2014-04-01 Council Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
April 1, 2014 – 7:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of March 18, 2014 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of March 25, 2014 Planning Commission Minutes
c. Approval of 2014 Par 3 Maintenance Contract
d. Approve Resolution 2014-16, Approval of Lot Split at Oak Street/North Freeway Road,
Planning Case 2014-08
e. Approval of North Urban Regional Trail Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County
f. Approval of Lexington Crosswalk Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County
g. Approval of March 18, 2014 Traffic Safety Committee Recommendations
h. Approval of Temporary On-Sale Liquor Licenses
i. Approval of Personnel Action Report
j. Approval of Resolution 2014-17, Support for Noise Oversight Committee/Metropolitan
Airports Commission Area Navigation Position Statement
k. Approval of Change in Start Time for May 6th City Council Meeting
l. Approval Resolution 2014-18, Cooperative Construction Agreement with MnDOT for
Storm Water Drainage Improvements at Marie Avenue and I-35E
m. Receipt of March 2014 Building Activity Report
n. Approval of Claims List
o. Approval of Contractor List
6. Public Comments
7. New and Unfinished Business
a. Resolution 2014-15 Approval of Conditional Use Permit for 2334 Swan Drive, Planning
Case 2014-07
8. Community Announcements
9. Council Comments
10. Adjourn
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota
Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights,
Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present:
Councilmembers Povolny, Petschel, and Norton. Councilmember Duggan was absent.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Krebsbach presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Norton moved adoption of the
agenda.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Krebsbach presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and
approval. Councilmember Norton moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and
authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items G) Approval of
Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for Trail Rehabilitation Projects and H) Approval of
Personnel Action Report.
a. Approval of March 4, 2014 City Council Minutes
i. Mayor Krebsbach noted one minor change to the minutes.
ii. Councilmember Petschel recused herself from approving the minutes as she was absent.
Ayes: 3
Recused: 1 (Petschel)
Absent: 1
page 2
b. Approval of March 11, 2014 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes
c. Approval of March 12, 2014 Airport Relations Commission Minutes
d. Approval of 2014 Street Sweeping Contract
e. Receipt of February 2014 Fire Department Synopsis Report
f. Approval of Replacement Chairs for Council Chambers
g. Approval of Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for Trail Rehabilitation Projects
h. Approval of Personnel Action Report
i. Appoint LOGIS Alternate Representative
j. Receipt of February Par 3 Report
k. Approval of February 2014 Treasurer’s Report
l. Approval of Claims List
m. Approval of Contractor List
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
G) APPROVAL OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH DAKOTA COUNTY FOR
TRAIL REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Public Works Director John Mazzitello explained that as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Plan,
city staff had identified two trails for rehabilitation; the first being along Wentworth Avenue between
Wachtler and Dodd and the second being along Pilot Knob Road between Mendota Heights Road and
Highway 13. Because the rights-of-way belong to Dakota County but the trails are City owned and
maintained, staff requested funding be included in Dakota County’s capital improvement plan to assist
the City in rehabilitating these trails. The joint powers agreement outlines the responsibilities of each of
the two governmental entities and the cost split for the projects.
Councilmember Petschel moved to approve the Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for Trail
Rehabilitation along Wentworth Avenue and Pilot Knob Road.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1
H) APPROVAL OF PERSONNEL ACTION REPORT
Police Chief Michael Aschenbrener stated that the Police Department is beginning the process of
creating a hiring eligibility list for Police Officers and Sergeants, which could take eight to ten weeks.
Once the lists are established, the department will seek council approval for hiring and promotion.
Councilmember Povolny moved to approve the job descriptions and authorize staff to create lists for
hiring and promotion.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
page 3
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
PRESENTATIONS
A) FRIENDLY HILLS MIDDLE SCHOOL FUTURE CITIES COMPETITION STUDENTS
Public Works Director Mazzitello stated that city staff has been assisting Friendly Hills Middle School
in an advisory capacity as they enter teams in the Future Cities Competition, which is sponsored by the
American Society of Civil Engineers, among many other professional societies. This competition is
geared towards sixth, seventh, and eighth graders, who are tasked to produce a city of the future. This
year the area of focus was “Tomorrow’s Transit and Transportation”. Friendly Hills Middle School
entered three teams in the state competition, in addition to several other teams who had an in-school
competition. There were 53 teams entered into the state competition; all three Friendly Hills teams
finished in the top half. It was the largest participating competition in the programs history.
Ms. Crystal Mielke, teacher from Friendly Hills Middle School, gave a brief background on her class
and the lessons provided to the students. Each student was tasked with writing an essay and a city
narrative about the design of the City they created using “SimCity” software and incorporated the theme
of Tomorrow’s Transportation, including accessibility for all, intermodality, and sustainability.
Ms. Mielke introduced two of her students who participated in the competition; Anna DuPont and Ellie
Thurston. Ms. DuPont and Ms. Thurston provided a description of the city they entered into the
competition.
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
There was no unfinished or new business to discuss.
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
Assistant to the City Administrator Tamara Schutta made the following announcements:
• Registrations for the June 7, 2014 5K Race are being taken; fee is $25.
• Registration for summer programs is now open, on-line or in person at City Hall.
page 4
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Povolny commented that he read an article in the newspaper about the City of Lakeville
owning a cell tower. He suggested that the City of Mendota Heights look at acquiring one of their own.
He also wished his son a happy 17th birthday.
Councilmember Petschel gave an update from the Metropolitan Airport Commission. The Noise
Oversight Committee presented the resolution that came forward from all of the cities and the users on
the Noise Oversight Committee on setting groundwork should the FAA ever come back to the airport
with Area Navigation (RNAV).
Mayor Krebsbach noted that a neighbor, Ms. Evelyn Lundgren, passed away January 6 at 79 years old.
The Mayor expressed her heartfelt regrets.
She also noted that her undergraduate degree is from Creighton University and they are in the NCAA
basketball bracket, playing University of Louisiana at Lafayette on Friday, March 21.
ADJOURN
Councilmember Povolny moved to adjourn.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1
Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 7:33 p.m.
____________________________________
Sandra Krebsbach
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 5
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 1
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 1
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA 2
3
PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES 4
March 25, 2014 5
6
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 7
25, 2013, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. 8
9
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners Howard 10
Roston, Doug Hennes, Robin Hennessy, and Mary Magnuson. Those absent: Michael Noonan 11
and Ansis Viksnins. Others present were City Planner Nolan Wall and Public Works Director/City 12
Engineer John Mazzitello. 13
14
Approval of Agenda 15
16
The agenda was approved as submitted. 17
18
Approval of February 25, 2014 Minutes 19
20
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO 21
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2014, AS PRESENTED. 22
AYES: 5 23
NAYS: 0 24
ABSENT: 2 25
26
Hearings 27
28
PLANNING CASE #2014-07 29
Lee Violet and Joe Rueckert, 2334 Swan Drive 30
Conditional Use Permit for fence in the required side yard 31
32
City Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicants requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 33
to construct a fence in the required yard adjacent to a public right-of-way. The subject parcel is 34
located at 2334 Swan Drive, is a corner lot, with driveway access off of Swan Drive and a side 35
yard abutting Bluebill Drive. The parcel contained a single family dwelling on 0.39 acres, zoned 36
R-1, and guided for low density residential development in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed 37
fence would encompass the back yard of the property, be located approximately four feet from the 38
property boundary lines, be five feet in height, and vinyl coated. The applicant requested the fence 39
in order to provide protection and containment for a future pet dog. 40
41
Staff recommended approval of this application. 42
43
Chair Field opened the public hearing. 44
45
Ms. Lee Violet, 2334 Swan Drive, was in attendance to answer questions from the Commissioners. 46
page 6
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 2
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public 47
hearing. 48
49
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO 50
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 51
AYES: 5 52
NAYS: 0 53
ABSENT: 2 54
55
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO 56
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CASE NO. 2014-07, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 57
REQUEST FOR FENCE CONSTRUCTION GREATER THAN 36 INCHES IN A REQUIRED 58
YARD ADJACENT TO A RIGHT-OF-WAY, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDING OF 59
FACTS: 60
1. The proposed project will not negatively impact traffic visibility at the Swan Drive/Bluebill 61
Drive intersection. 62
2. The proposed fence-type and height are consistent with Code requirements. 63
3. The fence is compatible with the established character of the neighborhood and will not 64
negatively impact any surrounding properties. 65
AYES: 5 66
NAYS: 0 67
ABSENT: 2 68
69
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its April 1, 2014 meeting. 70
71
PLANNING CASE #2014-08 72
Linda Dehkes, on behalf of Roger and Grace Pass 73
Lot split request for unaddressed property at Oak Street and North Freeway Road 74
(Lot 3, Block 3, Jefferson Heights) 75
76
City Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant requested a lot split for the vacant 77
unaddressed parcel located at the intersection of Freeway Road North and Oak Street. The subject 78
parcel is 0.92 acres, zoned R-1, and guided for low density residential development in the 79
Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has a purchase offer on the parcel contingent on the lot split 80
approval. If approved, the applicant intends to construct two new single family homes on the 81
proposed parcels, both of which would be proposed to have access onto Oak Street. 82
83
The subdivision would create two lots, both of which exceed the 15,000 square foot minimum lot 84
size standard for the R-1 district. Parcel A, to the north, is proposed to be 21,140 square feet and 85
Parcel B, to the south, is proposed to be 21,088 square feet. Both parcels would have 125 feet of 86
frontage on Oak Street, which meets the 100 foot requirement. Both parcels would be compliant 87
with the R-1 zoning requirements and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 88
89
Staff recommended approval of this application with conditions. 90
91
Chair Field opened the public hearing. 92
page 7
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 3
93
Ms. Linda Dehkes, 1830 Maple Street, Hastings, MN; and Mr. Mark Gergen, Greenwood Design 94
Build and Miles Realty, were on hand to answer any questions from the Commission. 95
96
Mr. Dominic Alphonso, 697 South Freeway Road, commented that the property in question is very 97
steep and goes down very rapidly from North Freeway Road south. He asked how the owner would 98
maintain the two proposed residences one from the other and not disturb each other and the 99
drainage. 100
101
Chair Field pointed out that the topic under consideration is the lot split only and not a site plan 102
specific to it. Public Works Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello replied that staff does not have 103
any building plans as part of this application and so would not be sure how the applicant is 104
proposing to handle construction on the two lots. However, the City has codes that prevent 105
drainage from one lot adversely affecting another and the applicant has been made aware of that. 106
There are storm drains in Oak Street that they could, through the course of grading and 107
construction, route drainage out into the catch basins. 108
109
Planner Wall noted that two of the conditions of this application address these concerns. 110
111
COMMISSIONER HENNESSY MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO 112
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 113
AYES: 5 114
NAYS: 0 115
ABSENT: 2 116
117
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO 118
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CASE NO. 2014-08, LOT SPLIT REQUEST FOR 119
UNADDRESSED PROPERTY AT OAK STREET AND NORTH FREEWAY ROAD (LOT 3, 120
BLOCK 3, JEFFERSON HEIGHTS) BASED ON THE FINDING OF FACT THAT THE 121
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY CODE AND 122
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 123
1. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,700, in lieu of land, is collected after City Council 124
approval and before issuance of any additional permits by the City. 125
2. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a 126
building permit. 127
3. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with 128
associated easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering Department 129
as part of any building permit application. 130
4. The land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance 131
Guidance document. 132
AYES: 5 133
NAYS: 0 134
ABSENT: 2 135
136
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its April 1, 2014 meeting. 137
138
page 8
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 4
PLANNING CASE #2014-03 139
Code Amendment for Electronic Display Signs 140
141
Chair Field noted that this is a continuation of the public hearing that began at the February 25, 142
2014 Planning Commission meeting. 143
144
City Planner Nolan Wall explained for the record that this is a request from the City of Mendota 145
Heights to amend the City Code that would allow electronic display signage, limited to institutional 146
uses in the R-1 and R-1A zoning districts. Staff was directed to bring back additional revisions for 147
discussion and the public hearing was to remain open to solicit additional comments. The Planning 148
Commission also suggested some additional outreach to promote awareness of the topic and 149
encourage additional comments. Staff issued a press release, which was published in the March 9, 150
2014 edition of the South-West Review, a link with the proposed amendments was provided on the 151
City’s website, and information was posted on the City’s Facebook page. 152
153
Chair Field also noted that there was a column in the St. Paul paper as well. 154
155
Planner Wall continued by stating that the revised code amendment was also then sent out to the 156
same previously identified institutional uses for additional comment and feedback. However, 157
despite the additional outreach efforts staff did not receive any new comments. 158
159
Planner Wall then summarized the proposed changes to the draft ordinance. 160
161
Commissioner Roston explained his reasoning for suggesting a minimum lot size standard was to 162
attempt to accommodate institutional uses within residential zoning districts without allowing 163
them for single-family homes that may qualify under the definition for an institutional use. Planner 164
Wall confirmed that all previously-identified institutional uses would comply with the proposed 165
2-acre minimum lot size standard. 166
167
Commissioner Magnuson suggested specifically excluding scoreboards from the proposed code 168
amendment language. Planner Wall noted that scoreboards are not intended to be regulated by 169
this proposed amendment, however an exclusion could be added to the electronic display sign 170
definition if desired. Commissioner Roston then proposed language for inclusion in the definition 171
that exempts scoreboards. 172
173
Planner Wall continued to summarize the additional proposed revisions to the draft code 174
amendment language, including flexibility for less intrusive sign setbacks from residential uses, 175
message change interval, sign aesthetics, and minimum lot size and display size for additional 176
electronic displays. 177
178
Chair Field opened the floor for additional public comments. 179
180
Ron and Dianne Berfelz, 688 W. Wentworth Avenue, are against lighted signs. They live across 181
the street from Somerset 19, who went from 100 watt bulbs to sodium vapor 150 watt bulbs. When 182
this occurred the lumens went up to 60,000 so they know that light can be very, very invasive. 183
page 9
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 5
They gave other examples of areas where lighting is invasive. They also asked about enforcement 184
of the ordinance and penalties for non-compliance. 185
186
