HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-14 Council PacketUpdated 1/3/14
WORK SESSION AGENDA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
Monday, January 6, 2014
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Community Room (not televised)
5:30 P.M.
Oath of Office – Jeff Reinert, Rob Rafferty, William Kusterm an
1. Pavement Management Program
2. NE Drainage Area Study Update
3. 7309 Lake Drive Code Enforcement
4. Advisory Board Appointments
5. Monthly Progress Report
Review Regular Agenda
Adjourn
WS – Item 2
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item 2
Date: January 6, 2014
To: City Council
From: Michael Grochala
Re: NE 35E Area Drainage Study
Background
The City Council authorized preparation of the NE 35E Area Drainage Study in Nov ember of 201 2 .
The purpose of the study was to evaluate options to address drainage for a 700 acre area lying NE of
the 35E interchange. The majority of this area drains to County Ditch 55, under 35E and ultimately
to Clearwater Creek. Land within this area is poorly drained with clay soils that ha ve minimal
infiltration capacity. Additionally, the tile line (Ditch 55) that conveys water from this area was
constructed in the early 1900’s for agricultural purposes. The size of the tile ranges from 10 to 15
inches and does not have the capacity to c arry new ru noff from developing properties .
Given the constraints of the syst em and need to balance agricultural, development and public
infrastructure needs , a comprehensive management plan is needed for this area. Addressing both
water quality and volume requirements within this area will have an impact on the developability of
property within the c orridor. Since this is an area of high importance from an economic development
perspective , it appears to be in the best interest of the city and land owners to develop a plan that
identifies the best options for stormwater treatment and storage, preservation of natural areas and
establishment of a preferred conveyance system and routing for stormwater.
The draft concept plan submitted to the Rice Creek Watershed D istrict (RCWD ) proposes the
construction of a new storm sewer line running south to Clearwater Creek. The plan would require
approval from the RCWD to increase the allowable rate of stormwater discharge d into the creek from
this drainage area . The outlet is proposed to include a gate that will limit this discharge to non -peak
periods. This is intended to mitigate any potential impacts downstream of the outlet. S ubmittal of
the conceptual plan in September has led to additional d iscussion s with the RCWD as well as data
production not originally anticipated with the original contract scope . While RCWD has been
cooperative and is taking an active role in modeling efforts we are anticipating additional analysis
will be needed from W SB.
The original contra ct for the study was $16,500. Additional work performed by WSB is being billed
on an hourly basis. Staff is requesting authorization to increase the contract amount to $25,000 to
address continued work on the project . This work will be funded from the Surface Water
Management Fund. This fund is established from fees collected from developing properties to cover
city planning, administration, and trunk infrastructure costs related to surface water management.
Once an acceptable rate of discharge is arrived at between the City and RCWD it is likely that a more
expansive stormwater management plan will need to be submitted to RCWD for approval. This
process will be covered under a separate agreement with WSB once the final drainage parameters are
determined.
Requested Council Direction
Staff is requesting direction to place the contract amendment on the January 13, 2014 council agenda
for consideration.
Attachments
1. NE Drainage Area Conceptual Plan
H u g o
L i n o
L a k e s
L i n o L a k e s C e n t e r v i l l e
