Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/13/2006 Council PacketREVISED WORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Monday Marc, 6 2006 March 13, 2006 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Council Chambers (not televised) 5:30 P.M. 4:30 P.M. 1. Heron Project 2. YMCA Funding 3. Charter Amendment Petition Process and Timeline 4. 21' Avenue /Backage Road Improvements with Centerville 5. White Bear Township Low Pressure Sanitary Sewer System (SE Lino Lakes) 6. Interchange Improvements Update 7. Visioning Process 8. Council Guidelines (To follow) 8. Advisory Board Appointments 9. Regular Agenda Items 10. Adjourn WORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Monday March 6, 2006 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Community Room (not televised) 5:30 P.M. 1. Heron Proj ect 2. YMCA Funding 3. Charter Amendment Petition Process and Timeline 4. 21St Avenue/Backage Road Improvements with Centerville 5. White Bear Township Low Pressure Sanitary Sewer System (SE Lino Lakes) 6. Interchange Improvements Update 7. Visioning Process 8. Council Guidelines (To follow) 9. Regular Agenda Items 10. Adjourn WS-1 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Marty Asleson Date: March 6, 2006 Re: Heron Rookery /Peltier Island Update The Peltier Lake Heron Rookery has been a focus of study since June 14, 2000 when it was discovered that the Herons had abandoned nests on the island. At that time the Heron colony was considered the second largest colony in the Metropolitan area. A task force was formed to investigate reasons for nest abandonment. Several hypotheses for abandonment were listed and the task force set out to investigate causes including: disturbance /human influence, predation, and loss of habitat. A Slow No Wake Ordinance was passed jointly with the City of Centerville on March 25th, 2002. The purpose of this ordinance was to minimize human disturbance to adjacent nesting birds and the shallow, resource - sensitive lake area around the island. On May 10th of 2004, the Lino Lakes City Council amended the Slow No Wake Ordinance to repeal a Sunset Clause written into the ordinance. The Heron Task Force meets on a regular basis to discuss the Heron issue and continue investigation into Heron nest abandonment. Council periodically has seen information on the Herons in the news media, DNR, University of Minnesota, and City Publications. The purpose of this update is to report to the Council findings of the Heron Task Force. In addition to myself, Jeff Perry, Glen Fuchs, Scott Noland from Anoka County parks and Andy Von Duyke from the University of Minnesota will be at the meeting. Page 1 WS -2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 2 Date: Council Work Session, Monday, March 6, 2006 To: Mayor and City Council From: Mary Divine Re: YMCA Agreement Background Staff and the YMCA have concluded negotiations for consideration by the City Council regarding expanding the YMCA in the first phase of construction. The final agreement will include: 1. The City of Lino Lakes provides up to $2.35 million for the construction and development of an expanded YMCA facility to include the additional leisure pool. (This is $850,000 more than the original $1.5 million committed.) 2. The YMCA of Greater Saint Paul provides up to $3.5 million for the construction and development of an expanded facility. (This is $1 million more than the $2.5 million the YMCA had committed.) 3. The City of Lino Lakes will eliminate the original agreement of a 5 -year, 10% discount on monthly membership fees. 4. Any potential savings from the cost projections in the final bids or value design reductions will be split 50/50 between the YMCA and the City of Lino Lakes. 5. The YMCA will construct an expanded YMCA facility to include the following: • Lap lane swimming pool WS -2 • Leisure style zero -depth pool • Sauna • Teen. Senior Center • Locker rooms: Women's, men's, family • Gymnasium • Aerobic Studio • Fitness Center • Kid's Stuff childcare • Lobby /lounge • Administrative offices 6. The YMCA will provide the following benefits to Lino Lakes Residents at the Chain of Lakes YMCA: • A Community Pass will be included in each Lino Lakes City Newsletter (4x per year) for a period of five years. This pass will allow an individual or family one use of the Chain of Lakes facility. There will be an expiration date on each pass based on the newsletter schedule. • Teen Center will be open to all Lino Lakes teens (6th — 10th grade) without a membership. (Fee $2 /day to start for nonmembers) • 4 annual community events will be held throughout the year free of charge to members and nonmembers. (If special activities, such as dinner, occur there will be a nominal charge.) • Free Learn to Swim water instruction will be offered in the early summer for children ages 3 —10 on an annual basis for three years. (Includes nonmembers. Registration will be taken until classes are full). • Once a year the YMCA will do health testing for the Police and Fire Departments. • Water aerobics will be offered to individuals with arthritis at a daily rate and will not require a membership. • Community Health Seminars • Senior Health Fairs will be offered annually which will include fitness classes, blood pressure checks and social opportunities. • Resident