HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/08/2008 P&Z Packet• CITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
(Scheduled to be televised on Ch. 16)
Please be courteous and turn off all electronic devices during the meeting.
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 10, 2008
IV. OPEN MIKE
V. ACTION ITEMS
A. Variance from Ordinary High Water Level to allow for the reconstruction of an
• accessory structure located at 1801 77th Street — Paul Bengtson
•
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Animal Chiropractic Care
B. Town Center Signage Requirements
VII. ADJOURN
Meeting guidelines on reverse side.
City of Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board
MEETING GUIDELINES
Open Mike — The purpose of a Board Meeting is to accomplish the business of the city.
When presenting at a meeting please remember to be respectful, and follow these
guidelines:
• Please address the meeting chair.
• State your name and address for the record.
• Please observe a 4- minute limit.
• The topic must relate to city business.
• Open Mike is for items not on the agenda.
• A spokesperson must represent a group of five or more — groups will have 8 minutes.
• The Presiding Officer may limit duplicative presentations.
• Remember, the meeting is to discuss city business only.
Public Hearing - Held as a separate item of business on the agenda. The public hearing
segment is your opportunity to tell the Board how you feel about issues scheduled to be
heard. Typically, a hearing follows these steps:
• The Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice - Chair) will announce the proposal to be reviewed and
ask for the staff report. The presiding Officer shall maintain strict order and etiquette at all
meetings.
• Staff will present their report on the proposal.
• Board members will then ask City Staff questions about the proposal.
• The Presiding Officer will then open up the public hearing for anyone present who wishes to
comment on the proposal. This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions
about the proposal.
Comments should be limited to four (4) minutes unless further time is granted by the
Presiding Officer. All comments should be directed to the Board as a body and not to any
individual Board Member or City Staff Member unless permission is granted by the Presiding
Officer. No person shall be permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a
member of the Board without the permission of the Presiding Officer.
• After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his/her comments, the Presiding
Officer shall close the public hearing.
• The Board will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed.
• The Board will then make a recommendation(s) and/or a decision.
When you are called upon for your comments, please step to the microphone at the
podium and state your name and address for the record.
Occasionally, the Board may continue a hearing to another meeting before taking action.
Meeting Etiquette
The Planning & Zoning Board must preserve order and decorum while the meeting
is in session. A resident shall not, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt
the proceedings or the business of the Board, nor disturb any resident or Board
Member while speaking or refuse to obey the orders of the Board.
•
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES
ERS'
PRESE
1U:08 P M.
1 Hyden, Perry Laden, RobertiNeh. =v,
ogalz (Vice Chair), Rob' affrty, M eha
rul Tralle Chaff]
0
. Paul Bengtson, .Michael Gruchala, Jeff Smyser, Jim'
Studens
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Chair Tralle called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:31
• p.m. on April 9, 2008.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as presented
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
July 9, 2008
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to approve the July 9, 2008 Minutes. Motion was supported
by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 - 0. (2 abstained)
IV. OPEN MIKE
Chair Tralle declared Open Mike at 6:34 p.m.
There was no one present for Open Mike.
Mr. Pogalz made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:35 p.m. Motion was supported by
Mr. Root. Motion carried 6 - 0.
V. ACTION ITEMS
A. Recommendation to the City Council regarding approval of the Draft 2030
Comprehensive Plan
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
September 10, 2008
Page 2
Jeff Smyser, City Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Smyser explained the process
that led to the drafting of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Smyser stated that the draft
plan was well received by the other boards, and a few minor corrections were suggested.
Ciara Schlicting, Bonestroo consultant firm, provided an overview of the Comprehensive
Plan and pointed out some of the proposed corrections. Ms. Schlicting's presentation
included key components of each chapter as well as implementation plans to support the
visions, goals & policies.
One suggested modification was the extension of the trail along Elmcrest Ave. Ms.
Schlicting added that staff recommended additional designated bike routes along Sunset
& County Road J per citizen comments. She also pointed out some corrections that
should be made to the Future Roadway System maps.
As a result of the joint meeting of the Environmental Board and Park Board, a text
revision was recommended in Chapter 11 regarding the city taking over the tile system
west of 20th Avenue.
Board Members requested additional information regarding the Urban Reserve
designation. Ms. Schlicting stated that most growing communities currently use Urban
Reserve as a designation. She noted that Met Council began using the designation of
Urban Reserve during the 1996 regional framework, and she is not aware of any legal
challenges regarding the use of Urban Reserve. She explained that the key benefit of
Urban Reserve is to keep larger parcels intact so that master planning can be done to
achieve the goals of the plan. She explained that if large parcels are carved into smaller
lots, then it becomes more difficult to provide necessary services that interconnect to
other parcels.
