1990-04-03 CouncilCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AGENDA
April 3, 1990 - 7:30 P.M.
1. Call to Order.
2. Roll Call.
3. Agenda Adoption.
4. Approval of March 20th Minutes.
5. Consent Calendar
a. Acknowledgment of the February 28, 1990
Planning Commission Minutes.
b. Acknowledgment of March Building Report.
c. Approval of Wetlands Permit - Case No. 90-07 -
Heaver Design and Construction.
d. Approval of Wetlands Permit - Case No. 90-08 -
Heaver Design and Construction.
e. Approval to hire temporary full time engineer.
f. Approval of MnDOT Limited Use Permit for Trails -
RESOLUTION NO. 90-15.
g. Approval of MSA Variance - Marie Avenue Trail -
RESOLUTION NO. 90-16.
h. Approval of the List of Contractors.
i. Approval of the List of Claims.
** j. Approval of Permanent.Employment for Patrol Officer.
** k. Approval of Birch Addition Final Plat - RESOLUTION
NO. 90-17.
End of Consent
6. Proclamation
a. Proclamation of Volunteer Recognition Week of
April 22-28, 1990 - RESOLUTION NO. 90-18
7. Public Comments
8. HEARING
a. Easement Vacations - 7:45 P.M.
1. Duggan Request - RESOLUTION NO. 90-19
2. Centex Homes Request - (Kensington Manor Home
Deck Encroachment) - RESOLUTION NO. 90-20
3. McManus Request - RESOLUTION NO. 90-21
b. Case No. 89-25: Dodge Nature Center - CUP FOR PUD
- 8:00 P.M. - (Recommend continuing to May 1, 1990
at 7:45 P.M.)
C. Case No. 89-40: Frye - CAO Variance - 8:00 P.M.
d. Garron Site Feasibility Hearing - 8:00 P.M.
e. Case No. 90-05: Foto Mark, Inc. - CUP for Mining -
- 8:15 P.M.
f. Case No. 90-03: Centex Homes - Rezoning,
CUP for PUD, Preliminary Plat and Wetlands -
- 8:30 P.M. - (Recommend continuing to May 1, 1990
at 8:00 P.M.)
9. Unfinished and New Business
a. Proposal to Salvage Acquired Property.
b. Update on House Burns.
c. Janitorial Service at City Facilities.
d. Local Water Resources Management Plan.
e. Approval of Plans and Specifications for Park Trails
* f. Air Noise Task Force Appointments.
Consideration of Sibley Park Agreement.
9. Council Comments
10. Adjourn.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
April 3, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Admin -C r
SUBJECT: Add On Agenda for April 3, 1990
Two items are recommended to be added to the consent
calendar (**) and additional information is being submitted
for an item already scheduled on the agenda (*).
3. Agenda Adoption
It is recommended that Council adopt the revised agenda
printed on pink paper.
5j. Approval of Permanent Employment for Patrol Officer.
See attached memo.
5k. Approval of Birch Addition Final Plat.
See attached memo and RESOLUTION NO. 90-17
9f. Air Noise Task Force Appointments.
See attached information.
MTL:kkb
S
Page No. 2751
March 20, 1990
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, March 20, 1990
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the
City Council, City of Mendota Heights, was held at 7:30 o'clock P.M.
at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
Mayor Mertensotto called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M.
The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers
Anderson, Blesener, Cummins and Hartmann.
AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Hartmann moved adoption of the
revised agenda for the meeting.
Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the
minutes of the March 6th regular meeting as
corrected.
Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Hartmann moved approval of the
consent calendar for the meeting along with
authorization for execution of any necessary
documents contained therein.
a. Acknowledgment of the Treasurer's monthly
report for February.
b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the Park
and Recreation Commission meetings held on
February 28th and March 13th.
c. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department
monthly report for February.
d. Acknowledgment of a letter from Howard
Dahlgren informing Council of his planned
retirement.
e. Acknowledgment of a court decision
regarding the Christofferson lawsuit.
