Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 17-99Council Member Bergeson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA RESOLUTION NO. 17 - 99 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ON LOT 2, BLOCK 1, OAK BROOK PENINSULA The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, does ordain: That it is in the best interest of the City to vacate a portion of the drainage and utility easement containing a hockey rink as well as an area adjacent to, and 12 feet from the exterior of, the hockey rink. That the City of Lino Lakes held a Public Hearing before the City Council on January 10, 2000, and February 14, 2000, and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard. III. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 14th day of February, 2000. John Jitirighion, NFayor Ry hel Gaustad, City Clerk The motion for adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member Carlson and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Carlson, Dahl, O'Donnell The following voted against same: none Whereupon said ordinance was duly passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of an ordinance duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on February 14, 0 Ry-CYeI Gaustad, City Clerk _ AGENDA ITEM 5C STAFF ORIGINATOR: John Powell, City Engineer MEETING DATE: August 23, 1999 TOPIC: Public Hearing — First Reading, Ordinance No. 17-99, Easement Vacation, Oak Brook Peninsula. VOTE REQUIRED: 4/5 Vote Required BACKGROUND: A report on this issue was prepared for the August 9, 1999, City Council meeting but the item was removed from the agenda as there were not four Council Members present to act on the matter. A copy of this report is attached. The easement and hockey rink were discussed in some detail at the August 4, 1999, City Council Work Session. Paul and Julie Schwartz and Russ Melton were present at the meeting to provide their viewpoints. During the Work Session discussions, the concept of the City taking over ownership and operation of the rink was offered. This concept was presented to the Director of Public Services on August 9, 1999, for consideration. It was determined that it is not feasible and/or advisable for the City to — own and operate this rink. The developer of Oak Brook Peninsula recently contacted the City regarding their Letter of Credit for developer improvements. In a recent meeting with City staff, the developer's engineer indicated a change in the compensatory storage requirements was approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) during construction. Although we have no documentation showing an alteration of the grading plan was approved, the developer's engineer indicated he would find and submit this information to the City at his earliest convenience. Upon receiving this information, we will submit it to the RCWD and MnDNR for their review. The recent letters from these agencies are the basis for our current recommendation regarding the easement vacation. They should be given an opportunity to review the new information before the City makes a decision on this matter. At the August 18, 1999, City Council Work Session, the Schwartz's and Elizabeth Melton were present to provide information supporting their viewpoints. In my remarks at the meeting, I referred to a survey prepared earlier this year by E.G. Rud and Sons showing the existing pond location. A copy of this information is attached. Ms. Melton also distributed a letter she had prepared regarding this issue. I will prepare a detailed response to the claims in the letter once I have received the information we expect from the developer. Revised 8-20-99 OPTIONS: 1. Approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 17-99 and direct staff to review the matter further prior to the second reading. 2. Approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 17-99 with conditions. 3. Continue the Public Hearing to a future date. 4. Do not approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 17-99. RECOMMENDATION: Option 3 — Continue the Public Hearing to September 13, 1999. Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA ORDINANCE NO. 17 - 99 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ON LOT 2, BLOCK 1, OAK BROOK PENINSULA The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, does ordain: I. That it is in the best interest of the City to vacate a portion of the drainage and utility easement containing a hockey rink as well as an area adjacent to, and 12 feet from the exterior of, the hockey rink. That the City of Lino Lakes held a Public Hearing before the City Council on June 14, 1999, and August 23, 1999, and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 23rdday of August, 1999. Kimberly A. Sullivan, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer The motion for adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said ordinance was duly passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of an ordinance duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on August 23, 1999. Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer August 9, 1999, City Council Background: The specific action requested by Russell D. and Elizabeth M. Melton, the owners of Lot 2, Block 1, Oak Brook Peninsula, is the vacation of a portion of the City's drainage and utility easement which contains a hockey rink which the Melton's have constructed. The specific area requested includes not only the hockey rink but also the area parallel to, and within 12 feet of, the rink. The entire area of the drainage and utility easement on this lot as indicated on the plat is about 22,100 square feet (SF). Of this total area, about 16,500 SF were intended to be used as compensatory flood storage based on the location of the 912 contour shown on the original grading plan. The resident of Lot 2 is requesting that the City vacate about 3,500 SF of the easement. This would result in about 20% of the flood storage area being vacated. For your information, the existing open water pond which