rate to participate in evening adult leagues (for Lino Lakes residents, a 10% discount for three years) WS -2 • 10% resident discount for the Fall Fun Run • The YMCA will provide an initial period of 90 days from the grand opening of the building to join the YMCA with all joiner fees being waived. The source of revenue that will be allocated for the city's additional $850,000 commitment will be tax abatement from the Tax Abatement District in Legacy at Woods Edge. Based on developer assumptions of anticipated values and phasing of the part of Woods Edge that is within the Tax Abatement District, a 15 -year abatement will generate in the range of $2,406,845. The capacity is available to meet an obligation of $2,350,000. Benefits to consider by building the full YMCA facility now rather than later: • The city has a community center valued at approximately $8.2 million for a capital investment of $2.35 million. • The city has no long term operations and maintenance costs • The YMCA is a catalyst for further development within Legacy at Woods Edge. • The benefits received for the city's contribution benefit the entire community, not just members. The YMCA has provided opportunities for families, children, teens and seniors. • The YMCA has a community oriented mission to ensure that all people, regardless of income, have access to the facility through sliding scale memberships for lower income families. WS -3 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Julie Bartell, City Clerk Date: March 6, 2006 Re: Charter Amendment Petition Process and Timeline Background The City Council received a petition to not allow City Council Members (including the Mayor) to also be members of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission at its September 26, 2005 meeting. Council member Carlson had questioned whether the petition had followed the requirements for petitions set forth in the charter. The Council revisited the matter at a work session on January 18, 2006 and reviewed the City Attorney's opinion that the provisions in the charter are not applicable, the petitioners are not attempting to institute an amendment under M.S. 410 as the petition does not meet the requirements of that statute, and that the petition is an "advisory" petition for ballot consideration by the City Council. The Council directed staff to prepare a timeline indicating the process and schedule such an amendment could follow in order to be presented on the November 7, 2006 ballot. That schedule is attached for review. Council member Carlson also requested more specific information on why the petition was found to be insufficient; a response from the City Attorney is also attached. Requested Council Direction Staff is seeking Council direction on the petition. If the Council wishes to proceed with the process, it would be appropriate to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming City Council meeting for referral to the Charter Commission. As indicated in the timeline, there is a determinate amount of time allowed for Charter Commission review (with an allowance for an extension) and a deadline of September 1 for the entire process. Attachments Timeline for consideration of Charter amendment; Correspondence with City Attorney • • • ine for consideration of E 1- U O N November 7 E U g U d O U U March 13 and March 27 O U ti a) ti • p o c O PO o ccd • w E ti e gam' 0 • U O O2 • N 60 2. ' o 0 5 H Zi) 6 - Timeline is based on the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 410.12. LAW OFFICES OF William G. Hawkins and Associates WILLIAM G. HAWKINS BARRY A. SULLIVAN October 7, 2005 Legal Assistants TAMMI J. UVEGES HOLLY G. PROVO Ms. Jean Viger Deputy Clerk City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Re: Petition Dear Jean: 2140 Fount! AVENUE Nom ANOICA, MINNESOTA 55303 PHONE (763) 427 -8877 FAX (763) 421 -4213 E -MAi, HawkLawl@aol.com I am responding to your fax regarding the petition submitted by Robert Bening and Al Demotts to the City Council at the September 26, 2005 City Council meeting. I have reviewed the petition as well as the State statute pertaining to amendment of a charter. The provisions in the City Charter are not applicable to the subject matter that is listed in the petition since this is a request to amend the City Charter. The applicable statute that would govern this procedure is Minn. Stat. § 410. Based upon a review of the information submitted and the discussion at the City Council meeting, it does not appear to me that the Petitioners are attempting to institute an amendment to the Charter by petition as authorized in Minn. Stat. §(412)12. The form of the petition does not meet the requirements of State law. shou,i _a :.o t It is my opinion that this is merely an advisory petition submitted to the City Council requesting that the Council initiate a proposed ordinance to amend the Charter as provided for in Minn. Stat. § 410, Subd. 5. ,The Council would have the discretion on whether or not-tb-pftopose such an ordinance, submit it to the Charter Commission followed by submission to the voters for approval or rejection. In conclusion, the Council has the discretion to determine whether or not to proceed on this request but is not mandated to do so by the petition. If you have any questions, please contact me. i�cercly, 