T
Page No. 2752
March 20, 1990
f. Adoption of Resolution No. 90-12,
"RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR
BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION."
g. Adoption of Resolution No. 90-13,
"RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION
(IMPROVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1)."
h. Approval of the renewal of the wetlands
permit granted on May 10, 1988 for Lot 3,
Block 1, Spring Creek Acres (726 Marie
Avenue) .
i. Approval of the refund of sewer
availability charges paid by thirteen
homeowners whose homes are not connected
to City sewer, and whose payments have
been refunded to the City by the
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission.
j. Award of the contract for the 1990 tree
planting program to Blaeser Landscaping
for its low bid of $14,050.00.
k. Approval of the list of contractor
licenses dated March 20, 1990 and attached
hereto.
1. Approval of the List of Claims dated March
20, 1990 and totalling $116,339.69.
m. Authorization for renewal of the agreement
with Goodwill/Easter Seals for recycling
services.
n. Adoption of Resolution No. 90-14,
"RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR STATE WIDE
PROGRAM FOR A HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE
TEAM," and authorization for copies of the
resolution to be forwarded to State
Senators Knutson and Metzen and
Representatives Pugh and Seaberg.
Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PRESENTATIONS Mayor Mertensotto presented a certificate of
appreciation to Steve Carlson, who retired
from the Volunteer Fire Department after 12
years of service. Certificates of
appreciation were presented to Fire Chief
Page No. 2753
March 20, 1990
Maczko on behalf of George Noack, Sr., who
retired after 35 years of service on the Fire
Department and Dan Barrett who resigned after
four years of service.
CRIME FAIR Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that
the Police Department will be conducting a
community crime fair at the Mendota School on
April 5th.
FURLONG UPDATE The Council acknowledged an update prepared by
the City Administrator regarding the Furlong
neighborhood, a report from Engineer Klayton
Eckles regarding utility extension
information, and a proposal from the Dakota
County Public Health Department for
environmental health assessment of the Furlong
Addition. Administrator Lawell orally
reviewed the details contained in the report
with respect to Dakota County testing, F.A.A.
Part 150, public utility extension,
neighborhood contracting for septic system
pumping, sources of free drinking water, lake
water quality testing options, and the alleged
contamination of Lake LeMay due to discharge
from the Mendota Heights Motel.
Administrator Lawell informed the Council that
the State Environmental Field Services has
been contacted regarding the alleged pumping
into the lake and has done a field
investigation. The agency issued an order to
the motel to correct the situation. Under the
order, issued on February 22nd, the motel must
come up with a plan to cure the problem in 30
days and to implement the plan in the
following 30 days, although the 60 day
deadline may not be reliable because of the
frost. The agency also issued an order to the
motel to pump its septic tank immediately.
The motel has two septic systems, and the
agency has requested that the motel only use
the rooms at the front of the building to
minimize the flow that comes to the back of
the building. The agency will investigate
tomorrow to see whether this has been done.
He informed the Council that if the agency
runs into resistance from the owner, it will
call a hearing and could then revoke the
license for the motel. No response has been
received from the PCA.
Mayor Mertensotto reviewed the issues. He
stated that he is appalled at the $64 per hour
O(
Page No. 2754
March 20, 1990
rate charged by Dakota County for testing of
the septic systems and wells. He suggested
contacting Twin City Testing to see what they
charge and the University to see if they
provide water testing kits.
Mr. Ron Spong, from the Dakota County Public
Department, stated that the Health Department
is totally self sufficient and receives no -
�-�� County funding. Everything done by
the department must be supported by fees, and
the fee for services set by the County Board
is $64 per hour. He explained what the
testing would involve. Responding to a
question from Councilmember Blesener, Mr.