Jack Vitelli, 1334 Sylvandale Road and former Councilmember, stated that he was surprised when 187
he saw the article in the St. Paul newspaper. He asked about the objective of the ordinance change, 188
benefit to the residents, benefit to the sign owners, why only institutions, cost to the City, 189
enforcement, future requests for changes, and notification to neighboring residents of these 190
institutions. Until these topics are addressed he would recommend denial of the ordinance 191
amendment. 192
193
Dawn Nichols, Head of School at Visitation, expressed her appreciation to the Planning 194
Commission for their attention to this request. She believes that the proposed changes to the 195
ordinance allow for reasonable and broader groups of institutional users in a smart and up-to-date 196
way. They reflect the changing times and a careful use of digital technology, that is not intrusive 197
and is used for a good purpose, would be an acceptable path. 198
199
Commissioners asked additional questions in regards to shut-off times for other lighted signs 200
within the City, candle strength of lights, and ability of the City to deny a conditional use permit. 201
202
Steve VanHout, Watchfire Signs, stated that the federal government just released a study talking 203
about digital signage, traffic safety, and other topics brought up this evening. He suggested the 204
Commission review that report before making any final decisions. He also mentioned that a LED 205
sign has built-in dimming capabilities at night and for a sign to be readable it cannot be 206
overpowering or too bright. He offered himself as a resource. 207
208
Commissioner Hennes stated that he believes he has learned enough in the last three meetings and 209
would be comfortable moving forward and closing the public hearing. Commissioners Magnuson 210
and Roston agreed with those comments. 211
212
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO 213
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 214
AYES: 5 215
NAYS: 0 216
ABSENT: 2 217
218
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNESSY, TO 219
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CASE NO. 2014-03, DRAFT ORDINANCE 460 BASED ON 220
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 221
1. Electronic display signs may replace handmade temporary and changeable copy signs on 222
institutional properties, resulting in a more attractive environment. 223
2. Limiting electronic display signs to institutional uses in the R-1 and R-1A Zoning Districts 224
with substantial setbacks from surrounding properties will protect against proliferation of 225
such signs. 226
3. Standards regarding the size of the sign structure and electronic display, message changes 227
interval, hours of operation, message characteristics, font size, off-premise advertising, 228
page 10
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 6
malfunction settings, and brightness of electronic display signs will mitigate potential 229
negative impacts to surrounding uses and the general public. 230
AND INCORPORATING COMMISSIONER ROSTON’S PROPOSED REVISIONS. 231
232
Commissioner Hennes commented that, in his opinion, the objective of this ordinance to provide 233
better information to residents as is the case with the request from Visitation. The benefit to the 234
sign holder is obvious. The benefit to residents is to be better informed. 235
236
Commissioner Magnuson stated that ultimately this is a decision that the City Council is going to 237
have to make. She is not troubled by the idea of electronic signs as long as they are adopted in a 238
way that is careful and respectful of the surrounding neighborhoods. 239
240
Commissioner Roston commented that he appreciated the ‘slippery slope’ comment about who 241
else is going to be asking for this type of signage. However, he believes the institutional uses that 242
fit under this ordinance is pretty narrow and they are responsible institutional uses. 243
244
Commissioner Hennessy commented that the example brought forward previously from Visitation 245
presents a good illustration of a way to take advantage of the new technology to present a better 246
looking sign. 247
248
Chair Field echoed the thoughts and comments from the Commissioners. He respected the 249
opinions of those that are concerned about it; however, he believes they have deliberately limited 250
it to the specific institutional uses where it provides some benefit. 251
252
There being no other comments, Chair Field called for the vote. 253
AYES: 5 254
NAYS: 0 255
ABSENT: 2 256
257
Planner Wall advised the City Council would consider this application at its April 15, 2014 258
meeting. 259
260
Discussion of Public Hearing Process 261
262
Chair Field stated that he had discussions with Planner Wall about making adjustments to the 263
public hearing process. He had chaired zoning in St. Paul and some of the following rules were 264
used for the public hearing process. For consideration by the Commissioners are the following: 265
266
After the Staff presentation, the Chair opens the public hearing and provides the following 267
proposed rules of procedures: 268
1. Comments shall be limited to the plan or application being submitted 269
2. Comments shall be limited to 3-5 minutes or a reasonable period of time 270
3. Comment shall not be repetitious until everyone else wishing to provide comments 271
has testified. 272
4. The applicant shall be allowed to speak last to address any comments. 273
274
page 11
March 25, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 7
Commissioner Hennes suggested that Item 2 be a specific amount of time, not 3-5 minutes, and 275
would not include the time taken by the Commission to ask questions. 276
277
Commissioner Magnuson suggested adding Item 5: The Chair shall have the ability to amend 278
provisions on a case by case basis to allow for extenuating circumstances. 279
280
Commissioner Roston asked if this was a solution without a problem. He has not observed any 281
abuse of anyone’s right to speak or where anyone has been unruly or difficult. 282
283
Commissioner Magnuson believes this would be helpful so people coming before the Commission 284
would know what to expect. 285
286
Planner Wall will draft a formal statement that the Chair would read before the public hearings. 287
This draft statement will be brought to the next Commission meeting for review. 288
289
Verbal Review 290
291
Planner Wall gave the following verbal review: 292
293
PLANNING CASE #2014-04 Rod and Sue Stombaugh Conditional Use Permit 294
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. 295
296
PLANNING CASE #2014-05 Alden and Joyce Landreville Lot Split Request 297
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. 298
299
PLANNING CASE #2014-06 United Properties Preliminary and Final Plat, 300
Conditional Use Permit, 301
Planned Unit Development Amendment 302
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. 303
304
COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO 305
ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:16 P.M. 306
307
AYES: 5 308
NAYS: 0 309
ABSENT: 2 310
page 12
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Sloan Wallgren, Recreation Program Coordinator
SUBJECT: Par 3 Maintenance Contract
BACKGROUND
The City of Mendota Heights has contracted with GM Management for maintenance of the
grounds and equipment of the Par 3 Golf Course since 2008. Previous contracts have included
maintenance labor as well as supervision of course maintenance.
For the 2014 season, the city will be hiring two part time seasonal Par 3 maintenance workers.
The course is still in need of a maintenance supervisor, with knowledge of turf and golf course
practices. Staff is recommending a contract with GM Management to continue overseeing
maintenance activities on a consultant basis.
The attached agreement would retain GM Management for the 2014 golf season as a consultant
golf course superintendent, providing insight and suggested activities to city staff. Staff views
this agreement as a means to maintain the healthy turf and good playing conditions that have
been developed since 2008, while allowing for continued control over the work direction of
maintenance staff.
BUDGET IMPACT
The attached Par 3 Maintenance Consulting Contract is for $6,000 and is included in the 2014
budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends entering into a Par 3 Maintenance Consulting Contract. If council wishes to
implement this recommendation, pass a motion authorizing staff to enter into an agreement with
GM Management of the 2014 season. This action requires a simple majority vote.
page 13
PAR 3 MAINTENACE CONSULTING CONTRACT
Mendota Heights Par 3 Golf Course
City of Mendota Heights, MN
Contractor:
Custom Tree Services Inc.
Phone:
(651) 648-2147
Date:
Address:
6477 S Roberts Street
Project Name:
2014 Mendota Heights Par 3 Maintenance
City, State, Zip Code:
Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077
Project Location:
1695 Dodd Road, Mendota Heights
Contact:
Jerry Murphy
1. Parties: This contract (“Agreement”) governs the rights and responsibilities of GM
Management, a division of Custom Tree Services, Inc., (“GM Management”) and the
City of Mendota Heights (“City”).
2. Scope of Services: GM Management has agreed to provide, and the City has agreed to
engage GM Management to provide for the City, certain management services at the
City’s Par 3 golf course. GM Management will supervise all regular turf maintenance
activities, including regular inspections of the course to review:
• Mowing of greens, tees, fairways and rough
• Watering/irrigation schedules
• Irrigation system maintenance
• Needs for chemical and/or fertilizer applications
• Turf management practices
GM Management will be in regular contact with city staff to evaluate course needs and
ensure that maintenance activities are completed in an efficient and professional manner.
Purchasing
GM Management will identify one individual to be authorized to make purchases up to
an amount of $500 for the Par 3 Golf Course on behalf of the City at the following
vendors: MTI Distributing, TurfWerks, LESCO mfg, Gertens and Menards. All other
purchases must be coordinated through the City of Mendota Heights.
3. Payment: The City will pay GM Management a management fee of $6,000 for Golf
Course Superintendent services.
4. Insurance, Indemnity, Limitation of Liability, Release:
a. Workers’ Compensation Insurance: Contractor shall provide a certificate of
insurance showing evidence of workers’ compensation coverage or provide
evidence of qualification as a self-insurer of workers’ compensation
b. At all times during the term of this contract, GM Management shall maintain
insurance commercial general liability (CGL), and if necessary commercial
umbrella insurance, with a limit of not les than $1,000,000 each occurrence. The
City shall be named as an additional insured under the CGL.
page 14
c. Indemnity: the parties hereby agree to mutually indemnify and hold harmless the
other party for claims arising out of its negligent acts and omissions or willful
misconduct or the acts of its employees or independent contractors, agents or
assigns in connection with or relating to the performance of each party’s
obligations under this agreement.
i. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this section is intended, nor
should it be construed as a waiver of any municipal tort liability limits,
governmental immunities or defenses which otherwise protect the City of
Mendota Heights.
d. After a period of 12 months from acceptance of the final payment due to GM
Management, GM Management agrees that it shall be deemed to have released
the City from any and all claims, causes of action and liability in connection with
this contract or the performance of services.
5. Termination: Either party may terminate the contract for any reason with thirty (30)
days written notice. Within thirty (30) days of termination, GM Management will be
entitled to a pro rata compensation for all work completed as of the date of termination to
the extent that such services were completed to the satisfaction of the City.
6. Amendment: This Agreement may only be amended by a written agreement, signed by
both parties.
7. Independent Contractors: GM Management and the City are deemed to be
independent contractors, and GM Management shall not be deemed to be an agent,
officer or employee of the City, in connection with the matters contemplated by this
Agreement. The City will not provide GM Management with any employee-type
benefits, including but not limited to health insurance, a pension plan, vacation pay, or
sick pay. Neither party has the right, power or authority, express or implied, to bind the
other party or otherwise create any duty or obligation on the part of the other party,
express or implied, nor shall either party hold out GM Management as having any such
status, right, power or authority. The City acknowledges that GM Management, as an
independent contractor, may perform services to other unrelated parties during the term
of this Agreement.
8. Representations of GM Management. GM Management acknowledges that the City is
hiring GM Management because of its expertise in this area and that the City has not
provided any training for GM Management, its employees or agents. GM Management
represents that it has sufficient knowledge and capacity to provide the Services for the
City.
9. Compliance with Laws. GM Management agrees that it will comply with all applicable
laws, rules and regulations in the performance of the Services.
10. Entire Agreement: This Agreement represents the entire agreement and understanding
of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and it
supersedes all prior and concurrent agreements, understandings, promises or
representations, whether written or oral, made by either party to the other concerning
such subject matter.
page 15
11. Waiver: The failure of either party to insist in any one or more instances upon strict
performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall not be construed as a
waiver or relinquishment of the right to enforce or require compliance with such
provision.
12. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with
the laws of the State of Minnesota.
13. Term: The term of this Agreement is to be from date of signing through December 31,
2014.
GM Management City of Mendota Heights
Signature:
Signature:
Name:
Name:
Title:
Title:
Date:
Date:
Contact Persons
The authorized contact person for GM Management is:
Jerry Murphy
6477 So Roberts Street
Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077
(651) 248-6147
The authorized contact person for City of Mendota Heights is:
Justin Miller
City Administrator
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651-452-1850
651-452-8940 (fax)
JustinM@Mendota-Heights.com
page 16
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Lot Split for an unaddressed parcel at the Oak Street/North
Freeway Road intersection
BACKGROUND
The applicant, on behalf of the property owners, is seeking approval to subdivide the existing unaddressed,
vacant parcel located at the southeast corner of the Oak Street/North Freeway Road intersection. The
subject parcel is 0.97 acres and is undeveloped with significant vegetation.
The applicant has a purchase agreement for the entire subject parcel contingent on the lot split approval. If
approved and purchased by the applicant, two new single family dwellings would be constructed with
access from Oak Street. The new parcels would be approximately 21,140 sq. ft. and 21,088 sq. ft. and meet
the requirements for the R-1 One Family Residential District.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing at the March 25 meeting. The applicant
acknowledged agreement to the conditions proposed by Staff and included in the attached resolution.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the lot split application, with conditions, as
described in Planning Case 2014-08. If the City Council desires to implement the recommendation, pass
a motion adopting RESOLUTION 2014-16 APPROVING A LOT SPLIT FOR AN UNADDRESSED
PARCEL AT THE OAK STREET/NORTH FREEWAY ROAD INTERSECTION.
This matter requires a simple majority vote.
page 17
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2014-16
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT FOR AN UNADDRESSED PARCEL
AT THE OAK STREET/NORTH FREEWAY ROAD INTERSECTION
WHEREAS, Linda Dehkes, on behalf of Roger and Grace Pass, has applied for a lot split
of the vacant property located at the intersection of Oak Street and North Freeway Road (PID 27-
38600-03-070; Lot 3, Block 3, Jefferson Heights) as proposed in Planning Case 2014-08; and
WHEREAS, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
matter at their regular meeting March 25, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that a
lot split as proposed in Planning Case 2014-08 is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,700, in lieu of land, is collected after City
Council approval and before issuance of any additional permits by the City.
2. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
3. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with
associated easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering
Department as part of any building permit application.
4. Any land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this first day of April, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
_____________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 18
DATE: March 25, 2014
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2014-08
Subdivision Request for Lot Split
APPLICANT: Linda Dehkes/Roger and Grace Pass
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Unaddressed – Oak Street/N. Freeway Rd. (PID# 27-38600-03-070)
ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential
ACTION DEADLINE: May 4, 2014
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, on behalf of the property owners, is seeking approval to subdivide the existing unaddressed,
vacant parcel located at the southeast corner of the Oak Street/North Freeway Road intersection. The
request requires City approval before being recorded with Dakota County.
BACKGROUND
The subject parcel is 0.97 acres (42,253 square feet) and is undeveloped with significant existing vegetation
(see attached Site Map). The parcel is zoned R-1 and is guided for low density residential development.