has been constructed has an area of about 6,000 SF. A review of the file for the Oak Brook Peninsula project indicates the drainage and utility easement on Lot 2 was dedicated for at least three purposes. The narrow portion at the northwest end of the property contains a storm sewer outlet to convey roadway runoff from Otter Lake Drive to a pond area. The easement also contains space for a 30 foot by 30 foot "wet" pond. The pond would help control the rate of runoff to Otter Lake and provide a settling basin for sedimentation from the roadway. The majority of the area contained in the easement was dedicated to provide compensatory flood storage adjacent to Otter Lake. The Rice Creek Watershed rules required that "no fill may be placed below the 100 -year flood elevation unless compensatory storage is provided". This requirement is necessary to ensure the capacity of the lake to store flood waters is not reduced by filling activity. The grading of the subdivision required a certain amount of fill be placed below the 100 -year level so the developer was required to excavate a like volume elsewhere along the Lakeshore. One matter not in dispute is the fact that the developer of the Oak Brook Peninsula subdivision did not grade the easement area on Lot 2 according to the proposed grading plan. To make matters worse, other alterations were apparently made to the grading in this area which contradicts the grading plan. These alterations include the construction of swales; excavation of pond areas not in conformance with the plan; and some filling of the easement area to support the hockey rink construction. When considering the vacation of the easement we did not focus on recent changes made to the drainage patterns. Instead, we focused on the original grading plan, the original purpose of the easement, and whether it is in the City's best interest to vacate a portion of the easement. As the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) both had review authority over the proposed grading plan for this subdivision, we have solicited their comments on the easement vacation. A copy of the correspondence received from these agencies is attached. Both of the agencies recommend that the compensatory flood storage shown on the original grading plan be constructed. If not within the existing easement, then in another location abutting the lake. If the storage is not constructed per the original plan, a new permit application will be required. The applicant has retained a consultant who has visited the site and reviewed various documents. A copy of the consultants letter is attached. The analysis in the letter addresses only the amount of new fill placed in the easement by the property owner. What it does not address is the compensatory storage already missing on this site because it was not graded per the original grading plan. It also does not address the developer's inability to construct the compensatory storage if the rink remains. Staff recognizes there have been many other issues raised with regard to this hockey rink. The specific request to be considered by the City Council at this time is the vacation of a portion of the City's easement. Other issues such as the rink lighting, shoreland setbacks, etc., can be considered after the City Council makes a decision on the issue currently presented. The entire context of how these issues are considered is determined by the City's decision on the easement vacation. In conclusion, I do not recommend vacation of the easement as requested as I do not believe it is in the City's best interest. Our ability to enforce the terms of the development agreement, including the proper grading, are severely hindered if the hockey rink remains on the easement. Even without the development agreement, we cannot contract directly to construct the proper compensatory storage without the full easement. Construction of the compensatory storage per the original grading plan is also consistent with the comments from the RCWD and the MnDNR. If the City Council decides to approve the easement vacation, I would recommend it be conditioned upon the owner's formal submittal of a Site Plan to be processed through the normal review process. This review would determine the zoning/ordinance impacts of the rink, the need for variances, etc. I would also recommend, if approved, that compensatory storage be constructed and the Site Plan approvals be received prior to the City's formal vacation of the easement. Russell and Elizabeth Melton 2150 Otter Lake Drive White Bear Lake, MN 55110 (651) 407-9283 August 18, 1999 Members of the City Council Honorable Mayor Sullivan Ladies and Gentlemen: We have asked you to partially vacate a drainage easement to accommodate a hockey rink on our property. By doing so, you will not be sanctioning any reduction in compensatory storage for drainage water on Oak Brook Peninsula. WHAT WE HAVE DONE TO THE PROPERTY THAT COULD HAVE AFFECTED THE EASEMENT: We have done nothing to reduce the amount of water that can be stored on the easement. Since we built our house in 1997, we have made two changes which could arguably affect the storage capacity of the easement: 1) We enlarged the pond that was on the property; and 2) We built a hockey rink. The first change increased the capacity for storage of water. The second has had no effect on water storage. As part of landscaping our yard, we enlarged the pond on our property. The City, the DNR and the Rice Creek Watershed District were all notified about this. They sent inspectors and worked with Russell to approve the changes to the pond. The pond was dug specifically to prevent sediment running into the wetlands to the east of the property. The part closest to the street was dug to a 3' level. The next area was dug to 2' and the narrow channel closest to the wetlands was dug to 1&1/2'. At first, we apparently dug too close to the wetlands, but that area was restored and the authorities had no further issues. By enlarging the pond, we added to the storage capacity of