Spong stated that there has been a consistency
in the test results from wells which have been
tested so far but that more testing is
necessary. Also, stated that lack of
knowledge on how the systems were constructed
and maintained is a problem, and he does not
know how consistent the results of random
sampling would be. If the agency had
information on the construction of the sewer
systems and wells and knew the direction of
the shallow ground water flow, the department
might have a better idea of what a random
sample would mean.
Councilmember Anderson stated that the real
question is what are the standards - what
degree of concern should Council have at this
point. If there are no State or scientific
standards, the City would have trouble
determining anything regardless of the expense
and results of testing.
Mr. Spong responded that his department looks
for reduced form nitrates, for which there are
standards established. He stated that five
wells have been tested to date and at least
three area residents have called to have
samples done.
Councilmember Anderson asked whether the
concern has been limited to water quality of
the tested wells for drinking purposes only or
for bathing as well. Mr. Spong responded that
additional testing would have to be done on
the most contaminated wells to determine water
quality for bathing.
Page No. 2755
March 20, 1990
Councilmember Blesener asked what Council
needs to do to get all of the answers it
should have.
Mr. Spong responded that one sample from any
given house doesn't mean very much and that
many of the contaminates vary through type.,
He stated that samples from two homes can
possibly give a good test if the wells are
deep and the samples are true. For a shallow
well there are variables that occur from day
to day.
Responding to a question from Mayor
Mertensotto, Public Works Director Danielson
stated that the cost for extending utilities
is estimated at $25,000 per lot and that the
lowest cost estimate is $21,000 per lot if the
proposed street improvements'are cut back.
Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that
Council has indicated the City would possibly
give a $10,000 credit against the individual
assessments.
Mrs. Carol Doffing stated that she would think
that before the residents can determine
whether they want sewer and water they must
know how much the utilities will increase
their property values. She felt that the
neighborhood would prefer to be bought out but
if that cannot happen, they do want to look at
utilities. She stated that the residents need
to know what it will cost each of them and
what the value increase to their properties
will be.
Mayor Mertensotto responded that if nothing is
done, the homes will have no marketability and
that if improvements are installed, they will
become marketable.
Councilmember Cummins asked the audience what
kind of septic pumping would be necessary for
most of the homes to allow people to stay in
the neighborhood.
Mr. Hiner responded that in some cases the
systems should be pumped every two weeks and
in other cases, every 6 to 8 weeks, depending
on the weather. He indicated that pumping
costs $85 each time.
Page No. 2756
March 20, 1990
Councilmember Blesener stated that one of the
other considerations is that some of the
systems are overflowing because they have been
let go, and this is something that a contract
with a pumper would relieve - if pumping is
done regularly the systems would not overflow.
Councilmember Cummins asked whether there are
any sources of bulk water other than what was
included in the Administrator's report.
Mr. Spong responded that in flood situations,
the National Guard has brought water trucks
into the affected areas, and sometimes water
has been provided by fire pumpers. He
informed Council that one possibility might be
"small community systems." Two small
communities in the county have solved sewer
and water problems with the assistance of the
HRA by installing small wells to serve 4 to 5
homes and have taken the same approach with
septic systems. This option would depend on
how much land is available as sites for the
systems.
Mr. Spong stated that he would like to meet
with City staff to get some sort of interim
scale testing program where his department
could get a clear fix on the extent of the
problem. City staff could then come back with
a program and the cost.
Councilmember Blesener stated that she would
also like to pursue getting a pumping company
involved, at least so that the sewage systems
that are overflowing are controlled. Mr.
Spong informed Council on a method his
department can use to determine which systems
are overflowing.
Councilmember Cummins asked Mr. Spong to work
with staff to survey the neighborhood and
preliminarily determine whether the community
well/septic system approach might be an
effective solution. He suggested that staff
be directed to work with Mr. Spong and report
back in two weeks with a proposal for testing
the water systems in the neighborhood and
surveying the neighborhood to exlore a
community facility for water and sewage
disposal on a 3 to 5 to 7 year solution.