4,re"- mar William G. Hawkins WGH /tju January 31, 2006 Mr. William G. Hawkins Attorney at Law 2140 Fourth Av S Anoka, MN 55303 Re: Charter Amendment — Charter Membership Dear Mr. Hawkins: I am writing in regard to the matter of the petition submitted to the Lino Lakes City Council requesting amendment of the City Charter to not allow City Council Members (including the Mayor) to also be members of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission. The City Council received your opinion regarding the petition submitted by Robert Bening and Al Demotts at their work session on January 18. Based on your advice that if the subject of the petition is to be submitted to the voters, it should follow the process set forth in Minn. Stat., Section 410.12, Subd 5 (Amendments proposed by council), the City Council requested the following information: a) A timeline indicating how this amendment could be considered for inclusion on the fall 2006 ballot (I have prepared a proposed timeline and am attaching it to this letter for your review); b) Since you have stated in your letter that the form of the petition does not meet the requirements of State law, Council Member Carlson requests more specific information on how the petition is insufficient and if the petition could be corrected to meet both the requirements of the State Statute and the City Charter (Chapter 5). The City Council will be considering this matter again at an upcoming work session (February 8 or March 6), pending receipt of the requested information. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Ju anne Bart 11 City Clerk Enc. • • • LAW OFFICES OF William G. Hawkins and Associates WILLIAM G. HAWKINS BARRY A. SULLIVAN February 14, 2006 Legal Assistants TAMMI J. UVEGES HOLLY G. PROVO Julianne Bartell Lino Lakes City Clerk Lino Lakes City Hall 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Re: Charter Amendment Dear Julie: 2140 FOURTH AVENUE Nom ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 PHONE (763) 427-8877 FAX (763) 421 -4213 E -MAa. HawkLawl@aol.com FEB 1 5 2005 CITY OF LINO LF,Y,_ S am responding to your letter of January 31 regarding questions about the procedure for petitioning for amendments of the City Charter. In your letter you make reference to Chapter 5 of the Lino Lakes City Charter. This section of the Charter deals with initiative and referendums on ordinances and recall of public officials. It does not describe the method for petitioning for the amendment of the City Charter itself. The provisions of Minn. Stat. § 410.12 govern charter amendments. They are extensive and rather than merely summarize those in this letter, I am attaching a copy of this statute. Basically, a petition of voters equal to 5% of the total votes cast at the last previous State general election in the City must be submitted to amend the Charter. There are other requirements in the statute regarding signatures, addresses of electors and attachment of the proposed amendment to the petition. The statute requires that the proposed Charter amendment must be submitted at least 12 weeks before the general election. This issue has come up in other cities that we represent and rather than having a petition circulated and obtaining signatures on a petition that is invalid under the statute or on a subject or change that is not lawful, these communities have authorized petitioners to spend up to one hour with our office to make sure the petition meets the requirements of Minnesota law. • • • Ms. Julianne Bartell February 14, 2006 Page Two The City Council may wish to consider this in Lino Lakes. I hope this answers your questions. Sincerely, William G. Hawkins WGH /tju Enclosure • Minnesota Statutes 2005, 410.12 Page 1 of 4 410.12 Amendments. Subdivision 1. Proposals. The charter commission may propose amendments to such charter and shall do so upon the petition of voters equal in number to five percent of the total votes cast at the last previous state general election in the city. Proposed charter amendments must be submitted at least 12 weeks before the general election. Only registered voters are eligible to sign the petition. All petitions circulated with respect to a charter amendment shall be uniform in character and shall have attached thereto the text of the proposed amendment in full; except that in the case of a proposed amendment containing more than 1,000 words, a true and correct copy of the same may be filed with the city clerk, and the petition shall then contain a summary of not less than 50 nor more than 300 words setting forth in substance the nature of the proposed amendment. Such summary shall contain a statement of the objects and purposes of the amendment proposed and an outline of any proposed new scheme or frame work of government and shall be sufficient to inform the signers of the petition as to what change in government is sought to be accomplished by the amendment. The summary, together with a copy of the proposed amendment, shall first be submitted to the charter commission for its approval as to form and substance. The commission shall within ten days after such submission to it, return the same to the proposers of the amendment with such modifications in statement as it may deem necessary in order that the summary may fairly comply with the