Board Members discussed development and staging. Ms. Schlicting described that
although there would be no cap on development, staging areas would allow for projected
growth that could be accommodated for in each staging area. She noted that the issue of
rate versus quality of development was discussed at length by the Comprehensive Plan
Advisory Panel.
Mr. Smyser stated that page 3 -25 of the 2030 Draft Comprehensive Plan contains the
Growth Management Policy Framework Outline. He explained that when the city
approaches the 10 -year threshold to when the next staging area would begin, the City
Council would need to determine whether or not the city is ready to open up that next
staging area. He explained that inadequate infrastructure may determine that new
development areas are not ready for development. He noted that development within a
staging area would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment prior to the designated
time.
Mr. Tralle opened the Public Hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Doug Koppy, 6689 East Shadow Lake Dr., and Bill Princeton, 7023- 256th St., were in
attendance to represent the Rice Creek Snowmobile Trail Club. They asked if the city
DRAFT MINUTES
•
Planning & Zoning Board
September 10, 2008
Page 3
had considered the existing snowmobile trails that are present in Lino Lakes. They stated
that it appears that some of the proposed city trails go over the snowmobile trails that
have existed for 25 years. They noted that these are DNR sponsored trails. Mr. Koppy
distributed a map of the existing snowmobile trails. He was concerned that the city
would be taking the existing trails away. He added that Mr. VonDeLinde (Anoka County
Parks Dept.) is aware of the existing trails. He stated that the city's map is not definitive
enough to show the exact location of the trails, but the location of city trails has caused
the club problems in the past. He stated that they would like to be involved in
discussions of trail locations. He added that some areas of the city include snowmobile
trails that run alongside of paved trails.
City Staff responded that the majority of the snowmobile trails in the city are within the
regional park, and are therefore not under the city's jurisdiction. Mr. Grochala said that
the city did consider this issue when locating the trail behind the YMCA in Lino Lakes.
Staff noted that language would be added to the plan recognizing snowmobile trails.
Dan Waldoch Jr., 559 Lois Ln., Lino Lakes stated he is a 58 -yr. resident. Mr. Waldoch
was present to discuss the proposed change for 1001 Main St. He noted that these
properties are in an estate and to settle the trust they will be sold in the future. He stated
that they are currently zoned with a 10 -acre minimum to provide a number of buildable
sites. He said that the new proposed Urban Reserve will reduce it to two conforming lots
and one non - conforming lot. He added that this will reduce the value of the parcels. He
requested that the minimum lot size does not change and thanked the board for their
consideration.
Jeff Joyer, 8174 Lake Drive, stated he has been a resident since 1978. He noted that his
parcel is the "front door" to the Waldoch Farm/Center. Mr. Joyer spoke about three
groups of parcels. He thanked the board for this amazing process and noted that he was a
former Planning & Zoning Board Member & task force member. Mr. Joyer commended
the board's efforts. Mr. Joyer distributed a handout he had created showing the location
of the parcels he referred to as "Parcel A," "Parcel B," and Parcel C," in addition to the
Family Trust parcel. He noted that staff had spent a number of hours with his family
describing the proposed impact to these parcels. Mr. Joyer explained the size of the
parcels and the use of the land, as well as the history of owners. He noted that utilities
are currently at the intersection of Lake Dr. & Main St. He stated that with each plan
revision, the parcels have been rezoned and the required lot size has increased. He was
concerned that the next generations will not have an opportunity to build. He said the
current proposed plan pushes development too far into the future and noted it was a bit of
a shock to discover the recent change to his site.
Mr. Joyer explained that three years ago they proposed to add a year -round retail center
to their existing garden center, and were told by the city that it would only be possible if
they brought in sewer and water and fire suppression throughout the greenhouses. He
stated that today they are faced with the fact that they cannot build commercial without
sewer and water, and that utilities will not be available until after 2030. He stated this
makes it difficult to have a viable growing business or for the next generation to continue
in a viable manner. He said this is creating an environment with few options for owners
to build and grow. He offered a solution could be to allow a 30 -acre parcel in the Urban
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
September 10, 2008
Page 4
Reserve to have commercial. He pointed out that all three parcels directly adjoin the area
where sewer will be provided. He wondered how the council proposes to provide utilities
to existing properties without the extension to a new commercial development. He stated
that a very abrupt line has been drawn along these parcels.
Mr. Joyer stated that he would prefer to develop on his property prior to the proposed
staging timeline, and provided specific recommendations for staff and the board to
consider for each of the three parcels. He noted that he had discussed these
recommendations with staff and he would welcome an option for change. Mr. Joyer
added that the parcel that is held in a family trust has been pastured and farmed for 92
years, and that this is not necessarily a practical solution for the future.
