Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/1996 Council Minutes• • • COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES DATE : October 28, 1996 TIME STARTED : 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED : 8:50 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Bergeson, Kuether, Landers, Lyden, Neal MEMBERS ABSENT : None. Staff members present: City Administrator, Randy Schumacher; City Attorney, Bill Hawkins; Community Development Director, Brian Wessel; City Engineer, David Ahrens; Planning Coordinator, Mary Kay Wyland; Consulting Attorney, Ron Batty; and Clerk -Treasurer, Marilyn Anderson. SETTING THE AGENDA Council Member Kuether questioned a disbursement for car rental in the amount of $91.25. Mr. Wessel explained that Community Development Assistant, Mary Alice Devine rented a second van for the Town Center tour. Ms. Wyland added that a van had to be rented, as no Waldoch vans were available on that day. Council Member Kuether called attention to the payment of $830.00 for a chair for the City Engineer, as well as $653.00 for vehicle decals. Mr. Schumacher explained that a significant number of decals were ordered at one time to replace old decals as well as for placement on new vehicles. Council Member Kuether also questioned the expenditure from petty cash of $25.62 for travel, which did not include the name of the individual claiming reimbursement. Council Member Kuether also asked about a disbursement by the Park Department for earplugs. Mr. Schumacher explained that the earplugs are worn while maintenance equipment is being operated. Council Member Kuether questioned the cost of mileage and meals for Cindy Larson of the Police Department, and mileage for Recreation Supervisor, Barry Bernstein. Mr. Schumacher explained that it is the City's policy to reimburse employees for out-of-pocket expenses incurred due to participation in a work-related seminar, including the cost for renting a vehicle when a City vehicle is not available. Finally, Council Member Kuether asked about a disbursement for street lighting. Mr. Schumacher explained that the City is now billed for the signal light at Lake Drive and Highway 49 (Hodgson Road), adding that in new subdivisions the developer pays the cost of installation and the City pays for monthly use. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Kuether moved to approve the consent agenda. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 ITEM ACTION DISBURSEMENTS: October 28, 1996 Approved Centennial Fire District Approved OPEN MIKE Tim Taylor, Discussion of Vehicle Purchased at Auction - Mr. Taylor, 7136 2nd Avenue, explained that some time ago he purchased a Jeep auctioned by the City of Lino Lakes, represented to be in "fine operating order". However, according to Mr. Taylor, he experienced problems with the vehicle and, upon approaching Mr. Ahrens and Mr. DeWolfe to ask about former repair, was informed that the vehicle had never been damaged and/or repaired. Mr. Taylor stated that he subsequently researched the history of the vehicle through the State of Minnesota motor vehicle records, finding that the vehicle was purchased in damaged condition from Big Lake Autos by the City of Lino Lakes. At this time, Mr. Taylor is requesting return of the amount he paid to the City in exchange for return of the vehicle. Council Members Kuether and Neal asked to see Mr. Taylor's documentation. Mr. Schumacher asked if the title to the vehicle indicated that it was salvaged. Mr. Taylor did not deny that the title indicated this fact, but added that the title did not include information as to repairs, adding that he felt the vehicle was misrepresented at auction. Council Member Lyden asked if Mr. Taylor had inquired of a particular individual whether or not the vehicle had ever been wrecked or otherwise damaged. Mr. Taylor responded that the vehicle was marked as requiring no repair and as having had no major damage. Council Member Lyden then asked Attorney Hawkins for an opinion, but Mr. Hawkins indicated he was not prepared to comment as he had not had an opportunity to become familiar with the details of this matter. Mayor Landers recommended that Mr. Taylor contact Attorney Hawkins. Mr. Schumacher requested clarification that Mr. Taylor had been provided with the maintenance records on the subject vehicle, to which Mr. Taylor responded yes, after purchase. 20/20 Vision Update, J. P. Houchins - Mr. Houchins of Stagecoach Trail advised the Council that representatives from the 20/20 project participate in meetings of the Comprehensive Plan Task Force and the Town Center Planning group, and that 20/20 recommendations have been considered in the initial plans for the Town Center. Mr. Houchins stated that an environmental committee had been established, and that the citizens advisory group which monitors and brings forward community issues continues to hold meetings. Council Member Neal asked about attendance at meetings. Mr. Houchins indicated that attendance has been good, but that as issues are addressed the need for additional meetings will diminish. Council Member Bergeson asked about the procedure for replacing members whose terms expire. Mr. Houchins responded that a form will be supplied to all who participated in the 20/20 process as well as advertisement in the local newsletter. • • COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Council Member Lyden asked if Mr. Houchins could identify the most significant deficit. Mr. Houchins responded communication between City government and the citizenry is perceived as the area of most need. Greg Miller, DFL Candidate - Mr. Miller introduced himself to Council, pledging his support to the City of Lino Lakes and all communities within District 51B in hopes of becoming its representative. Mr. Miller stated that he has been a resident of Lino Lakes for 16 years, and expressed his keen interest in the future of the community. POLICE DEPARTMENT, RANDY SCHUMACHER Consideration of Renewal of Animal Contract with Otter Lake Animal Care Center - Mr. Schumacher explained that the City of Lino Lakes has maintained a contract with Otter Lake Animal Control Center for the past two years. He added the relationship between the City and Otter Lake Animal Control Center has been excellent, and that through the provisions of the contract the Police Department has been able to meet the needs of the citizens, the Animal Control Care Center, and the City. Police Chief Pecchia recommends that the contract be renewed through December 31, 1998. Council Member Neal moved to renew the contract with Otter Lake Animal Control Care Center through December 31, 1998. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Centennial School District Contract for Youth Resource Officer - Mr. Schumacher explained that the Police Department is requesting that Council renew the current Youth Resource Officer Service Agreement with the Centennial School District for the 1996/97 school year. Both the City and the school district agree that a more formalized approach to the Youth Resource Officer Program is needed to improve understanding and promote mutual respect between police, school, staff, counselors, parents and students. Police Chief Pecchia recommended approval of the Agreement. Council Member Kuether asked if the term of the contract could be changed to conform to Council's budget period, or if the period for cancellation could be extended. Mr. Schumacher indicated that he would pursue such an adjustment. Council Member Bergeson asked who the officer would be. Council Member Neal indicated that certain correspondence indicated that the current officer would continue to serve in that capacity. Council Member Neal moved to renew the Youth Resource Officer Service Agreement for the 1996/97 school year, contingent upon the specified budgetary timeline consideration. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of a Plan for Designating Forfeit Revenues - Mr. Schumacher explained that the City of Lino Lakes received drug forfeiture funds in the amount of $6,316.64. According to State law and the Police Department's policies and procedures, these funds must be expended for law enforcement purposes. The Police Department is requesting that Council approve the purchase of an upgraded computer terminal for use in a marked police vehicle. The cost of this computer terminal would be approximately $6,000.00. COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Additionally, Mr. Schumacher explained that the Police Department received an estimated $2,332.55 in revenues from the sale of forfeited DWI offender -owned vehicles. Again, in accordance with State law and the Police Department's policies and procedures, the Department is asking that these funds be spent for DWI enforcement and D.A.R.E. programs. Council Member Kuether asked for further information regarding the programs suggested for use of funds from the DWI offender -owned vehicle sales. Mr. Schumacher indicated that additional information would be forthcoming. Council Member Kuether moved to approve the purchase of an upgraded computer terminal, as well as use of funds from the sale of DWI offender -owned vehicles for additional DWI enforcement and D.A.R.E. programs. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. CONTINUATION OF ASSESSMENT PUBLIC HEARING, RICE LAKE ESTATES LETTER OF MAP REVISION, DAVID AHRENS Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 137, Adopting Assessment, Rice Lake Estates Letter of Map Revision - Mr. Ahrens explained that this public hearing for adopting the assessment to certain properties in Rice Lake Estates is being continued in order to present additional information explaining the costs involved in the project, which costs bring the proposed assessment to $130.55 per lot from the $94 estimate established at the beginning of the project. Mr. Ahrens added that the original estimate to complete the Letter of Map Revision to remove the properties from a designated flood zone was $3,400. This estimate was based on the understanding that no FEMA processing fees would be required and that the scope of work was to provide additional elevation information to support previously submitted drainage information prepared in 1987. Per FEMA's direction, the submittal could not be treated as continuation of the previous drainage study, and the Letter of Map Revision was to be treated as a new application. Resulting increased FEMA processing fees were determined to be $400. Additionally, the fee for engineering work in connection with submitting a new Letter of Map Revision increased by $900. The entire cost breakdown is as follows: Original Estimate $3,400 Additional FEMA Processing Fees 400 Additional Engineering Expense 900 TOTAL PROJECT COST $4,700 Based upon the above information, the final assessment to each lot involved in the Letter of Map Revision is projected at $130.55 ($4,700 divided by 36 lots). Staff recommended that Resolution No. 96 - 137 be adopted establishing the assessment for the Rice Lake Estate Letter of Map Revision at $130.55 per lot. Council Member Bergeson asked if the additional engineering expense would be paid to the company that performed the original work. Mr. Ahrens responded in the affirmative. Council Member Kuether requested clarification that the FEMA requirement for treatment of this estimate as a new application was not known at the time of the original estimate. Mr. Ahrens responded that there was no knowledge of the possibility for additional expense at that time. Mayor Landers opened the public hearing continuation at 7:16 P.M. a • • • COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Lisa