HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/14/2001 Council Minutes•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
CITY OF LINO LAKES
DATE : May 14, 2001
TIME STARTED : 6:30 P.M.
TIME ENDED : 9:35 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT : Carlson, Dahl, O'Donnell, Reinert, and Mayor
Bergeson
MEMBERS ABSENT : None
Staff members present: City Administrator, Linda Waite Smith; City Attorney, Bill Hawkins; City
Engineer, John Powell; Acting City Engineer, Jason Wedel; City Planner, Jeff Smyser; Economic
Development Director, Brian Wessel (part); Economic Development Assistant, Mary Alice Divine
(part); Environmental Specialist, Marty Asleson (part); and Buildingsctor, Pete Kluegel (part)
SETTING THE AGENDA
Item 7J, Resolution No. 01— 67, Ordering Preparation of t for e Lino Lakes Marketplace
Improvements, was added to the agenda.
Item 8C, Notes from Highway 49 Meeting, was
The agenda was approved as amended.
CONSENT AGENDA
theagenda.
Council Member Dahl moved tthe Consent Agenda, as presented. Council Member
O'Donnell seconded the motcarried unanimously.
ITEM
DISBURSEMENTS:
ACTION
May 14, 2001 (Check No. 61657 -
61824, $350,713.88)
Centennial Fire District
Approved
Approved
Resolution No. 01— 28, Adopting 2001
Fee Schedule Approved
Approve Severance Agreement for
• Planning Coordinator Approved
1
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
OPEN MIKE
No one was present for open mike.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, AL ROLEK
There was no Finance Department report.
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAN TESCH
Consider Approval of Recommendation to Hire Community Development Director — City
Administrator Waite Smith advised that with Community Development Director Brian Wessel
retiring this fall, the City felt it necessary to begin the recruitment process for his successor early
enough for there to be some overlap in their tenures. During this overlap Mr. Wessel will concentrate
on completing a number of economic development projects, and Mr. hala will supervise the
Community Development Department.
Mr. Grochala is currently the Community Development Dire
Minnesota, and holds a Master's Degree in Urban Planni
Grochala's first day with the City is schedule for June
ty of Cambridge,
ato State University. Mr.
Council Member Dahl moved to make an offer o ymen"` to Mr. Michael Grochala as
Community Development Director, as presente
Motion carried unanimously.
Consider Approval of Hiring Polic
this year, Officer Travis Muyres le
agency. To replace Officer M
series of interviews and testi
vacant officer position. ! Hal
worked for Lino Lakes as
1 Member Reinert seconded the motion.
ty Administrator Waite Smith advised that earlier
es Police Department for a position with a state
ity advertised and sent out over 100 applications. After a
ity $ ould like to recommend Mr. Adam Halverson for the
is currently an officer with the City of Bayport, and has
fficer as well as in the records department.
Council Member O'Donnell oved to make an offer of employment to Mr. Adam Halverson as a
police officer, as presented. Council Member Carlson seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAVE PECCHIA
Ordinance No. 01— 05, Consider Adoption of 1997 Uniform Building Code and Fee Schedule,
(3/5 Vote Required), Pete Kluegel —Building Inspector Kluegel advised the City of Lino Lakes is
currently enforcing the 1994 Uniform Building Code and Fee Schedule. In order to update the City
Code to keep current with the latest revision of the state building code, it becomes necessary for the
City Council to adopt this ordinance.
2
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Building Inspector Kluegel added that the optional chapter regarding fire suppression will be
included. He reviewed some of the new fees and the impact to homeowners.
Council Member Reinert clarified that the City is adopting the 1997 code because the 2001 Uniform
Building Code is still being prepared.
Mayor Bergeson asked if the City is currently using the details of the 1997 code. Building Inspector
Kluegel advised the City is currently using the details of the 1997 code. By adopting the 1997 code
the City is updating its records.
Council Member Reinert moved to adopt Ordinance No. 01— 05, as presented. Council Member
Dahl seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Ordinance No. 01— 05 can be found in the City Clerk's office.
PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, RICK DEG
There was no Public Service Department report.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE
Consideration of Livable Communities Grant
Development Assistant Divine advised the Phas
Demonstration Account grants are due Ma
on whether or not a proposed project m
livable community. The guiding pri
• Make develop
density housi
ation, Mary Alice Divine — Economic
ations for the 2001 Livable Communities
s is a short form application that is judged
ain criteria that are important to the creation of a
selection of grant awards are:
• Mix uses, s
and public s
ces
by connecting uses and building a mix of mid -to high
rkplaces, residences, shopping, civic buildings, schools, parks
• Design for people by putting buildings within walking distance, designing streets for
cars and people, and promoting public gatherings
This application is a repeat of the one made last year, requesting funding for the extension of Town
Center Parkway to provide access to the residential neighborhood as shown on the development plan,
and to construct the neighborhood streets, alleys, sidewalks, and streetscape amenities. The intent is
to enable the City to lower the development costs, making it feasible for the developers to acquire the
land needed to complete the Village plan.
If the City meets the criteria for the Livable Communities, a more detailed Phase II application is
• required. That application is due September 14, 2001.