The applicant has a purchase agreement for the entire subject parcel contingent on the City’s approval of
the lot split request. If approved and purchased by the applicant, two new single-family homes would be
constructed with access from Oak Street.
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan
The subject parcel is guided LR, Low Density Residential in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The applicant’s
request to subdivide the subject parcel into two parcels, consisting of approximately 0.49 acres and 0.48
acres, is consistent with the LR maximum density of 2.9 units per acre.
R-1 One-Family Zoning District
Title 11-3-2 of the Code (Subdivision Ordinance) allows the subdivision of parcels, provided that the
resulting lots are compliant with the requirements of the applicable zoning district. According to the
certificate of survey map included as part of the application submittal, and shown in the table below, both
proposed parcels meet the R-1 lot standards.
page 19
Standard Parcel A Parcel B
Lot Area 15,000 sq. ft.
(0.34 acres)
21,140 sq. ft.
(0.49 acres)
21,088 sq. ft.
(0.48 acres)
Lot Width 100 ft. 125 ft. 125 ft.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the subdivision request with the following conditions:
1. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,700, in lieu of land, is collected after City Council approval
and before issuance of any additional permits by the City.
2. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a building
permit.
3. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with associated
easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering Department as part of any
building permit application.
4. Any land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance
document.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Recommend approval of the subdivision request, based on the finding of fact that the proposed
subdivision is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan, with conditions.
OR
2. Recommend denial of the subdivision request, based on the finding of fact that the proposed
subdivision is not consistent with the City Code or Comprehensive Plan.
OR
3. Table the request.
MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW
1. Aerial Site Map
2. Planning Application, including supporting materials
page 20
25
0
150185
18
2
169
50
200
90
119
117
100
61
267
126
24
8
24
9
24
7
36
30
25
24
13
6
111
2
20
0
20
0
25
0
20
0
684
697 693 685
699 689 679
OA
K
S
T
FREEWAY RD NLINDEN ST
890
892
894
89
6
898
888
886
900
902
884
9
0
4
882
880
876
87
8
906
90
8
91
0
912
874
914
880
8
7
4
JEFFERSON HEIGHTS, LOT 7, BLOCK 3 Planning Case 2014-08 City ofMendotaHeights060
SCALE IN FEETDate: 3/19/2014
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
page 21
page 22
Date: March 3, 2014 To: Nolan Wall City of Mendota Heights From: Linda and Ken Dehkes Miles Realty, Representing Greenwood Design Build Regarding: Property located at: XXX North Freeway Rd and Oak Street Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Interest : We currently have a fully executed Purchase Agreement on the above property with the contingency the property could be divided into 2 parcels.
Our Request: Permission to divide the property into 2 single family home sites.
Our intention with the property Our intention is to build 2 custom single family, new construction homes by GreenWood Design Build.
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for the Construction and
Maintenance of the North Urban Regional Trail
BACKGROUND
Dakota County has been developing plans for the North Urban Regional Trail (NURT) for the
past several years. The chosen alignment for the relocation of the NURT as part of the County’s
Greenways Master Plan is scheduled for construction in 2014. As part of this construction
project, a new Joint Powers Agreement for maintenance of the trail is needed.
The attached Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) outlines the responsibilities of both the City and the
County with respect to the ongoing maintenance of the NURT. Under the terms of this JPA, the
County would be responsible for all of the construction and maintenance of the relocated NURT
except for the signs placed within the Right-of-Way owned by the City of Mendota Heights. The
City of Mendota Heights would be responsible only for the routine maintenance and upkeep of
those signs.
BUDGET IMPACT
Minimal – With the signs being installed as part of the overall construction project, the City of
Mendota Heights would only be responsible for maintaining the signs, which can easily be
incorporated into the Street Division sign maintenance budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve the attached Joint Powers Agreement for Construction of
the North Urban Regional Trail and Use, Maintenance, and Occupancy of the North Urban
Regional Trail Located in the City of Mendota Heights. If Council wishes to enact the staff
recommendation, pass a motion approving the attached JPA by a simple majority vote.
page 31
Dakota County Contract No. C00________
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE COUNTY OF DAKOTA
AND THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FOR
Construction of the North Urban Regional Trail (NURT)
AND
Use, maintenance and occupancy of the entire North Urban Regional Trail
located in the City of Mendota Heights
page 32
THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (“JPA”) is entered into by and between the County of
Dakota (“County”) and the City of Mendota Heights (“City”) collectively referred to as “the Parties” and
witnesses the following:
WHEREAS, under Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, subdivision 1, two governmental units
may enter into an Agreement to cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties,
and one of the participating governmental units may exercise one of its powers on behalf of the other
governmental units; and
WHEREAS, the County has been acquiring easements and constructing a pedestrian and
bicycle trail in Dakota County which generally lies along the______________ and which has been
currently designated as the North Urban Regional Trail (“NURT”), but which name may change, the
substitution of which does not change the meaning or intent of this JPA; and
WHEREAS, construction of the NURT in the City remains to be completed; and
WHEREAS, the County has, in consultation with the City, prepared preliminary design and
engineering of the NURT, which is currently under review by affected landowners and subject to final
review and approval by the County and the City; and
WHEREAS, part of the NURT located in the City will occupy a portion of City street right-of-
way along Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue and the City agrees to allow NURT to occupy existing City
right-of-way for Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue as generally depicted on Exhibit A and will issue to
County a permit for a permanent regional trailway to occupy said City right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue exists by prescription or by statutory dedication;
and
WHEREAS, the County is responsible for securing land control necessary to accommodate
the construction, maintenance, and operations of the NURT; and
WHEREAS, this Agreement defines the roles and responsibilities of each party in regards to
the construction of the NURT; and
WHEREAS, this Agreement defines the rights of occupancy, maintenance and use of the
entire NURT that is constructed in the City through a separate Supplemental Maintenance Agreement
(“SMA”) that the parties are entering into contemporaneously, attached hereto as Exhibit B.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Recitals. The parties hereby agree that the above-referenced recitals/WHEREAS
clauses are true and correct, and constitute material terms of this Agreement; and, the above-
referenced Exhibits are hereby made a part of this Agreement as follows:
Exhibit A Project Layout
Exhibit B Supplemental Maintenance Agreement (“SMA”)
page 33
2. Construction and Engineering. The County, at its expense, will design and construct
the NURT, including preparation of necessary plan sheets, specifications, construction change
orders and engineering and inspection required to construct the NURT.
3. Land Acquisition. The County, at its expense, is responsible for acquisition of land
required for the NURT and securing all required permits.
4. City Access to Project Construction. The County agrees that the City will have the
right, at City expense, to inspect all construction related activities and improvements within
Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue. The County agrees to allow City staff to attend a pre-
construction meeting, and to construction progress meetings, as the City desires. The City will
be allowed to inspect any work that may affect the City’s infrastructure.
5. City Standards. The County is responsible for meeting all City standards for the
construction of the NURT and completing all punch list items that result from the City
inspections. The County shall provide the City with as-built record plans for the project.
6. City Permits. The City will issue the County a permit to work within the City’s right-of-
way allowing the County and its contractors to work on City street right-of-way for the
construction of the NURT. The County, or its contractors, must secure a City building permit
for retaining walls and/or other structures, and any other City permits as required by City
Code, and the City hereby agrees to waive the City’s permit fees for the permits obtained by
County. Nothing in this Agreement, the attached SMA or any permit issued by the City shall
prevent the use of the public right-of-way by utilities, telecommunication providers, or any
other entity entitled by law to use the public right -of -way.
7. Permits. The City will process permits for utility work and other activities within the
City’s right-of-way.
8. Maintenance and Operations. The City and the County have more specifically defined
the rights and responsibilities that each party agrees to assume for maintenance of the NURT
and the City’s use of the NURT. Such rights and responsibilities have been memorialized in a
Supplemental Maintenance Agreement (“SMA”), attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit B. The responsibilities and duties as set forth in Exhibit B may be amended from
time to time by the Parties if reduced to writing, dated and signed by the duly authorized
representative of each Party.
9. City Utilities. Payment for any and all water, sewer and electrical services consumed
by trail fixtures will be as identified in Exhibit B.
10. Right-of-Way. The City will issue to County a permit for a permanent regional trailway
to occupy City street right-of-way. The permit will be for all trailway parcels located on City
street right-of-way, as depicted in Exhibit A. The City represents that its interest in the Warrior
Drive and Marie Avenue right-of-way is by prescriptive easement or statutory dedication and
the City makes no representations or warranties as to the nature or extent of the rights of the
page 34
City or the public in the Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue right-of-way or as to the effect of the
issuance by the City of a permit to the County.
If additional right-of-way is required for construction or maintenance of the NURT in the City,
the County will be solely responsible for obtaining any additional necessary right-of-way for
trail construction or maintenance without cost to the City.
11. Rules and Regulations. The County shall promulgate and enforce rules for use of the
NURT.
12. Indemnification. The County agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of
this JPA and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the County and/or
those of County employees or agents. The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the County against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising
under the provisions of this JPA and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of
the City and/or those of City employees or agents. Both parties to this JPA recognize that
liability for any claims arising under this agreement are subject to the provisions of the
Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Law; Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466.
In the event of any claims or actions filed against either party, nothing in this JPA shall be
construed to allow a claimant to obtain separate judgments or separate liability caps from the
individual Parties. In order to insure a unified defense against any third party liability claim
arising from the construction or maintenance of the NURT, the Parties agree to require any
contractors or subcontractors hired to do any of the work contemplated by this JPA to maintain
commercial general liability insurance in amounts consistent with minimum limits of coverage
established under Minnesota Statutes §466.04 during the term of such activity. All such
insurance policies shall name County and City as additional insureds.
13. Employees of Parties. Any and all persons engaged in the work to be performed by
the County shall not be considered employees of the City for any purpose, including Worker’s
Compensation, or any and all claims that may or might arise out of said employment context
on behalf of said employees while so engaged. Any and all claims made by any third party as
a consequence of any action or omission on the part of said County employees while so
engaged on any of the work contemplated herein shall not be the obligation or responsibility of
the City. The opposite situation shall also apply: the County shall not be responsible under the
Worker’s Compensation Act for any employees of the City.
14. Audit. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 16C.05, Subd. 5, any books, records, documents,
and accounting procedures and practices of the County and the City relevant to the JPA are
subject to examination by the County and the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the
State Auditor as appropriate. The County and the City agree to maintain these records for a
period of six years from the date of performance of all services covered under this JPA.
15. Integration and Continuing Effect. The entire and integrated agreement of the Parties
contained in this JPA shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations or agreements
page 35
between the County and the City regarding the NURT along Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue
as depicted in Exhibit A, whether written or oral.
16. Authorized Representatives. The County’s authorized representative for the purpose
of the administration of this JPA is the County Administrator, 14955 Galaxie Avenue, 3rd Floor,
Apple Valley, MN 55124-8579, or successor. The City’s authorized representative for the
purpose of the administration of this Agreement is _______________, City Administrator, 1101
Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN. 55118, phone (651) 452-1850, or successor. All
notices or communications required or permitted by this JPA shall be either hand delivered or
mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the above addresses. Either party may
change its address by written notice to the other parties. Mailed notice shall be deemed
complete two business days after the date of mailing.
17. Term. This JPA shall be effective as the date of the signatures of the parties and shall
remain in effect so long as the County owns the real property and easements for a regional
bicycle and pedestrian trail. In the event the Parties mutually agree to terminate this JPA, the
Dakota County Board of Commissioners will approve a resolution to quit claim its rights to the
easements to the City, unless such action is contrary to law or not reasonable under the
circumstances. In the event of termination, the Parties shall be responsible for payment of all
outstanding, incurred costs relative to their interests in the NURT as of the date of termination
and, unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Engineer, the County will remove any part
of the trail that has been constructed and restore the property, as nearly as is reasonably
practicable, to its original condition. During the term of this Agreement and upon its termination
the Parties shall retain ownership of their own respective personal property.
18. Termination By County For Lack Of Funding. Notwithstanding any provision of this
Agreement to the contrary, the County may immediately terminate this Agreement if it does not
obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, Minnesota Agencies, or other funding source, or
if it’s funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow payment of the amounts due
under this Agreement or for the completion of the project. Written notice of termination sent by
the County to the City by facsimile is sufficient notice under this section. The County is not
obligated to pay for any services that are provided after written notice of termination for lack of
funding. The County will not be assessed any penalty or damages if the Agreement is
terminated due to lack of funding. The County will restore the disturbed right-of-way within
Warrior Drive and Marie Avenue to its original condition unless otherwise approved in writing by
the City Engineer if the project is terminated or abandoned prior to completion of the trail.
19. Relocation of NURT Located Within City Right-of-Way. The parties agree that in
the event that the City needs to widen, expand, and/or redesign its street, other transportation
facilities, and/or utilities within the City’s right-of-way, which actions will cause a displacement
of the NURT trail improvements, the parties will follow the procedures outlined herein.
a. The City will reconstruct the displaced NURT trail improvements within the
existing City right-of-way where practical and the County hereby agrees to reimburse the City
for the City’s construction project costs attributable to the relocation of the displaced NURT
page 36
trail improvements including, but not limited to, trail improvement design, construction and
inspections costs.
b. If it is not practical for the City to reconstruct the displaced NURT trail
improvements within the existing City right-of-way, the County may choose the following
options to relocate the displaced NURT trail improvements:
Option 1: The City will acquire the necessary additional right-of-way and/or trail
easement rights needed for the relocation of displaced NURT trail improvements as part of the
City’s construction project. The County hereby agrees to reimburse the City for the City’s
construction project costs and right-of-way/trail easement acquisition costs attributable to the
relocation of the displaced NURT trail improvements including, but not limited to, trail
improvement design, construction and inspections costs; and, including the additional right-of-
way and/or trail easement acquisition/eminent domain process costs including, but not limited
to, title costs, survey costs, City appraisal costs, landowner appraisal cost reimbursement
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.036, City attorney’s fees, landowner attorney fee awards
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.031, and any commissioner’s or jury award of just compensation.