Gevinka, Sandhill Drive, explained that at the time of closing on the refinancing of her property, she was informed that her lot was situated in a flood zone and that an additional fee of $1,700 for flood insurance would be required. Since that time, Mrs. Gevinka has worked closely with Ms. Wyland to resolve this issue. Mrs. Gevinka addressed Council on this occasion to express dissatisfaction with the increase in the assessment estimate without sufficient notice or explanation. Ms. Wyland added that the project approval came in last November with the assessment portion coming due this Fall, and that it was decided to notify property owners of the increased assessment amount at the time of the public hearing. Mayor Landers suggested that the quote was in the form of an estimate. However, Mrs. Gevinka's interpretation was that the amount was not an estimate but a firm cap of $94. Ms. Wyland stated that two additional application fees were incurred, which were not anticipated; and that she believed TKDA did not anticipate these additional expenses. Council Member Kuether asked whether TKDA could be expected to honor the original quote. Mr. Ahrens explained that unbeknownst to TKDA, the scope of work changed when FEMA required treatment of the Letter of Map Revision as a new application, resulting in additional expense. Council Member Bergeson asked for clarification regarding the City's notification to the property owners. Ms. Wyland indicated that notification of the $94 assessment was forwarded to property owners in October of 1994. Council Member Bergeson suggested that the City may share responsibility for the increased assessment amount. Mrs. Gevinka agreed that in any case the amount was reasonable compared to the cost of flood insurance. Council Members Neal and Lyden expressed their feeling that the additional costs should not be the responsibility of the property owners and should be borne by TKDA. Council Member Bergeson pointed out that there are two parts to this issue: engineering costs and FEMA charges. He stated that the FEMA charges are beyond the City's control, while it should be able to exercise a certain amount of control over such as the engineering costs. LeAnn Larson, 6677 Sandhill Drive, stated that although the difference between the original assessment figure and the adjusted one is not a large amount (approximately $45), the principle is significant. Bruce Gevinka stated that the Letter of Map Revision should have been the responsibility of the developer at the time his home was being planned. He also expressed pleasure that the Revision is now being accomplished, as it will save aggravation later in the event his property is sold or refinanced. Mr. Gevinka asked if the additional expenses were directed toward the 36 parcels subject to this assessment, or to a larger area. Mr. Ahrens responded that the work was for the 36 lots in the original study. COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Council Member Kuether asked Ms. Wyland if there was a reason why the property owners were not notified of the increase immediately upon discovering it. Ms. Wyland stated that she was not aware that the increased work would result in an increase to the amount of the assessment. Additionally, the assessment period had passed by the time the increased amount was known. Mrs. Gevinka thanked Ms. Wyland for all of her efforts throughout the three-year period since this effort began. Council Member Kuether moved to close the public hearing. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Neal moved to adopt Resolution No. 96 - 137 approving the assessment for the Rice Lake Estates Letter of Map Revision at $94 per lot. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Council Member Bergeson indicated disagreement with attempting to recoup the $400 paid to FEMA from TKDA, but that it might be appropriate to seek the additional engineering expense of $900 from TKDA. Council Member Kuether agreed with Council Member Bergeson. Mayor Landers agreed that the property owners should only pay the $94 they were originally assessed. Motion carried with Council Member Kuether voting no. Resolution No. 96 - 137 can be found at the end of these minutes. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REPORT, MARY KAY WYLAND Consideration of a Variance, John and Kim Sullivan - Ms. Wyland explained that Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan are requesting an "after -the -fact" variance which was tabled at the September, 1996 Planning and Zoning meeting. At the September 18, 1996 Council work session some members of Council indicated that a dangerous precedent would be set should Council agree to any cost sharing with respect to relocating the building as originally suggested by the Sullivans and some members of the Planning and Zoning Board. Council suggested the Sullivans review their original request, make some modifications if necessary, and return to the Planning and Zoning Board with a petition from the adjoining property owners. Ms. Wyland stated that after Staff discussions with the Sullivans, they opted to request permission to keep the building in its present location. Staff received a petition from the adjoining property owners indicating no objection to the location of the accessory building. By a vote of 5 to 2, the Planning and Zoning Board denied the Sullivans' request at its October, 1996 meeting. The Board did not believe a variance to allow the building 1-1/2 feet from the property line was acceptable even though the building is an existing structure and some miscommunication occurred between the Sullivans and City Staff. The Board did, however, acknowledge that a variance of 10 or 15 feet would receive a more acceptable review, as there is some apparent hardship to the land. Staff recommended adherence to its original recommendation of denial in the present location. 