3
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve the Phase I Demonstration Account application for
submission to the Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Fund, as presented. Council Member
Carlson seconded the motion.
Council Member Carlson referred to page 3, sentence 1, of the application and suggested the sentence
be changed to read "The Lino Lakes draft Comprehensive Plan allows housing densities between 10
and 24 units per acre in the Village". She stated she previously indicated she will support this if there
is a light at the end of the tunnel. She referred to a memo regarding an agreement between
landowners and issues relating to the design standards. She stated she hopes those issues will be
resolved. She asked staff to encourage developers to meet with the Taggs and clear up the unresolved
issues before the second application is due.
Council Member Dahl expressed concern relating to the housing mix of 350 units. She stated there is
no mention of assisted living. She referred to page 2 regarding the development agreement and stated
that has not yet been completed. She stated the City needs that in plac fore it can move forward.
Mayor Bergeson stated the Council has an interest in assisted li g plication does not
exclude assisted living if a good project came forward.
Council Member Reinert stated the housing mix is def ed :a t th ty would still have flexibility.
Economic Development Assistant Divine stated , does ave flexibility.
Motion carried with Council Member Dahl
Arbor Day Proclamation, Marty A onmental Specialist Asleson advised Arbor Day
was celebrated at Lino Lakes Ele •n y 4, 2001. The intention was to have the Arbor Day
Proclamation formally accepted q 'ty Council the week of the celebration, however that week
was one of those times the C an a ended period of times between meetings. Therefore, and
since the proclamation w read u celebration, and Arbor Day proclaimed for that day, the City
needs to retro -act on this . _ • " ' on to formalize it for Tree City USA clarification.
Environmental Specialist As son reviewed the highlights of the proclamation and thanked Lino
Lakes Elementary School for their involvement.
Mayor Bergeson read the last statement of the proclamation that urged all citizens to get involved
with Arbor Day.
Council Member Dahl moved to establish Friday the 4th of May as Lino Lakes Arbor Day, as
presented. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, FIRST READING, Ordinance No. 01— 06, Park Dedication Fees, (4/5
Vote Required), Jeff Smyser — City Planner Smyser advised the City has conducted a study of park
needs and land values to determine appropriate park dedication requirements in Lino Lakes. Section
4
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
1001 of the City Code makes up the requirements for the subdivision of land. Park dedication
requirements are included in the subdivision regulations, as authorized by state statute.
Minnesota Statutes 462.358 Subd. 2B. states in part that
...the regulations may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision can be
dedicated to the public or preserved for conservation purposes or for public use as parks,
recreational facilities..., playgrounds, trails wetlands, or open space; provided that (a) the
municipality may choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or
all of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or purposes based on the fair
market value of the land no later than at the time of final approval.
The park dedication study conducted by Northwest Associated Consultants resulted in a reasonable
estimate of land values at final approval (final plat) and the park dedication that can be justified based
on those values. The result differs from what is currently included info ity regulations for park
dedication.
Ordinance No. 01 — 06 amends the current ordinance. It cl
calculate park dedication requirements, and only uplands
Subdivisions 8 and 3). It includes a straightforward de
City to list the park dedication in the City's fee sche
City will use the land value at final plat to dete "'., h de
The study determined that when the City c
reasonable. This amount will be includ
order to make it easier to change in t
The fee schedule will list resid
combination, as determined
land, since land should b acquir
the City can apply the pro
upland will be used to
ed for park dedication (see
o of the uplands and allows the
ivision 8). It also states that the
ation (see Subdivision 13).
dedication rather than land, $1960 per lot is
ee schedule rather than in the City Code in
dedication as 10% of non -wetland area or $1960 per lot or a
ity. hen it will be a combination, the city will start with the
en possible. But if the City does not want the full 10% in land,
ensity to the remaining dedication need to get the cash value.
Commercial/industrial park dication listed in the fee schedule will remain what it is in the current
ordinance.
An ordinance requires two (2) readings, publication, and a 30 -day waiting period before it becomes
effective. Staff will prepare the appropriate change to the fee schedule to have it ready for adoption
when the new ordinance becomes effective. As stated in an earlier memo, the anticipated schedule is:
May 14 City Council Mtg.
May 29 City Council Mtg.
June 5
July 5
Public hearing and first reading of ordinance
Second reading of ordinance
Ordinance published in newspaper
Ordinance becomes effective (30 days after publication)
5
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
City Administrator Waite Smith stated there is confusion regarding the fees. Council intended to add
the new fees to the fee schedule and approve the fees when the ordinance is adopted. The new fee
will go into effect in 90 days.
City Planner Smyser advised the City will have to amend the fee schedule when the new fees go into
effect. Because of the first and second readings before it becomes effective, there is time to change
the fee schedule. Staff is not proposing to adopt any dollar amounts this evening.
City Administrator Waite Smith stated the second reading is on May 29. Staff will have to bring
forward a resolution to amend the fee schedule at the first Council meeting in June.
Council Member Carlson expressed concern relating to the ordinance not covering
commercial/industrial park dedication fees.
Mayor Bergeson advised the current ordinance is in effect until 30 da er publication of the new
ordinance.
The City Attorney verified that the current ordinance is still i eff t fo mmercial/industrial park
dedication fees.
