty
(60) feet per lane.
Over 300ft of automobile stacking space is provided.
7
2. The stacking lane and its access must be designed to control traffic in a
manner to protect the buildings and will not interfere with on-site traffic
circulation or access to the required parking space.
The stacking lanes and access are designed to control traffic.
3. No part of the public street or boulevard may be used for stacking of
automobiles.
No part of the public street is used for stacking.
4. The stacking lane, order board intercom, and window placement shall be
designed and located in such a manner as to minimize glare to adjacent premises,
particularly residential premises, and to maximize maneuverability of vehicles on
the site.
Glare is minimized and there are no adjacent residential premises.
5. The drive-through window and its stacking lanes shall be screened from
view of adjoining residential zoning districts and public street rights-of-way.
There are no adjoining residential zoning districts and the stacking lanes are screened from street
right-of-way.
6. A lighting and photometric plan will be required that illustrates the drive-
through service lane lighting and shall comply with §1007.043 (6) of this
Ordinance.
A lighting and photometric plan have been submitted and they meet zoning ordinance
requirements.
Grading Plan and Stormwater Management
Per the Final Stormwater Management Study prepared by Design Tree dated July 29, 2022, the
existing site is currently undeveloped with no existing structures or infrastructure. Runoff from
the site flows east and discharges into the existing storm sewer located in Market Place Drive
right-of-way. The site consists mostly of soils classified as Hydrologic Soil Group “A” which
are considered to have high infiltration rates when thoroughly wet. A series of porous pavement
and storm sewer pipe BMP’s have been proposed that meet the City’s and the RCWD’s rules
and regulations for water quality volume and rate control.
Public Utilities
The buildings will be municipally served by an 8” sanitary sewer main and an 8” watermain
located along Market Place Drive.
Tree Preservation and Mitigation Standards
8
Per the August 31, 2022 Environmental Board staff report:
A Master Landscape Plan for the retail area bounded by Lake Drive to the west, 77th Street to
the north, and Apollo Drive to the south was approved with conditions in August of 2001. A
revision submitted in October of 2001 incorporated the required changes and became the
approved final landscape plan for the area.
The landscape plan submitted for the 601 Apollo Drive Retail project should thus be measured
against the approved Master Landscape Plan from 2001, rather than strictly adhering to current
ordinance.
The submitted landscape plan is an improvement upon the Master Landscape Plan in several
respects.
• The 2001 plan called for 34 large tree equivalents and 29 large shrub equivalents. The
current submittal calls for 47 large tree equivalents and 110 large shrub equivalents.
• The ash trees (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) called for on the south perimeter have been
replaced with lindens (Tilia Americana) and sycamores (Plantanus x acerifolia ‘Morton
Circle’).
• The current plan calls for additional trees on the borders shared with Lake Drive, the
property to the north, and Apollo Drive. This provides buffer and screening, which will
improve the aesthetics of this corner lot.
• There are more trees in the parking lot islands to provide additional canopy cover and
shading of the vehicular hardscape area.
• Numerous shrubs have been added in the foundation landscape area.
• Diversity of plant species has increased significantly as compared to the 2001 landscape
plan.
Landscape requirements have been met.
Sod and Ground Cover Standards
All areas not otherwise improved in accordance with the approved site plans shall have a
minimum depth of 4 inches of topsoil and be sodded including boulevard areas. Seed may be
provided in lieu of sod in certain cases, including when the area is adjacent to natural areas or
wetlands.
Mn DOT seed mix 25-151 will be used for temporary stabilization. Permanent stabilization
will be sod.
Signage
A separate sign permit application shall be submitted to the City and approved prior to signage
installation. Signage shall be compliant with the Marketplace Design Guidelines.
Impervious Surface Coverage
9
The allowed impervious surface coverage in the GB, General Business District is 75%. The
proposed impervious surface coverage 66.8% and is compliant.
Traffic Study
A traffic study is not required. CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) is an A-Minor Reliever and has capacity
for the retail traffic. The site is part of a master planned development.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
An environmental assessment is not required for the retail development.
Wetlands
There are no wetlands on site.
Shoreland Management Overlay District
The site is not within the shoreland district.
Floodplain
There is no FEMA floodplain on site.
Additional City and Government Agency Review Comments
Anoka County Highway Department
Anoka County Highway Department received the plans and did not have any comments.
Public Safety Comments
The Fire Division is requesting a hydrant in front of the business with the drive through. They
are also requesting the FDC be located on this side of the business as well.
The Police Division had no issues that needed to be addressed.
Environmental Board
The Environmental Board recommended approval of the development proposal at their August
31, 2022 meeting.
Planning & Zoning Board
The Planning & Zoning Board held a public hearing on September 14, 2022. There were no
public comments. The Board recommend approval with a 5-0 vote with the following
revisions:
10
1. The buildings do not need a more defined cornice.
2. Any future changes in use on this lot (Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd
Addition) shall be consistent with the permitted uses, accessory uses, and conditional
uses listed in the City’s GB, General Business zoning district.
Agreements
Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
The stormwater facilities on the site will be privately maintained and a Declaration for
Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities will be required.
Development Agreement and Final Plat
The lot is not being subdivided; therefore, a development agreement is not required.
Site Improvement Performance Agreement
A Site Improvement Performance Agreement will be prepared by the City and shall be
executed.
Comprehensive Plan
Resource Management System
The Resource Management System Plan goal of preserving surface water quality is supported
by the construction of stormwater management BMP’s such as curb, gutter, and porous
pavement.
Land Use Plan
The Comprehensive Plan guides this property for commercial use. The proposed retail
development is consistent with commercial land use.
Housing Plan
The goals and policies of Housing Plan are not negatively impacted by the retail development.
Transportation Plan
Goals of the Transportation Plan are to ensure that streets are as safe as possible and to reduce
unnecessary traffic. CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) is an A-Minor Reliever road and has structural
capacity to handle the traffic volume of the retail development.
Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Plan
The building will be municipally served by an 8” sanitary sewer main and an 8” watermain
located along Market Place Drive.
11
The existing sanitary sewer and water supply system have capacity for the retail development.
Finding of Fact
Ordinance No. 04-22 and Resolution No. 22-115 detail the finding of fact.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and Boards recommend approval of the Marketplace PDO Amendment #3 and site plan &
building plan review for 601 Apollo Drive Retail
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Location and Aerial Map
2. Civil Site Plan
3. Architectural Plan Set & Exterior Materials
4. Ordinance No. 04-22
5. Resolution No. 22-115
6. Resolution No. 22-116
7. Site Improvement Performance Agreement
0 100 20050
Feet
609609
717717
76417641
625625
601601
709709
76217621
701701
APOLLO DRAPOLLO DR
AAPPOOLLLLOODDRR
Site Location & Aerial Map601 Apollo Dr Retail µCSAH 23 (Lake Drive)Market Place Drive
THIS DRAWING AND THE INFORMATION THEREIN IS
THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC.
USE BY THE HOLDER OR DISCLOSURE TO OTHERS
WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE
ENGINEERING INC. IS PROHIBITED. IT CONTAINS
PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF
DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC. REPRODUCTION OF
THE MATERIAL HEREIN WITHOUT WRITTEN
ERMISSION OF DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING INC.
VIOLATES THE COPYRIGHT LAWS OF THE UNITED
STATES AND WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATORS TO
LEGAL PROSECUTION.
COPYRIGHT @ 2022 BY DESIGN TREE ENGINEERING
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION,
OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY
DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY
LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
DRAWING NO.
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
PROJECT NO.:
NO.DATE DESCRIPTION
DATE:LICENSE #:
PRINTED NAME:JEREMY E. ANDERSON
44223
10921005
APOLLO DRIVE
RETAIL
601 APOLLO DR.
LINO LAKES, MN 55014
07/29/22
RJK
JEA
PARKING INFORMATION
PARKING STALLS 41 STALLS
ACCESSIBLE STALLS 2 STALLS
TOTAL STALLS 43 STALLS
PROPERTY INFORMATION
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA 1.324 AC
DISTURBED AREA 1.2 ±AC
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.121 AC
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.934 AC
NET INCREASE IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.813 AC
PROPOSED SITE LEGEND
LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
POROUS BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
CURB AND GUTTER
TIPPED CURB AND GUTTER
PAINTED DIRECTIONAL ARROW
PAINTED ACCESSIBLE PARKING SYMBOL
0'20'40'
NOTES:
1.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FLOW LINE, CENTERLINE OF FENCE,
EDGE OF PAVEMENT, OR EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING, UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
2.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS PRIOR
TO CONSTRUCTION.
3.ALL INTERIOR PARKING STALL STRIPING SHALL BE 4" AND YELLOW IN
COLOR.
4.ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL STRIPING, ACCESS AISLE, AND SYMBOL
SHALL BE PAINTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL AUTHORITY
REQUIREMENTS.
5.ALL CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE B612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
6.CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN FULL ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES
DURING CONSTRUCTION AND TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO
AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
7.ALL SITE WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
8.GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DAMAGE PREVENTION SYSTEM FOR BURIED
UTILITIES. 1-800-252-1166.
1
2
B612 CURB AND GUTTER
ADA PEDESTRIAN RAMP (SEE DETAILS)
PARKING STRIPING
TRASH ENCLOSURE
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
ATM (SEE ARCHITECTURAL)
SITE FURNITURE (SEE ARCHITECTURAL)
REPLACE CONCRETE SIDEWALK, CURB,
AND BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AS
NEEDED FOR UTILITY CONNECTIONS
7" STEP AT STOOP EDGE
8' WIDE CURB CUT
SPLASH BLOCK FOR ROOF DRAINS
3
4
5
KEY NOTES:
SITE PLAN
C201LAKE DRIVEMARKET PLACE DRIVEAPO
L
L
O
D
R
I
V
E40'-0" BUILDING SETBACK30'-0" BUILDING SETBACK10'-
0
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
&
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
15'-0" PARKING SETBACK15'-0
"
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
E
T
B
A
C
K 15'-0" PARKING SETBACKPR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A4,2
0
0
S
F
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
B2,2
4
0
S
F
R15.50
R29.50
R10.
0
0
R15.50R5.50
R5
.
5
8 R5.50
R5.50
R5.50R18.50R41.50R5.50
R10.50
R18.5
0
R3.
5
0
R5.50
R24.5
0
R5.50 R5
.
5
0 23.0023.
0
0
11.
5
0
11.
5
0
7.0011.0011.0015.
6
7
15.
6
7 10.6710.6710.004.6718.
0
0
(TY
P
)9.00(TYP)9.0018.
0
0
(TY
P
)9.00(TYP)25.0018.00(TYP)18.00(TYP)9.0
0
(TY
P
)
9.0
0
(TY
P
)23.006.3318.
0
0
4.3325.508.8
7
6.0
8
24.
0
0
1911
6
7
46.
1
7
46.
1
7
7.5
0
3.8
3
9.009.007.5
0
26.
5
0
1
1
1
3
3
4
5
5 22.886
7
6
7
2
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
11
11
11
11
1
1st Reading: Publication:
2nd Reading: Effective:
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ORDINANCE NO. 04-22
MARKETPLACE PDO AMENDMENT #3 FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLANS
FOR 601 APOLLO DRIVE RETAIL
The City Council of Lino Lakes ordains:
Section 1: Finding of Fact
1. The City received a Land Use Application to amend the Marketplace Planned
Development (PDO) Design Guidelines Ordinance No. 03-05.
2. Ordinance No. 03-05 regulates site plan and design guidelines for the Marketplace
development and states under Special Provisions #4 that substantial departures from the
approved plans will require an amendment to the Planned Development Overlay (PDO).
3. Per the Marketplace PDO Site Plan, the subject site is a future bank.
4. The applicant is proposing to construct a dental clinic, coffee shop, and ATM
drive-thru that will require modifications to the site plan and building elevations.
5. The Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on September 14, 2022 and
recommended approval the PDO Amendment #3 and the site and building plans.
6. Per City Zoning Ordinance Section 1007.015(5), the Planning and Zoning Board
shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed ordinance amendment. Its
judgement shall be based upon, but not limited to, the following factors:
(a) The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies
and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive
Plan.
The proposed retail development is consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan.
(b) The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of
the area.
The proposed retail development is compatible with present and future land uses.
(c) The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein.
The proposed retail development conforms with all performance standards with revisions
2
as noted in this resolution.