Michael Grochala, Community Development Director, provided some insight to the
process leading to the proposed changes to these parcels. Mr. Grochala noted that the
2007 map referenced by Mr. Joyer is the full build map included within the draft plan.
The full build map identifies the Joyer property as future commercial and high density
residential. In the short term (2030 Plan) the area is shown as Urban Reserve.
The location of the Urban Reserve was determined by evaluating the staging plan. Both
the development forecasts and the sanitary sewer capacity was analyzed to guide the
location of the stage 1 and stage 2 lines. He explained that there are five sewer districts
in the city, each with sub - districts. Staging in each sewer district is planned to ensure
there will be sewer capacity and to ensure a rational development sequence. He pointed
out that the Joyer property was located in Sewer District 2. The City does not currently
have capacity within the system to service all of district 2.
He noted that staff identified the areas that have the existing necessary infrastructure for
development. The plan is to bring a trunk reliever up the west side of the city that will
free up capacity in the rest of District 2. Without the reliever, capacity is limited to the
point that only the Stage 1 area can be served. He explained that the sod farms would
need to develop in order to allow for expansion into the Waldoch area. He added that the
plan is to reserve capacity for existing unsewered neighborhoods prior to allocating
service to new development areas. He pointed out that the Waldoch property and the
Joyer property will be serviced by separate lines, and the city is not projecting enough
growth to bring utilities to all this land in the foreseeable future.
Mr. Grochala pointed out that keeping these properties Urban Reserve at one unit per
forty acres would alleviate conflict as future development occurs. He noted that staff
would have no issue with moving Parcel C, as identified, into the Stage 1 growth area, as
it is immediately adjacent to the utilities from the Pine Glen subdivision. He noted that a
review of the Comp Plan every two years could provide opportunity for revisions if
development, such as the sod farms, should occur earlier than anticipated.
Board Members voiced their understanding that reserving capacity is one of the
mechanisms to control growth before it is ready to occur. Development at this location
will be dictated by what develops to the south, and that although a parcel may be moved
from Stage 2 to Stage 1, development will still not occur until utilities are present.
DRAFT MINUTES
•
Planning & Zoning Board
September 10, 2008
Page 5
Mr. Smyser explained that capacity for utilities is of utmost importance and that the
problem with the last plan was that it did not consider the availability of service to areas.
The city is trying to avoid misleading property owners, and reiterated that the
expectations of the past could not be fulfilled, so staff is trying to avoid creating this
problem again.
Mr. Tralle called for a 10- minute recess at 8:35 p.m.
Mr. Tralle reconvened the meeting at 8:48 p.m.
Board members discussed the proposed revisions to the parcels.
Staff explained that the need for fire suppression for the expansion of retail space at the
garden center is a state fire code requirement. Regarding the staging areas, staff noted
that a city always has to identify needs and draw a line, as development drives the
installation of a pipe. Staff pointed out that a residential area along Orange St. and Maple
Street with lots of around 10,000 sq. ft. with on -site sewer systems will require sewer
service soon from a public health standpoint. The city needs to plan for service to that
area.
Board Members further discussed the Urban Reserve designation. Some members
thought that Parcels A & B should be designated at one unit per ten acres versus
permanent rural. They were reminded that any parcel designated as Urban Reserve will
remain as such until someone comes in with a development proposal. Staff noted that
most property owners will wait to develop when sewer is available.
Board Members asked if staff had considered cluster developments. Staff replied that
clustering works well in permanently unsewered areas. But, as soon as a cluster system
is created, it becomes difficult to finance service to adjoining parcels when necessary,
which sometimes causes a donut hole for infrastructure. Staff reminded the board that
part of the city's growth management strategy is to provide a fully functional system.
Staff reiterated that the Urban Reserve designation is just a holding area for development.
The whole point of long term planning for full build out is to avoid these types of issues
and problems in the future.
Board members discussed the consideration of reducing the Urban Reserve requirements
to one unit per ten acres. Those in favor of reducing the requirements stated that they
understand the value of master planning, but acknowledge that it may cause limitations to
families. Those against changing the requirements stated it would complicate things for
the city, pointing out that this issue was discussed for a long time during the Comp Plan
process. Board members stated that they understand that Urban Reserve is just a
designation, and that the point is to maximize planning for optimal path for roads,
neighborhoods and businesses although it may be a burden to some land owners.
Staff reminded the board that there are areas in need of service, and the city would be
remiss if they are not trying to service an area that could be a public health hazard. Staff
explained the need to plan efficiently based on public, health, welfare and safety, and the
need to deal with existing homes rather than future potential homes.