Council Member O'Donnell asked how the cash or 1
Smyser advised the City does have a Comprehen
parkland. The City does determine if the dedic
Council Member Carlson referred to the
land area. She suggested a clarificati
City Planner Smyser stand the upl
Council Member Carlson sta
ation is determined. City Planner
k Pla that shows where the City wants
be land or cash.
agrapof the staff report regarding upland and net
ion between the upland and net land area be added.
same as the net area.
s may cause some misunderstanding for developers.
Mayor Bergeson stated thy s make changes between the first and second readings.
Council Member Carlson re ed to page 2 of the staff report and stated the $1960 fee is per housing
unit not per lot. City Planner Smyser stated the staff report is incorrect and the ordinance correctly
reflects housing units.
Council Member Dahl stated the ordinance does not state anything for cluster development or minor
subdivisions. Clarification relating to those types of development should be added. She referred to
page 3 of the ordinance and stated the term "roughly" and "City's best estimate of " is too vague. She
added that she agrees the Council thought the $1960 fee is for units, not lots.
Mayor Bergeson noted that cluster development is a type of subdivision and stated the City will have
a second reading of the ordinance.
6
•
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
City Administrator Waite Smith stated the reason the ordinance states "rough estimate" is that NAC
did a complex calculation of park needs. The different land parcels have different land values so the
calculation uses an average of land values.
Mayor Bergeson opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m.
Council Member Carlson moved to close the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Council Member Dahl
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Reinert moved to approve the FIRST READING or Ordinance No. 01— 06, as
presented. Council Member Carlson seconded the motion.
Mayor Bergeson stated the Council will have an opportunity for additional discussion regarding this
issue at the next work session.
Council Member Dahl voted yea. Mayor Bergeson voted yea. Co cil ber Carlson voted yea.
Council Member O'Donnell voted yea. Council Member Reine
Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, Twilight Acres/Twilight Ac ` s dition Sanitary Sewer
Improvements, John Powell — City Engineer Pvise. `.n March 26, 2001, the City Council
received a Feasibility Report, and set the public Leann .r the installation of sanitary sewer to the
Nancy Drive/Vicky Lane neighborhood. T e • h " been prepared in response to past petitions
received from Nancy Drive, and Vicky s� a property owners. The previous project, which
included watermain and complete str s i ion, was terminated.
Per the City Charter, no action a en on this project until 60 days after the conclusion of the
public hearing.
Engineer Wedel, TKDA,
and a timetable for the ent
for the Twilight Acres proje
e Feasibility Report in detail, including assessment information
pro ect. He also reviewed the project costs and assessment information
only, noting the cost is lower.
Council Member O'Donnell asked if the assessment information includes the CDBG funding. City
Engineer Powell advised the assessment information does include the CDBG funding in the amount
of $125,000.
Mayor Bergeson opened the public hearing at 7:23 p.m.
Ms. Cindy Brunberg, 7941 Nancy Drive, came forward and stated when comparing the assessments
from a year ago to the current figures, she does not see where the CDBG funding comes in. She also
asked where the additional funding will come from because the assessments do not equal the
appraisals of the property.
7
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
City Engineer Powell advised the CDBG grant was included in the computation of the assessments.
The grant was not enough to cover assessments compared to the appraisals. That is why staff has
submitted an alternative project to include Twilight Acres only.
Ms. Brunberg stated that technically, the assessment amounts are not different than one year ago.
City Engineer Powell reviewed the assessment figures from a year ago to the current figures noting
the charges that did stay the same.
Council Member Carlson inquired about the lateral sewer figure from last year's calculations. City
Engineer Powell advised the lateral sewer figure from last year is $3,104.50 per unit.
Ms. Brunberg stated there is confusion as to where the grant money is going because the street is not
being torn up. The residents will bear more of the cost in the long run. The project does not include
storm sewer and street restoration so the project should cost a lot less.
City Administrator Waite Smith stated the cost will increase al'
running two (2) pipes as opposed to one. However, there is
year's figures.
se the project includes
vings compared to last
City Engineer Powell reviewed the figures for the res 1 Nancy Drive. Last year the figure
was $25,518 and the current assessment is $8,36 e is ch less improvement included in this
proposal but the cost is much lower also.
Ms. Brunberg stated the assessment am•. 1 does not meet the appraisal figure.
Acting City Engineer Wedel revie
and Second as compared to Tw.
approximately $3,500 per lot
on from the assessment rolls for Twilight Acres First
es First Addition only. The cost for Twilight Acres First is
to $6,000.
Mr. Dick Paulson, 789 Vi came forward and thanked the Council for all their work on this
issue. He asked why there a c arge if there is no storm sewer and what the cost will be if residents
decide to hook up.
City Engineer Powell advised there is a drainage charge per an ordinance adopted in 1992. Storm
sewer construction has been eliminated from last year's figures. Sanitary sewer connection costs will
vary depending on usage. The connection cost does include the permit fee, service availability charge
that goes to the Metropolitan Council, and plumber fees. When comparing the two (2) proposed fees
to the feasibility study, there is a reduction in the cost.