requirements above set forth. Subd. la. Alternative methods of charter amendment. A home rule charter may be amended only by following one of the alternative methods of amendment provided in subdivisions 1 to 7. Subd. 2. Petitions. The signatures to such petition need not all be appended to one paper, but to each separate petition there shall be attached an affidavit of the circulator thereof as provided by this section. A petition must contain each petitioner's signature in ink or indelible pencil and must indicate after the signature the place of residence by street and number, or other description sufficient to identify the place. There shall appear on each petition the names and addresses of five electors of the city, and on each paper the names and addresses of the same five electors, who, as a committee of the petitioners, shall be regarded as responsible for the circulation and filing of the petition. The affidavit attached to each petition shall be as follows: State of ss. County of being duly sworn, deposes and says that the affiant, and the affiant only, personally circulated the foregoing paper, that all the signatures appended thereto were made in the affiant's presence, and that the affiant believes them to be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be. Signed http: / /www.revisor.leg. state. mn.us/ bin / getpub .php ?pubtype= STAT_CHAP_SEC &year = curr... 2/8/2006 • Minnesota Statutes 2005, 410.12 Page 2 of 4 (Signature of Circulator) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Notary Public (or other officer) authorized to administer oaths The foregoing affidavit shall be strictly construed and any affiant convicted of swearing falsely as regards any particular thereof shall be punishable in accordance with existing law. Subd. 3. May be assembled as one petition. All petition papers for a proposed amendment shall be assembled and filed with the charter commission as one instrument. Within ten days after such petition is transmitted to the city council, the city clerk shall determine whether each paper of the petition is properly attested and whether the petition is signed by a sufficient number of voters. The city clerk shall declare any petition paper entirely invalid which is not attested by the circulator thereof as required in this section. Upon completing an examination of the petition, the city clerk shall certify the result of the examination to the council. If the city clerk shall certify that the petition is insufficient the city clerk shall set forth in a certificate the particulars in which it is defective and shall at once notify the committee of the petitioners of the findings. A petition may be amended at any time within ten days after the making of a certificate of insufficiency by the city clerk, by filing a supplementary petition upon additional papers signed and filed as provided in case of an original petition. The city clerk shall within five days after such amendment is filed, make examination of the amended petition, and if the certificate shall show the petition still to be insufficient, the city clerk shall file it in the city clerk's office and notify the committee of the petitioners of the findings and no further action shall be had on such insufficient petition. The finding of the insufficiency of a petition shall not prejudice the filing of a new petition for the same purpose. Subd. 4. Election. Amendments shall be submitted to the qualified voters at a general or special election and published as in the case of the original charter. The form of the ballot shall be fixed by the governing body. The statement of the question on the ballot shall be sufficient to identify the amendment clearly and to distinguish the question from every other question on the ballot at the same time. If 51 percent of the votes cast on any amendment are in favor of its adoption, copies of the amendment and certificates shall be filed, as in the case of the original charter and the amendment shall take effect in 30 days from the date of the election or at such other time as is fixed in the amendment. Subd. 5. Amendments proposed by council. The council of any city having a home rule charter may propose charter amendments to the voters by ordinance. Any ordinance proposing such an amendment shall be submitted to the charter http: / /www.revisor.leg. state. mn. us / bin / getpub .php ?pubtype= STAT_CHAP_SEC &year = curr... 2/8/2006 Minnesota Statutes 2005, 410.12 commission. Within 60 days thereafter, the charter commission shall review the proposed amendment but before the expiration of such period the commission may extend the time for review for an additional 90 days by filing with the city clerk its resolution determining that an additional time for review is needed. After reviewing the proposed amendment, the charter commission shall approve or reject the proposed amendment or suggest a substitute amendment. The commission shall promptly notify the council of the action taken. On notification of the charter commission's action, the council may submit to the people, in the same manner as provided in subdivision 4, the amendment originally proposed by it or the substitute amendment proposed by the charter commission. The amendment shall become effective only when approved by the voters as provided in subdivision 