(d) The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will
not overburden the City’s service capacity.
The proposed retail development can be accommodated with the existing public services
and will not overburden the City’s service capacity. The development will be municipally
served by an 8” sanitary sewer main and an 8” watermain located along Market Place
Drive.
(e) Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving
the property.
Traffic generated by the proposed retail development is within capabilities of the streets
serving the property. Goals of the Transportation Plan are to ensure that streets are as safe
as possible and to reduce unnecessary traffic. CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) is an A-Minor
Reliever road and has structural capacity to handle the traffic volume of the retail
development.
Section 2: Amendment
Ordinance No. 03-05 of the City of Lino Lakes is hereby amended to include the
following plans subject to the revisions detailed in Resolution No. 22-115:
• Site and Civil Plans prepared by Design Tree revision date September 21, 2022
• Architectural Plans prepared by Lampert Architects revised September 28, 2022
• Landscape Plans prepared by Plan-Type revision date September 29, 2022
• Photometric Plan prepared by Viking Electric dated July 28, 2022
Section 3: Legal Description
The subject site is legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd
Addition.
Section 4: Development Regulations
Development of the subject site shall be in substantial conformance with the plans
noted under Section 2 above.
Section 5: Zoning Regulations
Any future changes in use on this lot (Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd
Addition) shall be consistent with the permitted uses, accessory uses, and conditional uses
listed in the City’s GB, General Business zoning district.
Section 6: Effect
3
This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication
according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. The other provisions of Ordinance No. 03-05
are still in effect.
Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 24th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was introduced by Council
Member and was duly seconded by Council Member and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
1
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-115
APPROVING MARKETPLACE PDO AMENDMENT #3 FOR SITE AND
BUILDING PLANS FOR 601 APOLLO DRIVE RETAIL
WHEREAS, the City received a Land Use Application to amend the Marketplace
Planned Development (PDO) Design Guidelines Ordinance No. 03-05; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 03-05 regulates site plan and design guidelines for the
Marketplace development and states under Special Provisions #4 that substantial
departures from the approved plans will require an amendment to the Planned
Development Overlay (PDO); and
WHEREAS, per the Marketplace PDO Site Plan, the subject site is a future bank; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing construct a dental clinic, coffee shop, and ATM
drive-thru that will require modifications to the site plan and building elevations; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market
Place 2nd Addition; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Board held a public hearing on September 14, 2022
and recommended approval of the PDO Amendment #3 and the site and building plans.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by The City Council of The City of Lino
Lakes hereby makes the following findings:
FINDINGS OF FACT
(a) The proposed development application must be consistent with the policies and
recommendations of the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan including:
1. Land Use Plan.
2. Transportation Plan.
3. Utility (Sewer and Water) Plans.
4. Local Water Management Plan.
5. Capital Improvement Plan.
6. Policy Plan
7. Natural Environment Plan.
2
The proposed retail development is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan in
regards to the land use plan, transportation plan, utility plans, local water management
plan, capital improvement plan, policy plan and natural environment plan.
(b) The proposed development application is compatible with present and future land
uses of the area.
The proposed retail development is compatible with present and future land uses.
(c) The proposed development application conforms to performance standards herein
and other applicable City Codes.
The proposed retail development conforms with all performance standards with minor
revisions required as detailed in this resolution.
(d) Traffic generated by a proposed development application is within the capabilities of
the City when:
1. If the existing level of service (LOS) outside of the proposed subdivision is A or
B, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of
service more than one grade.
2. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is C, traffic generated
by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below C.
3. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is D, traffic generated
by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below D.
4. The existing LOS must be D or better for all streets and intersections providing
access to the subdivision. If the existing level of service is E or F, the
subdivision developer must provide, as part of the proposed project,
improvements needed to ensure a level of service D or better.
5. Existing roads and intersections providing access to the subdivision must have
the structural capacity to accommodate projected traffic from the proposed
subdivision or the developer will pay to correct any structural deficiencies.
6. The traffic generated from a proposed subdivision shall not require City street
improvements that are inconsistent with the Lino Lakes Capital Improvement
Plan. However, the City may, at its discretion, consider developer-financed
improvements to correct any street deficiencies.
7. The LOS requirements in paragraphs 1. to 4. above do not apply to the I-
35W/Lake Drive or I-35E/Main St. interchanges. At City discretion,
interchange impacts must be evaluated in conjunction with Anoka County and
the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, and a plan must be prepared to
3
determine improvements needed to resolve deficiencies. This plan must
determine traffic generated by the subdivision project, how this traffic
contributes to the total traffic, and the time frame of the improvements. The
plan also must examine financing options, including project contribution and
cost sharing among other jurisdictions and other properties that contribute to
traffic at the interchange.
8. The City does not relinquish any rights of local determination.
The traffic generated by the proposed retail development are within the capabilities of
the streets serving the property and meet LOS requirements. The City will not relinquish
any rights of local determination.
(e) The proposed development shall be served with adequate and safe water supply.
The proposed development will be served with adequate and safe water supply.
(f) The proposed development shall be served with an adequate or safe sanitary sewer
system.
The proposed development will be served with adequate and safe sanitary sewer.
(g) The proposed development shall not result in the premature expenditures of City
funds on capital improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed
development.
No City funds are being expended for this development.
(h) Development shall be permitted only in such a manner that the maximum number of
trees shall be preserved. It shall be the duty of the person seeking approval to
demonstrate that there are no feasible or prudent alternatives to the cutting of trees
on the site.
The proposed retail development does not propose any tree removal. There are no trees
on site.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes hereby
approves the site and building plan for 601 Apollo Drive Retail subject to the following
conditions:
1. The subject site shall be developed in accordance with the following plans
including subsequent revisions:
a. Site and Civil Plans prepared by Design Tree revision date September 21,
2022
b. Architectural Plans prepared by Lampert Architects revised September 28,
2022
c. Landscape Plans prepared by Plan-Type revision date September 29, 2022
4
d. Photometric Plan prepared by Viking Electric dated July 28, 2022
2. A Third Amendment to the Operation and Easement Agreement between Target,
Prior Lake, and Kohl’s shall be recorded.
3. A Site Improvement Performance Agreement is required.
4. A Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities in favor of RCWD and
the City shall be recorded.
5. A separate sign permit application shall be submitted and approved by the City
prior to signage installation. Signage shall be compliant with the Marketplace
Design Guidelines.
6. An administrative permit is required for any accessory outdoor dining.
7. Any future changes in use on this lot (Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place
2nd Addition) shall be consistent with the permitted uses, accessory uses, and
conditional uses listed in the City’s GB, General Business zoning district.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes hereby
approves PDO Amendment #3 and the site and building plans for 601 Apollo Drive
Retail subject to the following comments being addressed prior to issuance of a building
permit:
1. Recorded copies of the following documents shall be provided to the City:
a. Third Amendment to the Operation and Easement Agreement
b. Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities
2. A Site Improvement Performance Agreement shall be executed and securities in
place.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council
Member_______________ and was duly seconded by Council Member
________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
The following voted against same:
______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-116
RESOLUTION APPROVING SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT
WITH JAVA LINO RETAIL, LLC
WHEREAS, the City has completed review of the site and building plans for 601 Apollo Drive
Retail; and
WHEREAS, the legal description of the property is Lot 2, Block 1, Market Place 2nd Addition
after recording of the final plat; and
WHEREAS, City Code Section 1007.020(5)(d) requires the execution of a site performance
agreement prior to issuance of a building permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes that
the Site Improvement Performance Agreement between the City of Lino Lakes and Java Lino
Retail, LLC is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to execute such
agreements on behalf of the City.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council
Member_______________ and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
_______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 1 of 11
CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this _______ day of _______________, 2022, is by
and between the City of Lino Lakes, a municipal corporation organized under the laws
of the State of Minnesota, and Java Companies (879 Scheffer Ave, St. Paul, 55102)
(“Developer”).
WHEREAS, the Developer has received approval of Site Development Plans,
hereinafter called the "Plans", by the City of Lino Lakes on the ___ day of ____, 2022,
and in accordance with the Plans all of which are made a part hereof by reference. In
consideration of such approval, the Developer, its successors and assigns, does covenant
and agree to perform the work as set forth in the Plans, in the aforesaid approval, and as
hereinafter set forth upon the real estate (hereinafter referred to as "Property") described
as follows:
Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises of the parties made herein,
IT IS AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO:
I. DESIGNATION OF IMPROVEMENTS.
A. Improvements on the project site to be installed at the Developer’s
expense by the Developer as hereinafter provided are hereinafter referred
to as “On-site Work”.
B. Improvements off the project site to be installed at the Developer’s
expense, if any, by the Developer as hereinafter provided are hereinafter
referred to as “Off-Site Work”.
C. Developer shall enter into a Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater
Facilities.
II. ON-SITE WORK.
A. On-Site Work. The On-Site Work shall consist of the improvements
described in the approved Plans, to include any approved subsequent
amendments, and shall be in compliance with all applicable statutes, codes
and ordinances of the City. The On-Site Work includes all on-site exterior
amenities as shown on the approved Plans and as required by the plan
approval, such as, but not limited to: landscaping, private driveways,
parking areas, sanitary sewer extension, water system extension, storm
drainage systems, curbing, lighting, fencing, fire lanes, sidewalks, exterior
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 2 of 11
building architectural design and building elements, site grading and
erosion control measures.
Such improvements shall be completed in accordance with Section IV
herein.
B. Cost Estimates. The Developer shall provide the City with a written
estimate of all applicable costs of the On-Site Work, itemized by type; the
estimates shall be based upon the actual estimates provided by the
contractors who are to do the Work. Said cost estimates shall be reviewed
by the City, and the City shall establish the actual amount of the financial
guarantee. The description and estimated cost of Developer's On-Site
Work are as follows:
Description of Improvements Estimated Costs
1. Lighting $ 8,000.00
2. Fences / Screen Structures $ 0.00
3. Trash Disposal Structures $ 10,000.00
4. Curbing / Islands / Delineators $ 20,000.00
5. Storm Drainage Systems / Sewers / Catch Basins /
Culverts / Swales $ 25,000.00
6. Public Trails and / or Sidewalk $ 0.00
7. Private Trials and / or Sidewalk $ 8,000.00
8. Driveway / Curb cut / Parking Lot / Fire Lane $ 50,000.00
9. Water mains / Hydrants / Sanitary Sewers $ 30,000.00
10. Landscaping $ 20,000.00
11. Site Grading $ 30,000.00
12. Erosion Control $ 5,000.00
Total Estimated Cost of Developer Improvements $ 206,000.00
Security Requirement (Total * 35%) $ 72,100.00
III. DEVELOPER FEES.
A. Trunk Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees
The City established trunk utility connection fees to uniformly distribute
the costs of public trunk sanitary sewer infrastructure. The Trunk Utility
Connection Fee consists of two components; a Trunk Charge and an
Availability Charge.
Trunk Charge
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 3 of 11
The trunk charge shall be paid at the time of subdivision approval or at the
time of hook-up, whichever is first. The Sanitary Sewer Trunk Charge is
$1,630.00 per unit. Commercial/Industrial/Institutional (CII) trunk charges
are based on a factor of 2.92 units per acre.
Availability Charge
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional availability charges shall be paid at the
time of building permit. Fees are based on the number of sanitary access
charge (SAC) units assigned by Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES).
City Sewer (CSAC) $1,525.00 Per SAC Unit
Trunk sewer unit charges addressed under this paragraph are in addition to
any SAC charges imposed by Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services.
B. Trunk Water Connection Fees
The City established trunk utility connection fees to uniformly distribute
the costs of public trunk water infrastructure. The Trunk Utility
Connection Fee consists of two components; a Trunk Charge and an
Availability Charge.
Trunk Charge
The trunk charge shall be paid at the time of subdivision approval or at the
time of hook-up, whichever is first. The Water Trunk Charge is $2,341.00
per unit. Commercial/Industrial/Institutional (CII) trunk charges are based
on a factor of 2.92 units per acre.
Availability Charge
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional availability charges shall be paid at the
time of building permit. Fees are based on the number of sanitary access
charge (SAC) units assigned by Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES).
City Water (CWAC) $1,473.00 Per SAC Unit.