Option 2: The County, at its sole cost, will acquire the necessary additional
right-of-way and/or trail easement rights needed for the relocation of displaced NURT trail
improvements. Under this option the County may choose to separately contract for the
reconstruction of the displaced NURT trail improvements, at its sole cost, or to include the
reconstruction of the displaced NURT trail improvements in the City’s construction project. If
included in the City’s construction project the County hereby agrees to reimburse the City for
the City’s construction project costs attributable to the relocation of the displaced NURT trail
improvements including, but not limited to, trail improvement design, construction and
inspections costs.
The City agrees to provide the County with reasonable notice of a pending displacement of the
NURT trail improvements and the County agrees to provide the City with written confirmation
of how the County wants to effectuate the relocation of displaced NURT trail improvements in
a timely manner that does not unreasonably delay the City construction project.
20. Amendments. Any alterations, variations, modifications, assignments or waivers of the
provisions of this JPA shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing and signed
by authorized representatives of both parties.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
page 37
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this Joint Powers Agreement to be executed by
their duly authorized officials.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
_____________________________ By___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
Date Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
City Attorney/Date Attest: ______________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Date _______________
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By___________________________
_____________________________ Brandt Richardson
W. Taud Hoopingarner, Director County Administrator
Operations Management Department
Date Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Dakota County Board
_____________________________ Resolution No. __________
County Attorney/Date
KS-______________ Contract No.
page 38
EXHIBIT A
page 39
EXHIBIT B
SUPPLEMENTAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
THIS SUPPLEMENTAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (“SMA”) is entered into between
Dakota County (“County”) and the City of Mendota Heights (“City”) pursuant to a Joint Powers
Agreement between County and City dated for the use, maintenance and occupancy
of the North Urban Regional Trail (NURT) located in the City (“JPA”).
WHEREAS, the County and the City have jointly identified the alignment of a regional
pedestrian and bicycle trail known as the NURT through the City, as depicted on Exhibit A to the
JPA; and
WHEREAS, the County has acquired easements for the NURT from private owners and the
County has acquired permission to occupy City right-of-way from the City for the NURT (“Easement
Right-of-Way”); and
WHEREAS, the City and the County desire to more specifically define the rights and
responsibilities that each party agrees to assume for maintenance of the Easement Right-of-Way; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree that maintenance responsibilities over the Easement
Right-of-Way will be divided as follows:
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.1 Maintenance by the County. Unless otherwise specified in this SMA, the County will be
responsible for all routine and deferred maintenance and replacement of NURT infrastructure
as improved by Dakota County or its agent at no cost to City. The County will be responsible
for all routine and deferred maintenance and replacement of future NURT infrastructure as
improved for the NURT by Dakota County or its agent at no cost to City. The County at its
discretion will establish the maintenance service standards for all routine and deferred
maintenance associated with the NURT. The County will be responsible for routine or
deferred maintenance such as, but not limited to the following:
A. Vegetation management such as applying herbicide for the benefit of the NURT when
necessary to control noxious weeds such as thistle, poison ivy and similar weeds, non-
desirable woody plant control, stump or foliar treatment of small plants, or for prairie
establishment.
B. Maintenance of vegetation within the Easement Right-of-Way is limited to the needs of
the trail. Typically a 2’ wide “clear-zone” is mowed adjacent to bituminous edges along
the entire length of the NURT regardless of underlying land ownership. Where tree
branches interfere with trail use, branches may be removed beyond the 2’ clear-zone in
order to apply best management practices of arboriculture for the health of the tree. All
vegetation work will be done within the Easement Right-of-Way.
page 40
C. Erosion control and stabilization pertaining to the NURT.
D. All utilities such as storm sewer infrastructure pertaining to the NURT.
E. Plantings of turf, trees, shrubs, prairie grasses and wildflowers for purposes of erosion
control, screening or improved corridor aesthetics, with the permission of the City if
placed on City owned easement or right-of-way.
F. Maintenance, repair, or replacement of signs that were installed by the County for the
purposes of the trail within the trail corridor. These may include regulatory, warning,
safety, way-finding, interpretive, and monument signs as shown in Exhibit C.
G. Maintenance, repair or replacement of fences, retaining walls, barriers, miscellaneous
site amenities and furnishings adjacent to the NURT that are constructed by Dakota
County for purposes of the NURT.
H. Sweeping of the NURT.
I. Snow-plowing and ice control pertaining to the NURT at the discretion of the County.
J. Graffiti control and removal from County infrastructure pertaining to the NURT.
K. Maintenance, repair or replacement of the bituminous surface of the NURT.
1.2 Maintenance by the City. Unless otherwise specified in this SMA, the City will be responsible
for all routine and deferred maintenance and replacement of infrastructure as improved by the
City or its agent for City trails that connect to the NURT within the Easement Right-of-Way at
no cost to County. The City will be responsible for all routine and deferred maintenance and
replacement of future infrastructure as improved within the Easement Right-of-Way by the City
or its agent for City trails that connect to the NURT at no cost to County. The City at its
discretion will establish the maintenance service standards for all routine and deferred
maintenance associated with City infrastructure within the Easement Right-of-Way. The City
will be responsible for the maintenance of City right-of-way along a City road that is outside of
the 2’ clear-zone adjacent to the NURT. The City will be responsible for routine or deferred
maintenance such as, but not limited to the following:
A. Maintenance, repair, or replacement of signs that were installed by the County or City
adjacent to the road and within City Easement Right-of-Way for the trail corridor.
These may include regulatory, warning, and safety signs as shown in Exhibit C.
1.3 State Statutes and Ordinances. Both Parties to this SMA shall be responsible for enforcement
of applicable state statutes and City and County ordinances relating to the NURT.
1.4 Access to Easement Area by City. The City may reasonably access NURT for routine
business purposes. The City will be required to obtain a special use permit from the County
for extended trail access, trail closure, use of equipment that interrupts trail use or events. The
County will be required to obtain a special use permit from the City for use of the NURT when
an activity impacts the public use of City road right of way.
1.5 New NURT Infrastructure. The City and County will coordinate and approve all new
infrastructure provided by either party within the Easement Right-of-Way.
page 41
1.6 Amendment of SMA. City and County agree to cooperate in accomplishing the actions and
tasks outlined in this SMA. This SMA may be amended by the Parties if reduced to writing,
dated and signed by the duly authorized representative of each Party.
1.7 Conflict Resolution. The County and City will cooperate in the coordination of operations and
maintenance of the Easement Right-of-Way and associated City property. The City and
County Parks Director will be responsible for resolving issues and conflicts. If the Park
Directors are unable to reconcile issues and conflicts the responsibility for resolution is
forwarded to the County Administrator and City Administrator. If the County Administrator and
City Administrator are unable to reconcile issues and conflicts the responsibility for resolution
is forwarded to the respective County Board and City Council.
1.8 Public Communications and Information. The County will be responsible for public education
for safe use of the NURT and communicating information to the City, public and other key
stakeholders regarding a trail closure or other actions affecting the NURT. The City will be
responsible for public education for safe use of the NURT and communicating information to
the County, public and other key stakeholders regarding a trail closure or other actions
affecting the NURT based on a City action affecting the NURT.
1.9 Authorized Representatives. The County’s authorized representative for the purpose of the
administration of this SMA is the County Administrator, 14955 Galaxie Avenue, 3rd Floor,
Apple Valley, MN 55124-8579 or successor. The City’s authorized representative for the
purpose of the administration of this SMA is _________, City Administrator, 1101 Victoria
Curve, Mendota Heights, MN. 55118, phone (651) 452-1850, or successor. All notices or
communications required or permitted by this SMA shall be either hand delivered or mailed by
first class mail to the above addresses. Either party may change its address by written notice
to the other parties. Mailed notice shall be deemed complete two business days after the date
of mailing.
page 42
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Supplemental Maintenance Agreement (SMA)
to be executed by their duly authorized officials as set forth below.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
_____________________________ By___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
Date Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
City Attorney/Date Attest: ______________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Date _______________
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By___________________________
_____________________________ Brandt Richardson
W. Taud Hoopingarner, Director County Administrator
Operations Management Department
Date Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Dakota County Board
_____________________________ Resolution No. __________
County Attorney/Date
KS-______________ Contract No.
page 43
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for Installation of a Pedestrian
Crosswalk on Lexington Avenue (CR43) at Victoria Road
BACKGROUND
In 2012, at the request of area residents, the City requested Dakota County install a crosswalk on
Lexington Avenue, just north of Victoria Road. This crosswalk would connect City trails on
either side of Lexington. In response to the City’s request, Dakota County has included the
crosswalk installation in their 2014 construction year. The crosswalk project is more extensive
than just painting the pavement. Because Lexington Avenue is over 3 lanes wide, Dakota
County has designed a crosswalk with a center median to provide a safe haven for pedestrians
between the travelled lanes of Lexington. The pedestrian ramps on both sides of Lexington will
also be relocated and replaced as part of this project.
The attached Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) outlines the responsibilities of both the City and the
County with respect to the crosswalk and median installation project. The County would be
responsible for designing, bidding, and constructing the improvement, while the project costs
will be split between the County and the City.
BUDGET IMPACT
Under the terms of the proposed agreement, the City would pay 55% of the design, engineering,
and construction cost; the County would pay the remaining 45%. The estimated construction
cost is $32, 461. Under the terms of the cost split, the City would be obligated to pay 55%, or
$17, 854. Actual costs of the project will be split based on the amount of the awarded contract.
Staff recommends that these costs be covered by utilizing the Infrastructure Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve the attached Joint Powers Agreement for Median and
Crosswalk Construction. If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, pass a motion
approving the attached JPA by a simple majority vote.
page 44
Contract No. C0025739
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
DAKOTA COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
AGREEMENT FOR
MEDIAN AND CROSSWALK CONSTRUCTION
BETWEEN
THE COUNTY OF DAKOTA
AND
THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FOR
COUNTY PROJECT NO. 43-39
CITY PROJECT NO. ______
FOR THE
Median and crosswalk construction on County Road (CR) 43 (Lexington Avenue) at Victoria
Road in Mendota Heights, Dakota County.
page 45
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the County of Dakota, referred to
in this Agreement as "the County"; and the City of Mendota Heights, referred to in this
Agreement as "the City"; and witnesses the following:
WHEREAS, under MINNESOTA STATUTES §§ 162.17, subd. 1 and 471.59, subd. 1, two or more
governmental units may enter into an agreement to cooperatively exercise any power common
to the contracting parties, and one of the participating governmental units may exercise one of
its powers on behalf of the other governmental units; and
WHEREAS, it is considered mutually desirable to construct median and crosswalk on County
Road (CR) 43 (Lexington Avenue) at Victoria Road in Mendota Heights (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the County and the City have included this Project in their Capital Improvement
Programs and will jointly participate in the costs of said turn lane construction.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that the County and the City will share Project responsibilities;
and jointly participate in the costs associated with the Project, and related activities as described
in the following sections:
1. Engineering. Design engineering, construction engineering, construction management,
construction inspection and all related materials testing shall be split based on the County’s and
City’s share of the final construction costs.
2. CR 43 Median Construction. The costs for the construction of the median and crosswalk
on CR 43 (Lexington Avenue) at Victoria Road shall be shared in the amount of fifty five percent
(55%) by the County and forty-five percent (45%) by the City. Cost sharing items include
pavement removal, aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter, concrete walk, bituminous
patching, and crosswalk pavement markings.
3. Plans and Specifications. The County shall prepare the complete plans, specifications
and contract documents for County Project 43-39 consistent with State Aid design standards
page 46
and the Dakota County Transportation Plan. The County Board will award the contract for
construction to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in accordance with state law.
4. Payment. The County will administer the contract and act as the paying agent for all
payments to the Contractor. Payments to the Contractor will be made as the Project work
progresses and when certified by the County Engineer. The County, in turn, will bill the City for
its share of the Project costs. Upon presentation of an itemized claim by one agency to the
other, the receiving agency shall reimburse the invoicing agency for its share of the costs
incurred under this Agreement within 30 days from the presentation of the claim. If any portion
of an itemized claim is questioned by the receiving agency, the remainder of the claim shall be
promptly paid, and accompanied by a written explanation of the amounts in question. Payment
of any amounts in dispute will be made following good faith negotiation and documentation of
actual costs incurred in carrying out the work.
5. Change Orders and Supplemental Agreements. Any change orders or supplemental
agreements that affect the Project cost participation must be approved by all parties prior to
execution of work.
6. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement will be effective only after approval
by both governing bodies and execution of a written amendment document by duly authorized
officials of each body.
7. Effective Dates. This Agreement will be effective upon execution by duly authorized
officials of each governing body and shall continue in effect until all work to be carried out in
accordance with this Agreement has been completed. Absent an amendment, however, in no
event will this Agreement continue in effect after December 31, 2015.
8. Final completion. Final completion of the construction Project must be approved by both
parties.
page 47
9. Pavement Maintenance. Upon acceptance of the Project, the County shall be
responsible for all pavement, median and crosswalk maintenance within County right-of-way
unless necessitated by a failure of a municipal utility system or installation of new facilities.
10. Subsequent Excavation. After completion of the Project, and after expiration of the
warranty period regarding repair, if excavation within the highway right-of-way is necessary to
repair or install water, sewer, or other city utilities, the City shall restore the excavated area and
road surface to substantially the condition at the time of disturbance. If the City employs its own
contractor for the above described water, sewer or other utility repair or installation, the City
shall hold the County harmless from any and all liability incurred due to the repair or installation
of said water, sewer or other municipal utility including, but not limited to, the costs of repair as
well as liability to third parties injured or damaged as a result of the work. If the City fails to
have the highway properly restored, the County Engineer may have the work done and the City
shall pay for the work within 30 days following receipt of a written claim by the County.
11. Rules and Regulations. The County and the City shall abide by Minnesota Department
of Transportation standard specifications, rules and contract administration procedures.
12. Indemnification. The County agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this
Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the County and/or
those of County employees or agents. The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the County against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the
provisions of this Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the
City and/or those of City employees or agents. All parties to this Agreement recognize that
liability for any claims arising under this Agreement are subject to the provisions of the
Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Law; Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. In the event of any
claims or actions filed against either party, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to allow
page 48
a claimant to obtain separate judgments or separate liability caps from the individual parties.
The County shall include the City as additional insured in the contract documents.