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
September 10, 2008
Page 6
Board Members asked if Parcel B could be changed to Mixed Use. Ms. Schlicting
replied that a Mixed Use designation would provide for flexibility.
Mr. Grochala reiterated that they could amend the staging of Parcel B, but that
development will drive the timing regardless.
Board members were concerned that the Waldoch Farm could not expand their business.
Staff pointed out that in order to expand, a business needs to be consistent with the full
build plan of the city. Mr. Joyer's property is currently guided medium density, which
means the existing business is in conflict with city's existing comprehensive plan. The
proposed plan will eliminate this conflict. Once again, staff reminded the board that the
current fire and building code requirements include a sprinkling suppression system for a
retail business. In addition, the current city code states that no future commercial
development is allowed without utilities.
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to amend the 2030 Comp Plan by changing the Full Build
Land Use designation of Parcel A from Commercial and High Density Residential to
Mixed Use. Motion was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0.
Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to amend the 2030 Comp Plan by changing the Staging
Plan designation of Parcel B from Stage 3 to Stage 2. Motion was supported by Mr.
Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0.
Board Members questioned if there would be any impediment to the city if this parcel
was added to Stage 2. Staff explained that accommodations would have to be made to
keep within the agreed upon growth forecast.
Motion failed 3 — 4. (Hyden, Laden, Pogalz and Rafferty voting nay.)
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to amend the 2030 Comp Plan by changing the Staging Plan
designation of Parcel C from Stage 3 to Stage 1. Motion was supported by Mr. Hyden.
Motion carried 6 -0.
Deb Waldoch, 559 Lois Ln., commented about the sewer line near the end of Main St.
near the Waldoch farm. Mr. Grochala explained that the existing sanitary sewer line is
there, but that the depth of the line is too shallow to serve the Waldoch area. Area 2C,
the Waldoch area, would require a new lift station in order to be developed.
Board Members asked why the lift station in Pine Glen was designed to provide for a
small area only. Mr. Studenski explained that the system is made up of trunk lines and
service lines. He explained that large pipes run on Lake Drive and Main Street, and that
the elevations of land cause a difference in the location of service. Cost & feasibility is
considered with each service pipe.
Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to recommend changing Urban Reserve to a density of one
unit per ten acres. Motion was supported by Mr. Tralle.
DRAFT MINUTES
•
•
Planning & Zoning Board
September 10, 2008
Page 7
• Mr. Laden pointed out that after many meetings and work of the Comp Plan Advisory
Panel, the board is drastically changing something that the panel had agreed on.
Motion carried 4 -3. (Hyden, Laden and Pogalz voting nay.)
Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 10:00 p.m. Motion was
supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 6 -0.
Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to recommend approval of the Draft 2030 Comprehensive
Plan as amended to the city council. Motion was supported by Mr. Root.
Mr. Smyser added that a resident came into city hall earlier that day and requested a
revision to move a three -acre parcel and a one -acre parcel into Stage 1 growth area. Mr.
Smyser stated that staff is comfortable with the requested change because the sewer pipe
is near and the additional few homes would not create a capacity problem.
Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to amend the motion on the table to include the revision
of the staging plan to include two small parcels on Birch St. into Stage 1. Motion was
supported by Mr. Tralle.
Mr. Rafferty thanked city staff and the P &Z Board members.
Mr. Rafferty stated that he is not comfortable with the openness of the plan, but is in
favor of the previous type of plan. Mr. Rafferty has a reservation to express a positive
vote, but will do his best to ensure that the plan is everything it should be.
Motion carried 5 — 1. (Rafferty voting Nay.)
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. None
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 10:08 p.m. Motion was
supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
Dawn Bugge
Community Development Assistant
DRAFT MINUTES
•STAFF ORIGINATOR:
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM 5.A.
Paul Bengtson
October 8, 2008
TOPIC: Variance to the Shoreland Ordinance — Ordinary High Water Setback
1801 77th Street
To allow the attached accessory structure to be rebuilt in a different layout
that would include a slight decrease in the setback to the Ordinary High
Water Line.
BACKGROUND
Ron Marier has requested approval of a Variance from the Ordinary High Water Level (150 feet) of Peltier
Lake to allow the reconstruction of a stoun damaged accessory structure. The structure was removed by the
applicant, and upon applying for a building permit for the reconstruction, staff infoliued the applicant that the
decrease in the setback from the lake caused by slightly reconfiguring the structure would not be allowed under
the strict enforcement of the Shoreland Ordinance. He has since begun construction of the center portion of the
proposed addition, to allow him to enclose the structure and prevent any further damage from nature.