C. Surface Water Management Area Charges
The City established a trunk area charge to uniformly distribute the costs
of public trunk surface water infrastructure and water quality
improvements. The Surface Water Management Charge shall be based on
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 4 of 11
developable acreage.
Units Fee
1. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Unit Fee ($1,630/unit; 2.92 units/Acre) 3.85 $0.00*
2. City Sewer Availability Fee ($1,525/SAC Unit) TBD**
3. Water Trunk Unit Fee ($2,341/unit; 2.92 units/Acre) 3.85 $0.00*
4. City Water Availability Fee ($1,473/SAC Unit) TBD**
5. City Surface Water Management Fee ($11,073/Acre) 1.32
Acres $14,616.00
Total Estimated (Budget) Developer Fees $14,616.00
* Previously collected
**Paid at the time of Building Permit based on MCES unit determination
D. Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) Sewer Availability
Charges (SAC) are in addition to the fees referenced above and shall be
determined by MCES, and shall be paid with the Building Permit.
IV. RECORD DRAWINGS.
a. Upon project completion, Developer shall submit record drawings, in
electronic format, of all public and private infrastructure improvements,
including grading, sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer facilities, and roads,
constructed by Developer. The as-built survey must include, but is not limited
to, proposed and final contours with adequate elevation shots to show
conformance, property irons (to be exposed in field), low floor and low
opening elevations, and the 100-Year High Water Level (HWL) of all ponds,
lakes, and wetland areas. The files shall be drawn in Anoka County NAD 83
Coordinate system and provided in both AutoCAD .dwg and Adobe .pdf file
formats. The plans shall include accurate locations, dimensions, elevations,
grades, slopes and all other pertinent information concerning the complete work.
The Developer shall also submit certified compaction testing results for the
site grading operations.
b. A summary of the record plan attribute data for the storm sewer, water main,
and sanitary sewer structures and pipes shall be submitted in the form of an
Excel Spreadsheet as provided by the City Engineer.
c. No securities will be fully released until all record drawings have been
submitted and accepted by the City Engineer.
V. COMPLETION DATE.
If the activities authorized by site and building plan approval are not initiated
within twelve (12) months from the final execution of this agreement, then
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 5 of 11
Developer will need to start the site and building plan approval process from
the beginning.
VI. GUARANTEE.
A. The Developer will fully and faithfully comply with all terms and
conditions of any and all contracts entered into by the Developer.
Concurrently with the execution hereof by the Developer, the Developer
will furnish to, and at all times thereafter maintain with the City, a cash
deposit, certified check, or Irrevocable Letter of Credit, based on thirty-
five (35%) percent of the total estimated cost of Developer's On-site
Work. An Irrevocable Letter of Credit shall be for the exclusive use and
benefit of the City of Lino Lakes and shall state thereon that the same is
issued to guarantee and assure performance by the Developer of all the
terms and conditions of this Development Contract, construction of all
required improvements in accordance with the ordinances and
specifications of the City and guarantees the workmanship and materials
for the landscape improvements for a period of one year following the
City’s acceptance of the landscape improvements. The City reserves the
right to draw, in whole or in part, on any portion of the Irrevocable Letter
of Credit for the purpose of guaranteeing the terms and conditions of this
contract, if Developer has been found to be in default of this agreement
and only after providing Developer with written notice and opportunity to
cure any default. The Irrevocable Letter of Credit shall be automatically
extended for additional periods of one year from present or future
expiration dates unless sixty (60) days prior to such the City Clerk or
Administrator is notified in writing by certified mail or overnight mail that
the Letter of Credit will not be renewed.
B. Upon written request, The City will grant a reduction of the Letter of
Credit, or cash deposit based on prepayment or the value of the completed
improvements at the time of the requested reduction. The Developer may
make such requests three times throughout the life of this agreement, with
the third and/or final request being at the completion of the project. The
City will respond to such request within 30 days time. Prior to the final
acceptance of the Developer’s Improvements the City shall require a
Letter of Credit or Cash Escrow to cover the warranty provisions of the
agreement. The amount shall be agreed to by the City Engineer and
Developer and Developer may use the Letter of Credit discussed in
Section VI.A above.
VII. REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS.
A. The Developer agrees to establish a non-interest bearing escrow account
with the City in an amount established by the City Engineer or his
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 6 of 11
designee for the payment of all City fees and costs incurred by the City
related to the On-site Work, including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Site Plan Review Fee $1,500.00
2.
Administration
(Legal, Engineering, Planning and Contract
Administration)
$4,120.00
3. Negative Short Term Escrow Balance $0.00
Total Estimated (Budget) Costs for Escrow Account $5,620.00
B. If it appears that the actual costs incurred will exceed the estimate or that
the actual costs incurred will be less than the estimate, then Developer and
City shall review the costs required to complete the project. In such case,
if the actual costs exceed the estimate, then Developer shall promptly pay
the additional sums to the City to pay for the agreed upon increase.
However, in such case where the actual costs are less than the estimate,
the City shall promptly reimburse to Developer any amounts overpaid by
the Developer. The Developer may request a statement of the account
each month for review.
C. Intentionally Deleted.
VIII. REMEDIES FOR BREACH.
A. The City shall give prior written notice to the Developer of any default
hereunder before proceeding to enforce such financial guarantee or before
the City undertakes any work for which the City will be reimbursed
through the financial guarantee. If within twenty (20) days after receipt of
such written notice to it, the Developer has not notified the City by stating
in writing the manner in which the default will be cured and the time
within which such default will be cured, the City will proceed with the
remedy it deems reasonably appropriate.
B. At any time after the completion date and any extensions thereof, if any of
the work is deemed incomplete, the City may proceed in any one or more
of the following ways to enforce the undertakings herein set forth, and to
collect any and all expenses reasonably incurred by the City in connection
therewith, including, but not limited to, engineering, legal, planning and
litigation costs and expense. The enumeration of the remedies hereunder
shall be in addition to any other remedies available to the City.
1. Specific Performance. The City may in writing direct the surety or
the Developer to cause the Work to be undertaken and completed
within a specified reasonable time. If the Developer fails to cause
the Work to be done and completed in a manner and time
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 7 of 11
reasonably acceptable to the City, the City may proceed to bring an
action for specific performance to require work to be undertaken.
2. Completion by the City. The City, after written notice, may enter
the premises and proceed to have the Work done either by contract,
by day labor or by regular City forces. The Developer may not
question the manner of doing such work or the letting of any such
contracts for the doing of any such work; provided that all such
work is performed in a reasonable manner, the costs are reasonable
and the work is completed in a good and workman-like manner
and in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.
Upon completion of such work, the Developer shall promptly pay
the City the full cost thereof as aforesaid.
3. Deposit of Financial Guarantee. In the event the financial
guarantee has been submitted in the form of a Letter of Credit, the
City may draw on the Letter of Credit the sum equal to the
reasonably estimated cost of completing the Work, plus the City's
reasonably estimated expenses as defined herein, including any
other reasonable costs, expenses, and damages for which the surety
may be liable hereunder, but not exceeding the amount set forth on
the Letter of Credit. The money shall be deemed to be held by the
City for the purpose of reimbursing the City for any reasonable
costs incurred in completing the Work as hereinafter specified.
Any funds remaining after completion of the project shall be
promptly returned to the Developer.
IX. OCCUPATION OF PREMISES.
The Developer agrees that it will not cause to be occupied any portion of the
building or improvements to be constructed upon the premises until completion of
the building and site improvements as more fully described in the approved plans
and following issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
X. INSURANCE.
Developer or its general contractor shall take out and maintain until one year after
the City accepted the Developer Improvements, public liability and property
damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for
property damage which may arise out of the Developer's or general contractor’s
work, as the case may be, or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or
indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be
not less than Five Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($500,000.00) Dollars for one
person and One Million and no/100 ($1,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence;
limits for property damage shall be not less than One Million and no/100
($1,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 8 of 11
of Two Million and no/100 ($2,000,000.00) Dollars or more. The City, its
employees, its agents and assigns shall be named as an additional insured on the
policy, and the Developer or its general contractor shall file with the City a
certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate
shall provide that the City must be given ten days advance written notice of the
cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any disclaimer for
failure to give the required notice.
XI. REIMBURSEMENT FOR LITIGATION EXPENSES.
The City and Developer agree that the prevailing party in any litigation pertaining
to the enforcement of this Agreement shall be entitled to reimbursement from the
non-prevailing party for all reasonable costs incurred by said prevailing party
including court costs and reasonable engineering and attorneys' fees.
XII. VALIDITY.
If a portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase in this
Agreement is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect or void any of the other provisions of
the Site Improvement Performance Agreement.
XIII. GENERAL.
A. Binding Effect. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon
and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and
assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of
all or any part of the Property and shall be deemed covenants running with
the land.
B. Notices. Whenever in this Agreement it shall be required or permitted that
notice or demand be given or served by either party to this Agreement to
or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally
or (i) mailed by United States mail by certified mail (return receipt
requested) or (ii) sent by nationally recognized overnight carrier to the
addresses hereinbefore set forth on Page 1. Such notice or demand shall
be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in
the mail or the overnight carrier in accordance with the above. The
addresses of the parties hereto are as set forth on Page 1 until changed by
notices given as above.
C. Incorporation by Reference. All plans, special provisions, proposals,
specifications and contracts for the improvements furnished and let
pursuant to this Agreement shall be and hereby are made a part of this
Agreement by reference as fully as if set out herein in full.
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 9 of 11
D. Hours of Construction Activity. Construction activity shall be limited to
the hours set out as follows:
Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Sunday and Holidays No working hours allowed
XIV. VIOLATIONS/BUILDING PERMITS.
In the event that Developer violates any of the covenants and agreements
contained in this Site Improvement Performance Agreement and to be performed
by the Developer, the City, at its option, and after providing written notice and
opportunity to cure to Developer in addition to the rights and remedies as set out
hereunder may refuse to issue building permits to any property within the
development and/or stop building construction within the development until such
time as such default has been corrected to the satisfaction of the City.
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 10 of 11
CITY OF LINO LAKES
By _________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
By_________________________
City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on ________ day of
____________, 2022, by Rob Rafferty as Mayor of the City of Lino Lakes on behalf of
said City.
_______________________________
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on ________ day of
____________, 2022 by Julianne Bartell as City Clerk of the City of Lino Lakes on
behalf of said City.
_______________________________
Notary Public
601 Apollo Drive Retail (Java Companies) Site Performance Agreement page 11 of 11
DEVELOPER
By _________________________
[Name/Owner of Developer]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
On this _______ day of _______________, 2022, before me, a Notary Public
within and for said County, personally appeared, _______________________________,
who executed the foregoing instrument.
______________________________
Notary Public
This instrument was drafted by:
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014
601 Apollo Drive Retail
City Council
October 10, 2022
Land Use Application
•Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
•Amend Ordinance No. 03-05 Marketplace Planned Development Overlay
(PDO) Design Guidelines
•Change lot use from bank to retail development
•Site & Building Plan Review
•Dental clinic
•Coffee shop
•Drive thru ATM 2
3
Existing Conditions
•601 Apollo Drive
•1.32 acre site
•Graded & pad ready
•Marketplace is master
planned retail center
approved 2001
•Market Place Drive is
private street
•Design Guidelines
•Building
composition
•Materials
•Lighting
•Signage
•Landscaping
•Zoning = GB w/ PDO
4
Current Marketplace
PDO Site Plan
•July 2005
•4,500 sf bank
•Several private
Declarations and
Operation &
Easement Agreements
encumber the
property.
•A Third Amendment
to the Operation and
Easement Agreement
shall be recorded
5
Site Plan
•4,200 sf dental clinic
•2,240 sf coffee shop
•Outdoor patio
•Drive thru ATM
•2 drive thru lanes
•10ft building separation
•Setbacks Required Proposed
•Lake Dr: 40ft 46ft
•Apollo 30 65
•Marketplace 30 100
•North lot line 10 160
•Parking Spaces
•Dental Office requires 22
•Coffee Shop requires 17
•Total required = 39
•Proposed = 43
6
Exterior materials
•Matte black prefinished metal
flashing
•Storm grey & morning mist EIFS
•Glen-gery light grey brick
accents
•Dark shadow and oak block
•Black and Green awnings
•Green awnings on the
coffee shop provide brand
identity.
•Color palette combines tan
colors of existing Market Place
retail buildings with modern
grey and dark colors
•Site plan and exterior material
requirements met
Planning & Zoning Board•Planning & Zoning Board held a public hearing on September 14, 2022.