Mayor Bergeson inquired about an area charge if storm sewer goes into the area in the future. City
Engineer Powell advised property owners have already incurred an area charge. Residents would
have to pay for the pipe that goes into the street. Storm sewer would probably not be installed for 5-
10 years down the road because the street itself is in good shape.
8
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Mr. Dick O'Kelly, 7951 Nancy Drive, inquired about the service life of the system.
City Engineer Powell advised sanitary sewer systems can last a very long time. The City anticipates
that it will not have to be replaced but it is possible it could get damaged and need repair.
Mr. O'Kelly stated his lot runs right down Vicky Lane and he asked if he can get in on the Vicky
Lane project.
City Engineer Powell advised the Council can consider that possibility as part of the project. There is
a 60 -day waiting period and Mr. O'Kelly should let the Council know about his request.
Mr. Lyle Bye, 775 Vicky Lane, came forward and asked how deep the pipe will be installed.
City Engineer Powell advised the pipe will be placed approximately 5-7 feet, as flat and shallow as
possible.
Mr. Bye asked for clarification on the quarterly sewer charge.
City Engineer Powell advised the City will base usage on a ge ®° other similar properties. It is
possible to install a meter. The quarterly sanitary sewe rat
Mr. Ray Johnson, 7971 Nancy Drive, came forw, ° askew if the City can waive the 60 -day
• waiting period because residents want the proje done fore October.
•
City Engineer Powell advised that per t Ch. er, the City must receive a petition from the
majority of residents to waive the w A o. e noted he will refer to the Charter to get more
specifics.
The City Attorney advised th oul°'need 100% of the resident's signatures to waive the waiting
period.
Mr. Gary Schmidt, 7916 N
Nancy Drive.
, 'ame forward and asked if the project excludes the residents on
Mayor Bergeson advised there are two (2) proposals: one that includes Nancy Drive and one that
does not.
Mr. Schmidt stated he understood that the project did include Nancy Drive. He stated he would like
to hook up to City sewer on the lot that the City owns if the project does not include Nancy Drive.
City Engineer Powell advised there is a City water retention pond close by. The City does not yet
know how it will proceed with this project. The assessments still do not meet the appraisal test.
9
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Ms. Deb Jones, 7961 Nancy Drive, came forward and stated the proposal is remarkable, however,
residents do not sewer. She stated she hopes the Council sees clear to approve both project so no
property owners are left out.
Mayor Bergeson asked if there are any property owners present that are on the south side of Nancy
Drive.
Mr. Dick Urbis, 7940 Nancy Drive, came forward and stated he still studying the project. He referred
to a letter received about 7-10 years ago regarding a rebate check from a pollution control agency if
residents are not hooked up to City sewer.
City Engineer Powell stated the rebate had to do with a service availability charge. Residents were
given the option of a refund or not being charged when they hook-up. The refund is still in effect.
City Administrator Waite Smith advised the City does have records of and residents will be
credited.
Mr. Mark Swenson, 7931 Nancy Drive, stated he does not se a in the project if the project
does not meet the test of the property value.
City Engineer Powell read the City Charter regardin _ of the 60 day waiting period. He noted
that the project was initiated by the City Council
The City Attorney advised the petition to wA a "ng period would have to be initiated by
100% of the residents and then 50 of the ing period can be waived.
Mr. Ed Frost, 733 Vicky, came fo d r" ested a description of a grinder pump. He also asked
how far from the middle of the digging take place.
City Engineer Powell adv ed the will be in the boulevard area 10 —15 feet away from the street.
Mr. Fry referred to the CD t and asked if the grant would be applied to only one project if that
is how the City chooses to pceed.
City Engineer Powell advised the grant was received for both projects and is federal money.
Mr. Frost stated the City may not get the grant if only one project proceeds.
City Engineer Powell stated the City would get clarification from the agency regarding using the
funds for only one project. He explained what a grinder is and how it works within the project.
Mayor Bergeson stated the cost of pumps and installation are not included in the assessments. City
Engineer Powell stated the City can get some estimates from plumbers for the pumps and installation.
10
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Mr. Doug Sontag, 767 Vicky Lane, came forward and asked if the tanks in the backyards can be
eliminated.
City Engineer Powell stated the pipes would pump directly into the City system. The only way it
would cut off is a problem with power failure.
Mr. Paulson came forward and expressed concern relating to his basement being lower than the sewer
pipe.
City Engineer Powell stated a malfunction would relate only to a power outage, which could be
controlled by lowering the usage of flow and/or using a pump.
Mr. Bye asked if it is possible to put something in to eliminate the backup.
City Engineer Powell stated a check valve could possibly be used but . - would increase the cost of
the project.
Mayor Bergeson noted the public hearing must be closed to ve ea'ith the process.
Mr. Dick O' Kelly inquired about the next step in the p
4
Acting City Engineer Wedel outlined the next st ''' _ e prowess relating to this project.
City Engineer Powell advised the City can
desires on which project should be com
the cooperation from the residents.
ditional poll to residents to indicate their
He rioted the City only received the grant because of
Council Member O'Donnell m• o •se the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. Council Member Dahl
seconded the motion. Motio d un imously.
Mayor Bergeson called focess at 8:04 p.m.