The property is located on the eastern shore of Peltier Lake just north of the intersection of Peltier Lake Drive
dand 77th Street. The existing accessory structure was damaged in the recent storm and was torn down to allow
econstruction. The applicant has submitted a plan indicating the previous and proposed layout.
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan, Land Use and Zoning: The table below identifies the existing land use and zoning
as well as guided land uses for the area.
Location
Existing Land Use
Guided Land Use
Existing Zoning
Site
Residential
Low Density Sewered Residential
Rural
North
Residential
Low Density Sewered Residential
Rural
South
Residential
Low Density Unsewered Residential
Rural
East
Residential
Low Density Sewered Residential
Rural
West
Peltier Lake
Peltier Lake
Peltier Lake
Setbacks:
The Zoning Ordinance requires a five foot setback from side property lines for attached accessory structures.
The proposal clearly exceeds this requirement.
The Shoreland Ordinance requires a 150 foot setback from the Ordinary High Water Level of Peltier Lake.
There is much of the site that would meet this setback, but in order to attach the structure it would need to
encroach into the 150 foot setback.
*Findings:
State law requires the following findings to be made in order to grant the approval of a variance. Staff has
completed the findings in regards to the upland lot area reduction based on the revised submittal:
•
FINDINGS
In considering all requests for Variance or appeal and in taking subsequent action, the City shall make a
finding of fact:
a. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions
allowed by the official controls.
While the zoning ordinance requires an accessory structure for all residential properties, the
structure is not required to be attached to the main structure. As such, the property would still
have reasonable use with a detached structure built the full 150 feet from the Ordinary High Water
Level of Peltier Lake.
b. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his property not
created by the landowner.
While the adjacent lake creates a somewhat unique physical circumstance to this property, there
still remains a large portion of land that could be constructed upon in compliance with all
ordinances.
c. That the hardship is not due to economic considerations alone if reasonable use for the
property exists under the terms of the ordinance.
While the zoning ordinance requires an accessory structure for all residential properties, the
structure is not required to be attached to the main structure. While the expense of construction
may be higher, the property would still have reasonable use with a detached structure built the full
150 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level of Peltier Lake.
d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same
district.
Considering that an alternative location for the garage, detached from the structure, is available,
granting the variance would allow the applicant to encroach into a setback in a way that other
structures would not.
e. That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance.
The spirit and intent of the Ordinary High Water Level setback for structures is to minimize
encroachment of development onto a natural environment. While the existing dwelling will still
encroach upon the setback, the encroachment would be minimized by denying the proposed
addition.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending denial of the request for a variance based on the attached finding of fact.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Marier Justification Letter submitted September 12, 2008.
2. Marier Site Plan submitted September 12, 2008.
•
•
•
Paul Bengtson
Associate Planner
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014 -1182
Dear Paul and Committee,
Narrative Information for Variance on 1801 77th Street East - Marier Property
Please grant a variance for the following reasons:
1. Enlarged the entrance to correct illegal stair case to the basement level.
2. Correct entering the home into a closet with 3 levels to navigate in a confined
area. Wheelchair and limited mobility access improved with change.
3. New entrance provides wheelchair and handicap access with a staging area.
4. Increase depth of garage to provide a straight stair case access on west wall to
living area from garage. Will provide a means to install handicap lift system from
garage to living area and provide room to navigate from the vehicle to stair case
into the living area.
5. Raise garage height by 8 inches to improve drainage away from structure and
improve access from garage area.
6. Add covered front entrance to correct water entering into well pit and root cellar.
7. Add 2 car garage to handicap entrance in order to use vehicle side lift system.
8. Add covered 3 season porch to exiting deck in order to cover walkout icing
problem and provide sheltered sitting area.
History: Original 1856 Marier homestead farm house site with existing structure and
proposed addition/remodel with greater set back from lake then original homestead
deweling. Home has provided care for Paternal and Maternal Parents, Grandparents and
great Grandparents. Improvements will allow the use of new medical equipment to
continue this tradition. Provisions are in place to ensure that the 4' &5th generation
Marier males will be able to provide this service as well as continue protecting the Peltier
Lake Watershed.
Please note that the new addition is 30 feet above the OHW and only 3 feet closer to the
lake, leaving a 119.9 foot set back. Please approve project so generations to come can
enjoy and protect this unique property.