•There were no public comments.
•Board recommend approval with a 5-0 vote with the following revisions:
•The buildings do not need a more defined cornice.
•Any future changes in use on this lot (Lot 2, Block 1, Lino Lakes Market Place 2nd Addition)
shall be consistent with the permitted uses, accessory uses, and conditional uses listed in
the City’s GB, General Business zoning district.
7
Findings of Fact•Ordinance No. 04-22 and Resolution No. 22-115 detail the finding of fact.Council Consideration
•Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 04-22, Marketplace PDO Amendment #3
•Consider Resolution No. 22-115 Approving Marketplace PDO Amendment #3 for Site
& Building Plans
•Consider Resolution No. 22-116 Approving Site Improvement Performance
Agreement
8
Unused slides
9
10
EFIS Zoning Ordinance
•No more than 30% EFIS or
stucco on primary front
elevation
•No more than 60% on side or
rear elevation
Proposed =
•East Primary Elevation
•29.4% & 17.6% stucco
•West Rear Elevation
•19.3% stucco
•South Side Elevation
•21.1% and 35.4% stucco
•North Side Elevation
•24.8% and 35.4% stucco
•2ft high oak colored block base
•2 different grey color EFIS
bands create building tops
•Building Height = 19’4”< 45’
11
•Trash enclosure is 6’8”
•8” rockface concrete block and
color to match building
•Gate is constructed of vertical
composite wood siding and
swing gate with minimum 80%
opacity
•Building exterior materials
meet ordinance requirements
for material types, color and %
•Market Place Design Guidelines
also met
•Need more defined cornice
12
Stormwater Management
•High infiltration soils
•Porous pavement and storm
sewer pipes BMP’s provide
stormwater management
•Drainage to pond near Target
•City Engineer & RCWD
reviewed
•Meets water quality volume
and rate control
Public Utilities
•8” sanitary sewer main and 8”
watermain located along
Market Place Drive
13
Landscaping
•Env Coordinator and Env
Board reviewed
•Market Place Master
Landscape Plan regulates
landscaping for development
•Proposed:
•47 large tree
•110 large shrub
•Parking lot island
plantings
•Foundation plantings
•Proposed landscaping exceeds
required Market Place
landscape plan
•Impervious: 66.8% < 75%
allowed
2001 Market Place-
Master Landscape
Plan
•34 large tree
•29 large shrubs
Comprehensive Plan•Resource Management System Plan
•Stormwater management BMP’s (curb, gutter, porous pavement)
•Land Use Plan
•Retail development is consistent with commercial development
•Housing Plan and Transportation System
•Not negatively impacted
•Sanitary Sewer Plan and Water Supply Plan
•System has capacity for retail development 14
Additional City & Agency Comments•Anoka County: reviewed preliminary plat and had no comments
•Fire Division: add hydrant and FDC in front of coffee shop
•Police Division: reviewed and no comments
•Environment Board: August 31, 2022 recommended approval
15
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6D
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator
MEETING DATE: October 10th, 2022
TOPIC: Consideration of Resolution 22-122, Approving 2023 Anoka
County Recycling Grant Agreement
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
The City of Lino Lakes receives Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment
(SCORE) funds each year from Anoka County. Cities using SCORE funds allocated from
Anoka County are required to enter into a cooperative agreement with the county.
BACKGROUND
In 1989, the Governor’s Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment recommended to
the Legislature to adopt a comprehensive set of laws referred to as SCORE. This act initiated a
state funding source for recycling programs, waste reduction initiatives, management of
household hazardous waste, and problem materials. Locally, Anoka County distributes these
funds to cities for use on residential recycling programs.
These funds are available for specific program areas, such as drop-off events (Recycling
Saturday), promotional materials, the organics drop-off program, and labor and staffing.
Total SCORE grant funds available for 2023: $73,699.00
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Resolution No. 22-122, Approving Anoka County Contract No. C0009416, 2023
Agreement for Residential Recycling Program.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-122
2. Anoka County Contract # C0009416 – 2022 Agreement for Residential Recycling Program
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-122
APPROVING 2023 ANOKA COUNTY RECYCLING GRANT
WHEREAS, The City of Lino Lakes has entered into an agreement with Anoka County over
the years to cooperatively work on solid waste abatement and recycling; and
WHEREAS, Anoka County receives funding from the Solid Waste Management Coordinating
Board and the State of Minnesota in the form of “SCORE” funds; and
WHEREAS, The County wishes to assist municipalities in meeting recycling goals established
by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners by providing SCORE funds to Cities in the
County for solid waste recycling programs; and
WHEREAS, The City of Lino Lakes is eligible for grant funding in the amount of $73,699.00
for the operation of residential recycling program elements, including but not limited to:
monthly drop-off events, Parks recycling, promotional materials, the organics drop-off
program, and labor and staffing;
WHEREAS, Anoka County Agreement No. C0009416 provides for the cooperative effort
between Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes
That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute Anoka County Agreement No.
C0009416, Agreement for Residential Recycling Program on behalf of the city.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_______________and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
_______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
Anoka County Contract # C0009416
2023 AGREEMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on the 1st day of January 2023,
notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties, between the COUNTY OF ANOKA, State
of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “COUNTY”, and the CITY OF LINO LAKES,
hereinafter referred to as the “MUNICIPALITY”.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the County will receive funding from the State of Minnesota pursuant to Minn.
Stat. § 115A.557 (hereinafter “SCORE funds”) during 2023 which must be used to encourage and
improve recycling and a portion must be specifically directed to recycling source -separated
compostable materials; and
WHEREAS, the County will also receive funding pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 473.8441
(hereinafter “LRDG) funds”) during 2023 and
WHEREAS, the County also has additional budgeted program funding available to
supplement SCORE and LRDG funds for solid waste recycling programs, so that the available
amount for the Residential Recycling Program is $1,600,885.00.
WHEREAS, the County Solid Waste Management Master Plan 2018 (Master Plan 2018)
and MPCA Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan 2016-2036 state that MSW
generated in the County that is not reused, recycled or composted, will be processed to the extent
that processing capacity is available; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan 2018 was developed with the participation of a representative
from the Municipality staff, and the Municipality is required to develop and implement programs,
practices, or methods designed to meet waste abatement goals by Minn. Stat. § 115A.551, Subd
2a. (b).
WHEREAS, the County wishes to assist the Municipality in meeting recycling goals
established by Anoka County by providing said SCORE, LRDG, and County budgeted program
funds to cities and townships in the County for solid waste recycling programs.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in
this Agreement, , the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. PURPOSE AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The purpose of this Agreement is to
provide for cooperation between the County and the Municipality to implement solid waste
recycling programs in the Municipality which will help the County and member
municipalities meet the goals set in the current Anoka County Solid Waste Management
Master Plan. The County and the Municipality agree that the information provided in the
recitals above is to be incorporated into the purpose of this agreement.
The Contract Documents include: the Anoka County Municipal Waste Abatement
Grant Funding Application submitted by the Municipality for the current contract year,
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
and the Grant Funding Award issued by Anoka County for the current contract year.
These documents are incorporated into this agreement by reference and are components
of the entire contract package. The order of precedence of these documents in the event
of inconsistency or ambiguity shall be resolved in the following order: 1) this Agreement
for Residential Recycling Program; 2) Grant Funding Award; and 3) Anoka County
Municipal Waste Abatement Grant Funding Application.
2. TERM. The term of this Agreement is from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023
unless earlier terminated as provided herein.
3. DEFINITIONS. Defined terms contained in this Agreement and all the attachments are
found in Minn. Stat. §§ 115A.03; 115A.471; and 115A.552. The use of capitalization for
defined terms has no special effect. Additionally:
a. “Full-Service Recycling Drop-off Center” means centralized permanent drop-off
center that is open at least two times a week and accepts at least four types of
materials beyond traditional curbside recyclables, i.e.: mattresses, appliances, scrap
metal, furniture, source-separated compostable materials, electronics, etc.
b. “Multi-family dwellings” means households within apartment complexes,
condominiums, townhomes, mobile homes, and senior housing complexes.
c. “Quasi-municipal event” means community festivals which appear to the public to be
supported and run by the Municipality but in fact are sponsored or co-sponsored by
an independent non-profit 501c (3) organization, for example: the Anoka Halloween
Parade.
4. ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDS. Per Minn. Stat. § 115A.557, Subd. 1, funding eligibility is
based primarily on population, with a minimum funding floor. For 2023, the County has
determined that funding will be determined by the Grant funding application. The
Municipality is entitled to receive reimbursement for eligible expenses, less revenues or
other reimbursement received, for eligible activities up to the project maximum, which shall
not exceed $73,699.00.
The County reserves the right to reduce the funding provided in the event the Municipality
does not complete the additional Grant Projects referenced in the Anoka County Municipal
Waste Abatement Grant Funding Application.
The County also reserves the ability to assess the programs and reallocate unused
SCORE and/or, LRDG funds mid-year if any participating municipality demonstrates
the need for the funding and funds are available. The Municipality shall be provided
documentation of the funding award determination and rationale as indicated by the 2023
Grant Funding Award.
5. PROGRAM. The Municipality shall develop and implement a residential solid waste
recycling program adequate to meet the Municipality’s annual recycling goal of 2,327 tons
of recyclable materials as established by the County. The Municipality shall ensure that
the recyclable materials collected are delivered to processors or end markets for recycling.
a. The Municipal recycling program shall include the following components:
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
i. Each household (including both single and Multi-family dwellings) in the
Municipality shall have the Opportunity to Recycle at least four broad types of
materials, including but not limited to, paper (including cardboard/paperboard
cartons), glass, plastic and metal.
ii. The recycling (including any organics) program shall be operated in compliance
with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations.
iii. The Municipality shall implement a public information program that contains at
least the following components:
(1) One promotional mailing to each household focused exclusively on the
Municipality’s recycling and source-separated compostable materials
program;
(2) One promotional advertisement detailing recycling and organics opportunities
available for residents included in the Municipality’s newsletter or local
newspaper; and
(3) Two community outreach activities at Municipal or Quasi-municipal events to
inform residents about recycling and source-separated compostable materials
opportunities.
iv. The public information components listed above shall focus on all recyclable
materials and the various opportunities to recycle and compost source-separated
compostable materials within the Municipality. The Municipality shall incorporate
County/regional/State campaigns and images and use the toolkits provided by the
County when preparing promotional materials. The Municipality, on an ongoing
basis, shall identify new residents and provide detailed information on the recycling
opportunities available to these new residents. The County shall work with the
Municipality on promotional materials to coordinate messages. The Municipality
shall provide promotional materials to the County for review prior to publication to
ensure accuracy.
v. The Municipality shall regularly attend the bi-monthly Solid Waste Abatement
Advisory Team (SWAAT) meetings per year.
vi. The Municipality shall offer a minimum of one spring and/or fall recycling drop-off
event(s) where items not normally accepted at the curb are collected for recycling.