Mayor Bergeson reconvene e meeting at 8:13 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING, FIRST READINGS, Ordinance No. 01— 01 and 01— 02, Rezone and
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Allocate 2.55 Acres of MUSA Reserve (4/5 Vote Required
for Each Ordinance), and Resolution No. 01— 06 Approving Preliminary Plat for Behm's Farm
Park Addition (3/5 Vote Required), Century Farms Development, Jeff Smyser — City Planner
Smyser advised the applicant, Century Farms Development, has applied for a rezoning, an allocation
of MUSA reserve acres, and a preliminary plat. The site is within the existing Behm's Park on the
southwest corner of Mustang Lane and Palomino Lane.
Behm's Park currently includes approximately 8.6 acres. The park area includes Lots 13, 14, 15, and
16. Block 2, Sunset Oaks. The City acquired these four (4) lots for park purposes via warranty deed
in December 1985 to fulfill park dedication for Sunset Oaks.
11
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
The City rezoned Lots 14, 15, and 16 to R-1 in 1994 (Ordinance 15 — 94). Lot 13, the southern
portion of the park, was not included in the rezoning action. This likely was an oversight.
In 1997, the City received approval from the Metropolitan Council to allow the City to use part of its
MUSA reserve for the Behm's Century Farms development. The approved submittal map included
Lots 14, 15, and 16, but did not include Lot 13. That is, the southern part of Behm's Park was not
included in the area where MUSA can be applied. Again, probably an oversight.
In 1999, the City Council authorized selling 2.55 acres of the park to G. M. Development for $75,000,
which was to include grading improvements to the park (Ordinance No. 16 — 99 and Resolution No.
99 — 50). The intent was to allow for the creation of nine (9) house lots. Proceeds of the sale of this
land would be used to develop the park. However, there was no guarantee in the purchase agreement
that the City would approve rezoning or development of the 2.55 acres.
Gary Uhde of G. M. Development has requested that the City allo
for developing the new lots. Staff discussed this with the City
November 8, 2000, and Council directed staff to proceed.
In order to proceed, three (3) actions are needed:
1. Rezone Lot 13 Sunset Oaks to R-
2. Allocate 2.55 acres of MUSA re
3. Preliminary plat.
City Planner Smyser presented the st
this at its January 4, 2001, meetin
complete the agreement and de
park dedication.
The Environmental Boar
recommends additional na
periodic burnings of the pl
llow through on his plan
ork session on
e are to be sold to the developer
the application noting the Park Board discussed
as glad this project is in progress in order to
ark. The Park Board is satisfied with the additional cash
this project at its January 3, 2001, meeting. That Board
pl tings behind the Mustang Lane lots and notification of the need for
ngs. Staff believes the existing native plantings are sufficient.
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the applications on January 10, 2001 and approved the
rezoning, MUSA allocation, and preliminary plat. Staff also recommends approval based on
conditions.
Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve Ordinance No. 01— 01, as presented. Council
Member Reinert seconded the motion.
City Planner Smyser noted a public hearing was held at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting.
Mayor Bergeson voted yea. Council Member Carlson voted no. Council Member O'Donnell voted
yea. Council Member Reinert voted yea. Council Member Dahl voted no.
12
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Motion failed with Council Member Carlson and Dahl voting no.
The City Attorney advised approval of the rezone is needed to proceed.
City Planner Smyser stated the Council must make findings tonight as to why the rezone was denied.
The City Attorney advised the Council Members who voted no to explain their reasons.
Council Member Carlson stated that there are only 291/ acres left if the MUSA bank. Approval of
the previous agreement was no guarantee that this would be approved. She stated there seems to be
too many oversights and this area is outside of the MUSA area.
City Planner Smyser advised that he does not know why this oversight occurred. There is no
explanation as to why Lot 13 was there and not in the MUSA. He stator, is very likely that this was
an oversight because there is no rational reason not to include it Indic : d he assumes it was a
mistake by the City. The rezoning in 1994 was before the MUS b�eve existed.
Council Member Dahl stated that in her opinion there are, o �y u esolved issues that need to be
resolved. She stated she would prefer not to mention leer re ons gy _; denial in a public meeting.
The City Attorney noted there has never been a c
Council Member Dahl stated she could not
Mayor Bergeson asked if action reg
advised he does not know how the,
Members voted in favor of the
eetin` on this subject.
quest.
ngs of Fact should be taken. The City Attorney
to findings when three (3) out of the five (5) Council
City Planner Smyser ask- s if the +• ine on the application also refers to the MUSA request. The
City Attorney advised the + oes refer to the MUSA request also. Action should be taken on
all three (3) items.
Council Member Carlson asked if approval could be given to a preliminary plat that includes lots that
MUSA and zoning do not apply to. The City Attorney advised that the Council could not technically
approve it because the lots relate to MUSA and rezone. The preliminary plat can not be approved
because it does not have the proper zoning. He recommended the two (2) other items be denied
unanimously.
Mr. John Johnson, Engineer for Mr. Uhde, came forward and asked if the item can be brought back to
the Council if the motion fails.
The City Attorney advised there is a timeline regarding when the request can be brought back.
• Mr. Johnson asked if the preliminary plat and rezone could be amended to exclude the two (2) lots.