Respectfully submitted,
Ron Marier
Ron Marier
RECEIVED
SEP 1 2 2008
CITY OF LINO LAKES
•
4d5±
I ii-G1 11,1
SEE DETAILS
PELTIER
LAKE
SHORELINE (884.73) &
OHW UNE(884.7) N.G.V.D. 29
OF PELTIER LAKE,
AS LOCATED, 9 -11 -08
100
h
0
200
Scale In Feet
9
77TH STREET
EXISTING
DETAIL a
EXISTING
BU!LDI \G
-LFE— 904.6s
NO SCALE
LEGEND
Bituminous Surface
Existing Building Line
LFE Lowest Floor Elevation
DESCRIPTION (PER CLIENT)
LOT 5 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 55,
ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SKETCH NOTES
1. For details see building plans.
2. Vertical Datum = NGVD 1929
3. Ordinary High Water Elevation =BB4.7 feet
Lowest Floor Elevation = 904.6 feet
HUI, T
BEBEISEN, P.A.
PO Box 37
Forest Lake, MN 55025
ph: (651) 464 -3130
fax: (651) 464-4822
email: hult@mfra.com
Surveyors + Engineers ± Wetiand Specialist
Client
RON MARL ER
Project
1801 EAST 77TH
ST., H U G O, MN
Location
11- 31 -22, ANOKA
COUNTY, MN
Certification
Summary
Approved: KLJ
Drawn: MDN
Revision History
No. Date By Submittal / Revisioi
Sheet Title
SKETCH
Sheet Number Revisioi
1 OF1
Project No.
0814:
• AGENDA ITEM 6.A.
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Paul Bengtson
MEETING DATE: October 8, 2008
TOPIC: Non - Veterinarian Animal Chiropractic Practices
BACKGROUND
The State of Minnesota recently adopted a revision to state statutes to allow chiropractors to practice upon
animals, if certain requirements were met. Previously only licensed veterinarians were allowed to do such
work. Our city is home to one of the chiropractors has requested to expand their business to include animal
chiropractic care at their current location in the Rice Lake Professional Center building at 6776 Lake Drive.
The State Statute that was adopted is attached. It leaves much of the regulation of the use to the licensing
board. The Minnesota state chiropractic board requires the following for treating animals:
•
• Must register with the chiropractic board
• Must have completed an approved course of at least 210 hours
• Must have a referral from a Veterinarian
• Must have a separate treatment room
• Must complete 6 additional hours of continuing education in this subject every year
The state board currently lists 5 licensed (non - veterinarian) animal chiropractors, two are located in
Minneapolis, and the others are located in Roseville, Plymouth, and Lino Lakes. I've spoken with the other
cities that have animal chiropractors in their city and none have specifically amended their codes to address the
issue. However, city staff is concerned with the potential consequences of allowing animal related uses in
buildings that are not specifically designed to allow them. It is a potential public health, safety and welfare
issue that the zoning ordinance is meant to prevent.
ANALYSIS
Currently, any chiropractic care allowed in Lino Lakes is allowed within the Office Business — Clinic
definition:
An establishment located within a building or portion of a building providing out - patient health services
to patrons, including general medical clinics, mental health providers, chiropractor, dentists, orthodontia,
oral surgeons, opticians, and other uses of similar character.
As the definition uses the word `patrons', staff has determined that it implies people who buy the goods or use
the services, not animals. The ordinance could be amended to specify animal chiropractic as part of the office
iiwbusiness-clinic definition, but this would mean it would be allowed in any office building in the city.
IP
Or.rior to the state statute change, only licensed veterinarians were allowed to administer chiropractic care to
mals in the state of Minnesota. As such, the city's ordinances allowed this type of treatment under the use
`Veterinary Hospitals' which is defined as:
A place for the treatment, hospitalization, surgery, care and boarding of animals and birds, under the
direction of one or more licensed veterinarians.
This means that any building used for the treatment of animals (chiropractic or otherwise) had to meet certain
requirements meant to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. These requirements included:
Veterinary Hospitals provided that:
a. Property shall be in conformance with minimum lot size requirements of this zoning
district.
b. All areas in which animals are confined are located indoors and are properly
soundproofed from adjacent properties.
c. Animal carcasses are properly disposed of in a manner not utilizing on -site garbage
facilities or incineration and the carcasses are properly refrigerated during periods prior to
disposal.
d. An animal kennel is permitted as an accessory use to the veterinary hospital provided
that:
1) The number of animals boarded shall not exceed forty (40).
2) An enclosed indoor or exterior exercise area shall be provided to accommodate
the periodic exercising of animals boarded at the kennel.
3) A ventilation system shall be designed so that no odors or organisms will spread
between wards or to the outside air and will be capable of completely exchanging
internal air at a rate of at least twice per hour. Air temperature must be
maintained between 60 and 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
4) A room separate from the kennel area shall be provided of sufficient size to
adequately separate animals that are sick or injured from healthy animals.
5) Indoor animal kennel floors and walls shall be made of non - porous materials or
sealed concrete to make it non - porous.