If the Municipality is hosting a monthly drop-off as described below, the spring/fall
recycling drop-off events may be included within that program.
b. The Municipality is encouraged to expand its recycling program to include one or
more of the following components in order to receive additional funding.
i. Organize monthly/quarterly recycling drop-off events which can be held in
conjunction with a neighboring municipality(ies) on a cooperative basis for the
citizens of both/all municipalities.
ii. Provide a community event recycling program, which at a minimum would consist
of providing recycling opportunities at all Municipal sponsored or Quasi-municipal
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
events and festivals as required by Minn. Stat. § 115A.151. The feasibility of
adding organics collection at the event will be explored, and if feasible,
implemented as an enhancement to the waste abatement program.
iii. Provide the opportunity for citizens to engage in recycling activities at Municipal
and Quasi-municipal facilities as required by Minn. Stat. § 115A.151 such as
athletic fields and public centers.
iv. Organize and manage a Full-Service Recycling Drop-off Center.
v. Develop enhanced recycling promotion and assistance for Multi-family dwellings.
vi. Develop additional opportunities for source-separated compostable materials
collection.
vii. Develop and implement additional opportunities to recycle bulky and problem
materials (e.g., appliances, batteries, carpet pad, electronics, fluorescent lamps,
mattresses, oil, scrap metal, etc.) from residents on an on-going basis either
curbside or at a drop-off.
c. If the Municipality’s recycling program did not achieve the Municipality’s recycling
goals as established by the County for the prior calendar year, the Municipality
shall work with the County to prepare a plan to achieve the recycling goals set forth
in this Agreement.
d. The Municipality’s recycling program shall be limited to residential programming
for funding reimbursements under this Agreement. The County will not reimburse
business recycling programming or household hazardous waste programming by
the Municipality. Any inquiries or requests regarding these topics should be sent
to the County for response.
e. In addition to the above requirements designed to increase residential recycling
opportunities, the Municipality shall provide recycling opportunities in all municipal
buildings including but not limited to, city offices, public meeting rooms and parks,
as required by Minn. Stat. § 115A.151. If items collected through the Municipal
recycling program prove to be contaminated or not recyclable, those items shall
be treated as public entity waste and shall be processed at a resource recovery
facility unless the waste has been certified as unprocessible. Minn. Stat. §§
115A.46, 115A.471 and 473.848. See page 44, 47-48, 51, and p. 67 of the 2018
Anoka County Solid Waste Management Master Plan regarding the requirements
for Public Entity Waste.
f. If the Municipality requests reimbursement for park/public entity
recycling/organics/trash waste systems/containers, the Municipality needs to work
with the County before an order is placed to make sure the containers are
consistent with the requirements set forth by the County for colors e.g. (blue for
recycling, green for organics and gray or black for trash), openings and labels.
g. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 115A. 46, 115A.471 and 473.848, all waste generated
by municipal government activities (including city/town halls, public works and
public safety buildings, parks, and libraries, and for municipalities that arrange for
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
waste services on behalf of their residents (organized collection)) shall be
delivered to a waste processing plant for disposal as long as capacity is available.
Failure to comply with this provision shall constitute a breach of this Agreement
resulting in the loss of all Grant Funding unless, pursuant to statute, the
Municipality has conferred with the County and developed a plan to comply within
a reasonable period of time.
6. REPORTING. The Municipality shall submit the following reports semi-annually to the
County no later than the third Friday in July 2023, and the second Friday in January 2024.
a. An accounting of the amount of waste which has been recycled as a result of the
Municipality’s activities and the efforts of other community programs, redemption
centers and drop-off centers. For recycling programs, the Municipality shall certify
the number of tons of each recyclable material which has been collected and the
number of tons of each recyclable material which has been marketed. For
recycling programs run by other persons or entities, the Municipality shall also
provide documentation on forms provided by the County showing the tons of
materials that were recycled by the Municipality’s residents through these other
programs. The Municipality shall keep detailed records documenting the
disposition of all recyclable materials collected pursuant to this Agreement. The
Municipality shall also report the number of cubic yards or tons of yard waste and
source-separated compostable materials collected for composting, chipping, or
land spreading, together with a description of the methodology used for
calculations. Any other material removed from the waste stream by the
Municipality, i.e., tires and used oil, shall also be reported separately.
b. Information regarding any revenue received from sources other than the County
for the Municipality’s recycling programs, i.e., revenue taken in from the sale of
recyclables and fees collected from residents, shall be reported.
c. Copies of all promotional materials that have been prepared by the Municipality
during the term of this Agreement to promote its recycling and organics collection
programs.
d. The Municipality agrees to support County efforts in obtaining hauler reports by
ensuring compliance through ordinance, contract or license requirements and the
ability to exercise punitive actions, if needed.
e. The Municipality agrees to furnish the County with additional reports in form and
at frequencies requested by the County for financial evaluation, program
management purposes, and reporting to the State of Minnesota.
7. BILLING AND PAYMENT PROCEDURE. The Municipality shall submit itemized invoices
semi-annually to the County for abatement activities no later than the third Friday in July
2023 and the second Friday in January 2024. The invoices shall be paid in accordance
with standard County procedures, subject to the approval of the Anoka County Board of
Commissioners.
8. PUBLICATIONS. The Municipality shall acknowledge the financial assistance of Anoka
County on all promotional materials, reports and publications relating to the activities
funded under this Agreement, by including the following acknowledgement: “Funded by
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
the Anoka County Board of Commissioners and State SCORE (Select Committee On
Recycling and the Environment) funds.” The Municipality shall provide copies of all
promotional materials funded by this grant.
The County shall provide all printed public information pieces about County programs. A
Municipality shall not modify County publications related to business recycling, household
hazardous waste management or the County compost sites.
Information about the County’s business recycling program, household hazardous waste
management program or County compost sites that a Municipality plans to publish in a
Municipal communication, printed or electronic, shall be provided to the County for review
and approved by the County prior to publication to ensure accuracy and consistency.
9. INDEMNIFICATION. The County agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the Municipality
harmless from all claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or character,
including the cost of defense thereof, resulting from the acts or omissions of its public
officials, officers, agents, employees, and contractors relating to activities performed by
the County under this Agreement.
The Municipality agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the County harmless from all
claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or character, including the cost of
defense thereof, resulting from the acts or omissions of its public officials, officers, agents,
employees, and contractors relating to activities performed by the Municipality under this
Agreement.
The provisions of this subdivision shall survive the termination or expiration of the term of
this Agreement.
10. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
a. In performing the provisions of this Agreement, both parties agree to comply with
all applicable federal, state or local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations or
standards established by any agency or special governmental unit which are now
or hereafter promulgated insofar as they relate to performance of the provisions of
this Agreement. In addition, the Municipality shall comply with all applicable
requirements of the State of Minnesota for the use of SCORE funds provided to
the Municipality by the County under this Agreement. The Municipality shall also
comply with all relevant portions of the current Anoka County Solid Waste
Management Master Plan and shall participate in the preparation of the successor
Master Plans.
b. If the Municipality utilizes the services of a subcontractor for purposes of meeting
requirements herein, the Municipality shall be responsible for the performance of
all such subcontracts and shall ensure that the subcontractors perform fully the
terms of the subcontract. The agreement between the Municipality and a
subcontractor shall obligate the subcontractor to comply fully with the terms of this
Agreement.
c. It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement is contained herein, and that
this Agreement supersedes all oral and written agreements and negotiations
between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof.
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
d. Any amendments, alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of this
Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing, duly signed
by the parties.
e. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any paragraph, section,
subdivision, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held
to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining portion of this
Agreement.
f. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as creating the relationship of co-
partners, joint venturers, or an association between the County and the
Municipality, nor shall the Municipality, its employees, agents or representatives
be considered employees, agents, or representatives of the County for any
purpose.
g. The Municipality shall maintain financial and other records and accounts in
accordance with requirements of the County and the State of Minnesota. The
Municipality shall maintain strict accountability of all funds and maintain records of
all receipts and disbursements. Such records and accounts shall be maintained
in a form which will permit the tracing of funds and program income to final
expenditure. The Municipality shall maintain records sufficient to reflect that all
funds received under this Agreement were expended in accordance with Minn.
Stat. § 115A.557, Subd. 2, for residential solid waste recycling purposes. The
Municipality shall also maintain records of the quantities of materials recycled. All
records and accounts shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a
period of less than five years from the last receipt of payment from the County
pursuant to this Agreement.
h. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, the Municipality shall allow the County or other
persons or agencies authorized by the County, and the State of Minnesota,
including the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor, access to the records of the
Municipality at reasonable hours, including all books, records, documents, and
accounting procedures and practices of the Municipality relevant to the subject
matter of the Agreement, for purposes of audit. In addition, the County shall have
access to the project site(s), if any, at reasonable hours.
11. TERMINATION. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written agreement of the
parties or by either party, with or without cause, by giving not less than seven (7) days’
written notice, delivered by mail or in person to the other party, specifying the date of
termination. If this Agreement is terminated, assets acquired in whole or in part with funds
provided under this Agreement shall be the property of the Municipality so long as said
assets are used by the Municipality for the purpose of a landfill abatement program
approved by the County.
(SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW)
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto set their hands.
CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA
By: By:
Cindy Cesare, Chief Officer G.R. Rafferty
Mayor Anoka County Human Services
Date: Date:
By: By:
Julie Bartell Rhonda Sivarajah
City Clerk County Administrator
Date: Date:
Approved as to form and legality:
By:
Kathryn M. Timm
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
kmt\contracts\integrated waste contracts\SCORE grants\2023 Lino Lakes
DocuSign Envelope ID: B86F0558-8143-498B-BDE2-D2513CE93F12
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6E
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator
MEETING DATE: October 10th, 2022
TOPIC: Consideration of Resolution 22-123, Approving Anoka County
Grant Agreement for Organics Enclosure
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
The City has received approval for $25,000 in supplemental recycling grant funds to be used
for the construction of an organics enclosure in Sunrise Park. To accept these funds, the City is
required to enter into an agreement with Anoka County.
BACKGROUND
The City of Lino Lakes receives Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment
(SCORE) funds each year from Anoka County. This year the County has made additional
funds available to supplement these SCORE grant funds. Cities may receive up to $25,000 in
supplemental funding to be used for new programs or expansion and improvement of existing
programs. Construction of organics enclosures is an eligible expense.
The organics program in Lino Lakes has been growing rapidly, and has 468 participants as of
October 3rd, 2022. Participants currently drop their organics materials at four sites in the City.
Each site has 90-gallon organics carts to accept the material. As use of these sites increases,
more carts are added to accommodate the increased use. Eventually, the carts must be replaced
with roll-off dumpsters in enclosures in order to keep the sites tidy while accommodating the
increased use.
The organics drop-off at Marshan Park currently receives the heaviest use. An enclosure at
Marshan Park was deemed infeasible due to site restrictions. Sunrise Park has ample room for
an organics enclosure that would not conflict with other uses of the park.
The best quote for this an enclosure with composite boards and concrete pad came in at
$29,198. Supplemental grant funds from the county have been approved for this project and
will pay for $25,000 of the total cost. The difference of $4,198 will be paid by SCORE grant
funds for 2022.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Resolution No. 22-122, Approving Anoka County Contract No. C0009443, 2022
Supplemental Grant for Residential Recycling Program Organics Site Enclosure.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-123
2. Anoka County Contract # C0009443 – 2022 Supplemental Grant for Residential Recycling
Program Organics Enclosure
3. Site map and example enclosure
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-123
APPROVING ANOKA COUNTY SUPPLEMENTAL RECYCLING GRANT FOR
ORGANICS ENCLOSURE
WHEREAS, Anoka County receives funding from the Solid Waste Management Coordinating
Board and the State of Minnesota in the form of “SCORE” funds; and
WHEREAS, The County wishes to assist municipalities in meeting recycling goals established
by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners by providing SCORE funds to Cities in the
County for solid waste recycling programs; and
WHEREAS, The County has made available Supplemental Grant funding of up to $25,000 per
municipality for municipal waste prevention and recycling projects not included in the
approved 2022 SCORE grant program; and
WHEREAS, The City of Lino Lakes has been approved for $25,000 to be used for the
construction of an organics collection enclosure; and
WHEREAS, Anoka County Agreement No. C0009443 provides for the cooperative effort
between Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes
That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute Anoka County Agreement No.
C0009443, Agreement for Supplemental Grant for Residential Recycling Program on behalf of
the City.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_______________and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
_______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
Anoka County Contract # C0009443
2022 SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
FOR
RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM
THIS GRANT was made and entered into on the 1st day of September, 2022,
notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties, by the COUNTY OF ANOKA, State of
Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “COUNTY”, to the CITY OF LINO LAKES, hereinafter
referred to as the “MUNICIPALITY”.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Anoka County will receive funding from the State of Minnesota pursuant to
Minn. Stat. § 115A.557 (hereinafter “SCORE funds”) and pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 473.8441
(hereinafter “LRDG funds“) during 2022. The County also has additional budgeted program
funding available to supplement SCORE and LRDG funds for solid waste recycling programs;
and
WHEREAS, the County has budgeted $350,000.00 for Supplemental Grants for solid
waste recycling programs in 2022; and
WHEREAS, the County and Municipality have already executed a grant contract for the
Municipality’s Residential Recycling Program. The Municipality has identified additional
expenses which are eligible for reimbursement under the County program criteria, and the County
wishes to reimburse these expenses from remaining available funds.