4. If so approved it shall be filed in the same manner as other amendments. Nothing in this subdivision precludes the charter commission from proposing charter amendments in the manner provided by subdivision 1. Subd. 6. Amendments, cities of the fourth class. The council of a city of the fourth class having a home rule charter may propose charter amendments by ordinance without submission to the charter commission. Such ordinance, if enacted, shall be adopted by at least a four - fifths vote of all its members after a public hearing upon two weeks' published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment and shall be approved by the mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances. The council shall submit the proposed amendment to the people in the manner provided in subdivision 4, but not sooner than three months after the passage of the ordinance. The amendment becomes effective only when approved by the voters as provided in subdivision 4. If so approved, it shall be filed in the same manner as other amendments. Subd. 7. Amendment by ordinance. Upon recommendation of the charter commission the city council may enact a charter amendment by ordinance. Within one month of receiving a recommendation to amend the charter by ordinance, the city must publish notice of a public hearing on the proposal and the notice must contain the text of the proposed amendment. The city council must hold the public hearing on the proposed charter amendment at least two weeks but not more than one month after the notice is published. Within one month of the public hearing, the city council must vote on the proposed charter amendment ordinance. The ordinance is enacted if it receives an affirmative vote of all members of the city council and is approved by the mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances. An ordinance amending a city charter shall not become effective until 90 days after passage and publication or at such later date as is fixed in the ordinance. Within 60 days after passage and publication of such an ordinance, a petition requesting a referendum on the ordinance may be filed with the city clerk. Such petition shall be signed by qualified voters equal in number to two percent of the total number of votes cast in the city at the last state general election or 2,000, whichever is less. If the city has a system of permanent registration of voters, only registered voters are eligible to sign the petition. If the requisite petition is filed within the prescribed period, the ordinance shall not become effective until it is approved by the voters as in the case of charter Page 3 of 4 http: / /www. revi sor.l eg. state. mn.us/bin/getpub. php ?pubtype= STAT_CHAP_SEC &year = curr... 2/8/2006 Minnesota Statutes 2005, 410.12 Page 4 of 4 amendments submitted by the charter commission, the council, or by petition of the voters, except that the council may submit the ordinance at any general or special election held at least 60 days after submission of the petition, or it may reconsider its action in adopting the ordinance. As far as practicable the requirements of subdivisions 1 to 3 apply to petitions submitted under this section, to an ordinance amending a charter, and to the filing of such ordinance when approved by the voters. HIST: (1286) RL s 756; 1907 c 199 s 1; 1911 c 343 s 1; 1939 c 292 s 1; 1943 c 227 s 1; 1949 c 122 s 1; 1959 c 305 s 3,4; 1961 c 608 s 5,6; 1969 c 1027 s 3; 1973 c 503 s 1 -4; 1986 c 444; 1998 c 254 art 1 s 107; 1999 c 132 s 42; 2005 c 93 s 1 http: / /www.revisor.leg. state. mn.us/ bin / getpub .php ?pubtype= STAT_CHAP_SEC &year= curr... 2/8/2006 WS -4 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Date: March 6, 2006 Re: Work Session Item 4 21st Avenue/Backage Road Improvements with Centerville Background The City of Centerville is proposing to construct a new backage road, south of Main Street, between 20th Avenue South (CSAH 54) and 21St Avenue. The proposed roadway project would also include the extension of 21St Avenue to a point approximately 900 feet south of its existing terminus. The intent of the proposed road project is to; 1) provide new access to commercial and industrial properties south of main street; 2) provide vehicle circulation to off set access limitations contemplated as part of the CSAH 14 reconstruction project; and 3) if built this year would serve to minimize business access disruption during the CSAH 14 project in 2007. The proposed roadway is generally consistent with the planning efforts that have taken place over the last three years including the CSAH 14 Planning Study and the City's I- 35E Corridor AUAR. Each of the studies contemplated the need for a backage road system to complement the planned county road improvements. It is staff's understanding that the City of Centerville has authorized preparation of plans and specification for the project, called for a hearing on improvements, and authorized eminent domain proceedings for their portions of the project. 