13
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
The City Attorney advised the Council does have the authority to amend the preliminary plat. The
question is if the amended plat would be substantially different than the original. He indicated he
believes the preliminary plat can be amended by Council action.
Mr. Johnson stated the lots were given to the City for park dedication. He stated he believes the
resolution just did not include all three (3) lots. If there is concern regarding the rezone, the applicant
would like to pursue a seven- (7) lot plan.
Mayor Bergeson stated the preliminary plan can be resubmitted or the Council can amend it.
City Planner Smyser stated he believes the plat can be approved with the condition that the plat is
redrawn to include only Block 1 and Block 2.
City Engineer Powell advised all of the lots are set up for subdivisions a plat could be approved
with a deadline for a new drawing.
City Planner Smyser suggested the preliminary plat be appro d = h endment and condition
that the new drawing is completed by final plat approval.
City Engineer Powell stated he would like to see a re
Mr. Johnson stated an amended plat and gradin
City Engineer Powell recommended a n
Council Member Dahl asked if th
approved. The City Attorney a
not have to act on the rezone.
be provided that eliminates Block 3.
rading plan is submitted within three (3) weeks.
d vote on the ordinance again if the amended plat is
amended plat only applies to Block 3. The Council does
other issue.
City Planner Smyser state
deny the ordinance then ap
to be submitted within three
A is only needed for Block 3. He recommended the Council
ve he resolution only including Block 1 and Block 2 with new drawing
) weeks.
Mr. Johnson stated the applicant is opposed to denial of the MUSA request.
Council Member Reinert moved to deny Ordinance No. 02 — 01 due to the staff recommendation.
Council Member Reinert stated allocation of MUSA is needed so the plat can be developed. There is
no water and sewer to develop. City Planner Smyser clarified that MUSA is needed to develop any of
the lots.
Council Member Reinert stated that the Council can not vote because the new acreage of the plat is
not known.
14
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
• Mr. Johnson requested that the two- (2) items be tabled until the next Council meeting.
•
•
Mayor Bergeson verified that the applicant wishes to withdraw his requests until the May 29, 2001,
Council meeting.
City Planner Smyser advised staff supports the tabling of the requests.
Council Member Reinert withdrew his motion.
Council Member Reinert moved to table Ordinance No. 02 — 01 and Resolution No. 01— 06 until the
May 29, 2001, Council meeting. Council Member Carlson seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
Resolution No. 01— 58, Order Preparation of a Feasibility Study for the 2002 — 2003 Street
Reconstruction Program, (4/5 Vote Required), John Powell — City
March 12, 2001, the City Council directed staff to review the prop
to determine whether or not alterations to the priority ranking s
existing land use, the existing MUSA line, the draft -propose
system. Staff is not recommending altering the Street Re
ineer Powell advised on
reconstruction program
e. Staff has reviewed the
ing, and the existing utility
rogram order.
Resolution No. 01 — 58 orders the preparation of a fe tudy to investigate the reconstruction of
the following streets located in the City:
Street From
Rice Court
Hokah Court
Hokah Drive
Totem Trail
Arrowhead Drive
West Shadow Lake Drive
Lamotte Drive
Lamotte Circle
Marilyn Drive
Barbara Lane
ve
em Trail
whead Drive
are Road
Birch Street
County Road
Lamotte Drive
77th Street
Marilyn Drive
To Segment
Cul-de-sac
Cul-de-sac
Birch Street
Birch Street
Tomahawk Trail
Northern End
City Limit
Cul-de-sac
Highland Meadows West
Cul-de-sac
This listing recognizes that Ware Road has already been reconstructed, that Elm Street will likely be
reconstructed as a Municipal State Aid roadway; and that two (2) years worth of construction is to be
considered.
The study will consider utility issues, wetland impacts, road section and other -matters related to
reconstructing the streets. Public information meetings and other public participation are planned to
familiarize residents and other property owners on the City Charter and public improvement process.
A preliminary schedule has been attached.
15
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and the Lino Lakes Charter, Council is required to order
the preparation of a report studying the proposed improvements.
Mayor Bergeson asked why this item calls for a 4/5 vote. City Engineer Powell referred to the City
Charter and stated the 4/5 vote refers only to the study.
The City Attorney verified that a 4/5 vote is required and recommended a roll call vote.
Council Member Carlson moved to adopt Resolution No. 01— 58, as presented. Council Member
Reinert seconded the motion.
Council Member Carlson voted yea. Council Member O'Donnell voted yea. Council Member
Reinert voted yea. Council Member Dahl voted yea. Mayor Bergeson voted yea.
Motion carried unanimously.
Resolution No. 01— 58 can be found in the City Clerk's office.
Resolution No. 01— 65, Order Preparation of a Feas
Reconstruction Project, (4/5 Vote Required), John
discussed in the past, the reconstruction of Elm Stree
high priority due to the proximity of Centennial
and the amount of pedestrian traffic using the c
work will be Municipal State Aid funds, b
the report.
ib' 'tv` dv r the Elm Street
ngineer Powell indicated as
nset Avenue to Fourth Avenue, is a
Schon , the level of development in the area,
way. The primary funding source for this
and trunk funds will also be considered in
Proceeding with the study of this rso allows the City to take advantage of the
neighborhood involvement mo R ;fated to the efforts by St. Joseph's Church related to traffic
issues alongElm Street and �
`�'=� Ave �� e. During preparation of the report, neighborhood
meetings will be held to • licit in ® • n the design of the proposed improvements. Staff will consider
"traffic calming" concern ' i "se roadways as part of the study.