%&c (
C i t y o f L i n o L a k e s 4 9 5 A c r e s Q 1 0 0 = 2 5 c f s
E x i s t . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 2 1 9 8 8 7 .6 1 0 Y r 3 2 2 8 8 8 .0 1 0 0 Y r 4 2 8 8 8 8 .3
P r o . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 2 2 6 8 8 7 .6 1 0 Y r 3 2 2 8 8 8 .0 1 0 0 Y r 4 2 8 8 8 8 .3
E x i s t . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 2 1 5 8 9 6 .4 1 0 Y r 3 1 6 8 9 7 .2 1 0 0 Y r 3 9 8 8 9 7 .9
P r o . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 2 2 3 8 9 6 .3 1 0 Y r 3 1 6 8 9 7 .2 1 0 0 Y r 3 9 8 8 9 7 .9
E x i s t . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 2 0 2 8 9 8 .2 1 0 Y r 3 0 2 8 9 9 .5 1 0 0 Y r 3 8 1 9 0 0 .5
P r o . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 2 1 7 8 9 8 .5 1 0 Y r 3 0 2 8 9 9 .5 1 0 0 Y r 3 8 1 9 0 0 .5 E x i s t . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 1 7 3 9 0 0 .9 1 0 Y r 2 6 4 9 0 2 .1 1 0 0 Y r 3 2 3 9 0 3 .5
P r o . C F S E l e v .2 Y r 1 8 8 9 0 1 .1 1 0 Y r 2 6 4 9 0 2 .1 1 0 0 Y r 3 2 3 9 0 3 .5
G a r d e n L a
E v e r t o n A v e N
V a l j e a n
B l v d
E m p r e s s W a y N
P o e t s G r n
E m i n e n c e
A v e
E
t
h
a
n
A v e
J a r d i n
A
v
e
E u r o p a
A
v
e
N
G a r d
e
n W a y
G r a n t a i r e L a
H e r i t a g e P k w y N
F a b l e H i l l C t
R o s e m a r y W a y
C o s e t t e
L
a
A r b r
e
L a
F r e n c h m a n R d N
E n f i e l d A v e
1 5 8 t h S t N
V i c t o r P a t h
V
i
c
t
o r H u g o B l v d
E m p r e s s A v e N
1
4 6 t h S t N
1 7 0 t h S t N
1 6 5 t h S t N
S o r e l S t
D u p r e R d
T o u r v i l l e C i r
L a c a s s e C t
H e r i t a g e S t
U n i t y A v e
B r i a n
C t
C l e a r w a t e r
R d
O l d M i l l R d
M
e
a
d
o
w
C
t
2 0 t h
A v e N
C e n t e r v i l l e R d
2 0 t h
A v e
N
M a i n S t
P h e a s a n t
L a
T e l e
L a
G a t e w a y C i r
G o
r d
o
n
A v
e
P i o n e e r L a
C l e a
r
R
d
g
M
a
l
l
a
r
d
W
a
y
C e d a r S t E
D e e r P a s s D r
M e a d o w L a
P
a
r
t r i d g e P l
M e a d o w
C
i
r
7 3 r d S t
D u p
r
e
e
R
d
2
0
t
h
A
v
e
S
B r i a n
D r
P r a i r i e D r
C o t t o n w
o
o d
C t
2 1 s t
A v e
N
M i l l R d
C e n t e r S t
L a k e l a n d
C i r
R e v o i r S t
Q u e b e c S t
P h e l p s R d
C o m m e r c e D r
P e l t i e
r
C i r
2 2 n d A v e S
O t t e r L a k e R d
R e h b e i n s S t
1 4 0 t h S t N
7 7 t h S t E
E a g l e T r
E l m c r e s t A v e N
P e l t i e r L a k e D r
E l m c r e s t A v e N
8 0 t h S t E
H
a
r
d
w
o
o
d
C
r
e
e
k
C l e a r w a t e r C r e e k
R i c e
C r e e k
D o c u m e n t P a t h : K :\0 2 0 2 9 -4 0 0 \G I S \W o r k i n g \2 0 2 9 -4 0 -S u b s _D r _C f s _C W C _G a t e I n s t a l l e d .m x d D a t e S a v e d : 9 /1 1 /2 0 1 3 3 :5 7 :5 4 P M
P r o p o s e d C o n d i t i o n s - G a t e I n s t a l l e d a t O u t l e t N o r t h e a s t A r e a D r a i n a g e S t u d y C i t y o f L i n o L a k e s M N 1 i n c h = 1 ,2 0 0 f e e t
±
F l o w D i r e c t i o n
P r o p o s e d P i p e
P o t e n t i a l P o n d s
O t t e r L a k e R d E x t e n s i o n
P r o j e c t A r e a
C l e a r w a t e r C r e e k
D r a i n a g e L i n e s
L I N O L A K E S
H U G O
W E S T _s u b w a t e r s h e d s C i t y o f H u g o 2 1 5 A c r e s Q 1 0 0 = 6 2 c f s
3 5 .9 c f s
2 0 .5 c f s
2 .8 c f s
2 .8 c f s
WS – Item # 3
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 3
Date: January 6, 2014
To: City Council
From: Michael Grochala
Re: Exterior Storage – 7309 Lake Drive
Background
On February 22, 2013, following receipt of resident complaint s , city staff issued a Cease
and Desist Order to Pinnacle Point, LLC, owner of property located at 7309 Lake Drive .
The order required the discontinuance of the use of property for the exterior storage of
shipping containers and construction trailers. Th e containers and trailer s were being
stacked three to four high approximately 30 feet in height across the 5 acre parcel.