the easement. In his memorandum to the City Council, Mr. Powell has indicated that the pond has an area of 6,000 square feet. We think this is a conservative estimate, but we will use that figure for the time -being. Assuming an average depth of 2', the pond holds 12,000 cubic feet of water. There are 8 gallons of water in a cubic foot. That means the pond now holds at least 96,000 gallons of water. In the file at the Rice Creek Watershed District, the notes indicate that the entire easement is required to hold 96,000 gallons of water. The requirement for compensatory storage is fully satisfied by the pond alone. Building the hockey rink has had no effect on the drainage capacity of the easement. The hockey rink was built on the highest ground within the easement area. While fill was taken from one area and moved to another area, there was no net change. An engineer we retained has given an opinion that the hockey rink has only a negligible effect on drainage. We have seen no evidence from anyone contradicting this. WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE WE BUILT OUR HOUSE IS RELEVANT ONLY TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH STORAGE IS NEEDED. In Mr. Powell's memorandum to the council, he makes an issue of the fact that the developer did not grade the easement area according to the proposed grading plan. He refers incorrectly to "storage already missing" and things being made worse by the addition of a swale and the changes to the pond. There is no fire under all this smoke. The developer was required to replace any storage displaced by fill on the rest of the Peninsula. At the time of the proposal, he was estimating how much fill would be needed for the road. In the end, he needed less than 60% of that fill, so he was not required to provide the entire amount of storage in the original plan. There was no "missing storage" before we built on the property. The addition of the swale which was built to accommodate the Schwartz's would have had no negative impact on storage. If anything, digging that out added to the storage capacity. As I explained above, the changes to the pond increased the storage capacity. In any case, what the developer did or did not do before we built our home is \-' water over the dam. It is too late to require the property grading to match the original plan. In order for the City to get a court order, it will have to meet the requirements for equitable relief. We will argue that the City has waited too long to enforce the development agreement and that we have relied to our detriment on City actions in the meantime. We have landscaped our yard around the pond. If there were an issue with needing more storage, it could be accommodated by adding to the pond or taking fill away from the land between the rink and the pond. As far as I can see, Mr. Powell is figuring that we should not only remove the hockey rink, but that we should allow or pay for our yard to be dug apart. The end result would be a large area where vegetation would not grow and water would not stay. THE CITY SHOULD APPROVE A PARTIAL VACATION OF THE EASEMENT. We remain willing to satisfy the City's legitimate concern about storage of water. However, there is no question that the easement remaining after vacation for the hockey rink is more than enough to provide for compensatory water storage as envisioned in the original development plan. FORMAL REQUEST TO CITY OF LINO LAKES CITY COUNCIL TO VACATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT Russell D. Melton and Elizabeth M. Melton, property owners of Lot 2, Block 1; Oak Brook Peninsula; Anoka County, Minnesota, requests that the Lino Lakes City Council vacate the portion of the drainage easement containing the hockey rink with a 12 foot perimeter on the rink dimensions. July 19, 1999 f, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources DNR Waters - Metro Region, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (651) 772-7977 Jeff Smyser, City Planner City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 RE: OTI'ER LAKE SHORELINE MEETING, JULY 13 1999, CITY OF LINO LAKES, ANOKA COUNTY Dear Mr. Smyzer: This letter is to present my recollections of the meeting that we attended at the end of the Otter Lake Drive cul-de-sac last week on July 13. I hope my early departure from the meeting was not too disruptive. I was able to make it to my next meeting almost on time. I was hoping to find high ground or a ridge that would have provided a clear separation between the lake and "non -lake" on the site. There was none that I could perceive without the aid of a level or other instrument, as the topography is too flat. The question remains as to whether the flood storage compensation area is physically connected to Otter Lake below the ordinary high water elevation (OHW) of 911.5'. I maintain though, that the compensatory storage area was never intended to be part of the Lake. If the area is found to be inadvertently connected to the main body of the lake we will need to pursue restoration of the higher ground that separated the pond from the lake at the OHW. Although setbacks and buffers will benefit almost all water bodies, it was not the intent of the shoreland regulations to apply the same shoreland setbacks to stormwater ponds. Also, I have no interest in applying public waters rules to floodplain fill compensation areas or stormwater ponds. I still think it's important to complete the job of creating the originally required amount of floodplain compensation. The details probably need to be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District. We also discussed the benefits of screening the ice rink with vegetation on all sides. We strongly encourage screening the structure from view with native plants. Thank you for the opportunity to meet regarding this project. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Sir -rely, Tom Hove Area Hydrologist DNR Information: 651-296-6157 • 1-888-646-6367 • TTY: 651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 Rice Creek Watershed April 28, 1999 3585 N. LEXINGTON AVENUE , SUITE 330 ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 55126-8056 PHONE (651) 766-4191. FAX (651) 766-4196 John Powell, City Engineer City of Lino Lakes 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes MN 55014-2123 Re: Easement Vacation: 2150 Otter Lake Drive, Lino Lakes Dear Mr. Powell: www.mnwate .htm drewr00'1 @tc.0 Board of Managers Regular Meetings: 2nd and 4th Wednesdays at Shoreview City Hall KATE DREWRY, District Admin. BONITA TORPE, Admin. Assist. With reference to your letter of 3/18/99, we have reviewed our permit file for this development, completed a field inspection, and offer the following comments relative to the request for easement vacation. Our permit file confirms that the easement area was designated for compensatory flood storage. We would therefore recommend that no portion of the easement be vacated unless another area within the development is acquired, graded and placed under easement to assure compensatory storage in accordance with the RCWD permit conditions. Also a note that any such change to the permit as originally approved would require submittal of plans and a new RCWD permit application. Please let me know if you need further information. Sincerely or 1, �t to Drewry District Administrator bct c: Correspondence RCWD File #92-172 Paul & Julie Schwartz, 2140 Otter Lake Dr., White Bear Lake MN 55110 A.I. CARDINAL, SR. BOARD OF MANAGERS TOM WADDELL ROBERT M. HULT ORDEEN J. BRAATHEN EUGENE L. PETERSON March 25, 1999 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources DNR Waters - Metro, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (651) 772-7977 Mr. John Powell, City Engineer City of Lino Lakes 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 RE: DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT 2150 O 1"1'ER LAKE DRIVE, LINO LAKES, ANOKA CO. Dear Mr. Powell: The Department of Natural Resources does not object to vacation of the requested portion of the drainage easement. suspect though that the Rice Creek Watershed District has more of an interest, and I see that "-they have been contacted as well. If the easement and originally proposed grading were in response to fill in the floodplain, then I suggest that an equal area of easement be obtained and the grading completed to compensate for lost floodplain storage. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please feel free to call if you have questions. Sincerely, Tom Hovey Area Hydrologist L DNR Information: 651-296-6157 • 1-888-646-6367 • TTY: 651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer or prim.,. o J l o r•.,.,1 -b;. inn 1 PROJECT ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT, INC. 6603 Queen Avenue South, Richfield, MN 55423 12) 798-0021, (612) 798-0022 (fax) June 14, 1999 Ria :sell D. Melton 2150 Otter Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55 i 10 Re: Residential Hockey Rink Drainage Dear Mr. Melton: • Engineers • Analysts • • Scientists • Educators • As you requested I have investigated the effect of your residential hockey rink at the above address on flood storage and drainage of the surrounding area and find that the construction of the hockey rink has had no effect on the ability of the area to store flood waters and has a negligible effect on the drainage characteristics of the surrounding area. The hockey rink in question is, approximately, 80 feet long by 49: feet wide. Approximately the north west, 4.of the.rink:lies.within a drainage easement that extends through your property. My investigation consisted of examination of: 1. the Summons and Complaint filed with District Court, Tenth Judicial District, Paul and Julie Schwartz, Plaintiffs, vs. Oak Brook Peninsula Homeowners' Association, a Minnesota Not -for -Profit Corporation, Defendant, dated 5-18- 99; 2. a letter addressed to Julie and Paul Schwartz from James E. Jacques, PE, Orr- Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, dated May 18, 1999 and attached to the above referenced Summons and Complaint: 3. a letter to Mr. Russ Melton from_John M.,P ow ell, P.E., City, of Lino Lakes dated May 7, 1999; 4; -a letter .to :John Powell, City Engineer from Kate. Drewry, District Administer, -Rice Creek Watershed:District, dated April 28, 1999; , Russell D. Melton June 14, 1999 Page 2 5. a drawing titled "Sketch and Description for: Robert Adamson & Marlin Hansen of: Division of part of Outlot B, Otter Lake Estates, and Part of Gov't Lots 6 & 7, Section 36, T31, R22, Anoka County, Minnesota" prepared by E. G. Rud & Sons, Inc., Land Surveyors dated 4-3-91; 6. a drawing titled "Preliminary Plat and Grading Plan of: Oak Brook Peninsula" prepared by E. G. Rud & Sons, Inc., Land Surveyors, originally dated 12-11- 89, revised and dated 2-12-90 and 2-27-90; 7. a copy of a drawing showing the boundaries of your lot and the drainage easement (title and date of drawing not included on the copy); 8. copies of photographs of the site prior to construction of the hockey rink; and 9. an affidavit of Robert Adamson dated June 10, 1999. In addition to examination of the above referenced documents I visited the site on June 12, 1999 and visually examined the hockey rink construction and the surrounding area. I observed that approximately 35 feet of the perimeter of the northwest end of the hockey rink had been filled to a maximum depth of approximately 12 inches above the original grade and the southeast end of the rink had been cut to a maximum depth of approximately 6 inches below the original grade. You informed me that all of the fill I observed at the northwest end of the rink had been obtained from excavation of the southeast end and replacement for fill used in the swale. The fill placed in the northwest end of the rink is within the drainage easement described on the drawings and it appears that most of the fill removed from the southeast end is outside of the drainage easement. I have estimated the amount of fill removed from the southeast end and placed