WHEREAS, Municipality has completed a Supplemental Grant Application and the County
has reviewed the Application. The County has available funds from the SCORE/LRDG budget to
fund Supplemental Grants; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in
this Grant, and incorporating the information in the above recitals, the parties mutually agree to
the following terms and conditions:
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Grant is to provide for cooperation between the County
and the Municipality to implement solid waste recycling programs in the Municipality.
2. INCORPORATION OF PREVIOUS AGREEMENT. The County and the Municipality have
entered into an AGREEMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR 2022
Anoka County Contract #C0009443. The terms of that Agreement are incorporated into
this additional Supplemental Grant by reference and are binding on the parties as if the
terms were set out here in full. This Grant will control only to the extent that it applies to
the Supplemental Grant exclusively for any inconsistent terms.
3. BILLING AND PAYMENT PROCEDURE. The Municipality shall submit itemized invoices
to the County for abatement activities subject to this Supplemental Program Improvement
Grant. The invoices shall be paid in accordance with standard County procedures, subject
to the approval of the Anoka County Board of Commissioners.
2
4. ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDS. The Municipality is entitled to receive reimbursement for
program improvement funds in the amount of $25,000.00. The funds are for the specific
purpose of construction of an organics collection enclosure. See attachment A –
Supplemental Grant Application and Award Letter. All Supplemental Grant monies will be
expended no later than December 31, 2022.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County hereunto set its hand as of the dates first written
above:
COUNTY OF ANOKA
By:
Jonelle Hubbard
PHES Director
Dated:
Approved as to Form:
By:
Kathryn Timm
Assistant County Attorney
Dated:
CITY OF LINO LAKES
By: ______________________________
Its: ______________________________
Dated: _________________________
Approved as to Form:
By: ______________________________
Its: ______________________________
Dated: _________________________
KMT\CONTRACTS\Int Waste Mgmt\SCORE Grants\2022 Enhancements grants\C0009443 Lino Lakes supp grant
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention and Recycling Grant Program 1
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention & Recycling
Grant Program Application
Date Application Submitted:
7/28/22
Application Submitted By:
Andy Nelson, Environmental Coordinator, City of Lino Lakes
Date Application Reviewed by Anoka County:
Date Application Approved by Anoka County:
Date Application Denied by Anoka County:
Grant funding of up to $25,000 per municipality may be available for municipal waste prevention and
recycling projects in Anoka County that are not included in the approved 2022 SCORE grant program.
Waste prevention and recycling grant applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis with
approval at the discretion Anoka County. Capital improvement projects may also be considered and will
require additional detailed documentation including how the improvement space or equipment will be
dedicated to waste prevention and/or recycling over a 15-year period.
Submit completed applications and/or grant program questions via email to Jill Curran at
jill.curran@co.anoka.mn.us. All projects must be completed and invoiced by the end of day
December 31, 2022.
Eligible Project Expenses
Waste Prevention and Reuse Project Expenses
• New waste prevention or reuse project start-up expenses
o Project viability study
o Equipment and supplies
o Program promotion materials
o Staff training
• Space remodeling
• New space construction
Organics/Food Waste Project Expenses
• Food waste drop-off start-up expenses
• Food waste enclosure
• Food waste prevention
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention and Recycling Grant Program 2
Problem Materials Project Expenses
• New problem materials collection start-up expenses
• Pop-up event expenses
NEW or Improved Recycling Program Project Expenses
• Mid-calendar year program expansion expenses may be eligible for this grant program if they
have not already been approved in the 2022 SCORE grant program application.
• Start-up collection expenses for targeted materials that are not currently being collected may
qualify for this grant program.
• Expenses related to reducing contamination may be eligible for this grant program.
Project Description
1. Indicate focus area for project (check one):
☐ Waste Prevention or Reuse
☒ Organics/Food Waste
☐ Problem Materials
☐ NEW Recycling
2. Describe the project purpose, scope, design, and detailed project costs. Include in this description
how the project will prevent waste, increase materials reuse, improve efficiency, and increase
collaboration between communities.
The organics program in Lino Lakes has been growing rapidly. We have 450 participants as of
7/28/22. Our 4 sites are currently comprised of 90 gallon carts. In order to provide more capacity
while also meeting city ordinance for trash bin placement, we are hoping to build organics enclosures
and shift site locations to better meet the program’s needs.
The best quote that we received for an organics enclosure with a concrete pad is for $29,198.
The enclosure itself is $21,998.00. The concrete pad is $7,200.
The composite boards will be lower maintenance than wood and will be a better long-term solution
for our program. Our site design and best quote are the same as Ramsey County has installed at
Vadnais Heights and White Bear Lake City Halls.
The enclosure will be sized according to Walters enclosure specifications. A 12’ X 14’ enclosure will
accommodate a 4 yard organics dumpster. This same design will also house up to an 8-yard
enclosure, which will allow for future program growth.
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention and Recycling Grant Program 3
Project Description, cont.
3. Explain how the project will be sustained over time after the grant funds are depleted.
After the one-time cost of $29,198 for the enclosure construction,
there should be minimal maintenance costs due to the composite
board design. The city will be able to maintain these sites by
replacing boards and hardware as needed to ensure the site remains
functional over time.
Project Outcomes
1. Describe expected project outcomes including materials to be collected for reuse or recycling and
estimated annual diversion weight for each material.
At this point, our sites typically collect about 1150 pounds per month, but they also fill up. With the
increased capacity afforded by the dumpster/enclosure site, we will be sure that no one has to turn
around without dumping their organics.
Estimated annual organics diversion from one site: 6.9 tons.
With the increased capacity, 10+ tons per year for one site should be attainable.
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention and Recycling Grant Program 4
Project Outcomes, cont.
2. For waste prevention and reuse projects, list strategies for promoting and executing these projects.
Also list reuse outlets for the materials.
N/A
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention and Recycling Grant Program 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto set their hands.
CITY OF _________________________________ COUNTY OF ANOKA
By: By:
Name: Name: _________________________________
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
2022 Municipal Waste Prevention and Recycling Grant Application
EVALUATION FORM
City Name: Lino Lakes Date Application Submitted: 7/28/2022
Amount Requested: __$29,198___________________________ Evaluation Completed: 8/11/2022
Anoka County confirmed that the project meets the eligible expense criteria set forth in the grant application.
___x_______ yes __________ no
Anoka County confirmed that this project is NOT included in the approved 2022 SCORE grant.
_____x_____ yes __________ no
Applicant confirmed that all expenses for project will be applied to NEW waste prevention or recycling efforts.
___x_______ yes __________ no
Applicant confirmed that all details in the Project Description are complete and accurate in the application.
___x_______ yes __________ no
Applicant confirmed that all details in the Project Outcomes are complete and accurate in the application.
____x______ yes __________ no
Applicant confirmed the project will be completed and invoices submitted to the county no later than
December 31, 2022
___x_______ yes __________ no
Application Approved: ____x______ yes __________ no
Amount Approved: ____$25,000________________________________
Approved By: Jill Curran Title: Recycling & Resource Solutions Supervisor
Signature: Date: 8/12/2022
Organics enclosure location in Sunrise Park
Example organics enclosure
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6F
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Public Hearing. Consider Resolution No. 22-127,
Approving Five Year Street Reconstruction Plan and
Providing for Use of Unspent Bond Proceeds
VOTE REQUIRED: Unanimous
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting City Council approval to amend the 2020-2024 Five Year Street
Reconstruction Plan.
BACKGROUND
On June 22, 2020 the City Council approved the 2020 – 2024 Street Reconstruction Plan. The
plan and subsequent approvals authorized issuance of Street Reconstruction Bonds for the 2021
Street Reconstruction project. This project included the following streets:
Phase Streets Est. Cost
2021 4th Avenue (Main Street to Pine Street), Karth Rd, Joyer Ln, Talle Ln,
Canfield Rd, and Gaage Ln.
$1,849,000
This project was substantially completed in 2021 with final completion planned in 2022. Due
to cost underruns and no use of contingency staff has identified approximately $437,000
remaining in the project fund. Since these funds are restricted to use for street improvements
staff is recommending adding an additional project for reconstruction in 2023.
Pheasant Run is a 450’ long cul de sac, lying north of Birch Street and east of Blackduck Drive.
The Overall Condition Index rating of the street is 11 on a scale of 0 – 100. The street has
undersized water main and poor stormwater drainage. The project would include full
replacement of the water, sanitary and storm facilities. The estimated project cost is $850,000
with approximately 50% of the cost related to the street. This is generally consistent with the
available funding in the 2021 Street Reconstruction Fund.
To move forward with the project the City needs to amend the 2020 – 2024 Street
Reconstruction Plan to identify the project. This requires a public hearing and unanimous vote
by the City Council. Additionally, a 30-day period must elapse during which time a petition
may be submitted requesting an election. If no petition is received the city may proceed with
the project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 22-127.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-127
2.Amended and Restated 2020 – 2024 Street Reconstruction Plan
3.Project Location map
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-127
RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED
STREET RECONSTRUCTION PLAN AND PROVIDING FOR
THE USE OF UNSPENT PROCEEDS OF THE GENERAL
OBLIGATION STREET RECONSTRUCTION BONDS,
SERIES 2021A
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Lino Lakes (the
“City”), as follows:
Section 1. Background.
1.01. The City is authorized under Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.58, subdivision 3b (the
“Act”), to prepare a plan for street reconstruction in the City over the next five years that will be financed
under the Act, including a description of the proposed work and estimated costs, and to issue general
obligation bonds to finance the cost of street reconstruction activities described in the plan.
1.02. Before the issuance of any bonds under the Act, the City is required to hold a public
hearing on the plan and issuance of the bonds.
1.03. On June 22, 2020, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council adopted a
resolution approving a five-year street reconstruction plan (the “Original Plan”), which described certain
street reconstruction activities in the City for the years 2020 through 2024. The reconstruction activities
described in the Original Plan included, but were not limited to reconstruction of 4th Avenue, Karth Road,
Joyer Lane, Talle Lane, Canfield Road, and Gaage Lane Drive Improvements (collectively, the “Original
Project”).
1.04. On July 15, 2021, the City issued its General Obligation Street Reconstruction Bonds,
Series 2021A (the “Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $1,849,000, the proceeds of
which were used to finance the Original Project described in the Original Plan.
1.05. Construction of the Original Project has been completed, and the City has determined that
there are unspent proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $437,000. The City has determined to use the
unspent proceeds of the Bonds to finance street reconstruction activities for Pheasant Run from Birch
Street to its northern terminus (the “Additional Project”). The City does not expect to issue additional
bonds to finance the Additional Project.
1.06. In order to authorize the use of the unspent proceeds of the Bonds for the Additional
Project, the City has prepared an Amended and Restated 2020 through 2024 Five-Year Street
Reconstruction Plan (the “Amended and Restated Plan”), which amends and restates the Original Plan.
1.07. On the date hereof, the City Council held a public hearing on the Amended and Restated
Plan and the use of the unspent proceeds of the Bonds, after publication in the City’s official newspaper
of a notice of public hearing at least ten (10) days but no more than twenty-eight (28) days before the date
of the hearing.
2
Section 2. Amended and Restated Plan Approved.
2.01. The City Council finds that the Amended and Restated Plan will improve the City’s street
and utility systems, which serves the interests of the City as a whole.
2.02. The Amended and Restated Plan is approved in the form on file in City Hall.
Section 3. Unspent Proceeds of Bonds.
3.01. The use of the unspent proceeds of the Bonds for the Additional Project as described in
the Amended and Restated Plan is hereby approved.
3.02. City staff are authorized and directed to take all other actions necessary to carry out the
intent of this resolution.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_______________ and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
LN140-87 (JAE)
823520v1
Amended and Restated
2020 through 2024
Five-Year Street Reconstruction Plan for the
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Date of Original Plan: June 22, 2020
Date of Amended and Restated Plan: October 10, 2022
City of Lino Lakes
Amended and Restated
Five-Year Street Reconstruction Plan
2020 through 2024
I. PURPOSE
Street reconstruction is a major expenditure of city funds for the reconstruction of streets.
Street reconstruction may include bituminous overlays, utility replacement and
relocation, public safety street modifications, and other incidental activities, turn lanes
and other improvements having a substantial public safety function, realignments, other
modifications to intersect with state and county roads, and the local share of state and
county road projects. Except in the case of turn lanes, safety improvements,
realignments, intersection modifications, and local share of state and county road
projects, street reconstruction does not include the portion of project costs allocable to
widening a street or adding curbs and gutters where none previously existed. A Street
Reconstruction Plan (“SRP”) is a document designed to anticipate street reconstruction
expenditures and schedule them over a five-year period so that they may be purchased
in the most efficient and cost effective method possible. An SRP helps enable the
matching of expenditures with anticipated income. As potential expenditures are
reviewed, the city considers the benefits, costs, alternatives and impact on operating
expenditures.