Exterior Storage is not allowed as the principal use of property in the LI, Light Industrial
District.
Discussions regarding complian ce have been ongoing between the City, property owner
and the current lessee , Mini Mobile, Inc . The owner has maintained that the use is
consistent with the prior uses on the property and “grandfathered” in. The lessee has
stated that they are not using the property to st ore containers but rather they are operating
a container rental business .
Following discussion at the September 3, 2013 work session the City Council requested
further background on the property history, including review of the owners leasing
informatio n, and clarification of zoning requirements.
Property History
The property was originally the offices of Glenn Rehbein Excavating dating back to the
early 1970’s. The property included offices , shops and exterior storage of equipment and
materials used in the everyday activities of the business . The approximate size of the
parcel is 5.49 acres.
Tshchida Excavating followed Rehbein Companies in 1995. In 2001 Diamond Dirt
purchased the property which was occupie d by Kieger Enterprises, a contracting fir m that
specialized in n atural d isaster c leanup. Beaver Landscaping and StoneWest occupied the
site as the principal tenants in the mid 2000’s. Since the departure of Beaver
Landscaping in 2007 the site has been occupied by a number of businesses at any g iven
time.
Shops and Offices for contractors have been a permitted use in the LI, Ligh t Industrial
District since at least 1971. The use is described in the zoning ordinance as follows:
Construction -related businesses, including s hops and offices for plumbing,
heating, gl azing, painting, paper hanging, roofing, ventilating, electrical, carpentry,
welding, landscaping, excavating, general contracting and similar uses, including
contractor storage of equipment and building materials if enclosed within a building, but
not storage yards.
Storage Yards are defined in the zoning ordi nanc e as follows:
Exterior Storage/Storage Yards: An outside area where equipment, vehicles,
trailers, or material relating to the principal use of a parcel of land is stored. This
includes semi -trucks and t railers. The stored items are not for sale or display but are
used in the everyday operation of the principal use. Also referred to as “outdoor
storage” Outdoor sales lots are not outdoor storage but are distinct uses regulated by
this ordinance.
E xter ior s torage , referred to as Open and Outdoor Storage, accessory to the principal use
is only allowed by conditional use permit in the LI, Light Industrial District.
A conditional use is defined in the ordi n ance as:
A land or developme nt that may not be appropriate generally with in a certain
district but may be allowed in that district with appropriate restriction s , conditions or
limitations as imposed by the City Council.
An accessory use is defined in the ordinance as:
A use of land or of a buil ding or portion thereof customarily incidental and
subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with
such principal use.
A principal use is defined in the ordinance as:
The primary or predominant use of any lot an d/or building.
City records indicate that the property received a Conditional Use Permit in 1982. It is
not clear from the record what the conditional use permit was issued for other than
expansion of the existing building. However, it is clear that at that time the property met
the conditional use permit requirements as follows:
Open storage of materials and equipment when fenced and screened relating to
the principal use.
In February of 2000 the City amended the Zoning Ordinance related to outside st orage in
the LI, Light Indu s trial Zoning District. While still allowed by conditional use permit ,
outdoor storage accessory to a permitted use was further restricted by the following
additional provisions:
a. The storage area is landscaped and screened from view of neighboring uses
and abutting residential zoning districts and public right -of -ways per Sec. 3,
Subd. 4.S of the Zoning Ordinance . The storage area shall be screened 100%
from residential properties.
b. Storage area is fenced in a manner approved by the City.
c. Storage area is blacktopped or concrete surfaced unless specifically approved
by the City Council.
d. All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 4.H of this ordinance
or other lighting standards in place at the time of project approv al..
e. The storage area does not take up parking space or loading space as required
for conformity to this ordinance and not in front yards.
f. The property shall not abut property zoned for residential, rural, or business
use, including land in a neighboring c ity. “Abutting includes across a street.
Abutting does not include properties that touch only corner to corner.
g. The property shall not abut I -35W or I -35E.
h. The storage area shall not abut a school or public park.
i. The ratio of storage area to building foo tprint shall not exceed 3.5:1.
j. Storage shall not include material considered hazardous under Federal or State
Environmental Law.
At the time of adoption in February of 2000 t he use at 7309 Lake Drive d id not meet
requirements of the ordinance. Specifical ly, the property did not meeting the screening
or the surfacing requirements. The property a but s property zo ned for residential use and
abuts school property . Based on a building size of 25,688 sq. ft. the total allowable
outside storage area would be 89 ,908 sq. ft. or 2.06 acres. The existing storage a rea is
approximately 4.5 acres which exceeded the ratio of storage area to building footprint of
3.5:1. Therefore as of February 28, 2000 the property became a non -conforming use.