6) Animal wastes shall be flushed down an existing sanitary sewer system or
enclosed in a container of sufficient construction to eliminate odors and
organisms and shall be properly disposed of at least once a day.
7) A commercial kennel license is obtained from the City.
e. The applicable provisions of Chapter 503 are determined to be satisfied.
f. All State Health Department and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements for
such facilities are met.
s the definition of Veterinary Hospital clearly requires a licensed veterinarian, this use can not encompass
ion- veterinarian animal chiropractic care. One option for addressing non - veterinarian chiropractors would be
to amend the current Veterinary Hospital definition to have it encompass animal chiropractic care by any
licensed party. This opens up the use to allowing kenneling though, and isn't necessarily the clearest answer.
The other alternative to amending the above sections of code would be to adopt a new definition and use within
the ordinance that specifically accounts for animal chiropractic care. This would allow the most control of the
use, as the use could then be specifically listed as a permitted, accessory, or conditional use in each zoning
district.
Staff is requesting some direction from the Planning and Zoning Board on how to address the issue at hand.
Specifically, we would like some direction on the following questions:
1. What zoning districts should allow this use?
2. Should the use be considered permitted or conditional?
3. If considered conditional, what concerns should be addressed within conditions for the use?
•
•
•
•
Animal Chiropractic Statute
S.F. No. 3683, 4th Engrossment - 85th Legislative Session (2007 -2008) Posted on May 08, 2008
Sec. 24. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 148.01, subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purposes of sections 148.01 to 148.10;_
(1) "chiropractic" is defined as the science of adjusting any abnormal articulations of
the human body, especially those of the spinal column, for the purpose of giving freedom
of action to impinged nerves that may cause pain or deranged function; and
(2) "animal chiropractic diagnosis and treatment" means treatment that includes
identifying and resolving vertebral subluxation complexes, spinal manipulation, and
manipulation of the extremity articulations of nonhuman vertebrates. Animal chiropractic
diagnosis and treatment does not include:
(i) performing surgery;
(ii) dispensing or administering of medications; or
(iii) performing traditional veterinary care and diagnosis.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Sec. 25. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 148.01, is amended by adding a subdivision
to read:
Subd. 1 a. Animal chiropractic practice. A licensed chiropractor may engage in
the practice of animal chiropractic diagnosis and treatment if registered to do so by the
board, and the animal has been referred to the chiropractor by a veterinarian.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Sec. 26. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 148.01, is amended by adding a subdivision
to read:
Subd. lb. Scope of practice; animal chiropractic. Criteria for registration
to engage in the practice of animal chiropractic diagnosis and treatment must be set
by the board, and must include, but are not limited to: active chiropractic license;
education and training in the field of animal chiropractic from an American Veterinary
Chiropractic Association, International Veterinary Chiropractic Association, or higher
institution- approved course consisting of no less than 210 hours, meeting continuing
education requirements; and other conditions and rules set by the board. The board
shall consult with the State Board of Veterinary Medicine in preparing proposed rules
on animal chiropractic.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Sec. 27. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 148.01, is amended by adding a subdivision
to read:
Subd. 1c. Titles. Notwithstanding the limitations established in section 156.12,
subdivision 4, a doctor of chiropractic properly registered to provide chiropractic care to
animals in accordance with this chapter and rules of the board may use the title "animal
chiropractor."
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Animal Chiropractic Statute S.F. No. 3683, 4th Engrossment Page 1 of 3
85th Legislative Session (2007 -2008) Posted on May 08, 2DO8 g
•
•
Sec. 28. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 148.01, is amended by adding a subdivision
to read:
Subd. ld. Provisional interim statute. Upon approval by the board, a licensed
chiropractor who has already taken and passed the education and training requirement
set forth in subdivision lb may engage in the practice of animal chiropractic during the
time that the rules are being promulgated by the board. Enforcement actions may not
be taken against persons who have completed the approved program of study by the
American Veterinary Chiropractic Association or the International Veterinary Chiropractic
Association until the rules have been adopted by the board.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Sec. 29.1148.0321 EDUCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR LICENSURE IN ANIMAL
CHIROPRACTIC DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT; RECORDS; TREATMENT
NOTES.