13. Waiver. Any and all persons engaged in the work to be performed by the County shall
not be considered employees of the City for any purpose, including Worker’s Compensation, or
any and all claims that may or might arise out of said employment context on behalf of said
employees while so engaged. Any and all claims made by any third party as a consequence of
any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the work
contemplated herein shall not be the obligation or responsibility of the City. The opposite
situation shall also apply: the County shall not be responsible under the Worker’s Compensation
Act for any employees of the City.
14. Audits. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sec 16 C. 05, Subd. 5, any books, records,
documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the County and the City relevant to the
Agreement are subject to examination by the County or the City and either the Legislative
Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate. The County and the City agree to maintain these
records for a period of six years from the date of performance of all services covered under this
Agreement. Dakota County will be financially responsible for the cost of the audit.
15. Integration and Continuing Effect. The entire and integrated agreement of the parties
contained in this Agreement shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations or
agreements between the County and the City regarding the Project; whether written or oral. All
agreements for future maintenance or cost responsibilities shall survive and continue in full
force and effect in accordance with the Dakota County Transportation Plan after completion of
the median and crosswalk construction provided for in this Agreement.
16. Authorized Representatives. The County’s authorized representative for the purpose of
the administration of this Agreement is Mark Krebsbach, Dakota County Engineer, 14955
Galaxie Avenue, 3rd Floor, Apple Valley, MN 55124-8579, phone (952) 891-7100, or his
page 49
successor. The City of Mendota Heights’s authorized representative for the purpose of the
administration of this Agreement is John Mazzitello, Public Works Director/City Engineer, 1101
Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118, phone (651) 452-1850, or his successor. All
notices or communications required or permitted by this Agreement shall be either hand
delivered or mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the above addresses. All
parties may change its address by written notice to the other parties. Mailed notice shall be
deemed complete two business days after the date of mailing.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
N:\Highway\AGRMENT\2014\43-39 Mendota Heights C0025xxx.docx
page 50
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly
authorized officials.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
By
Public Works Director/City Engineer Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: (SEAL)
By
City Attorney City Clerk
Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAKOTA COUNTY
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
County Engineer Assistant County Attorney / Date
By:
County Administrator
COUNTY BOARD RESOLUTION:
No: 14-______Date: ____________ Date:
KS-__________
page 51
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Traffic Safety Committee Meeting Summary and Recommendations
BACKGROUND
The Traffic Safety Committee met on March 18th from 6:00 to 6:45 pm at City Hall. There was
only one discussed at the meeting as summarized below:
Request for parking restrictions on the east side of Warrior Drive – Requested to City Council by
Stuart Simek of 577 High Ridge Circle. Referred to TSC by City Council on September 17, 2013.
A number of residents came to the September 17th, 2013 City Council meeting to talk about their
concerns regarding Henry Sibley High School student parking along the east side of Warrior
drive. City Council referred the matter to the Traffic Safety Committee to come up with
recommendations to bring back to City Council. One of the residents observed as many as 71
cars parked on the east side of Warrior Drive between the parking lot entrance and Mendota
Road. Independent School District 197 charges students $100 per semester to park in the high
school parking lot, which has more than enough parking available to meet City Code. It is
assumed that students not wishing to pay the parking fee are parking on Warrior Drive and on
other public streets to avoid the payment.
The Traffic Safety Committee discussed this issue at a meeting on October 1, 2013 and
recommended to City Council that a resolution be adopted requesting Independent School
District 197 address the issue. Council accepted this recommendation and passed the resolution.
ISD 197, in response, made the southeastern parking lot on the Henry Sibley High School
property available for student parking free-of-charge.
Since last fall, Dakota County has completed design plans for the North Urban Regional Trail
(NURT) Greenway realignment. These plans include three areas of posted no parking along
Warrior Drive. The first is approximately 275 feet immediately to the south of the Henry Sibley
High School entrance off Warrior Drive. The other two are 40-foot areas, 20 feet on either side
of the pedestrian access points located just north of Sibley Court and High Ridge Circle. It is
estimated that these no parking areas will eliminate approximately 20 parking spaces along
Warrior Drive.
page 52
The Traffic Safety Committee met on March 18th to further evaluate the request and analyze the
County’s plans for the NURT construction. A number of area residents were in attendance at the
meeting, including the requestor.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Traffic Safety Committee recommends the Council take no action on a parking prohibition
along the east side of Warrior Drive at this time. Once the new no parking areas are established
as part of the NURT construction, the situation can be re-evaluated.
The Traffic Safety Committee further recommends that prior to any further parking prohibition
being implemented, City staff notify the entire subdivision of the proposed action and receive
input from the whole neighborhood.
page 53
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk SUBJECT: Approval of Temporary On-Sale Liquor Licenses
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to Mendota Heights City Code, no person shall sell or give away intoxicating liquor or 3.2
percent malt liquor without first having received a license. Temporary On-Sale Liquor licenses shall
be granted only to clubs and charitable, religious or nonprofit organizations for the sale of
intoxicating liquor. The licenses are subject to final approval by the Director of Alcohol and
Gambling Enforcement.
St. Thomas Academy, located at 949 Lake Drive, is planning to hold their annual Community
Auction Gala on April 26, 2014, in the school’s cafeteria and gymnasium. The event will take place
from 5:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. They have requested a Temporary On-Sale Liquor license to allow for
the sale of alcoholic beverages at the event. Security will be present during the entire event. St.
Thomas Academy has submitted an application and a certificate of insurance for liquor liability.
SonShine Learning Center, located at 680 Highway 110, is planning to hold a fundraising event on
Saturday, May 3, 2014 at the SonShine Learning Center/Mendota Heights United Church of Christ
during the hours of 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. They have requested a Temporary On-Sale Liquor license
to allow for the sale of wine and beer. Security will be present during the event. SonShine Learning
Center has submitted an application and a certificate of insurance for liquor liability.
It should be noted that Temporary On-Sale Liquor licenses have been issued in the past to charitable,
nonprofit and religious organizations within the city with no incidents or negative reports.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends the City Council approve the Temporary On-Sale Liquor licenses for St. Thomas
Academy and for SonShine Learning Center/Mendota Heights UCC as proposed, subject to final
approval of the Director of Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement.
page 54
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Tamara Schutta, Assistant to the City Administrator/HR Coordinator
SUBJECT: Personnel Action Items
Item 1: Authorize Appointment of Project Engineer
At a recent meeting, the City Council authorized staff to begin the recruitment process to fill the
Project Engineer position. A total of six applications were received for the Project Engineer
position.
Public Works Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello, Assistant City Engineer Ryan Ruzek,
Senior Engineer Tech Bobby Crane and I interviewed five candidates initially and narrowed the
number down to two candidates that were brought back for a more in-depth interview. Public
Works Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello, Assistant City Engineer Ryan Ruzek, Senior
Engineer Tech Bobby Crane, Senior Secretary Nancy Bauer and I conducted the final interviews.
A conditional job offer was made contingent upon receipt of results of a background check, pre-
employment drug test and City Council approval.
It is our pleasure to recommend to you that the city appoint of Almin Ramic as the Project
Engineer. Mr. Ramic earned his bachelor’s degree in civil engineering and political science from
the University of Minnesota. Mr. Ramic also has four years of Civil Engineering experience with
Minnesota Department of Transportation. Mr. Ramic will be a great addition to the Mendota
Heights Engineering Department.
City staff recommends that city council approve the appointment of Almin Ramic as the Project
Engineer effective Monday, April 28, 2014 with wages set at Grade 19, Step D of the 2014
Employee Position/Pay Classification Plan. The 2014 rate for Grade 19, Step D is $58,145
annually.
Item 2: 2014 Public Works Summer Seasonal Hires
At a recent meeting, City Council gave approval for staff to begin the hiring and recruitment
process for the Public Works Department. Several employees from the 2013 season have re-
applied for their positions. Applicants were offered their position contingent upon a successful
completion of a criminal background check and council approval. Staff is recommending the
following individuals for employment for the spring/summer 2014 season:
page 55
Position Name Rate of Pay:
Chad Hanson Public Works – Parks Division $10.50
Jacob Kreuser Public Works – Parks Division $10.75
Item 3: Par 3 Temporary Seasonal Hires 2014
At a recent meeting, City Council gave approval for staff to begin the hiring and recruitment
process for the 2014 Par 3 golf season. Several employees from the 2013 golf season have re-
applied for Par 3 positions. Applicants were offered their position contingent upon a successful
completion of a criminal background check and council approval. Staff is recommending the
following individuals for employment for the 2014 golf season:
Position Name Rate of Pay:
Clubhouse Workers Chris Clark $8.50
Thomas Clifford $8.75
Jason Lano $8.75
Max Schway $9.00
Jeff Skaar $9.00
Golf Course Jr. Ranger/ Darlene Wandersee $11.36
Clubhouse Worker
Clubhouse Worker/ Thomas Clifford $8.75 (Clubhouse)
Maintenance Worker $10.25(Par 3 Maintenance)
Maintenance Worker James Knox $10.25
Golf Instructor/ Allan Green $8.50 (Clubhouse)
Clubhouse Worker $22.25 (Golf Instructor)
Golf Instructors David Kessel $22.75
John Mangold $22.75
Item 4: Parks and Recreation Temporary Seasonal Hires 2014
At a recent meeting, City Council gave approval for staff to begin the hiring and recruitment
process for the 2014 Parks and Recreational season. Several employees from the 2013 season
have re-applied for positions. The following applicants were offered their position contingent
upon a successful completion of a criminal background check and council approval. Staff is
recommending the following individuals for employment for the 2014 summer season:
Position Name Rate of Pay:
Playground Lead Hayley Thomas $13.50
Playground Assistant Katherine Kulhanek $10.00
Playground Assistant Sydney Latterell $10.00
Playground Assistant Alicia Olsen $10.00
Playground Assistant Erin Patrick $10.00
page 56
Tennis Instructor Meredith Lawrence $22.25
Tennis Assistant Daniel Axelrod $10.00
Item 5: Approve Amended Police Sergeant Job Description
At the March 4th council meeting, the city council approved job descriptions and authorized staff
to create lists for hiring and promotion for police officers and sergeants. Staff noted an
administrative error in the police sergeant’s job description. Staff omitted a minimum
requirement of “or currently enrolled in an accredited college working towards a four year degree
in law enforcement or equivalent.”
Staff is recommending approval of the amended police sergeant’s job description.
Attached:
• Sergeant Job Description
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approves the actions requested above
for these five items.
page 57
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
TITLE: Police Sergeant
DRAFT
Department:
Police
Accountable To:
Police Chief
Class Code:
Non-Exempt/Union
Primary Location:
City Hall
Normal Hours:
Varies
Date of Last Revision:
April 1, 2014
Job Purpose:
Responsible for supervising and directing patrol officers, investigators and records personnel.
Responsible for making work assignments, leading, motivating, training, inspecting and
correcting subordinates. Participates in the work of subordinates as needed. Assumes
command of specific police situations.
Essential Duties
A. Functions as a supervisor commanding assigned divisions within the department.
Assumes command at police incidents providing assistance to subordinates as necessary.
B. Supervises, schedules, assigns, instructs and evaluates subordinates to ensure
adherence to law and applicable department policies and procedures.
C. Reviews the work performance of subordinates on a continuous basis. Conducts formal
performance evaluations of department personnel.
D. Accepts, documents, investigates and processes citizen complaints against department
members' conduct or department procedure/policy violations in accordance with
department policy and agency directives. Keeps the Chief of Police informed of the status
of such investigations and makes recommendations to the Chief of Police with regard to
these matters.
E. Promotes positive department relationships with the community and participates in agency
crime prevention and community oriented policing activities.
F. Reviews patrol officer and investigator reports and daily logs to keep abreast of police
activities, assure quality, direct follow-up investigations, and makes or recommends
necessary changes in procedures, practices and policy.
G. Conducts periodic inspections of department personnel and equipment in accordance with
department directives.
H. Oversees initial and ongoing in-service police training, ensuring that POST Board and
OSHA mandates are complied with. Maintains department training records.
I. Responds while on duty to take command of priority calls, major crime scenes and critical
incidents. Is reasonably available by telephone or pager while off duty for consultation or
to respond to such incidents as circumstances dictate.
J. Communicates up and down the chain of command, representing the Chief of Police to
subordinates, keeping the Chief informed of information and developments in the
page 58
department.
K. Keeps himself/herself and subordinates informed of new developments in policing and
changes related to laws and ordinances.
L. Responds to routine calls when needed in accordance with available staffing. Serves as a
backup to other officers as needed. Evaluates the performance of department personnel.
M. Makes decisions on the proper course of action to be taken when:
1. Requested to by subordinates;
2. The seriousness and/or difficulty of situation dictates that decisions be made by a
superior officer;
3. Decisions at the rank of sergeant or above are required by departmental policy.
N. Performs non-supervisory patrol. From time-to-time, performs any or all of the routine,
non-supervisory patrol duties normally performed by a patrol officer.
O. Attends supervisory staff and department meetings.
P. Assists in research and development issues as required.
Q. Assists in the preparation and administration of the department budget. Tracks division
budget and is accountable for expenditures.
R. Assists in the recruitment and hiring process of department employees.
S. Performs other duties and assumes other responsibilities as assigned by the Chief of
Police.
Minimum Qualifications
A. Bachelor’s degree in law enforcement or equivalent or currently enrolled in an accredited
college working towards a four year degree in law enforcement or equivalent.
B. Minimum five (5) years full-time employment as a Minnesota POST licensed peace officer
at the time of appointment, three (3) of which must be consecutive years as an officer with
the Mendota Heights Police Department.
C. Valid Minnesota Class D driver's license.
D. Basic computer skills including word processing and spreadsheets.
E. Last three (3) consecutive years of acceptable performance reviews
Desired Qualifications
F. Master’s Degree in criminal justice or equivalent.
G. Experience with specialty assignments.
page 59
Knowledge/Skills/Abilities Required
A. Knowledge of the principles and practices of modern police supervision, administration
and law enforcement methods and techniques.
B. Knowledge of and commitment to the principles and practices of Community Oriented
Policing/Problem Oriented Policing as a department philosophy and the ability to
operationalize these principles and practices in day-to-day police work.
C. Knowledge of city ordinances, state and federal statutes, including rules of arrest, and
search and seizure case law.