in the northwest end to be between 1.5 and 2 cubic yards (Le. 40 to 60 cubic feet). The area of the area of the drainage easement appears to be approximately 25000 square feet. Forty to sixty cubic feet of fill placed within a drainage area of 25000 square feet will have a negligible effect on the capacity of the drainage area to store flood waters. Furthermore, the fill placed within the drainage easement is balanced by fill removed from an area immediately adjacent to the drainage easement. Therefore, the net effect on the storage capacity of the drainage easement is zero. Russell D. Melton Page 3 June 14, 1999 Inspection of the area around the hockey rink indicates the construction of the hockey rink has had a negligible effect on drainage patterns outside of the hockey rink. This is particularly true because the boards on the northwest end of the rink have been left up to about four inches above grade. This allows surface water to run unimpeded under the boards and across the rink. At distances of more than approximately 50 feet from the hockey rink the effect of the effect on drainage patterns is zero. Sincerely, PROJECT ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT, INC. Lawrence W. Gubbe, Ph.D., P.E. Senior Engineer (Staff Consultant) cc. Curriculum Vitae LVW/sec Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA ORDINANCE NO. 17 - 99 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ON LOT 2, BLOCK 1, OAK BROOK PENINSULA The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, does ordain: That it is in the best interest of the City to vacate a portion of the drainage and utility easement containing a hockey rink as well as an area adjacent to, and 12 feet from the exterior of, the hockey rink. That the City of Lino Lakes held a Public Hearing before the City Council on January 24, 2000, and February 28, 2000, and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard. III. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 28th day of February, 2000. John J. Bergeson, Mayor Ry -Chef Gaustad, City Clerk The motion for adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said ordinance was duly passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of an ordinance duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on February 28, 2000. Ry -Chef Gaustad, City Clerk AGENDA ITEM 6B STAFF ORIGINATOR: John Powell, City Engineer COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 8, 1999 TOPIC: Public Hearing — First Reading, Approve Ordinance No. 17-99, Easement Vacation, Oak Brook Peninsula. VOTE REQUIRED: 4/5 Vote Required BACKGROUND: The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) has requested additional information on this matter from the developer of Oak Brook Peninsula. Consequently, we do not have a recommendation from the RCWD at this time. A recommendation from the RCWD is required before City staff is able to prepare a recommendation. We are requesting that the Public Hearing be continued until November 22, 1999. The Environmental Board reviewed this request at their October 27, 1999, meeting. A copy of their recommendation is attached. OPTIONS: 1. Continue the Public Heariw-- AGENDA ITEM 6 D STAFF ORIGINATOR: John Powell, City Engineer COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 13, 1999 TOPIC: Public Hearing — First Reading, Approve Ordinance No. 17-99, Easement Vacation, Oak Brook Peninsula. VOTE REQUIRED: 4/5 Vote Required BACKGROUND: Rice Creek Watershed District has completed their review of this matter. A copy of their letter is attached. Also attached is a copy of correspondence recently received from the residents at 2140 Otter Lake Drive. In order to fully respond to concerns from all parties specifically related to the requested easement vacation, adequate review time is necessary. OPTIONS: 1. Continue the Public Hearing to the January 10, 2000, City Council meeting. 2. Hold the public hearing for the first reading without a staff recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option No. 1, continuation of the Public Hearing. Rice Creek Watershed November 29, 1999 John Powell, City Engineer City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes MN 55014-1182 Subj: Oakbrook Peninsula Dear Mr. Powell: 3585 N. LEXINGTON AVENUE , SUITE 330 ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 55126-8056 PHONE (651) 766-4191 • FAX (651) 766-4196 www.mnwatershed.o drewrO0'l @tc.unln:ed ce.htm ry Board of Managers Regular Meetings: 2nd and 4th Wednesdays at Shoreview City Hall Proposed Easement Vacation; RCWD Permits #90-14, 92-171 & 93-167 KATE DREWRY, District Admin. BONITA TORPE, Admin. Assist. The District Engineer has completed his review of the supplemental information provided by Robert Adamson, and a copy of his report and findings (dated 11/17/99) is enclosed. In summary, it appears that the District's compensatory storage requirement has been fulfilled, although not in the manner specified in the original grading plan and permit. At this point, we do not see a need to regrade the entire easement area to bring it into conformance with the original grading plan. However, we do recommend that the swale from the Schwartz property line to the pond be regraded as discussed in the enclosed report. With regard to the proposed easement vacation, as a minimum, easement should be retained over the existing pond, the drainage swale and any area below Otter Lake's HWL of 912.9. We feel that any decisions relative to vacation of other portions of the easement are best left to the City as we understand that there are a number of ancillary issues unrelated to the District's permit requirements. Lastly, we would point out that our findings relative to compensatory storage are based on the survey information furnished by the developer. Since the survey was prepared by a reputable Registered Land Surveyor, we have no reason to question its accuracy. However the Schwartzes have pointed out discrepancies between the E.G.Rud survey and a survey done by Advance Surveying and