6 • • COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Council Member Kuether asked for clarification as to how the building came to be 1-1/2 feet from the property line. Mrs. Sullivan explained that the building actually stands approximately 16 feet from the curb. Ms. Wyland clarified that the curb does not represent the property line. Mrs. Sullivan added that she conducted considerable investigation to determine what type of restriction might exist at her property location. She said she was assured there was none. She was told that a building could be placed 30 feet from the center of the street; however, later that information was retracted because consideration had not been given to the property being a corner lot. The term "setback" was not discussed. Ms. Sullivan maintains her appeal for consideration of the variance, as hardship to the land exists. She also pointed out that the Sullivan's building does not impair view, nor does it conflict with the neighborhood. Council Member Lyden asked how close the building is from the 30 -feet -from -center -of -the - street measurement. Mrs. Sullivan explained approximately 1-1/2 feet. Council Member Lyden moved that the Sullivan variance of 28-1/2 feet based upon drainage easement, unusual shape of the lot, and absence of a suitable alternate site be approved. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Council Member Bergeson, having visited the site, expressed his agreement that characteristics of the lot may warrant the requested variance. He suggested that there is an ordinance which allows for a 5 -foot variance for a non -corner lot, and the Sullivan's situation comes very close to meeting that criterion. However, he expressed concern that a dangerous precedent could be set by allowing for this variance. Justification for this departure from the standard variance distance must be in place. Council Member Lyden asked what the costs are to the property owners for the variance. Mrs. Sullivan indicated that there was a $200 deposit and $50 filing fee for the variance. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of MUSA Expansion on Lilac Street and Marvy Street - Ms. Wyland explained that the City received a petition from six property owners on Lilac Street requesting that their property be included in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary (MUSA). The subject properties are located on the north side of Lilac between the Behm's Century Farm development and 4th Avenue. Two of the six property owners are currently having problems with their septic systems and would like to connect to municipal utilities which are available on Lilac Street. The other property owners have indicated an interest in connecting but are not experiencing immediate difficulty with their existing systems. The utilities were originally extended past these parcels to serve the Behm's Century Farm Development. Ms. Wyland added that the properties are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and indicated as residential on the City's Land Use Map. They are not, however, currently located within the City's MUSA boundary and must be included in that designation to be allowed access to the sewer system. The City must prepare a Minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment in order to extend MUSA to these properties. Staff has been advised by the Metropolitan Council that this extension is reasonable considering the eminent health hazard of the failed systems. With respect to the property located at 74 Marvy Street, Ms. Wyland explained that the owners are also experiencing difficulty with the existing septic system. A replacement system would be very costly and questionable as to its effectiveness due to poor soils. Sewer is available to the rear of this property on Apollo Drive where there is MUSA designation. However, the dwelling COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 sits on the Marvy Street side of the property, which is not currently within the MUSA boundary. The property owner is interested in connecting to the municipal utilities currently available on Apollo Drive through his back yard. The City Engineer is considering the extension of utilities from Apollo Drive to Marvy Street. He will be reviewing this proposal with the property owners in the near future. Ms. Wyland added that the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on Wednesday, October 9, 1996 to review these two MUSA requests, and recommended approval of a Minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment to include the following properties within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary: Total "new" MUSA acreage on Marvy Street - .92 acres 74 Marvy Street, Lot 1, Block 12, Sunset Oaks Total "new" MUSA acreage on Lilac - 16.2 acres: 307 Lilac Street, Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0007 315 Lilac Street, Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0008 323 Lilac Street, Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0004 339 Lilac Street, Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0013 347 Lilac Street, Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0020 Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0018 Parcel No. 07-31-22-44-0016 Ms. Wyland pointed out that this designation in no way effects the 150 acres of MUSA reserve. Council Member Bergeson asked if including one property on Marvy Street and then a number on Lilac would appear to be "soliciting emergencies". Ms. Wyland indicated that the Lilac property should be considered at this time and perhaps the Marvy Street property should be held for later determination. She added that two separate applications will be prepared, one for the Lilac Street properties and the other for the Marvy Street