D. Knowledge of first aid and ability to respond promptly to emergency situations.
E. Ability to plan, evaluate, instruct and prioritize the work of department members in a
manner which will command their respect and result in a high level of performance within
the overall framework of department goals and objectives.
F. Ability to effectively utilize human relation skills in resolving disputes and similar problems
through verbal and non-verbal communications.
G. Ability to establish, maintain and promote cooperative and harmonious work relationships
within the department, with other law enforcement agencies, with other city departments
and the general public.
H. Ability to communicate ideas and explanations clearly in English, both orally and in writing.
I. Ability to adapt and react quickly to change and changing circumstances.
J. Ability to work professionally with other employees and to deal with the public in a friendly
and tactful manner.
K. Ability to evaluate situations, improvise solutions with available resources and adapt to a
changing environment.
L. Ability to work with a minimal amount of supervision and complete assigned projects in a
timely manner.
M. Ability to work well under stress/pressure.
Core Competencies by all City Employees:
• Knowledge of work rules. Develops and maintains a thorough working knowledge of
all city and applicable jurisdictional policies and procedures in order the help facilitate
compliance with such policies and procedures by all staff members.
• Develops respectful, cooperative and productive work relationships with
coworkers, including the demonstrated willingness to help newer staff so their
respective job responsibilities can be performed with confidence as quickly as
possible.
• Commitment to customer service. Demonstrates by personal example the service
quality and integrity expected from all staff members. Represents Mendota Heights in
a professional manner to the general public, employees and to other outside
page 60
contact/constituencies in a manner that helps maintain and enhance Mendota Heights’
reputation as well managed and citizen oriented.
• Communication. Confers regularly with and keep immediate supervisor informed of
all important matters pertaining to those functions and job responsibilities for which the
employee is accountable.
• Productivity and work organization. Demonstrate ability to plan, organize and
accomplish work in a timely and efficient manner.
• Problem solving and decision making. Exercise good judgment, analytical thinking,
and independent thinking as it relates to departmental and city procedures, problems
and policy interpretations.
• Safety rules and procedures. Develop knowledge of and observe the safety policies
and procedures of the city. Perform tasks in a safe and efficient manner while using
appropriate safety equipment, clothing and devices.
Safety Policy
It is the responsibility of every employee of the City of Mendota Heights to know and observe
the safety policies and procedures of the city. Each employee is expected to perform their
tasks in a safe and efficient manner while using appropriate safety equipment, clothing and
devices.
Miscellaneous Information
Must satisfactorily pass a criminal background examination.
Physical Activities/Requirements
Overall Physical Strength Demands
Sedentary Exerting up to 10 lbs. occasionally or negligible weights frequently; sitting most of
the time.
Light Exerting up to 20 lbs. occasionally, 10 lbs. frequently, or negligible amounts
constantly; Sitting most of the time. Frequently requires walking or standing.
Medium Exerting 20 – 50 lbs. occasionally, 10 – 25 lbs. frequently, or up to 10 lbs.
constantly.
Heavy Exerting 50 – 100 lbs. occasionally, 25-50 lbs. frequently, or up to 10-20 lbs.
constantly.
Very Heavy Exerting over 100 lbs. occasionally, 50 – 100 lbs. frequently, or up to 20-50 lbs.
constantly.
Physical Demands
C = Continuously
2/3 or more of the
time.
F = Frequently
From 1/3 to 2/3 of
the time.
O = Occasionally
Up to 1/3 of the
time.
R = Rarely
Less than 1 hour
per week.
N = Never
Never Occurs
Physical Demands Frequency Code Example
Standing F Directing traffic flow, assisting at community events.
Sitting F Squad car, workstation
page 61
Walking F During regular police activities and training, foot patrol
Lifting O Transporting essential gear and emergency equipment,
assisting others by lifting victims onto gurney cart
Carrying F Equipment, victims
Running F Foot pursuits
Pushing/Pulling F Vehicles, debris, individuals in custody, doors
Reaching F Retrieving items within workstation or vehicle such as radio,
firearm, other essential equipment
Handling F Suspect search and frisk, driving, firearms use or checking
for vital signs when rendering medical assistance
Fine Dexterity F Computer keyboard
Kneeling O Firearms training, to assist at accident scene, gathering
evidence
Crouching O Firearms training, to assist at accident scene, gathering
evidence
Crawling O Firearms training, to assist at accident scene, gathering
evidence
Bending F Firearms training, to assist at accident scene, gathering
evidence
Twisting F Getting in and out of squad car
Climbing O Climbing stairs, scaling walls and fences
Balancing F Fences, ladders, stairs,
Vision C Reading reports, monitoring patrol area, identify cars and
suspects. Computer screen.
Hearing C Monitoring radio communication, answering inquiries from
the public, taking statements
Talking C Conducting interviews and investigations, communicating
with the public.
Foot Controls F Driving Squad car
Other (specify) F The individual may encounter stress and pressures from
dealing with emotional issues and conflicts.
Machines, Tools, Equipment and Work Aids
Police vehicles, firearms, radio, camera, digital recorder, finger printing kit, measuring devices,
smartphones, uniform, computer, bicycles, impact weapons, first aid kits and all other police related
equipment used for police service.
Environmental Factors
D = Daily W = Several times
per week
M = Several times
per month
S = Seasonally N = Never
Health and Safety Environmental Factors Primary Work Location
Mechanical Hazards W Dirt and Dust W Office Environment X
Chemical Hazards W Extreme Temperatures S Vehicle X
Electrical Hazards W Noise and Vibration D Outdoors X
Fire Hazards W Fumes and Oder W Other
Explosives M Wetness/Humidity S
Communicable Diseases D Darkness or poor lighting D
Physical Danger or abuse D
Other (specify):
Work Schedule Possibilities
Typical 40 hour work week Work on Weekends
page 62
Rotating Shift Work Overtime
Varied Hourly Shift Work (i.e.
9.5 hrs. /10 hrs.)
On call/call out
Work on Holidays
Employees performing the duties of this job will frequently work in outside weather conditions. Office
environment work is performed in a well-lit, well ventilated and temperature controlled office. Noise level
in the work environment is usually moderate.
Protective Equipment Required
Hazardous material and biohazard personal protective equipment, bullet proof vest, respirators, eye & ear
protection, firearms, pepper spray, baton, EMD, handcuffs, rain gear, and various immunizations.
Non-physical Demands include
Continuously
2/3 or more of the
time
Frequently
From 1/3 to 2/3 of
the time
Occasionally
up to 1/3 of the
time
Rarely
Less than 1 hour
per week
Never
Time Pressures - Occasionally
Emergency Situations - Frequently
Frequent Change of Tasks - Occasionally
Irregular Work Schedule/Overtime - Frequently
Performing Multiple Tasks Simultaneously - Frequently
Working Closely with Others as Part of a Team - Frequently
Tedious Work - Frequently
Noisy/Distracting Environment - Frequently
Other:
The above description is intended to describe the general functions, skills and
knowledge of the person assigned to this job. These examples are intended only as
illustrative of various types of work performed, and are not all inclusive. The employee
may be required to perform other related duties as assigned. The job description is
subject to change as the needs of the employer and requirements of the job change.
page 63
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Justin Miller, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Noise Oversight Committee Resolution of Support
BACKGROUND
For many years, the City of Mendota Heights has been a full voting member of the Noise
Oversight Committee (NOC). This committee advises the Metropolitan Airports Commission
(MAC) on various issues relating to noise impacts of airport operations.
There has recently been significant media attention to an FAA decision to delay the
implementation of Area Navigation (RNAV) for departure routes at MSP International Airport.
In response, the NOC and MAC passed a resolution stating their position on the matter and
informed the FAA of their expectations should such a proposal come back before the MSP
community. The MAC/NOC resolution is attached to this report.
Councilmember Petschel, who currently serves as co-chair of the Noise Oversight Committee,
has been diligently working on this issue and suggested that the City consider a resolution
supporting the MAC position. A resolution stating such support is attached to this report.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
If council desires, a motion to approve the attached resolution would be in order. Approval of
this action requires a majority vote of the city council.
page 64
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2014-17
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS
COMMISSION POSITION TOWARDS FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION OF AREA
NAVIGATION AT MSP INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights recognizes that there are benefits of having
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport nearby, but that we also suffer from the noise impacts
of flight operations at the airport; and
WHEREAS, the City is a full voting member of the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC),
which is a group of impacted cities and airline industry representatives; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently announced that the
implementation of Area Navigation (RNAV) for departure routes would be indefinitely delayed;
and
WHEREAS, the NOC, as an advisory body to the MAC, recommended that the MAC
formally articulate their expectations of the FAA when they begin to develop RNAV departure
routes at MSP International Airport sometime in the future; and
WHEREAS, the MAC adopted such a resolution on March 17, 2014;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that
the City of Mendota Heights fully supports the Metropolitan Airports Commission Resolution
#01-2014 and looks forward to continuing to work with the MAC and FAA on this issue.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this first day of April, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
_____________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 65
page 66
NA, S p
illIl
r,
MINNEAPOLIS-ST.PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MSP)
NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (NOC)
RESOLUTION # 01-2014
REGARDING FUTURE FAA PERFORMANCE-BASED NAVIGATION (PBN)/AREA
NAVIGATION (RNAV) STANDARD DEPARTURE PROCEDURE DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION EFFORTS AT MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MSP)
WHEREAS, the NOC is the primary advisory body to the full Metropolitan Airports Commission
MAC) on topics related to aircraft noise at MSP; and,
WHEREAS, NOC members have been officially selected to represent their respective
community group and airport user group constituencies and vote accordingly; and,
WHEREAS, the NOC is a balanced forum for the discussion and evaluation of noise impacts
around MSP including the identification, study, and analysis of noise issues; and,
WHEREAS, since 2007 the NOC has advocated for implementation of Performance-Based
Navigation (PBN) procedures in the form of Area Navigation (RNAV) to enhance
existing vectored noise abatement procedures at Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport (MSP); and,
WHEREAS, in late 2010, amidst the ongoing NOC dialogue on RNAV noise abatement
procedures, the Federal Aviation Administration determined it was moving forward
with an airspace-wide Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) procedure design and
implementation process in the form of Area Navigation ( RNAV) Standard
Instrument Departures (SIDs) and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) on
all runways at MSP; and,
WHEREAS, the NOC realized there were expanded considerations such as capacity, noise
mitigation, and operational efficiency, beyond just noise, that would factor into the
process as a result of the transition from a locally-focused noise procedure
enhancement initiative, to an FAA headquarter-driven airspace-wide effort; and,
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2011 the NOC sent a letter, and the MAC Commission sent a similar
letter on May 16, 2011, to the FAA requesting that the Agency's process include
page 67
various measures in the form of five noise related activities including noise impact
analyses, community engagement, information sharing, and noise-reducing
procedure design considerations; and,
WHEREAS, following the March 2011 NOC letter, FAA representatives indicated that the project
scope did not include the requested analyses and community
engagement/information sharing activities; and,
WHEREAS, the NOC structured a plan to attempt to provide the desired analyses and
community engagement/information sharing activities (planned to require
approximately six months to complete) following receipt of the FAA's final proposed
procedure tracks; and,
WHEREAS, in early September 2012 the MAC and the NOC received the FAA's final proposed
procedure tracks and shortly thereafter, in mid-September 2012, the FAA
requested the MAC's support for the procedures by the end of November 2012 to
avoid jeopardizing the procedure implementation by delaying publication by more
than a year beyond the planned 2014 dates; and,
WHEREAS, the NOC analyses and community engagement/information sharing activities were
accelerated and the planned six month timeframe was shortened to approximately
a month-and-a-half to aid in the MAC's consideration of the procedures on the
FAA's requested timeline; and,
WHEREAS,t h e Novemberovember 19 2012 MAC Commission meetin g over one hundred residents
living northwest of MSP expressed passionate concern regarding the speed of the
process and lack of FAA efforts to engage communities on the noise impacts of the
procedures; and,
WHEREAS, at the November 19, 2012 MAC Full Commission meeting, in consideration of the
residents' concerns, the MAC voted to support the proposed STARs to all runways
at MSP and the proposed SIDs off all runways except Runways 30L and 30R; and,
WHEREAS, since the November 19, 2012 MAC Commission meeting, NOC City
Representatives have received increasing concerns from their constituencies
located southeast and south of MSP regarding the possible noise impacts of RNAV
implementation on their neighborhoods; and,
WHEREAS, in February 2014 the FAA determined the RNAV STARs can be implemented as
proposed and that the partial implementation of RNAV SIDs at MSP is not possible
for safety reasons; and,
WHEREAS, the FAA's proposed RNAV STARs integrate the use of Optimized Profile Descents,
are overlays of existing arrival paths, reduce noise impacts under the arrival paths,
and reduce fuel burn and associated emissions,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Noise Oversight Committee of the Minneapolis-
St. Paul International Airport that:
page 68
The NOC supports the following FAA actions related to any possible future RNAV SID design
and implementation at MSP, and requests the MAC's support of the following provisions to be
communicated to the FAA:
1. The NOC remains supportive of the RNAV STARs as presented and the FAA should
move forward with the implementation of these procedures at MSP.
2. The FAA RNAV STAR procedures should incorporate Optimized Profile Descents for all
runways at MSP.
3. Prior to the commencement of any future RNAV SID design and implementation efforts
at MSP, the FAA must present to the NOC and the MAC a case study of the successful
implementation of RNAV at an airport with similar challenges to those existing at MSP,
which includes the airport's location adjacent to densely populated residential areas. The
case study should detail, how the FAA's proposed design and implementation plan for
MSP builds on the proven successes at the other similarly-situated airport.
4. Any future FAA RNAV SID design and implementation plans must, in addition to the
above, be structured in a way that incorporates the provisions communicated in Mr. Jeff
Hamiel's February 1, 2013 letter to the FAA regarding future FAA community outreach
efforts related to RNAV implementation at MSP (See Attachment 1).
5. The NOC acknowledges the FAA will need adequate time to prepare the requested case
study and community outreach plan, and as such, the FAA's future implementation of
RNAV SID could be delayed until said study and outreach plan are finalized.
Adopted by the Noise Oversight Committee of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport this 6th day of March 2014.