Engineering, and have requested further verification of the elevation data upon which the compensatory storage calculations are based (refer to letter dated 11/2/99 from the Schwartzes which you were previously copied on). We must advise that the District is not in a position to provide such verification and leave it to the City to determine if you feel it is appropriate. Please let me know if you have further questions on this matter and keep us appraised of its final disposition. Sincerely, Kate Drewry District Administrator bct Enclosures: 1 c: Paul & Julie Schwartz, 2140 Otter Lake Dr., White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Elizabeth Melton, 2150 Otter Lake Drive, White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Robert Adamson, 6001 Sargent Court N., White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Derek Knapp, PE, Montgomery Watson Engineers Board of Managers (5) Correspondence RCWD File #93-167 A.J. CARDINAL, SR. ANOKA COUNTY TOM WADDELL RAMSEY COUNTY BOARD OF MANAGERS ROBERT M. HULT \,V\tir IINGTON COL N TY ORDEEN J. BRAATHEN RAMSEY COUNTY EUGENE L. PETERSON ANOKA COUNT' N(N 1(;( )MFRY WATSON (consulting Engineers 61 )-5O i-()01)0 • Co -Counsel: F1 \ROLU) 11. SF-1EFF 612-332-1000, MICHELLE I. LARK -11651-699-9845 MEMORANDUM © MONTGOMERY WATSON To: Kate Drewry, District Administrator Date: November 17, 1999 Rice Creek Watershed Dist ict From: Derek Knapp, P.E. Reference: Subject: Otter Lake Drive Hockey Rink/Easement Vacation The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize my review of the Otter Lake Drive Hockey Rink/Easement Vacation situation based upon the updated survey data sent by Bob Adamson, dated November 2, 1999, received November 15, 1999. RECENT ACTIONS The new data was submitted in response to my October 12, 1999 memorandum requesting 1) more detailed survey data on the Melton pond at the eastern end of Otter Lake Drive, 2) verification of the pond's runout elevation, 3) recalculation of the pond's live storage volume between the newly surveyed pond runout elevation (911.3) and Otter Lake's HWL of 912.9, and 4) survey data along the centerline of the swale between the Melton pond and a low area on the northeast corner of the Schwartz's property. The requested survey data was satisfactorily completed. COMPENSATORY STORAGE The Rice Creek Watershed District's (RCWD) permit (90-14) for the Oak Brook Peninsula development specified 640 cubic yards of compensatory floodplain storage volume to mitigate for fill in Otter Lake's floodplain. The RCWD permit was issued based upon plans showing the compensatory storage basin to be excavated at the eastern end of Otter Lake Drive. This storage area was not constructed as approved. Instead, the requisite 30' x 30' water quality pond (dead storage only) at the eastern end of Otter Lake Drive was enlarged during site construction to approximately 220' long x 30' wide (on average). As approved, this water quality pond was intended to function separately from the compensatory storage basin. As constructed, this pond provides approximately 525 cubic yards of live storage below Otter Lake's HWL. An additional 30' x 30' water quality pond was required by the RCWD to pretreat roadway runoff prior to discharge to Otter Lake. This pond is located on the south side of Otter Lake Drive approximately 800' west of the permitted compensatory storage area. The pond appears to be constructed according to approved plans and provides 126 cubic yards of live storage below Otter Lake's HWL. SCHWARTZ/MELTON SITE DRAINAGE The recent survey of the swale running from the low area on the northeast corner of the Schwartz's property to the Melton pond shows a slightly negative flow gradient. The swale high point appears to be approximately 0.5' above the lowest spot on Melton's property. According to Bob Adamson's November 10, 1999 letter, the Melton's have agreed to regrade the swale to provide adequate drainage. SUMMARY Approximately 650 cubic yards of live storage was constructed in the form of the two water quality ponds. This volume is in excess of the required 640 cubic yards of compensatory floodplain storage. Live storage created in the ponds should qualify as compensatory floodplain storage because 1) the live storage in both ponds is directly connected to Otter Lake's floodplain, 2) as -built live storage between pond runout elevation and Otter Lake's HWL of 912.9 was calculated correctly, and 3) rate control was not required for this permit (which eliminates the possibility of "double counting" live storage needed for both rate control and compensatory storage). The Melton swale is insufficiently graded to provide adequate drainage from the northeast • portion of the Schwartz's property. RECOMMENDATIONS I recommend the following: • The compensatory storage created in the two ponds suffices as compensatory floodplain storage as required by the RCWD permit. • The Melton swale is regraded to provide adequate drainage from the Schwartz property to the pond. Please distribute this memorandum to all interested parties. Feel free to refer questions to me at (612) 595-5261. -2- • 0 L lat L zkv y o O , LP 0 N7:!.•...... ' \ _ c • — -- • `� \ ` \ • \ _ • \ • i 1 / ,•-•,, 1‘ i, r -_,- .., ,,,„ , , i , , ..., ...... ... , / ., , ,. •, I .2, I.", ,/ , 1 11. I 't \\c‘r* •ItI., \ tIN- /%) ' / ' ' 1�t �• Q_C ibd` . % ' // / /"/ i •r. ; l — — i• i / i —,\ � / -./ /� / / 6► i a - J• —co o w N.