21st Avenue straddles the corporate limits of the City of Centerville and Lino Lakes. For the project to move forward the two cities will need to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). Centerville has already prepared the JPA based, in part, on the one previously entered into for the first leg of 21St Avenue. While staff supports the concept of the backage road there are several issues that need to be resolved prior to the City of Lino Lakes taking action on the project. As proposed in Page 2 the JPA, Lino Lakes would be responsible for 50% of the 21' Avenue extension costs estimated at $150,000 and acquisition of the right -of -way in Lino Lakes. The City does not have this project programmed in its draft 5 -year Financial Plan and does not have a potential funding source other than special assessments to the benefiting property owner or a property tax levy. Staff is not recommending the use of property taxes for this proj ect. The property affected by the improvement is currently owned by Mr. Gerald Rehbein. Staff also understands the property is under contract with a development company. Staff has spoken with Mr. Rehbein and the development company regarding the project. Both are supportive of the project, however the proposed alignment creates some potential site development issues. As proposed, the roadway alignment is off set from the existing utility and roadway corridor established for Northern Lights Boulevard. Therefore, they are unwilling, at this time, to commit to the special assessments and right -of -way dedication. City staff has made it clear to Centerville staff that Lino Lakes cannot move forward with the project without an assessment agreement with the benefited property owner and the dedication of right -of -way. Staff would recommend that the proposed intersection of the backage road and Northern Lights Blvd. be shifted southerly to line up with the existing utilities and roadway corridor. Centerville has expressed concern with that alignment due to additional Clearwater Creek flood plain impacts that would need to be addressed and potentially delay the project. Staff is continuing to meet with Centerville and the property owners to resolve this issue. Council Direction Should the City move forward with this project provided that an assessment agreement is executed with the benefited property owners, right -of -way is dedicated and roadway alignment issues are resolved? Attachments 1. General Location Map 2. Backage Road Layout Page 2 z 0 -, U 0W 7 F- \0Q16 z En z :OU O Z. 1o, L'Q mO ��z 703 O O r+13eNa 3 01V00 3nN3ne , rScz I . ! G LC, 33 H.5.1 Pp ),,,:// 1 L .,„ �� %� U a ' �! .< ce re a. O SS � i I 10.3 i I ■■ zj � II r Lounc E z 0 0 7 W z z 0 < W N Pf w o - i ■ I I d 1 0 9 once 0 w L — PS' HVS0 3fN3i1 V'IJOZj a o 0H O i 113 CD g :P INDUSTRIAL PARK AND 21st AVENUE UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS w 0 C cn w z z J J ct w z w U ren wv rn rr..o onnrli /s fi.n'r nvr. rno un.1ow cwaAfixn \on\r ,.rrnor o \or o\:: COMM: 616 -05143 DATE: 2 /08/06 61605143601 DWG General Location Map Proposed Centerville Backage Road Future New Intersection Proposed Backage Road WS -5 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: James E. Studenski Date: March 6, 2006 Re: Work Session Items — White Bear Township Utilities Background White Bear Township is extending a low pressure sanitary sewer and water main system to their northern limits of the Township just south of C.R. J and West Bald Eagle Boulevard. The City Lino Lakes has been contacted by White Bear Township to see if we are interested in a future extension of their proposed utility project. Also, the Township has received a petition (attached) from their resident requesting connection to the new utilities for a vacant lot owned in Lino Lakes. The vacant lot abuts the Township on West Bald Eagle Boulevard where the new utilities are to be installed. The actual connection location would be from North Hobe Court in White Bear Township. This is an existing neighborhood currently serviced by private systems. If feasible, the new system could be enlarged to provide future service to the West Oaks neighborhood in Lino Lakes. The extra cost would be paid by Lino Lakes. It should be noted that White Bear Township is anticipating constructing the improvements this spring. Any additional costs related to capacity increases to service Lino Lakes are not currently programmed within our draft 5 year CIP. Costs for this type of improvement would typically be borne by the City Trunk Utility Fund. Any consideration of agreement with White Bear Township would need to include evaluation of financing the project. The Lino Lakes area that could be served is located within our sanitary sewer district 3F (map attached). This area is proposed to be service through a lift station that would pump to the north to the Met Council interceptor. Due to the existing wetlands in the area it may be more feasible to provide future service to this area from White Bear Township This area in Lino Lakes is currently defined as Low Density Unsewered Residential. It is outside of the staged growth area and is outside of the MUSA boundary. Page 1 Requested Council Direction Staff is requesting the following direction from the Council: 1. Does the City want to consider sanitary sewer service to the West Oaks area from White Bear Township? 