Representative Vote
Oleson Aye
Miller Aye
Petschel Aye
Quincy Absent
Fitzhenry Aye
Bergman Aye
Hennessy Aye
Carlson Absent
Erazo Aye
Underwood Aye
McQuillan Aye
Christiansen Aye
Resolution adopted by a unanimous vote of 10 to 0.
011P •
Chris -ne Sirois ron, NOC Secretary
page 69
Attachment 1
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
t y( 6040-28th Avenue South•Minneapolis,MN 55450-2799
i o Phone(612)726-8100
MAC_ Office of Executive Director
O F
Qryt 6°
AlReo Ftl
February 1,2013
Mr. Dennis Roberts
Director,Airspace Service
Orville Wright Bldg.( FOB10A)
FAA National Headquarters
800 Independence Ave., SW
Washington,DC 20591
Dear Mr. Roberts,
I am writing to follow up on our January 15, 2013 meeting regarding the Federal Aviation
Administration's (FAA) Performance-Based Navigation Implementation (PBN) efforts at Minneapolis-St.
Paul International Airport (MSP). As you know, on November 19, 2012,the MAC provided support for
partial implementation" of the FAA-proposed Area Navigation/Required Navigation Performance
RNAV/RNP) Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) and RNAV Standard Instrument Departures
SIDs), with the exception of the Runways 301 and 30R RNAV SIDs to the northwest of MSP. As part of
our discussion, you asked that we provide a framework for the FAA's consideration in its community
outreach efforts at MSP to facilitate any future implementation of RNAV SIDs.
Our recommendations are as follows:
1. liming
We recommend that the FAA focus on the partial implementation proposal supported by the
MAC. FAA efforts to re-engage the communities on the possibility of RNAV SIDs on Runways 30L
and 30R should commence in July 2015 after the partial.implementation proposal has been
implemented and there has been ample time between partial implementation and follow-on
outreach efforts. This will allow for successful integration of the procedures and data gathering
in support of follow-on efforts.
2. Local FAA Leadership as a Critical Component
Local FAA Air Traffic Control representatives(Mr. Rydeen and his team)should be placed in lead
positions when communicating with the public and strategizing on the appropriate allocation ofa
FAA resources in addressing community concerns. The insight and years of experience that Mr.
Rydeen and his team can provide will help to ensure that FAA resources are directed toward
community initiatives, the successful completion of which will be critical to ensuring local needs
and expectations will be addressed in the process and conflict minimized. Moreover, including
local FAA Air Traffic Control in decisions refated to procedure design and publishing schedule
development should ensure that future community initiatives, and the time required to
complete them adequately,are not excluded from the overall FAA planning process.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
www.mspairportcom
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE •ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE •CRYSTAL•FLYING CLOUD •LAKE ELMO •SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
page 70
3. Holistic Outreach
Any future FAA efforts to re-engage communities northwest of MSP (such as Richfield,
Minneapolis, or Edina) in support of RNAV SID implementation on Runways 30L and 30R,should
also include a component intended to reach out to the communities impacted by the partial
implementation of RNAV procedures. The plan should include components for engaging the
communities to the south and east of MSP to receive feedback on how the procedures are
impacting communities. Moreover, the effort should include a willingness on behalf of the FAA
to consider procedure changes to address community concerns, in circumstances where such
changes would not impact safety or efficiency.
4. Early Coordination with Local Community Leaders
Future FAA efforts to re-engage communities around MSP must begin with outreach to key
community representatives in each of the cities located within a defined area around the airport
at a minimum this should include communities that have expressed interest in this issue to
date) to establish community expectations related to community outreach efforts and related
analyses. This effort will help to define the specific elements in the plan that will be critical to
addressing community concerns in the case of communities to the northwest of MSP where
RNAV SIDs are yet to be implemented, as well as in communities where the procedures are
being used. This will be critical for maintaining support throughout the process for the
implementation of RNAV SIDs on Runways 30L and 30R.
5. Adequate Resource Allocation
The FAA will need to dedicate the resources necessary to complete the elements of the plan
successfully. This will likely require a mix of FAA staff resources and consultant services with a
dedicated project budget. Local FAA Air Traffic Control representatives will be an important
participant in the development and prioritization of these project resources. As we have
experienced over the years,early outreach to the communities will tend to define the scope and
focus of the plan required for a successful outcome.The appropriate allocation of the resources
necessary to address local expectations is critical to the success of the community outreach
effort.
The communities around MSP are very engaged and have a long history of intelligent dialogue, and
active participation, with regard to the topic of aircraft noise. This has resulted in a complex
environment within which to plan for and implement projects that have a well-defined aircraft noise
component,such as PBN.
I hope you find the above insights helpful in defining a productive path forward that positions the FAA to
meet local expectations successfully. Respecting that the FAA is the lead agency on PBN initiatives, I
want to assure you that the MAC stands ready to provide assistance as needed.
incerely,
Je r y . Hamiel
Executive Director/CEO
Metropolitan Airports Commission
page 71
page 72
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Justin Miller, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Change of Meeting Time for May 6th City Council Meeting
BACKGROUND
ISD 197 will be holding a bond referendum on May 6th, and state statutes prohibit public
meetings from occurring between 6:00 and 8:00 pm on election dates. Staff is recommending
that the start time for the city council meeting on May 6th be pushed back to 8:00 pm.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the city council approve changing the start time for the May 6th city
council meeting to 8:00 pm. Approval of this action requires a majority vote of the city council.
page 73
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Cooperative Construction Agreement with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation for Storm Water Drainage Improvements: I35E & Marie Avenue
BACKGROUND
In July of 1994, the City of Mendota Heights and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
entered into an agreement for storm water drainage improvements in State and City owned right-of-way
at the Interstate 35E overpass of Marie Avenue. Last summer MnDOT and City staff observed additional
erosion that has exposed utility conduits and pipes within the right-of-way area. In response to requests
form the utility companies MnDOT has prepared plans and specifications to address this new erosion
issue. The original 1994 agreement established a cost sharing and maintenance responsibility for
improvements, and the same cost share and maintenance responsibility is carried through into this
agreement.
The attached Cooperative Construction Agreement (CCA) outlines responsibilities of both the City and
MnDOT for the construction of the storm water drainage improvements. Under this agreement, MnDOT
has prepared the plans and specification, and will be the ultimate owner of the underground facilities.
The City would be responsible for bidding, awarding, and administering the construction contract,
maintenance of surface vegetation on City property, and collecting funding obligations from the
benefitting utility companies.
BUDGET IMPACT
Under the terms of the CCA, the City would pay 65% of the construction cost; MnDOT would provide
the designed plans and specification and would pay the remaining 35%. The estimated construction cost
is $62,512. Under the terms of the cost split, the City would pay 65%, or $40,633. MnDOT would pay
the remaining 35%, or $21,879. In 1994, the City split its portion of the project costs with the benefitting
utility companies. City staff has already begun discussing the project with both utility companies about
sharing in the City’s portion of the project cost. Actual costs of the project will be split based on the
awarded contract amount. Staff recommends that these costs be covered by utilizing a combination of
Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds and Storm Water Utility funds.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve the attached Resolution 2014-18, A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING ENTERING INTO A COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
WITH THE MINNESOTA STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
INTERSTATE 35E/MARIE AVENUE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT
#201407). If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, pass a motion approving the attached
CCA by a simple majority vote.
page 74
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2014-18
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENTERING INTO A COOPERATIVE
CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA STATE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE INTERSTATE 35E/MARIE AVENUE DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT #201407)
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Department of Transportation and the City of Mendota
Heights have identified the need for storm water drainage improvements at the northeast
quadrant of Interstate Highway 35E and Marie Avenue in Mendota Heights; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Department of Transportation and the City of Mendota
Heights desire to improve the areas storm water drainage so as to reduce or eliminate soil erosion
around area utilities; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights enter into
Mn/DOT Agreement No.05466 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for
the following purposes: To provide storm water runoff drainage improvements within the State
and City owned rights-of-way located east of Interstate Highway 35E and north of Marie
Avenue, in the City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, Minnesota.
BE IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Administrator and the Public Works
Director are authorized to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 1st day of April, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this _____ day of
September, 2013
Notary Public ________________________
My Commission Expires _______________
__________________________________
(Signature)
____________________________________
(Type or Print Name)
page 75
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
And
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT
State Project Number (S.P.): 1982-181 Original Amount Encumbered
Trunk Highway Number (T.H.): 35E=390 $26,879.16
State Aid Number (S.A.P.): 140-101-010
This Agreement is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("State") and
City of Mendota Heights acting through its City Council ("City").
Recitals
1. The City will perform ditch grading, erosion repair, storm sewer and drainage structure construction and
other associated construction adjacent to T.H. 35E on Marie Avenue in the City of Mendota Heights from
T.H. 35E to Trail Road according to City-approved State prepared plans, specifications and special
provisions designated by the City as State Aid Project No. 140-101-010 and by the State as State Project
No. 1982-181 (T.H. 35E=390)("Project"); and
2. The City requests the State participate in the costs of the ditch grading, erosion repair, storm sewer and
drainage structure construction and the State is willing to participate in the costs of said construction; and
3. Minnesota Statutes § 161.20, subdivision 2 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make
arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing,
maintaining and improving the trunk highway system.
Agreement
1. Term of Agreement; Survival of Terms; Plans; Incorporation of Exhibits
1.1. Effective date. This Agreement will be effective on the date the State obtains all signatures required by
Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 2.
1.2. Expiration date. This Agreement will expire when all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled.
1.3. Survival of terms. All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive
in order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement,
including, without limitation, the following clauses: 2.4. State Ownership of Improvements; 5. Maintenance
by the City and State; 10. Liability; Worker Compensation Claims; Insurance; 12. State Audits;
13. Government Data Practices; 14. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue; and 16. Force Majeure.
1.4. Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions. City-approved State prepared plans, specifications and special
provisions designated by the City as S.A.P. 140-101-010 and by the State as S.P. 1982-181 (T.H. 35E=390)
are on file in the office of the City's Engineer and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. ("Project
Plans")
1.5. Exhibits. Preliminary Schedule "I" is attached and incorporated into this Agreement.
2. Right-of-Way Use
2.1. Limited Right to Occupy. The State grants to the City (and its contractors and consultants) the right to
occupy trunk highway right-of-way as necessary to perform the work described in the Project Plans. This
right is limited to the purpose of constructing the project, and administering such construction, and may be
revoked by the State at any time, with or without cause. Cause for revoking this right of occupancy
includes, but is not limited to, breaching the terms of this or any other agreement (relevant to this project)
page 76
with the State, failing to provide adequate traffic control or other safety measures, failing to perform the
construction properly and in a timely manner, and failing to observe applicable environmental laws or terms
of applicable permits. The State will have no liability to the City (or its contractors or consultants) for
revoking this right of occupancy.
2.2. State Access; Suspension of Work; Remedial Measures. The State's District Engineer or assigned
representative retains the right to enter and inspect the trunk highway right-of-way (including the
construction being performed on such right-of-way) at any time and without notice to the City or its
contractor. If the State determines (in its sole discretion) that the construction is not being performed in a
proper or timely manner, or that environmental laws (or the terms of permits) are not being complied with,
or that traffic control or other necessary safety measures are not being properly implemented, then the State
may direct the City (and its contractor) to take such remedial measures as the State deems necessary. The
State may require the City (and its contractors and consultants) to suspend their operations until suitable
remedial action plans are approved and implemented. The State will have no liability to the City (or its
contractors or consultants) for exercising its rights under this provision.
2.3. Traffic Control; Worker Safety. While the City (and its contractors and consultants) are occupying the State
right-of-way, they must comply with the approved traffic control plan, and with applicable provisions of the
Work Zone Field Handbook (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/workzone/index.html). All City,
contractor, and consultant personnel occupying the State's right-of-way must be provided with required
reflective clothing and hats.
2.4. State Ownership of Improvements. The State will retain ownership of its trunk highway right-of-way,
including any improvements made to such right-of-way under this Agreement, unless otherwise noted. The
warranties and guarantees made by the City's contractor with respect to such improvements (if any) will
flow to the State. The City will assist the State, as necessary, to enforce such warranties and guarantees, and
to obtain recovery from the City's consultants, and contractor (including its sureties) for non-performance of
contract work, for design errors and omissions, and for defects in materials and workmanship. Upon request
of the State, the City will undertake such actions as are reasonably necessary to transfer or assign contract
rights to the State and to permit subrogation by the State with respect to claims against the City's consultants
and contractors.
3. Contract Award and Construction
3.1. Bids and Award. The City will receive bids and award a construction contract to the lowest responsible
bidder (or best value proposer), subject to concurrence by the State in that award, according to the Project
Plans. The contract construction will be performed according to the Project Plans.
3.2. Bid Documents furnished by the City. The City will, within 7 days of opening bids for the construction
contract, submit to the State's State Aid Agreements Engineer a copy of the low bid and an abstract of all
bids together with the City's request for concurrence by the State in the award of the construction contract.
The City will not award the construction contract until the State advises the City in writing of its
concurrence.
3.3. Rejection of Bids. The City may reject and the State may require the City to reject any or all bids for the
construction contract. The party rejecting or requiring the rejection of bids must provide the other party
written notice of that rejection or requirement for rejection no later than 30 days after opening bids. Upon
the rejection of all bids, a party may request, in writing, that the bidding process be repeated. Upon the
other party's written approval of such request, the City will repeat the bidding process in a reasonable period
of time, without cost or expense to the State.
3.4. Direction, Supervision and Inspection of Construction
A. The contract construction will be under the direction of the City and under the supervision of a registered
professional engineer; however, the State participation construction covered under this Agreement will
be open to inspection by the State District Engineer's authorized representatives. The City will give the
State Aid Agreements Engineer at five days notice of its intention to start the contract construction.
page 77
B. Responsibility for the control of materials for the contract construction will be on the City and its
contractor and will be carried out according to Specifications No. 1601 through and including No. 1609
in the State's current "Standard Specifications for Construction".
3.5. Completion of Construction. The City will cause the contract construction to be started and completed
according to the time schedule in the construction contract special provisions. The completion date for the
contract construction may be extended, by an exchange of letters between the appropriate City official and
the State District Engineer's authorized representative, for unavoidable delays encountered in the
performance of the contract construction.