� ` U ` C H •/ a �mrri \• y W From : THE LAKE STATE CO. Docember 6, 1999 The City of Lino Lakes Mr. John Powell, City Engineer 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 PHONE No. : 651 653 1381 Dec.06 1999 1:32PM P01 RE: Easement Vacation at 21 50 Otter Lake Drive **********VIA I+ACSIMILE********** original via U.S. Mail Dear Mr. Powell: Regarding thc above-mentioned easement vacation request, we have a few questions we hope to address with both you and Mr. Wessel personally. We hope to set up a meeting at your earliest convenience to discuss some ()idle following issues, or at a minimum, have these issues addressed prior to any formal city action being taken. As you arc aware, we have supplied a survey indicating that the Melton rink is significantly closer to the DNR protected wetland (lake) than as indicated on the Melton -procured survey. The distance indicated on our survey would indicate that the rink is in violation of the Shoroland Ordinance, and as such, would need a variance to remain. How does the City intend to doal with these two contradictory surveys? Additionally, would a variance request be conducted simultaneously to the easmnent vacation request? Iu light of the potential error on the Melton survey, we feel it is important to validate the calculations made for compensatory water storage, as reliance on erroneous calculations by the RCWD and City, would be to our and our development's detriment. in light of the Anoka Conservation District letter and thc Environmental Committee recommendation, how will the City consider these in any formal decision made in the staff recommendation? Plcusc note, both were concerned, as we are, with the prcccdcnt this sols to encourage people to ignore permitting requirements and thc casement ordinance, as well as the preoedent it sets for others to request casement vacations. lithe City docs not vacate the easement, what action will bc taken to stop interim use attic rink on city -encumbered property? Specifically, what will be dune about the lights in the interim, which we believe exceed candle -foot powers as stated in the City Ordinance? Please also note that the power hox for the lights is still within the easement area that would he retained by the city (not part of the vacation request). Since the presence of this is in violation of ordinance, how will this bc dealt with? Docs the City consider this a permanent or temporary structure? If permanent, does it not nccd a permit? We believe it is permanent due to definitions stated in the UBC and City code, specifically, the method of attachment, and the fact that it has remained up year-round, raid has not been, as defined by the temporary structure definition in the City's zoning code "removed when the designated time period, activity, or use for which the temporary structure was erected as ceased." Based on this inlbrmation, will the Mcltons need to seek obtaining a building permit? From : THE LAKE STATE CO. PHONE No. : 651 653 1381 Dec.06 1999 1:32PM P02 Please validate the swale elevations. This was hand -dug by Mr. Adamson over the course of' two days. Please note, the excavated material was than placed on other areas of the easement, including around the perimeter of tic hockey iiuk (please scc photographs). Also, the RCWD engineer shows a significantly larger and wider swale, as compared to the approximate 1' width hand -dug by Adamson (please see photographs). We would like to see a PE sign off on specifications for this swalc, have it designed similar to the RCWD recommendation, and be properly grassed -in. We hope this can be done prior to the spring thaw, which leaves us a short window of opportunity. We have been dealing with this issue now for over one year, and adequate time has passed to deal with this appropriately. If vacation is considered, what additional conditions will be placed? Can side hoards be removed and/oi posts? What about landscaping, as Tom Hovey pointed out? Will hours of oporation be imposed on the lights -- if they arc designed to be within the appropriate candle -foot power? The Melton engineering report indicates "negligible" impact. Thu deliberate choice of this word indicates some impact and is an admission that the hockey rink does dam natural wale- flow. While in most years, this may not be a problem, during a 10 -year or 100 -year event, this could have a dramatic impact on our property. Please rote the Melton hydrology report also states that the impact is negligible because the side boards are raised 4" at the northwest comer of the rink. Please note that this was the area that was recently filled in by Adamson with the swale excavation material. If this area is blocked, is it not true that the hydrology report procured by the Mcltons is no longer valid? John, you had mentioned that you will be apprizing the City Council on the staff time/expenditure of money that this entire hockey rink issue has entailed. We are wondering if this has been Clone, and if so, how much has been spent. if it has not been done, we lope that this will be done prior to any decision being made by the City Council. We also want to request obtaining this information at the time it is quantified. Finally, if this issues is not heard by the present City Council, after January, the Bcrgcsson Council suatwill be vacant pending special election, we are curious about what will happen if there is only four people on the council, nut five at the. time that this is heard, when a 4/5 majority is needed? Please let us know when we can discuss these issues. We look forward to your response. Again, thank you for all of you time and effort into this matter. Sincerely, Paul a. Seltwntlz Julie Schwartz otic; photographs cc: Brian Wessel AGENDA ITEM 6B STAFF ORIGINATOR: John Powell, City Engineer COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 25, 1999 TOPIC: Public Hearing — First Reading, Approve Ordinance No. 17-99, Easement Vacation, Oak Brook Peninsula. VOTE REQUIRED: 4/5 Vote Required BACKGROUND: The Rice Creek Watershed District(RCWD) had previously indicated we would receive their recommendation on this matter no later than October 18, 1999. After reviewing the attached memo from the RCWD engineer, it is apparent they do not yet have a definitive position on this request and have asked that the applicant prepare and submit additional data. A recommendation on this matter from the RCWD is required before City staff is able to prepare a recommendation. We are requesting that the Public Hearing be continued until November 8, 1999. This matter has also been placed on the agenda for the Environmental Board meeting to be held on October 27, 1999. OPTIONS: 1. Continue the Public Hearing to the November 8, 1999, City Council meeting. 