The study will include not o the reconstruction of the roadway and related drainage concerns but
will also consider sanitary sewer and watermain system needs.
Council Member Dahl moved to adopt Resolution No. 01 — 65, as presented. Council Member
Carlson seconded the motion.
Council Member O'Donnell voted yea. Council Member Reinert voted yea. Council Member Dahl
voted yea. Mayor Bergeson voted yea. Council Member Carlson voted yea.
Motion carried unanimously.
Resolution No. 01— 65 can be found in the City Clerk's office.
16
•
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Resolution No. 01— 66, Order Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the 2001 Surface
Water Management Project, (3/5 Vote Required), John Powell — City Engineer Powell advised
after storm water ponds and drainage ways are constructed, they require periodic maintenance to
ensure their effectiveness. Five (5) areas have been identified for maintenance in 2001; they are
located as follows:
Location
Mar Don Acres
Twilight Acres 2nd Addition
Highland Meadows West
Thomas Street
Tomahawk Trail
Type of Maintenance
Pond cleaning
Pond cleaning
Downstream ditch cleaning
Outfall repair
Ditch Cleaning
The maintenance activity required at these sites is more extensive that
Public Works staff. They have been combined into one project in
costs. If, after staff begins preparation of the construction docu
specific maintenance activity far outweighs the benefit, staff
project scope.
The funding for this work is provided by the Surface
established in 1992 as a revenue source in order
mitigation, and water quality needs" of the City
subdivisions and is also collected as prope
The schedule for this project is as fol
City Council Approves
City Council Authori
City Council Aw ds Con
Construction Begi
t is typically undertaken by
'nimize mobilization
scover the costs of a
nd reductions in the
anagement Fund. This fund was
the `• ministrative, planning, ponding,
bursed through assessments to new
nect to City utilities.
ecifications
June 25, 2001
June 25, 2001
July 23, 2001
August 1, 2001
Council Member O'Donnell oved to adopt Resolution No. 01— 65, as presented. Council Member
Dahl seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Resolution No. 01— 66 can be found in the City Clerk's office.
PUBLIC HEARING, FIRST READING, Ordinance No. 01— 07, Vacating an Easement on Lot
11, Block 1, Lino Air Park North, (4/5 Vote Required), John Powell — City Engineer Powell
advised the owner of the lot at 314 Carl Street has petitioned the City to vacate a portion of the
easement located on his lot. The dimensions of the existing easement, the proposed easement, and the
legal description have been outlined. The existing easement was dedicated for ponding and flowage
purposes. The property owner has requested this change because the existing easement configuration
will not accommodate his proposed house and hanger. There is also a taxiway easement on the
property that will be left unaltered.
17
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
Rice Creek Watershed District has reviewed and approved of the proposed change as shown on
correspondence dated March 5, 2001. City staff has determined that the drainage can be conveyed
using the reduced easement area as shown and recommends granting the vacation request.
Section 12.05 of the City Charter requires that real property of the City cannot be disposed of except
by Ordinance. The Ordinance will require two (2) readings, publication, and a waiting period before
it is in effect. The proposed schedule for this vacation is as follows:
First Reading of the Ordinance
Second Reading of the Ordinance
Publication in the Legal Newspaper
Effective Date of the Ordinance
Mayor Bergeson opened the public hearing at 9:00 p.m.
May 14, 2001
May 29, 2001
June 5, 2001
July 5, 2001
Council Member O'Donnell moved to close the public hearing
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Reinert moved to approve the FIRST
presented. Council Member Dahl seconded the moti
Council Member Carlson
Ordinance No. 01 — 07, as
Council Member Reinert voted yea. Council tuber ;ahl voted yea. Mayor Bergeson voted yea.
Council Member Carlson voted yea. Coun'Donnell voted yea.
Motion carried unanimously.
Resolution No. 01— 67, Orde
Improvements — City Engin
Companies US, also sign- by
Target/Kohl's/Ryan site.
site. The petition requests
1.
ration of a Study for the Lino Lakes Marketplace
ell vised the City has received a petition from Ryan
ehbein, requesting public improvements to serve the proposed
development site is also known as the Lino Lakes Marketplace
owing improvements:
Traffic signal at Lake Drive/Apollo Drive.
2. Construction of roadway, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water from the Lake
Drive/Apollo Drive intersection to 745 feet east.
The next step in the public improvement process (State Statute Chapter 429) is for City Council to
authorize preparation of a feasibility study for the requested improvements.
In order to expedite action on this petition, staff is requesting City Council action this evening.
Ms. Kathy Hansmann, resident of Lino Lakes, came forward and indicated she has concerns regarding
the traffic light and feasibility study. She stated she attended the Planning and Zoning Board meeting
18
•
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
and it appeared there are several questions relating to the process necessary to meet the timeline. She
noted she is not opposed to the project. She distributed a letter outlining her concerns and reviewed
them in detail. She asked that her issues be addressed. She also asked if there will be County funds
available for the improvements. She requested clarification on the City process relating to the project.