A Non -Conforming Use is defined in the ordinance as:
A use or activity which was lawful prior to the adoption, revision or amendment
of a zoning ordinance, but which fails, by reason of such adoption, revision or
amendment, to conform to the present requirements of the zoni ng district.
2008 Sec. 3, Subd. 2. regulates Non -Conforming Uses and Structures as follows:.
A. Purpose . It is the purpose of this section to provide for the regulation of non -
conforming buildings, structures and uses and to specify those requirements,
circumstances, and conditions under which non -conforming buildings, structures
and uses will be operated and maintained. The Zoning Ordinance establishes
separate districts, each of which is an appropriate area for the location of uses
which are permitted in that district. It is necessary and consistent with the
establishment of these districts that non -conforming buildings, structures and
uses not be permitted to continue without restriction. Furthermore, it is the intent
of this section that all non -confo rming uses shall be eventually brought into
conformity.
B. Provisions .
1. Any nonconformity, including the lawful use or occupation of land or
premises existing at the time of the adoption of an additional control
under this chapter, may be continued, including through repair,
replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including
expansion, unless:
a. The nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of
more than one year; or
b. Any nonconforming use is destroyed by fir e or other peril to the
extent of greater than 50 percent of its market value, and no building
permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is
damaged. In this case, the City may impose reasonable conditions
upon a building permit in or der to mitigate any newly created impact
on adjacent property.
Of specific importance to this topic is the requirement that while the use can be continued
it cannot be expanded. Secondly, if the use is discontinued for a period of more than one
year it cannot be reestablished.
As requested by the City Council the applicant provided leasing information to verify the
continuance of the outdoor storage use. Based on a review of this information it appears
that as of 2007 approximately 4.15 acres of the pr operty was leased and used for outside
storage purposes by nine (9) separate businesses.
As of January 1, 2010, the leased outdoor storage area had dropped to a total of 1.5 acres
by 5 separate businesses as follows:
Business Use Outdoor Storage
Area (Sq. Ft.)
Bu i lding Lease Area
(Sq. Ft.)
BHS Roadrunner Truck Storage 2000 0
Nitti Rolloff Dumpster Storage 10,840 2,760
Custom Deckwork Shop/Truck Storage N/A N/A
Pomp’s Tire Shop/Outdoor Tire
Storage
26,000 5,891
On time Lawn &
Snow
Contractor
Office/Outdoor
Storage
27,850 4,760
Total 66,690 13,411
No lease info receive d for C ustom D eckwork. Owner ’s representative indicated small
area was leased.
Based on this information the property , while still noncon forming for several other
reasons , was in c onformance with the outdoor storage area to building ratio. The lease
agreement with MiniMobile Inc., including the use of approximately 130,000 feet of
outdoor storage area , was not executed until March of 2011. Accordingly, staff is of the
opinion that the occupation of the site by MiniMobile constitutes an expansion of the
non -conforming use and is not allowed under the zoning ordinance.
In addition , staff questions the lawful use of the property by several of the of the property
tenants that are bein g used to justify continuation of the legal non -conforming status of
the property.
BHS Roadrunner was solely leasing exterior storage space. Pomp’s Tire is an automobile
and truck repair service. Automobile and Truck repair requires a Conditional Use Pe rmit
within the Light Industrial zoning district (Pomp’s has a CUP for their facility on Apollo
Drive). No CUP was applied for or granted for Pomp’s Tire Service at this location. At
the September 3, 2013 City Council work session MiniMobile described t heir use as a
rental business. Rental businesses are not listed as a permitted or conditional use in the
LI, Light Industrial District. Nitti Rolloff would fall under the same category.
Section 1, Subdivision 2..E of the Zoning Ordinance addresses u ses n ot p rovided for
w ithin z oning d istricts as follows .
In any zoning district, whenever a proposed use is neither specifically allowed
nor denied, the City Council shall determine if the proposed use is comparable in
potential activities and impacts to a use listed within the zoning district and is
acceptable related to land use compatibility, traffic, and/or nuisance issues and
established conditions and standards relating to development of the use. Where
such a determination is made, the requirements es tablished for the listed use shall
apply as minimum standards for the proposed use. Additional requirements may
be applied to address differences between the listed use and the proposed use.