2. Hold the public hearing for the first reading without a staff recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option No. 1, continuation of the Public Hearing. 10/18/1999 14:11 651-766-4196 RICE CREEK W DIST PAGE 02 MEMORANDUM MONTGOMERY WATSON To: Kate Drewry, District Administrator Date: From: Derek Knapp, P.E. Reference: Subject: Otter Lake Drive Hockey Rink/Easement Vacation October 12, 1999 The purpose of this memorandum is to provide you with the results of my analysis of the Otter Lake Drive Hockey Rink/Easement Vacation situation in Lino Lakes and provide recommendations toward issue resolution. I have purposely omitted a detailed project history since it has been documented in detail through recent correspondence by the property owners (Melton and Schwartz), City of Lino Lakes, and RCWD. RCWD ISSUES The main purpose of the original drainage easement was to cover the proposed floodplain fill compensatory storage basin which was to be excavated as part of the Oak Brook Peninsula as shown on the Preliminary Plat and Grading Plan, last revised December 10, 1990 (RCWD Pemuts 93-167, 92-171, and 90-14). As documented by the City and developer, the compensatory storage basin was not constructed as approved. The basin was to provide 640 cubic yards of compensatory floodplain storage volume below Otter Lake's flood elevation of 912.9. It is unclear at this time if the basin, as constructed, provides the requisite compensatory storage volume to meet RCWD standards. Drainage and ponding easements are required by the RCWD also to ensure the preservation of existing and/or proposed drainage features, including stormwater ponds, natural or constructed stormwater collection and conveyance systems, wetlands, floodplain, and all other hydrologic features. Approximately one-half of the hockey rink was constructed in the platted drainage and utility easement. Also, the stormwater pond/compensatory storage basin was partially constructed outside the existing easement. In this particular case, RCWD concerns over the easement issue are only related to adequate compensatory floodplain storage volume and maintenance of drainage patterns affecting off-site landowners. RESULTS OF SITE REVIEW The following describe the results of my review, separated by issue. 10/18/1999 14:11 651-766-4196 Compensatory Floodplaln Storage Volume RICE CREEK W DIST PAGE 03 As mentioned earlier in this memorandum, compensatory floodplain storage volume totaling 640 cubic yards was required as part of the RCWD permits. The following water elevations were used in my analysis of as -built floodplain storage volumes: • Otter Lake Normal Water Level (NWL) 910.3 (Bald Eagle Lake tailwater elevation controls) • Otter Lake Ordinary High Water Elevation (OHW) 911.5 (Per Torn Hovey, DNR) • Otter Lake 100 -year Flood Level (HWL) 912.9 (Highest recorded water level — 1986) RCWD policies specify that compensatory storage volume must be provided in an amount equal to the floodplain fill quantity and must be excavated at an elevation between the impacted basin's NWL and HWL. Additionally, storage cannot be "double -counted" for portions of the compensatory storage basin below the localized or regional NWL (run -out elevation). In this case, the 640 cubic yards of floodplain storage were to be provided between Otter Lake's NWL of 910.3 and HWL of 912.9. Robert Adamson calculated 650± cubic yards between elevation 910.5 and 912.8 in his September 15, 1999 letter to the RCWD. The calculated volume appears to be in error. The volume calculation is incorrect because portions of the 650± cubic yards provided by the existing pond are below the pond run -out elevation of approximately 911.5. Therefore, compensatory floodplain storage is valid only between the pond's run -out elevation of 911.5 and Otter Lake's HWL of 912.9. The compensatory storage volume calculations need to be revised to reflect these requirements. Site Drainage Issues As mentioned earlier in this memorandum, another goal of drainage easements is to ensure preservation of adequate drainage routes to avoid future alterations which may excessively impound stormwater runoff on properties upstream of final or intermediate receiving waterbodies. Based upon my site inspection, the hockey rink does not appear to singularly pose a significant drainage hindrance to the Schwartz property to the west. A small swale has been constructed to convey water northeast from a low area along the Melton/Schwartz property line to the stormwater pond. However, it appears this swale was graded with insufficient positive gradient to the pond and may actually back up runoff onto the Schwartz property. The current survey does not adequately identify the swale and centerline flow elevations. -2- 10/18/1999 14:11 651-766-4196 SUMMARY RICE CREEK W DIST PAGE 04 I recommend the compensatory floodplain storage volume calculations be redone to provide in- place storage volumes between the pond's run -out elevation of 911.5± and Otter Lake's HWL of 912.9. The pond fun -out elevation should also be verified and documented as part of the storage calculations. Additional survey points should be collected to adequately show the drainage swale centerline elevations and surrounding topography extending from the Melton pond across the Schwartz property line. This data should subsequently be resubmitted to the RCWD for review. Please distribute this memorandum to all interested parties. Feel free to refer questions to me at (612) 595-5261. 10/18/1999 14:11 3 651-766-4196 / 12.�1\�t�.' • to 3'ti �; \ q/ / 9/ 40 \i� o ; • ME ('cf _ • ,"i �'Edgs c1 91 e11..12 7�-L n s�VI q3 ContouR___, ,�� �.s3 I I 1 V 4.Tf ' At `,� 91282�I. � �J\,J 1 t 1114.05 T� 0j,'•.1. o RICE CREEK W DIST tit PAGE 05 :ts, 119 \ /.,N I , g 915.55 / / /I I • / f1A /.o ' �. / iy0 / • NOTE: 'JOW a of Cut ESEt 910.5 Contou DENOTE IRON MONUMENT SET N MONUMENT O • 0 DENOTES 411} DENOTES BENCHMARK DENOTES APRON