The City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota (the “City”) believes the street reconstruction process
is an important element of responsible fiscal management. Major capital expenditures
can be anticipated and coordinated so as to minimize potentially adverse financial
impacts caused by the timing and magnitude of capital outlays. This coordination of
capital expenditures is important to the City in achieving its goals of adequate physical
public assets, preservation of public assets and sound fiscal management. Good planning
is essential for the wise and prudent use of limited financial resources.
The SRP is designed to be updated periodically. The Street Reconstruction Plan is a part
of the City’s capital improvement plan. In this manner, it becomes an ongoing fiscal
planning tool that continually anticipates future capital expenditures and funding sources.
On June 22, 2020, the City approved an SRP for the years 2020 through 2024. On July 15,
2021, the City issued its General Obligation Street Reconstruction Bonds, Series 2021A
(the “Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $1,849,515,000 to finance the
street reconstruction improvements originally described therein. Following completion
of the bond-financed street reconstruction improvements, proceeds of the Bonds in the
amount of $437,000.00 remain outstanding. The City is amending the original SRP, as set
forth herein, to authorize the expenditure of the unspent proceeds of the Bonds to
finance additional street reconstruction improvements.
II. THE STREET RECONSTRUCTION PLANNING PROCESS
For the City to use its authority to finance expenditures under Chapter 475.58,
Subdivision 3b, it must meet the requirements provided therein. The street
reconstruction planning process is as follows:
The City staff prepares an SRP reflecting the street reconstruction projects anticipated
to be undertaken within the next five years (based on their priority, fiscal impact, and
available funding) and the estimated costs thereof. If general obligation bonding is
deemed necessary, the City works with its financial advisor to prepare a bond sale and
repayment schedule. A public hearing is held to solicit input from citizens on the SRP
and the issuance of bonds. Notice of such hearing must be published in the official
newspaper of the City at least 10, but not more than 28 days prior to the date of the
public hearing. The City Council must approve the SRP and the sale of street
reconstruction bonds by a unanimous vote of those members present at the meeting
following the public hearing.
Voters may petition for a reverse referendum on the issuance of street reconstruction
bonds. If a petition bearing the signatures of voters equal to at least 5% of the votes
cast in the last general election requesting a vote on the issuance of street
reconstruction bonds is received by the City Clerk within 30 days after the public
hearing, the City may only issue general obligation street reconstruction bonds after
approval by voters at an election. If no petition is submitted, general obligation street
reconstruction bonds may be issued without an election.
In subsequent years, the process is repeated annually or as expenditures are
completed and new needs arise.
III. PROJECT SUMMARY AND FINANCING
Street reconstruction projects anticipated to be undertaken within the next five years
and the estimated costs thereof are set forth in Appendix A. A map of the proposed
project streets is included in Appendix B. Those for which street reconstruction bonds
are anticipated to be issued are marked with an asterisk in Appendix A and are
currently anticipated to include the following:
2021 Street Reconstruction Bond Financed Expenditures –
The 2021 Street Reconstruction Project includes the reconstruction of the following
streets; 4th Avenue (Main Street to Pine Street) by required upgrades of the existing
stormwater management system and curb replacement, and bituminous surfacing.
General obligation street reconstruction bonds are proposed to be issued in 2021 in
an aggregate principal amount of approximately $2,600,000.00 for the costs of the 4th
Avenue Improvements from Main Street to Pine Street; the Karth Area Improvements
including Karth Road, Joyer Lane, Talle Ln, Canfield Road, and Gaage Lane Drive
Improvements; the Pheasant Run Improvements from Birch Street to its northern
terminus; and the costs of issuing the bonds. Such bonds may be combined with other
financing tools, including general obligation improvement bonds, to finance other
capital improvements in the City.
The bonding for the 4th Avenue Improvements, the Karth Area Improvements, and the
Pheasant Run Improvements is expected to occur in 2021 but could happen at any
time during the 2020 through 2024 Five-Year Street Reconstruction Plan.
4th Avenue Improvements
The pavement on 4th Avenue is in very poor condition. The roadway is located in a
high water table and poorly draining soils are located under and adjacent to the
roadway. Portion of the road cross through wetlands with surface water one foot
below the roadway. Large potholes have occurred in many areas of the roadway. In
order to reconstruct the road, the roadway will need drainage issues corrected . The
road reconstruction project will include reconstructing the street to meet the City’s
standard road requirements, improvement of the drainage system to keep
stormwater from compromising the new roadway, and meeting the Rice Creek
Watershed District’s rate control and water quality treatment requirements related
to the construction of the new roadway. The road reconstruction project will also
include investigating the conditions of the County Ditch culvert under the roadway
and reconstructing the culvert if necessary.
Karth Area Improvements
The pavement of streets within the Karth Area are also in very poor condition. The
road reconstruction project will include reconstructing the street to meet the City’s
standard road requirements, improvement of the drainage system to keep
stormwater from compromising the new roadway and meeting the Rice Creek
Watershed District’s rate control and water quality treatment requirements related
to the construction of the new roadway.
Pheasant Run Improvements
The pavement on Pheasant Run and the drainage system including existing curb and
gutter is in poor condition. The road construction project will include reconstructing
the roadway to meet the City’s standard road requirements, improvement of the
drainage system to keep stormwater from compromising the new roadway and
meeting the Rice Creek Watershed district’s rate control and water quality treatment
requirements. The replacement of existing sanitary sewer and water, as necessary
will be completed and funded by sewer and water utility operating and trunk utility
funds.
Street reconstruction bonds are included in the amount of indebtedness of the City
which cannot, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53, exceed 3% of the assessor’s
taxable market value for the City (“TMV”). The proposed bonds will not exceed
statutory limits.
All other foreseeable capital expenditures are expected to be financed through other
revenue or financing sources.
2024 Street Reconstruction Project
The 2024 Street Reconstruction Project includes the reconstruction of the following streets;
Evergreen Trail, Diane Street, and Red Maple Lane by replacement of curb and gutter as
needed, required upgrades of the existing stormwater management system and bituminous
surfacing.
No bonds are being contemplated for this project at the present time.
APPENDIX A
PROJECT COSTS
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
4th Avenue (Main to Pine),
Karth Road, Joyer Lane,
Talle Ln, Canfield Road,
Gaage Lane, Pheasant Run
(Birch Street to northern
terminus)* $1,412,515 $437,000
Evergreen Trail, Diane
Street, Red Maple Lane $4,400,000
Totals by year $1,412,515 0 $437,000 $4,400,000
*Expenditures financed by Street Reconstruction Bonds where issued in an aggregate principal
amount of approximately $1,849,000 in 2021.
APPENDIX B
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
Rondeau Lake
Peltier Lake
Marshan Lake
Centerville Lake
George Watch Lake
Sherman LakeWardsLakeReshanau Lake
Rice Lake
Golden Lake BaldwinLake
Bald Eagle Lake
AmeliaLake
Otter Lake
Cedar Lake
Rice CreekMarsh
RICE CREEKCHAIN OF LAKESREGIONAL TRAIL
County Hwy 10 County Hwy 14County Hwy 21County Hwy 23County Hwy 14
Hodgson RdCounty Hwy 23County Hwy 21%&d(
%&c(
)s
Hugo
White Bear Twp.
Lino Lakes
White Bear Twp.
Lino Lakes
North Oaks
Lino Lakes
ShoreviewLino LakesCircle PinesLino LakesBlaineLino Lakes
Columbus
Lino LakesHugoLino Lakes
Centerville
Document Path: K:\02029-230\GIS\Maps\2020-2024_StreetReconstructionPlan.mxd Date Saved: 6/11/2020 8:30:34 AM
Street Reconstruction Plan
2021
2023
2024
0 3,200Feet¯1 inch = 3,200 Ft
Appendix B
2020 - 2024Street Reconstruction Plan
City of Lino Lakes MN
Amended
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6G
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project
i. Consider Resolution No. 22-120, Accepting bids,
Awarding a Construction Contract
ii. Consider Resolution No. 22-121, Approving Construction
Services Contract with WSB & Associates
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting council’s consideration to accept bids, award a construction contract, and
approve a construction services contract for the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project.
BACKGROUND
On August 8, 2022, the City Council ordered the project and authorized the advertisement for bid
for the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project. The project is the second phase of the NE Drainage
Improvements as outlined in the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan and includes
constructing a stormwater conveyance system under I35E to the east side of the freeway, north of
Main Street. The pipe system will tie into the Watermark Development systems.
The I35E Pipe Crossing Projects included two alternative bids, allowing either jacking 60”
diameter steel casing pipe and installing 42” diameter PP storm pipe (Alternate 1) or jacking 42”
diameter reinforced concrete pipe without a casing (Alternate 2).
Bids were received on Wednesday, October 5, 2022. A total of three bids were received. As
shown below:
CONTRACTOR TOTAL
BASE BID
TOTAL
BASE BID +
ALT 1
TOTAL
BASE BID +
ALT 2
Minger Construction Co., Inc. $142,827.80 $647,877.80 $512,927.80
New Look Contracting, Inc. $126,808.50 $735,508.50 $583,758.50
Meyer Contracting, Inc. $359,470.98 $1,129,980.86 $933,195.42
The low bid was submitted by Minger Construction, Co., Inc. in the amount of $512,927.80 for
the base bid and bid alternate 2. This would be Minger Construction, Co. first project in Lino
Lakes and WSB and Associates has completed construction projects with Minger Construction
Co. in other communities.
The total budget for the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project including soft costs and
contingencies, is $750,000.00. The project is funded through the City’s Surface Water
Management Fund.
The substantial completion date for this project is January 31, 2023.
WSB and Associates has submitted a proposal to complete the construction services the project
in the amount of $32,036.00.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 22-120, Accepting the Bid and Awarding a
Construction Contract for the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project in the amount of $512,927.80 to
Minger Construction, Co., Inc., and adoption of Resolution No. 22-121 Approving the
Construction Services Contract with WSB for the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project, in the
amount of $32,036.00.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolutions 22-120 & 22-121
2. Bid Tabulation
3. WSB Proposal
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-120
ACCEPTING BASE BID AND AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2022 I35E PIPE CROSSING PROJECT
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the construction of the 2022 I35E Pipe
Crossing Project, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids
were received complying with the advertisement; and
CONTRACTOR TOTAL
BASE BID
TOTAL
BASE BID +
ALT 1
TOTAL
BASE BID +
ALT 2
Minger Construction Co., Inc. $142,827.80 $647,877.80 $512,927.80
New Look Contracting, Inc. $126,808.50 $735,508.50 $583,758.50
Meyer Contracting, Inc. $359,470.98 $1,129,980.86 $933,195.42
WHEREAS, it appears that Minger Construction, Co., Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it would be in the best interest of the city to proceed with
Base Bid and Alternate 2,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes:
1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with
Minger Construction, Co., Inc., in the amount of $512,927.80 by the name of the City of
Lino Lakes for the Base Bid and Alternate 2 construction of the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing
Project according to the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and on file in
the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidder the Bid
Bonds made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next
two lowest bidders shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_______________and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
_______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-121
APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONTRACT
2022 I35E PIPE CROSSING PROJECT
WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Council awarding a construction contract to Minger
Construction, Co., Inc. in the amount of $512,927.80, on October 10, 2022; and
WHEREAS, WSB and Associates has submitted a proposal to complete the construction
services for the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project in the amount of $32,036.00; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it would be in the best interests of the city to proceed with
the construction oversight and administration,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, the
Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with WSB, in the name
of the City of Lino Lakes for the construction services of 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_______________and was duly seconded by Council Member ________________ and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
_______________________________
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
PROJECT:OWNER:City of Lino LakesWSB PROJECT NO.: 019485-000Bids Opened: Wednesday, October 5, 2022, at 10:30 amContractorBid Security (5%) BASE BIDALTERNAT 1Steel Pipe JackingALTERNAT 2Concrete Pipe JackingBASE BID AND ALTERNATE 1BASE BID AND ALTERNATE 21 Minger Construction Co., Inc. x $142,827.80 $505,050.00 $370,100.00 $647,877.80 $512,927.802 New Look Contracting, Inc.x $126,808.50 $608,700.00 $456,950.00 $735,508.50 $583,758.503 Meyer Contracting, Inc.x $359,470.98 $770,509.98 $573,724.44 $1,129,980.96 $933,195.42Engineer's Opinion of Cost$198,819.50 $604,000.00 $342,700.00 $802,819.50 $541,519.50Denotes corrected figureDiane Hankee, PE Project ManagerBID TABULATION SUMMARYI hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on October 5, 2022.2022 I35E Pipe Crossing ProjectK:\019485-000\Admin\Construction Admin\Bidding\019485-000 Bid Summary 100522
\\metro-inet\linolakes\Shared\Community Development\Projects\Capital Improvement Projects\2022 I35E Pipe Crossing\Staff Reports\20221010 CC Award Project
& Construction Services\4. Construction Services Proposal.docx 178 E 9TH STREET | SUITE 200 | SAINT PAUL, MN | 55101 | 651.286.8450 | WSBENG.COM October 5, 2022
Mr. Michael Grochala
Community Development Director
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Re: Proposal for Construction Services for 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project
WSB Project No. R-019135-000
Dear Mr. Grochala:
WSB & Associates, Inc. is providing a proposal for construction services associated with
the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing Project. This construction services proposal would be
subsequent to the City Council awarding the construction contract.