2. Should staff work with White Bear Township to evaluate the potential for sewer service to the West Oaks area? 3. Does the City wish to consider allowing sanitary sewer service to be provided, by White Bear Township to one property in the extreme southeast corner of the City? Attachments 1. General Location Map 2. Sanitary Sewer District Map 3. Resident Petition Page 1 FEB. 28.2006 8:27AM WHITE BEAR TOWNSHIP White Bear Township Town Board c/o Bill Short, Town Clerk NO. 712"'"7 P, 3 February 7, 2006 Re: Timber Hills Area — Sanitary Sewer, Watermain and Street Restoration Town Project No. 2005 -6 Sirs: We own the property which parallels the east/west portion of North Hobe Court in Timber Hills, on the north side of the Ramsey /Anoka county line. Property I.D.: 36 -31- 22-44 -0007 Approximate Address: 6000 W Bald Eagle Blvd, Lino Lakes, MN 55110 -0000 We are requesting that this property be added to the Timber Hills sewer & water project, with connections available for this property located across the street from the driveway at 5982 North Hobe Court. Sincerely, Frank & Sue Grover 5231 W. Bald.Eagle Blvd. White Bear Lalcg, MN 55110 ( FEB 0.8 2pns , / J --------. 1 ;1. - --------------,.... No. ■■ ■ ow Ott Peltier Lake 1 MIL INN Centerville Lake 4 .„.,, itaviitvii..1 an MIA xi 1-W:ulangir immix e III 1111111 i. r mum ,iimid.. ogi ,.. moms imii0e. :a Ea rst o„. swum imgrOt poi Irj wpm. nt.r0 11"412N 1111 IM ma iralleViIiIIN &NO ow AIM= 1111 ''-- "sITZ 11-4•111 IN Er. rum • Sem MUD 'ilA Wm .. 1.0--1r-s - .1.■ .... ..... IIII °Vim mum% 1- si lit c...pa . ma II. , , ma ra limmingliMI irii• MIL IN .. MIMI 1,0P■ " . .. im sow/II ii■ Et. Le ,g1 1 ism A■1111 III :11 :LIEN 111/1111111WS sr-`-, Sherman Lake IE "4/figestromg MIN Immo PRI ‘441 Mr% 11 ram :ISM "6" "*. SIM riniN 441111tiiiimanu ire wave. ma "%AV rre70 ILA ME Nam :14111INIAb 111 ■ is Es • • ons_!1___• weilm =NNE Sbillill MN MA FUTURE MCES SEWER 3A ersT lit-' -"I-- ; 101100 III, FORCEMAI up 0 z M220 • 1 1 win-m.1m FUTURE LIFT STATION • OA • 1F 48 FUTURE LIFT STATION • Amelia Lake 4A 1-D Ak. 1-11111M - -OM ■,r r FUTURE UFT STATION 4C, FUTUR LIFT ANN 1 ORTH OAKS n_ma_rs. , —t.IFT STATION TY OF LINO LAKES, MN FIGURE 6 MPREHENSIVE N Otter Lake 1 1 1 0 1000 2000 3000 3 F EXISTING MCES SEWER -7 U) 'Bald Eagle Lake TKDA C1TY' F IN �� KES WS-6 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Date: March 6, 2006 Re: Work Session Item 6 Interchange Improvements Update Background City staff is continuing to work with Anoka County, Mn/DOT, and State Legislators regarding funding for the 35W /Lake Drive and 35E /Main Street interchanges. The following is a status update of each project. 35W /Lake Drive Interchange City staff, SEH Inc., Anoka County and Mn/DOT are continuing to work on the final design of the interchange. The City's application for federal participation through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) was not recommended for funding. Anoka County, on behalf of the City has submitted a 2007 federal appropriations request to Senator Coleman and Congressman Kennedy for consideration. Additionally State Senator Reiter has submitted legislation, on behalf of the City, for state bond proceeds in the amount of $2.86 million for the interchange. Staff has also met with our Mn/DOT District Engineer to evaluate other potential funding methods. In each case state funding for the interchange is doubtful. The latest estimate for the interchange reconstruction is approximately $9.2 million, assuming $2.5 million each from the City and County, the cooperative agreement dollars and in -kind construction engineering from Mn/DOT, we still have a $3.2 million dollar gap in the funding. Staff is also in the process of completing final plans for the interim improvements (signals, ramp realignment, and Lake Drive widening). These have been sent to Mn/DOT for final review. The estimated interim improvement cost is approximately $2.8 million. The right -of -way acquisition process is currently underway. Property appraisals are being completed and staff anticipates offers being made in March. While we intend to make 1 every effort to acquire property through direct purchase we anticipate the need for council authorization to commence eminent domain proceedings in April. The City was awarded $400,000 from Mn/DOT's Cooperative Agreement program for the interim interchange improvements. However, these funds are only available through the end of State Fiscal Year 2006 which in on June 30, 2006. Therefore, the City will need to determine whether or not to continuing pursuing the interchange reconstruction. Completing the interim improvements, while improving the system during the short term, will likely result in the interchange improvements being delayed nearly a decade. 35E /Main Street Interchange The 35E interchange has received a recommendation for funding as part of the STIP process. These dollars would be available in 2010. In addition the project has received $1 million in federal appropriations for engineering design. The total project cost, including right -of -way and engineering is approximately $15 million. With the existing and proposed federal funding of $6.5 million approximately $8.5 million is needed to construct the project. The unfunded portion of the project will need to be shared between Anoka County, Mn/DOT, and Lino Lakes. Contributions from neighboring communities is also being considered. The City of Hugo has announced its inclusion of $100,000 for the interchange in its 2006 budget. Anoka County has also submitted a 2007 federal appropriations request to Senator Coleman and Congressman Kennedy for consideration. The City of Centerville has informed staff of their intent to submit legislation to the state for $14,100,000 to cover federally eligible costs associated with the CSAH 14 reconstruction project and the 35E /Main Street interchange that are not covered by federal funds due to maximum funding caps. Centerville has requested a letter and /or resolution of support for the legislation. While we agree with their intent to get additional funding for the project, staff does not recommend supporting the legislation for several reasons. 