Mayor Bergeson stated the City depends on staff for the right and legal order of the City process.
There will be an assessment hearing relating to the stoplight.
City Engineer Powell outlined the process for the public improvements (State Statute Chapter 429).
He stated the City does not need to have a detailed plan to prepare a feasibility study. The feasibility
study is a separate issue from the Planning and Zoning Board process. The City needs to expedite the
process for the public improvements. The study will define the assessments and benefiting property
owners relating to the stoplight. The cost for the study will be assessed to benefiting property owners
if the project moves forward.
Council Member Carlson asked for an estimate of the total costs of th- . light. City Engineer
Powell stated that is why the City needs the feasibility study. The be more detailed than the
funding request received.
Council Member Carlson stated her concern is that there
determine where the funds will come from. She under
25%, Apollo will be assessed 50%, and the remainin
City Engineer Powell stated the assessment met
and assessment hearing. The study is not li
not a development agreement. Property
oplights and the City has to
marketplace will be assessed
ill be to the City and property owners.
roportions will be determined in the study
erbiage in the funding request. The study is
have a right to appeal assessments.
Council Member Carlson stated th •pe" putting language in that indicates what he
understood.
The City Attorney advise' he has gal concerns. The fact is that the petition does not bind the
City to anything.
City Administrator Waite S i�' h stated Council Member Carlson's concerns are related to a letter
proposing cost sharing on a different project.
The City Attorney verified that the letter is different from the letter submitted on the other project.
City Engineer Powell suggested the following statement be added to the resolution:
WHEREAS, not withstanding the developer's claims regarding assessable costs in the May 8,
2001, letter, the City will determine benefiting properties and assessable costs and methods.
Council Member Dahl asked who pays for the study if the improvements are not completed. City
Engineer Powell stated there is some benefit of the study. The City may be able to assess for the cost
of the study.
19
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
The City Attorney stated it would be difficult to prove a benefit of the study. The City will, however,
recover the cost of the study at some point in the future
Mayor Bergeson added that it is the City's long term plan to put the stoplights in. The study will be
assessable at some point in the future.
Council Member Carlson moved to adopt Resolution No. 01— 67, with the addition of the following
statement:
WHEREAS, not withstanding the developer's claims regarding assessable costs in the May 8,
2001, letter the City will determine benefiting properties and assessable costs and methods.
Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
City Engineer Powell advised with all the street projects there will a to activity in
neighborhoods within the City.
Resolution No. 01— 67 can be found in the City Clerk's o
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Consideration of April 18, 2001, Council W
to page 5, paragraph 5, and corrected it to s
covered with plastic or a tarp". She als
"She asked if Mr. Goertz will be co
back for a PDO".
Minutes — Council Member Dahl referred
ember Dahl suggested the dirt pile be
age 6, paragraph 4, and added the following
PDO. Mr. Goertz indicated he will not be coming
Council Member Carlson ref ''� . pa 3, paragraph 15, and corrected the spelling of "Rehbein".
She also referred to page . arag, 7, and corrected the sentence to read "Council Member Carlson
stated she did not have a • , `th high quality 2-3 unit townhomes that were proposed and also
supports the change to singf. ' ly housing". She referred to page 6, paragraph 10, sentence 2, and
corrected it to read "The Ci ` Attorney had previously clarified ...".
Council Member Dahl moved to approve the April 18, 2001, Council Work Session Minutes, as
amended. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of April 23, Council Meeting Minutes — Council Member Dahl moved to approve
the April 23, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, as presented. Council Member Reinert seconded the
motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Notes from Highway 49 Meeting — Mayor Bergeson indicated notes had been distributed to Council
Members from a Highway 49 meeting with legislators, city council members and a MnDOT
representative. He asked if Council Members had time to review them. He suggested Council
20
COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2001
• Members read them as soon as possible and phone in any corrections or additions to Council Member
Carlson.
Council Member Carlson stated she does not believe official approval is necessary because they are
not meeting minutes. She asked Council Members to review the notes and forward any corrections to
her by Thursday. She will include the notes in the Friday packet.
Mayor Bergeson noted that a statement relating to potential liability as a reason why engineers are
hesitant to depart from standard engineering practices and designs should be added.
NEW BUSINESS - None
COMMUNITY CALENDAR MAY 15 THROUGH MAY 29, 2001:
Special Council Goal Setting Session, Wednesday, May 16, 2001, .m.
Comprehensive Plan Work Session, Saturday, May 19, 7:00
Council Work Session, Wednesday, May 23, 2001, 5:3
CITY HALL CLOSED, Memorial Day Observed, " .' May 28, 2001
• City Council Meeting, Tuesday, May 29, 200
AD TOURN
There being no further business, C
Member Carlson seconded the
. (Note Date Change)
er Dahl moved to adjourn at 9:35 p.m. Council
otion carried unanimously.
These minutes were considered
proved at the regular Council Meeting, May 29, 2001.
Ry-Chel Gaustad, City Clerk
Transcribed by:
Kim Points
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
•
Bergson, Mayor