In such cases where, in the judgment of the City Council, th ere is no comparable
use listed, the City Council or Planning and Zoning Board, on their own
initiative or upon request from the property owner, may conduct a study to
determine if the proposed use is acceptable and, if so, what zoning district would
be m ost appropriate and what conditions and standards should apply to the
proposed use. The City Council, Planning and Zoning Board, or property owner,
on receipt of the staff study, may initiate an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
consistent with Section 2, Subd. 1. of this Ordinance to provide for the particular
use under consideration or shall find that the proposed use is not compatible for
development within the City.
No such determination was requested or made by the City regarding this specific use
In 2011 , the City Council initiated a review of our industrial district requirements
specific ally related to outdoor storage. This review resulted in the amendment of the
zoning ordinance to allow additional flexibility for outdoo r storage as an accessory use
but stopped short of allowing it as a principal use.
The amended ordinance adopted in 201 1 eliminated the probation on storage areas
abutting residentially zoned property and schools. However the outdoor storage area to
building ration was reduced to 2.5:1.
City staff along with the City Attorney met with the representatives of the owner and
Mini Mobile on December 5, 2013 to discuss options for c ompliance . The owner ’s
representatives disagree with the City ’s posit ion and are seeking options for settlement as
an alternative to a ny possible legal proceedings . In an effort to arrive at an outcome
beneficial to all parties it was su ggested that an agreement be considered that would
allow for the existing use to continue on a temporary basis until a predetermined date. At
that time the property would be brought into compliance with the ordinance provisions.
The Mini Mobile representative agreed to draft a proposed agreement however, no
document has been received at this time. Staff has requested an update from the owner ’s
representa ti v e and Mini Mobile.
Requested Council Direction
Up date only.
Attachments
1. General Vicinity Map
WS – Item 4
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 4
Date: January 6 , 201 4
To: City Council
From: J eff Karlson
Re: Annual Board Appointments
Background
Openings for the city’s advisory boards were advertised and applications recei ve d
through December 18 . Attached is an outline of the applicants for each of the boards or
committee. At this time we are continuing to advertise for two remaining EDAC
o penings.
- Park Board – 4 seats , 4 applicants
- P&Z – 2 seats, 2 applicants
- E nvironment al Board – 2 seats, 2 applicants
- EDAC – 4 seats , 2 applicants
At the December 2 w ork session it was decided the council would like to interview all
applicants .
Requested Council Direction
Staff requests a proposed date for the interviews. It is propos ed to set the interviews at
15 - minute intervals.
Attachments
List of applicants
WS – Item 4 Attachment
201 4 Advisory Board Applicants
Park Board
1. George Lindy (current board member)
2. Charles Evans (current board member)
3. Matt Koehn (current board member)
4. Andrew Levi
Environmental Board
1. Martha DeHaven (current board member)
2. K elly Jo McDonnell
EDAC
1. Nathan Vojetch
2. Rebecca Glewee
3.
4.
Planning & Zoning
1. Perry Laden (current board member)
2. Joe Orehek
Item #5
Monthly Progress Report
January 6 , 2013
Item Last Action Taken Staff Status
Elmcrest Road I mprovements 5/6/13 – Staff met with Hugo to discuss
road improvements at Elmcrest & Cedar
Michael
& Rick
Hugo is interested, b ut is
waiting for development
Digital S canning P roject 10 /14 /13 – Council approved hiring two
PT scanner operator s
Jeff The new hires are currently
scanning financial records
7309 Lake Dr. C ode
V iolation
9 /3 /13 – Council requested additional
information on the property, including
historical use
Michael Included on the January 6
work session agenda
Labor N egotiations
(Sergeants)
12 /19 /13 – Arbitration hearing was held
December 19
Jeff
Expect decision from
arbitrator within 30 days
ECFE Building 1 1 /26 /13 The couple looking to start a
child care business passed the first review
of their SBA loan application and will
likely be approved January 2014
Jeff
KW Commercial prepar ed a
draft lease agreement
Centennial Fire District
11/25/13 The Council app roval an
amendment to Section 2.6 of the JPA
Jeff Councils from each city
approved a 30 -day extension
White Bear Lake Restoration
Assn. v. Dept. of Natural
Resources (DNR)
12/6/13 Lino Lakes was subpoenaed to
appear for a deposition on Dec. 6
Mike
The 1 0 cities named in the
lawsuit are discussing the idea
of forming a JPO for legal
representation