3.6. Plan Changes. All changes in the Project Plans and all addenda, change orders and supplemental
agreements entered into by the City and its contractor for contract construction must be approved in writing
by the State District Engineer's authorized representative.
3.7. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, Regulations. The City will comply and cause its contractor to comply
with all Federal, State and Local laws, and all applicable ordinances and regulations. With respect only to
that portion of work performed on the State's trunk highway right-of-way, the City will not require the
contractor to follow local ordinances or to obtain local permits.
3.8. Construction Documents Furnished by the City. The City will keep records and accounts that enable it to
provide the State, when requested, with the following:
A. Copies of the City contractor's invoice(s) covering all contract construction.
B. Copies of the endorsed and canceled City warrant(s) or check(s) paying for final contract construction, or
computer documentation of the warrant(s) issued certified by an appropriate City official that final
construction contract payment has been made.
C. Copies of all construction contract change orders and supplemental agreements.
D. A certification form, provided by the State, signed by the City's Engineer in charge of the contract
construction attesting to the following:
i. Satisfactory performance and completion of all contract construction according to the Project Plans.
ii. Acceptance and approval of all materials furnished for the contract construction relative to
compliance of those materials to the State's current "Standard Specifications for Construction".
iii. Full payment by the City to its contractor for all contract construction.
E. Copies, certified by the City's Engineer, of material sampling reports and of material testing results for
the materials furnished for the contract construction.
F. A copy of the "as built" plan sent to the State Aid Agreements Engineer.
4. Right-of-Way; Easements; Permits
4.1. The City will, without cost or expense to the State, obtain all rights-of-way, easements, construction permits
and any other permits and sanctions that may be required in connection with the local and trunk highway
portions of the contract construction. Before payment by the State, the City will furnish the State with
certified copies of the documents for rights-of-way and easements, construction permits and other permits
and sanctions required for State participation construction covered under this Agreement.
4.2. The City will comply with Minnesota Statutes § 216D.04, subdivision 1(a), for identification, notification,
design meetings and depiction of utilities affected by the contract construction.
5. Maintenance by the City and State
Upon completion of the storm sewer facility construction, the State and the City will share in the proper
maintenance of the facilities. The State will own and maintain those portions of the facilities located on the State
right-of-way, including structure 5001; and the City will own and maintain those portions of the facilities off the
State right-of-way, including structures 5002, 5003 and 5004. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to,
page 78
removal of sediment, debris, vegetation and ice from structures, grates and pipes; repair of erosion problems;
structure and pipe repair; and any other maintenance activities necessary to preserve the facilities and to prevent
conditions such as flooding, erosion, sedimentation or accelerated deterioration of the facilities.
6. Basis of State Cost
6.1. SCHEDULE "I". The Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" includes all anticipated State participation construction
items covered under this Agreement.
6.2. State Participation Construction. The State will participate at a rate of 35 Percent in all of the cost of the
ditch grading, erosion repair, storm sewer and drainage structure construction. The construction includes,
but is not limited to, those construction items tabulated on Sheets No. 2 and No. 3 of the Preliminary
SCHEDULE "I" and the State's proportionate share of item costs for mobilization and traffic control.
7. State Cost and Payment by the State
7.1. State Cost. $26,879.16 is the State's estimated share of the costs of the contract construction and a $5,000.00
contingency amount as shown in the Preliminary SCHEDULE "I". The Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" was
prepared using estimated quantities and unit prices, and may include any credits or lump sum costs. Upon
review of the construction contract bid documents described in Article 3.2, the State will decide whether to
concur in the City’s award of the construction contract and, if so, prepare a Revised SCHEDULE "I" based
on construction contract unit prices, which will replace and supersede the Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" as
part of this agreement. The contingency amount is provided to cover increased State cost after preparing the
Revised SCHEDULE "I" with contract unit prices.
7.2. Conditions of Payment. The State will pay the City the full and complete lump sum amount as shown in the
Revised SCHEDULE "I", after the following conditions have been met:
A. Encumbrance by the State of the State's full and complete State funded lump sum cost share as shown in
the Revised SCHEDULE "I".
B. Approval by the State's Land Management Director at St. Paul of certified documentation, submitted by
the City, for all right-of-way and easement acquisitions required for the contract construction.
C. Execution of this Agreement and transmittal to the City, including a letter advising of the State's
concurrence in the award of the construction contract.
D. The State's receipt of a written request from the City for the advancement of funds. The request will
include certification by the City that all necessary parties have executed the construction contract.
7.3. Limitations of State Payment; No State Payment to Contractor
The State’s participation in the contract construction is limited to the lump sum amount shown in
Article 7.1, and the State’s participation will not change except by a mutually agreed written amendment to
this Agreement. The State’s payment obligation extends only to the City. The City’s contractor is not
intended to be and will not be deemed to be a third party beneficiary of this Agreement. The City’s
contractor will have no right to receive payment from the State. The State will have no responsibility for
claims asserted against the City by the City’s contractor.
8. Authorized Representatives
Each party’s Authorized Representative is responsible for administering this Agreement and is authorized to give
and receive any notice or demand required or permitted by this Agreement.
8.1. The State's Authorized Representative will be:
Name/Title: Maryanne Kelly-Sonnek, Municipal Agreements Engineer (or successor)
Address: 395 John Ireland Boulevard, Mailstop 682, St. Paul, MN 55155
Telephone: (651) 366-4634
E-Mail: maryanne.kellysonnek@state.mn.us
page 79
8.2. The City's Authorized Representative will be:
Name/Title: John Mazzitello, City Engineer (or successor)
Address: 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118
Telephone: 651-452-1850
E-Mail: johnrm@mendota-heights.com
9. Assignment; Amendments; Waiver; Contract Complete
9.1. Assignment. Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the
prior consent of the other party and a written assignment agreement, executed and approved by the same
parties who executed and approved this Agreement, or their successors in office.
9.2. Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has
been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original Agreement, or
their successors in office.
9.3. Waiver. If a party fails to enforce any provision of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision
or the party’s right to subsequently enforce it.
9.4. Contract Complete. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the State and
the City. No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind
either party.
10. Liability; Worker Compensation Claims; Insurance
10.1. Each party is responsible for its own acts, omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law
and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of others and the results thereof. Minnesota Statutes
§ 3.736 and other applicable law govern liability of the State. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other
applicable law govern liability of the City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City will indemnify, hold
harmless, and defend (to the extent permitted by the Minnesota Attorney General) the State against any
claims, causes of actions, damages, costs (including reasonable attorneys fees), and expenses arising in
connection with the project covered by this Agreement, regardless of whether such claims are asserted by
the City’s contractor(s) or consultant(s) or by a third party because of an act or omission by the City or its
contractor(s) or consultant(s).
10.2. Each party is responsible for its own employees for any claims arising under the Workers Compensation
Act.
10.3. The City may require its contractor to carry insurance to cover claims for damages asserted against the
City’s contractor.
11. Nondiscrimination
Provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 and of any applicable law relating to civil rights and discrimination are
considered part of this Agreement.
12. State Audits
Under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 5, the City’s books, records, documents, and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and the State Auditor
or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this Agreement.
13. Government Data Practices
The City and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under this Agreement, and as it applies to all data
created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the City under this Agreement. The civil
remedies of Minnesota Statutes §13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the City
or the State.
page 80
14. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue
Minnesota law governs the validity, interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. Venue for all legal
proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with
competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
15. Termination; Suspension
15.1. By Mutual Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties or by the
State for insufficient funding as described below.
15.2. Termination for Insufficient Funding. The State may immediately terminate this Agreement if it does not
obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at
a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the services covered here. Termination must be by written or
fax notice to the City. The State is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice and
effective date of termination. However, the City will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis,
for services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. The State will not be assessed any
penalty if this Agreement is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other
funding source, not to appropriate funds.
15.3. Suspension. In the event of a total or partial government shutdown, the State may suspend this Agreement
and all work, activities, performance and payments authorized through this Agreement. Any work
performed during a period of suspension will be considered unauthorized work and will be undertaken at the
risk of non-payment.
16. Force Majeure
Neither party will be responsible to the other for a failure to perform under this Agreement (or a delay in
performance), if such failure or delay is due to a force majeure event. A force majeure event is an event beyond a
party’s reasonable control, including but not limited to, unusually severe weather, fire, floods, other acts of God,
labor disputes, acts of war or terrorism, or public health emergencies.
[The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank]
page 81
INCLUDE COPY OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS
EXECUTION.
STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION
Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered
as required by Minnesota Statutes § 16A.15 and
16C.05.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Recommended for Approval:
Signed: By:
(District Engineer)
Date: Date:
SWIFT Purchase Order: Approved:
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By:
(State Design Engineer)
The undersigned certify that they have lawfully
executed this contract on behalf of the Governmental
Unit as required by applicable charter provisions,
resolutions or ordinances.
Date:
By: COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
Title:
By:
Date: (With delegated authority)
Date:
By:
Title:
Date:
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
2014 Licensing List for City Council
Type Contractor Name
Excavating
Benjamin Franklin Plumbing
Dirtworx, LLC
Gas Piping
Blue Ox Heating & Air
Cities 1 Plumbing & Heating
Kulla Heating & Air, Inc
Metro Gas Installers
General
Serice Construction, Inc
Total Construction & Equipment, Inc
HVAC
Blue Ox Heating & Air
Cities 1 Plumbing & Heating
Kulla Heating & Air, Inc
NAC Mechanical & Electrical Services
TNC Industries, Inc
Thursday, March 27, 2014 Page 1 of 1
page 95
DATE: April 1, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit at 2334 Swan Drive
BACKGROUND
The applicant is seeking approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) for construction of a 5-foot tall fence
in a required yard adjacent to a public right-of-way. Title 12-1D-6(D) of the Code requires a conditional
use permit for fences over 36 inches in such a location. The property is guided low density residential,
zoned R-1 One-Family Residential, and used as a single-family home.
According to the applicant, the proposed fence will be black vinyl-coated chain link and will be set back
approximately 4 feet from the side and rear lot lines. The proposed fence will not impact visibility at the
Swan Drive/Bluebill Drive intersection.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing, there were no comments.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit as described in planning
case 2014-07. If City Council desires to implement this recommendation, pass a motion adopting
RESOLUTION 2014-15 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FENCE GREATER
THAN THIRTY-SIX INCHES WITHIN THIRTY FEET OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 2334
SWAN DRIVE.
This matter requires a simple majority vote.
page 96
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2014-15
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A FENCE GREATER THAN THIRTY-SIX INCHES WITHIN THIRTY FEET
OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 2334 SWAN DRIVE
WHEREAS, Lee Violet and Joe Rueckert have applied for a conditional use permit for a
fence greater than thirty-six inches in height within the 30-foot setback at 2334 Swan Drive (PID
27-64550-00-110; Lot and Block 11, Rogers Lake Shore Addition) as proposed in Planning Case
2014-07; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter at their
regular meeting March 25, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council
that a conditional use permit as outlined in Planning Case 2014-07 is hereby approved with
the following findings of fact:
1. The proposed project will not negatively impact traffic visibility at the Swan Drive/Bluebill
Drive intersection.
2. The proposed fence-type and height are consistent with Code requirements.
3. The fence is compatible with the established character of the neighborhood and will not
negatively impact any surrounding properties.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this first day of April, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 97
DATE: March 25, 2014
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2014-07
Conditional Use Permit for a Fence
APPLICANT: Lee Violet and Joe Rueckert
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2334 Swan Drive
ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential
ACTION DEADLINE: May 2, 2014
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant is seeking approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) for construction of a 5-foot tall fence in a
required yard adjacent to a public right-of-way. Title 12-1D-6(D) of the Code requires a conditional use permit
for fences over 36 inches in such a location.
BACKGROUND
The subject parcel is 0.39 acres and contains a single-family residential dwelling on a corner lot with access
from Swan Drive and a side yard abutting Bluebill Drive. In addition, it is zoned R-1 and guided for low
density residential development. The applicants are proposing to construct a fence encompassing their
backyard to provide protection for their child and contain a future pet dog.
ANALYSIS
As previously noted, the proposed fence will exceed 36 inches and will be located within 30 feet of the public
right-of-way. According to the applicant, the proposed fence will be black vinyl-coated chain link and will be
set back approximately 4 feet from the side and rear lot lines (see attached drawings).
The CUP provision for such fences was established to allow the City to evaluate the property conditions before
a fence can be constructed to ensure public safety and appropriate aesthetics. According to Title 12-1D-5 of
the City Code, no fences, structures, man-made berms or plantings may exceed 36 inches in height above the
center grade of the intersection within any front or side yard area on a corner lot which may interfere with the
visibility across the corner. The proposed fence will not impact visibility at the Swan Drive/Bluebill Drive
intersection.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit request, based on the findings of fact.
page 98
ACTION REQUESTED
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider the following options:
1. Recommend approval of the conditional use permit request for fence construction greater than 36
inches in a required yard adjacent to a right-of-way, based on the finding of facts.
OR
2. Recommend denial of the conditional use permit request for fence construction greater than 36 inches
in a required yard adjacent to a right-of-way, based on the finding of fact that the proposed fence will
have a negative impact on traffic visibility and neighboring properties.
OR
3. Table the request.
MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW
1. Findings of Fact
2. Aerial Site Map
3. Planning Application, including supporting materials
page 99
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit Request for Fence
2334 Swan Drive
The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed request:
1. The proposed project will not negatively impact traffic visibility at the Swan Drive/Bluebill Drive
intersection.
2. The proposed fence-type and height are consistent with Code requirements.
3. The fence is compatible with the established character of the neighborhood and will not negatively
impact any surrounding properties.
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
170
10
0
112156
13
6
13
5
677
679
10
0
170
10
0
13
5
170
10
0
677
677
909
2334
2342
903
2333
2341
2350 2351
8972319
2343
2335
2351
SW
A
N
D
R
BLUEBILL DR
880
88
2
87
8
8
8
4
880
878
87
8
88
0
88
0
2334 Swan DrivePlanning Case 2014-07 City ofMendotaHeights050
SCALE IN FEETDate: 3/19/2014
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
page 104
page 105
p
a
g
e
1
0
6
p
a
g
e
1
0
7
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111