(a) The following educational criteria must be applied to any licensed chiropractor
who requests registration in animal chiropractic diagnosis and treatment. The criteria must
include education and training in the following subjects:
(1) anatomy.,
(2) anatomy laboratory.,
(3) biomechanics and gait;
(4) chiropractic educational basics;
(5) animal chiropractic diversified adjusting technique, including:
(i) lecture cervical;
(ii) thoracic;
(iii) lumbosacral:
(iv) pelvic; and
(v) extremity;
(6) animal chiropractic diversified adjusting technique, including:
(i) laboratory cervical;
(ii) thoracic;
lumbosacral;
(iv) pelvic; and
(v) extremity;
(7) case management and case studies;
(8) chiropractic philosophy;
(9) ethics and legalities;
(10) neurology, neuroanatomy, and neurological conditions;
(11) pathology;
(12) radiology;
(13) research in current chiropractic and veterinary topics;
(14) rehabilitation, current topics, evaluation, and assessment;
(15) normal foot anatomy and normal foot care;
(16) saddle fit and evaluation, lecture, and laboratory;
(17) veterinary educational basics;
(18) vertebral subluxation complex; and
(19) zoonotic diseases.
• Animal Chiropractic Statute S.F. No. 3683, 4th Engrossment Page 2 of 3
85th Legislative Session (2007 -2008) Posted on May 08, 2008
•
•
(b) A licensed chiropractor requesting registration in animal chiropractic diagnosis
and treatment must have completed and passed a course of study from an American
Veterinary Chiropractic Association, International Veterinary Chiropractic Association, or
higher institution- approved program, consisting of no less than 210 hours of education
and training as set forth in paragraph (a).
f cl A licensed chiropractor engaged in the practice of animal chiropractic diagnosis
and treatment must maintain complete and accurate records and patient files in the
chiropractor's office for at least three years.
f d) A licensed chiropractor engaged in the practice of animal chiropractic diagnosis
and treatment must make treatment notes and records available to the patient's owner
upon request and must communicate their findings and treatment plan with the referring
veterinarian if requested by the patient's owner.
fel A licensed chiropractor who treats both animal and human patients in the same
facility must post a conspicuous sign in the reception area of that facility informing
customers that nonhuman patients are treated on the premises.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Sec. 30. [148.033] ANIMAL CHIROPRACTIC CONTINUING EDUCATION
HOURS.
Any chiropractor engaged in the practice of animal chiropractic diagnosis and
treatment applying for renewal of a registration related to animal chiropractic diagnosis
and treatment must have completed a minimum of six hours annually of continuing
education in animal chiropractic diagnosis and treatment, in addition to the required 20
hours annually of continuing education in human chiropractic under this chapter. The
continuing education course attended for purposes of complying with this section must be
approved by the board prior to attendance by the chiropractor.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Sec. 31. [148.035] SEPARATE TREATMENT ROOM REOUIRED.
A licensed chiropractor who provides animal chiropractic treatment in the same
facility where human patients are treated, shall maintain a separate noncarpeted room for
the purpose of adjusting animals. The table and equipment used for animals shall not be
used for human patients.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.
• Animal Chiropractic Statute S.F. No. 3683, 4th Engrossment Page 3 of 3
85th Legislative Session (2007 -2008) Posted on May D8, 2008
• AGENDA ITEM 6.B.
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Paul Bengtson
MEETING DATE: October 8, 2008
TOPIC: Town Center Signage Criteria
BACKGROUND
The Country Inn and Suites located within the Town Center project has reported that a great number of their
patrons can not find the establishment because it lacks a sign on Town Center Parkway. As you recall, all
single tenant buildings in the Town Center project were allowed only two wall signs to advertise their business.
The developer of the building originally installed three signs on the Country Inn and Suites building and was
instructed by staff to remove one in order to meet the signage criteria of the Town Center Design and
Development Standards. After many months of operation, they have approached the city with a request to
allow a third wall sign for single tenant buildings.
ANALYSIS
The sign ordinance adopted by the City of Lino Lakes allows a normal business to have up to two wall signs,
,and free standing signage based on the amount of frontage the property has.
However, within the Town Center project the Town Center Design and Development Standards are enforced,
and the Signage Criteria within the TCDDS only allows free standing signage for buildings in the Civic district
(City Hall, YMCA). As such, all single tenant buildings which are located in the Commercial or Mixed -Use
districts of Town Center, like the Country Inn and Suites, are only allowed their two wall signs and therefore
have significantly less signage than would be allowed if they were located elsewhere in the city.
This disparity was meant to be covered by master development signage that would potentially advertise the
larger businesses, like the Country Inn and Suites, but the master developer for the site has stalled out any
construction activities and the disparity in signage is affecting the hotel's ability to generate customer
satisfaction and repeat business.
While staff opposes free standing signage that could impede the streetscape and destroy the character that is
meant to be created within the Town Center, we recognize the negative impacts that the hotel is experiencing
because of a lack of proper identification from the street. Therefore, staff is seeking the board's opinion on the
allowance of additional wall signage within the Town Center area.
•