property. They can be submitted at separate times. Mr. Wessel stated that each emergency would be considered on its own merit in any case, and that handling all of these properties at the same time shouldn't make any difference. Mayor Landers asked at what point the Marvy Street residents would be contacted with respect to connecting, since there are other possibilities for poor septic system situations. Mr. Ahrens indicated that communications soliciting need/interest would be necessary right away. He also agreed that the applications should be processed separately. Council Member Bergeson suggested two separate motions. Mr. Ahrens explained that future plans and considerations are taken under advisement as projects are proposed. Council Member Bergeson moved to approve a MUSA amendment for the properties between the Behm's Century Farm development and 4th Avenue, fronting on Lilac Street. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Kuether moved to approve a MUSA amendment for the Marvy Street property. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. R • • • COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, DAVID AHRENS Consideration of Resolution No. 96 -143, Ordering Preparation of Report, Otter Lake Service Road Improvements - Mr. Ahrens explained that the Clearwater Creek Development area continues to receive interest from business owners to incorporate industrial and commercial construction sites. Recently Staff reviewed a proposal to build an Amoco station with attached restaurant at the corner of Main Street and Otter Lake Road. The location of this proposed construction necessitates the installation of the east -west portion of the Otter Lake Service Road with utilities to serve the site and other undeveloped property in the area. This work is proposed for completion under the same contract as the Otter Lake Road Realignment Project planned for next Spring. However, the proper steps in the public improvement process for the service road project need to be followed to allow this to happen. It is necessary that the public improvement process be initiated at this time to prepare a feasibility report on street and utility improvements to serve properties adjacent to the proposed Otter Lake Service Road. Council Member Bergeson pointed out that the lot to the east could be a problem with respect to double frontage. He suggested that at a future meeting or work session a motion or possible action could be suggested to ensure that future construction doesn't result in the rear of a building being on a frontage road. Mr. Wessel agreed that Staff should come back to Council with a recommendation on this issue. Council Member Kuether moved to adopt Resolution No. 96 - 143, as presented. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 96 - 143 can be found at the end of these minutes. Consideration of an Apollo Drive Access Agreement - Prior to Mr. Ahrens' presentation, Council Member Kuether asked that this item be tabled pending additional information. Patrick Simons, Twin City Town Homes, spoke to Council indicating that the property is proposed for development as town homes, but that the layout has not yet been determined. He indicated that a new plan has been submitted, which the County Public Works Committee and County Board have approved unanimously. All those involved agree that the best access to this project is off Apollo Drive. Council Member Kuether asked if both matters could be presented simultaneously. Mr. Simons indicated that access should be gained prior to submission of the site plan. However, at this time the site plan has been submitted, and will be considered at the next Planning and Zoning Board meeting. This new plan is based upon Apollo Drive access. Council Member Lyden agreed with Council Member Kuether that the project should be reviewed by Council in its entirety. Mr. Ahrens expressed agreement with Mr. Simons, in that access is critical to going forward with site plans. Mayor Landers agreed with Council Members Kuether and Lyden. COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Council Member Kuether moved to return this item to Staff for presentation at a future meeting together with a site plan. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 144, Receiving Report and Calling Hearing on Trunk Utilities Improvement, 35W/TH 49 Interchange Commercial Development Area - Mr. Ahrens explained that the feasibility report for providing utility service to this area is complete, and according to Minnesota State Statutes 429 and Lino Lakes City Charter, Council will receive the report and schedule a public hearing. Thus the public hearing is scheduled for the November 25, 1996 Council meeting. Council Member Bergeson asked about the amendment to the City Charter regarding treatment of areas near the interchange. Mr. Ahrens indicated that all of the subject property is exempt from Charter provisions. Mr. Wessel agreed that the property owners must be advised of how their property is affected by governing regulations. Council Member Kuether moved to adopt Resolution No. 96 - 144, as presented. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 96 - 144 can be found at the end of these minutes. Consideration of Accepting Proposal for a Street Reconstruction Plan - Mr. Ahrens explained that Council and the Charter Commission met recently to discuss reconstruction of City streets. A result of that meeting was a motion adopted by the Charter Commission requesting the City Engineer to prepare a Street Reconstruction Plan. Mr. Ahrens added that Staff received a proposal from BRW, Inc. to prepare a Street Reconstruction Plan for the not -to -exceed amount of $11,990. The Plan will review existing street data in the City's pavement management system, conduct a field review, prioritize the streets for reconstruction, and prepare cost estimates. The Plan will be very useful in selecting streets for reconstruction per Council and Charter Commission direction and assist the City in the future for possible projects. Council Member Neal asked what is involved in preparing a street reconstruction plan. Mr. Ahrens reiterated an evaluation would include prioritization and include cost estimates. Council Member Kuether asked how this fits in with the City's transportation plan. Mr. Ahrens indicated that this is a separate issue. Council Member Bergeson pointed out that this matter began with creation of a test case for street improvements through meeting with the Charter Commission. He noted the importance of such a Plan in the future. Council Member Kuether moved to approve the proposal for a street reconstruction plan. Council Member Bergeson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS - None. NEW BUSINESS 10 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 • Consideration of Minutes of Special Council Meeting (Council Member Neal was absent) Council Member Kuether moved to table consideration of these minutes until the next regular Council meeting. Council Member Bergeson seconded the motion. Motion carried with Council Member Neal abstaining. Consideration of Setting Public Hearing Regarding Organized Solid Waste, Wednesday, November 20, 1996, 7:00 P.M. Council Member Kuether moved to set the public hearing regarding organized solid waste for Wednesday, November 20, 1996 at 7:00 P.M., and to cancel the meeting originally scheduled for 6:30 P.M. on October 30. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Mayor Landers asked about support by Council with respect to this issue. Mayor Landers expressed his support, as did Council Members Kuether, Neal, Lyden and Bergeson. Motion carried unanimously. REMINDER, Next Regular City Council Meeting, Tuesday, November 12, 1996, 6:30 P.M. (Monday, November 11, 1996 is Veterans' Day) ADJOURN • Council Member Bergeson moved to adjourn at 8:50 P.M. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. These minutes were considered, corrected, and approved at the regular Council Meeting, October 13, 1997. �1 _ Maril aAnd juiun Clerk -Treasurer Jo L. Landers, Mayor (Ji Transcribed by: Judy Pope TimeSaver Off -Site Secretarial, Inc. Council Member Neal introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96 -137 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE RICE LAKE ESTATES LETTER OF MAP REVISION WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the Rice Lake Estates Letter of Map Revision, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of fifteen years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1997 and shall bear interest at the rate of seven percent (7%) per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1996. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31, of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. • • • • • • RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 137 Page -2- Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 28th day of October, 1996. Jot h L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn . Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Lyden and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Lyden, Neal, Landers. The following voted against same: Kuether Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Council Member Kuether introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-143 RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT FOR OTTER LAKE ROAD SERVICE ROAD STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Otter Lake Service Road between Phelps Road and re- aligned Otter Lake Road by constructing street, curb and gutter, storm sewer, watermain and sanitary sewer and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. That the proposed improvement be referred to the City Engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day ,» October, 1996. Marilyn yn . Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer n L. Landers, Mayor The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Neal and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Kuether, Lyden, Neal, Landers. The following voted against same: None . Whereupon said resolution was duly passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of a resolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on October 28, 1996. Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer • • • Council Member Kuether moved its adoption: introduced the following resolution and CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-144 RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT - 35W/TH 49 INTERCHANGE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA TRUNK UTILITIES. WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted June 24, 1996, a report has been prepared by OSM, Inc., with reference to the improvement of the 35W/TH 49 Interchange Commercial Development Area by constructing watermain and sanitary sewer, and this report was received by the council on October 28, 1996, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. The council will consider the improvement of such improvement in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 and the Section 8 of the Lino Lakes City Charter at an estimated cost of the improvement of $582,440. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 25th day of November, 1996, in the council chambers of the city hall at 6:30 p.m. and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of October, 1996. )1,\ CL‘,1„wop,_ Marilyn G. Anderson Clerk -Treasurer hn Landers, Mayor The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Kuether, Lyden, Neal, Landers. The following voted against same: none. Council Member Neal Whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. • • •