1) As with our own bill there is little opportunity for success; 2) It is likely to compete with and impact any chance we have for our Lake Drive legislation which should be our number one priority at this time; 3) We are uncertain whether there is support for the bill from our local state legislators. Preliminary Design of the interchange is anticipated to commence within the next two months. City staff participated with Anoka County and Mn/DOT on the consultant selection process. SRF Consulting Group was selected for the project. SRF is the engineering consultant for the CSAH 14 project and recently completed Mn/DOT Interregional Corridor Study that evaluated long term operation of 35E and 35W. The federal grant for the preliminary design covers 80% of the cost. The local share of approximately $62,500 is proposed to be split 50/50 between Anoka County and Lino Lakes. This amounts to approximately $31,250. Additionally, the final design of the project is anticipated to start in 2007. Again federal participation will cover 80% of the total design cost of approximately $940,000. This leaves approximately $190,000 to be shared by the City and County. This amounts to approximately $95,000 in city costs. While both the City and County will pursue additional cost participation from adjacent 2 communities and Mn/DOT, we are evaluating funding sources based on the 50/50 funding scenario. Staff is proposing to fund our local share from State Trunk Highway Turnback dollars that are available from the Highway 49 turnback of which a portion adjacent to the State Correctional Facility was returned to the City. It appears from our evaluation that approximately $250,000 to $300,000 is available to the City from this fund. While a substantial portion of the $8.5 million construction funding gap will be covered by Anoka County we are anticipating a significant local contribution. The amount of our contribution will likely have an impact on the timing of construction as well as potentially impacting, positively or negatively, the County's ability to assist with the Lake Drive interchange construction. If it is the City's intent to apportion some of these infrastructure costs to new development in the interchange area then we need to begin evaluating what options are available to facilitate this. The Council is aware that the Hardwood Creek developer has identified their willingness to substantially participate in this improvement. However, there is also considerable development interest in the other quadrants of the intersection. It is staff s opinion that infrastructure costs should be equitably distributed across the benefiting properties within the interchange area. In order to do this staff would recommend preparing an engineering analysis to evaluate possible cost allocation scenarios as well as a review and report from our financial and legal consultants. We would also recommend an evaluation of our Municipal State Aid fund to identify what dollars, if any, could be available for either the 35E or 35W interchanges. Council Direction 1. Should the City continue to pursue reconstruction of both 35W and 35E interchange reconstruction? 2. Should staff work with the City's Financial, Engineering and Legal Consultants to evaluate interchange funding sources including special assessments and Municipal State Aid Funds? 3. Should the City use available State Trunk Highway Turnback funds to cover local share of costs related to 35E /Main Street preliminary and final design, and 35W /Lake Drive and funding source review expenditures? 4. Should the City support City of Centerville's proposed CSAH 14 and interchange improvement legislation? 3 ws - 7 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 7 Date: Council Work Session March 6, 2006 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Re: Visioning Process Background Conducting a visioning process is one of the activities included in the 2006 Council goals. During the recent Council retreat, many issues where discussed which indicated the need to review and update the comprehensive plan. Therefore, it was determined that the comprehensive plan update will begin in 2006 and be completed in 2007. Following the report on the results of the community survey, the second step in the comprehensive plan update process is completing a community visioning process. In order to adhere to the 2007 comprehensive plan completion date, steps need to be taken to initiate the community visioning process in order for this activity to proceed in a timely manner Requested Council Direction Staff is seeking direction from the Council to request proposals from consultants to conduct the community visioning process.