The project includes constructing temporary access routes, jacking storm sewer under
Highway I35E, and relocating a MnDOT fiber optic line.
Scope of Engineering Services
WSB is pleased to provide professional construction engineering services for the 2022
I35E Pipe Crossing Project including contract administration, construction observation,
construction staking, coordinating access with private property owners, and weekly
project updates to those impacted by construction. Below is a detailed description of the
engineering services and WSB’s proposed approach.
I. Construction Services
a. Project Management/Contract Administration
Contract Administration includes holding meetings with the contractor & City
of Lino Lakes (preconstruction & weekly construction), processing monthly
quantities for pay vouchers, construction notices and communicating with
property owners on a regular basis.
b. Construction Observation
WSB will provide an experienced engineering specialist whose
responsibilities will include communicating with the Contactor as an agent of
the City, calculating and keeping track of daily construction quantities and
costs, coordinate with impacted property owners as necessary, and work with
the Contractor to assist with a quality constructed product. We will also
coordinate construction testing. Construction testing will be by others.
c. Construction Staking (Survey)
WSB will provide Surveying staff as necessary to provide field staking for
necessary utility alignments, elevations, and any necessary structure related
information.
Mr. Michael Grochala
October 5, 2022
Page 2
\\metro-inet\linolakes\Shared\Community Development\Projects\Capital Improvement Projects\2022 I35E Pipe Crossing\Staff Reports\20221010 CC Award Project
& Construction Services\4. Construction Services Proposal.docx
Proposed Fee
WSB will complete the scope of work the project discussed herein on hourly basis for a
not-to-exceed amount of $32,036.00. Tasks not shown are considered outside of the
scope of services. If additional work is necessary, we will prepare a detailed scope of
work and include it as an addendum to this agreement.
This letter represents our complete understanding of the 2022 I35E Pipe Crossing
Project and the proposed scope of services. If you agree with the scope of services and
proposed fee, please sign in the appropriate space below and return one copy to us.
If you have any questions about this proposal, please feel free to call me at
763.287.8536.
Sincerely,
Mark Erichson
Brian Bourassa Mark Erichson
Client Representative Director
ACCEPTANCE:
The City of Lino Lakes hereby accepts the WSB proposal of $32,036.00 for services
outlined in this letter.
City of Lino Lakes
Name
Title
Date
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6H
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Kelsey Gelhar, Assistant City Engineer
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 22-117, Adopting Assessments, 2022
Individual Properties
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 Vote Required
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting City Council consideration to adopt assessments for properties where the
owners have requested connection to City utilities and have entered into a Petition and Waiver
Agreement.
BACKGROUND
The property owners have submitted a signed waiver, which waives their rights to a hearing and
waives their rights to appeal under the Lino Lakes City Charter and/or Minnesota Statute 429
provided that the assessment associated with the improvement is levied against their property. The
City will adopt assessments for the following individual properties, which requested connection to
city utilities:
- 617 Apollo Drive
- 6134 Ware Road
The total amount to be assessed is $96,189.00. Attached is the proposed assessment roll.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 22-117, Adopting Assessments, 2022
Individual Properties.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-117
2. Assessment Roll
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-117
RESOLUTION ADOPTING INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
WHEREAS, pursuant to an executed Petition and Waiver Agreement, associated property
owners waive all rights to a hearing on conducting of local improvements which will benefit the
following properties which requested connection to City utilities:
- 617 Apollo Drive
- 6134 Ware Road
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes:
1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, is
hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named
therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the
proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of
ten years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January,
2022, and shall bear interest at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum from the date of
the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest
on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2022. To
each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid
installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property,
with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City, except that no interest shall be
charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
resolution; and the owner may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City the entire amount of
the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in
which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or
interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County
Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be
collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_____________and was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
ASSESSMENT ROLL OCTOBER 10, 2022
2022 INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
SANITARY SURFACE NEW LOT SANITARY WATERMAIN STREET STORM SEWER
SEWER WATERMAIN WATER ASSESSMENT FRONT FRONT FRONT FRONT TOTAL
PIN ADDRESS UNIT UNIT UNIT MGMT UNIT FOOTAGE FOOTAGE FOOTAGE FOOTAGE ASSESSMENT
08-32-22-43-0024 617 APOLLO DRIVE 26 39,650.00$ 38,298.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 77,948.00$
32-31-22-32-0005 6134 WARE ROAD 1 3,155.00$ 3,814.00$ -$ -$ 5,792.00$ 5,480.00$ -$ -$ 18,241.00$
TOTAL 42,805.00$ 42,112.00$ -$ -$ 5,792.00$ 5,480.00$ -$ -$ 96,189.00$
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6I
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Kelsey Gelhar, Assistant City Engineer
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 22-118, Adopting Assessments, Butler
Addition
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 Vote Required
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting City Council consideration to adopt assessments for the Butler Addition
Development pursuant the Development Agreement for the project.
BACKGROUND
The City Council approved the Development Agreement for Butler Addition dated August 11th, 2021.
The Agreement provides for the assessment of trunk water, sanitary sewer, and surface water fees.
The total amount to be assessed for Butler Addition is $14,128.00. In the above referenced
Development Agreement, the developer has waived any and all procedural and substantive objections
to the special assessments.
The developer has reviewed and approved the assessments. Attached is the proposed assessment roll.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 22-118, Adopting Assessments, Butler Addition.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-118
2. Assessment Roll
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-118
RESOLUTION ADOPTING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, BUTLER ADDITION
WHEREAS, pursuant to the development agreement dated August 11th, 2021, the developer waives all rights to a
hearing on conducting of local improvements which will benefit the properties within the Butler Addition
development which requested connection to City utilities,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes:
1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of
land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the
assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of fifteen years,
the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2023, and shall bear interest
at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution.
To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution
until December 31, 2022. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year
on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the
County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment, to the City, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30
days from the adoption of this resolution; and the owner may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in
which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be
charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be
extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in
the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_____________and was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
ASSESSMENT ROLL OCTOBER 10, 2022
BUTLER ADDITION ASSESSMENTS
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
SANITARY WATER
SANITARY ACCESS WATER ACCESS SURFACE TOTAL
PIN ADDRESS UNIT TRUNK CHARGE (SAC)TRUNK CHARGE (SAC)WATER ASSESSMENT
08-31-22-24-0053 7870 Meadow View Trail 1 -$ -$ 2,341.00$ 1,473.00$ 1,672.50$ 5,486.50$
08-31-22-24-0054 540 Lois Lane 1 1,630.00$ 1,525.00$ 2,341.00$ 1,473.00$ 1,672.50$ 8,641.50$
TOTAL 1,630.00$ 1,525.00$ 4,682.00$ 2,946.00$ 3,345.00$ 14,128.00$
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM 6J
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Kelsey Gelhar, Assistant City Engineer
MEETING DATE: October 10, 2022
TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 22-119, Adopting Assessments, Watermark
5th Addition
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 Vote Required
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting City Council consideration to adopt assessments for the Watermark 5th Addition
Development pursuant the Development Agreement for the project.
BACKGROUND
The City Council approved the Development Agreement for Watermark 5th Addition on August 8th,
2022. The Agreement provides for the assessment of trunk water, sanitary sewer, and surface water
fees.
The total amount to be assessed for Watermark 5th Addition is $516,462.92. In the above referenced
Development Agreement, the developer has waived any and all procedural and substantive objections
to the special assessments.
The developer has reviewed and approved the assessments. Attached is the proposed assessment roll.
Property ID Numbers and addresses have yet to be assigned by Anoka County and will be updated
prior to registering the assessment with the county.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 22-119, Adopting Assessments, Watermark 5th
Addition.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 22-119
2. Assessment Roll
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 22-119
RESOLUTION ADOPTING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, WATERMARK 5TH ADDITION
WHEREAS, pursuant to the development agreement dated August 8th, 2022, the developer waives all rights to a
hearing on conducting of local improvements which will benefit the properties within the Watermark 5th Addition
development which requested connection to City utilities,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes:
1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of
land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the
assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of fifteen years,
the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2023, and shall bear interest
at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution.
To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution
until December 31, 2022. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year
on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the
County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment, to the City, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30
days from the adoption of this resolution; and the owner may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in
which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be
charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be
extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in
the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota this 10th day of October, 2022.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
_____________and was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL OCTOBER 10, 2022
WATERMARK 5TH ADDITION ASSESSMENTS
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
SANITARY WATER
SANITARY ACCESS WATER ACCESS SURFACE TOTAL
PIN ADDRESS UNIT TRUNK*CHARGE (SAC)TRUNK *CHARGE (WAC)WATER ASSESSMENT
PENDING Lot 1 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 2 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 3 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 4 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 5 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 6 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 7 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 8 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 9 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 10 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 11 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 12 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 13 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 14 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 15 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 16 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 17 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 18 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 19 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 20 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 21 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 22 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 23 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 24 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 25 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 26 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 27 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 28 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 29 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 30 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 31 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 32 Block 1, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 1 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 2 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 3 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 4 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 5 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 6 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 7 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL OCTOBER 10, 2022
WATERMARK 5TH ADDITION ASSESSMENTS
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
SANITARY WATER
SANITARY ACCESS WATER ACCESS SURFACE TOTAL
PIN ADDRESS UNIT TRUNK*CHARGE (SAC)TRUNK *CHARGE (WAC)WATER ASSESSMENT
PENDING Lot 8 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 9 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 10 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 11 Block 2, XXXX Norway Lane/XXXX Lotus Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 1 Block 3, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 2 Block 3, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 3 Block 3, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 4 Block 3, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 5 Block 3, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 6 Block 3, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 1 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 2 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 3 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 4 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 5 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 6 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 7 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 8 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 9 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 10 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 11 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 12 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 13 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 14 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 15 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 16 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 17 Block 4, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 1 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 2 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 3 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 4 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 5 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 6 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 7 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 8 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 9 Block 5, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 1 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 2 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 3 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL OCTOBER 10, 2022
WATERMARK 5TH ADDITION ASSESSMENTS
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
SANITARY WATER
SANITARY ACCESS WATER ACCESS SURFACE TOTAL
PIN ADDRESS UNIT TRUNK*CHARGE (SAC)TRUNK *CHARGE (WAC)WATER ASSESSMENT
PENDING Lot 4 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 5 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 6 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 7 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 8 Block 6, XXXX Norway Lane 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 9 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 10 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 11 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 12 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 13 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 14 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 15 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 16 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 17 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 18 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 19 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 20 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 21 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
PENDING Lot 22 Block 6, XXXX Koronis Circle 495.57$ 1,525.00$ 1,830.79$ 1,473.00$ -$ 5,324.36$
TOTAL 48,070.29$ 147,925.00$ 177,586.63$ 142,881.00$ -$ 516,462.92$
* Sanitary Trunk Credit of $110,040.00 and Water Trunk Credit of $49,490.00 are applied and are reflected here