Councilmembers Blesener and Cummins felt that
Council needs to acknowledge that city sewer
Page No. 2757
March 20, 1990
and water is not the answer to the problems
and that Council needs to find an interim
solution and work towards the elimination of
the neighborhood.
Councilmember Anderson stated that installing
sewer and water would cost about $830,000, and
that if the City contributes at the proposed
level, the assessible cost would be $415,000.
The City owns two homes, from which it can
recapture some of the $415,000, which is much
less than the cost the City would bear to buy
out the neighborhood. He felt that the
$415,000 City investment is considerably less
than the $4.5 million potential buyout cost
and the City cannot guarantee a buyout. He
disagreed with doing comprehensive testing on
the basis that the residents will never be
comfortable with drinking their water until
something is done with the sewers. He felt
that Council must come up with a solution -
everyone knows the problems. He asked the
residents what price they put on their health
and on the saleability of their homes.
Mr. Robert Tousignant asked why Acacia Park
Cemetery can't share in the cost of public
improvements.
Councilmember Blesener asked Treasurer
Shaughnessy to prepare an update on the Tax
Increment Financing availability.
Furlong resident David Hiner wanted to see a
neighborhood for -sale sign installed.
A lady in the audience asked whether there is
some way to find out the total cost to the
residents for sewer and water.
Councilmember Blesener suggested that the City
retain a realtor to market the neighborhood.
Another lady in the audience asked that the
City pursue a contract for pumping for the
neighborhood so that the residents would have
some assurance that their costs for pumping
would not continue to go up. Staff was
directed to pursue the matter.
Mr. Robert Tousignant suggested that the City
allow a contractor to dump sewage into the
City sewer main to reduce costs.
Page No. 2758
March 20, 1990
It was the consensus of Council that further
discussion be tabled to April 17th and that
staff be directed to follow-up on items
discussed this evening and invite someone from
the MAC to attend the April 17th meeting to
discuss the Part 150 program.
City staff was directed to take bids for
closing the wells on the two City owned
properties in the Furlong Addition.
RECESS Mayor Mertensotto called a recess at 9:35 P.M.
The meeting was reconvened at 9:45 P.M.
TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUEST Council acknowledged a request from Andrea
Drake, 665 Wesley Lane, for a reduction of the
speed limit on Wesley Lane from 30 miles per
hour to 25 miles per hour. Council also
acknowledged an associated response from
Police Chief Delmont recommending that no
action be taken on the request.
TENNIS COURT USE Council acknowledged a request from St. Thomas
Academy that it be allowed to reserve the
Rogers Lake Park and Friendly Hills Park
tennis courts from 3:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m., on
weekdays from April 1st through June 1st. It
was noted that the request was being made
because the St. Thomas courts are in an unsafe
condition. Council also acknowledged a memo
from Administrative Assistant Batchelder
recommending that the request be approved on
the condition that the Academy pay for the
cost of the design and posting of signs
informing the public of the reservation times.
Mayor Mertensotto supported the request, but
felt that no charge should be imposed. He
stated that St. Thomas only plans to use the
facilities until theirs can be repaired, and
felt that the City should install the signs as
an accommodation, since St. Thomas has made
its courts available for community use when
the courts were in good condition.
Administrative Assistant Batchelder informed
Council that Barton/Aschmann included the St.
Thomas and Visitation tennis courts in its
survey of facilities.
It was the consensus of the Council that the
request be approved. Staff was directed to
notify the Academy that there will be no
charge and that the City has appreciated the
Page No. 2759
March 20, 1990
use of the St. Thomas courts in the past and
their future use when they are repaired.
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Council acknowledged a memo from Parks Project
Manager Guy Kullander regarding cost estimates
for neighborhood park improvements.
Councilmember Blesener asked whether staff was
convinced that change orders can be issued if
the costs are too high. She felt that
provisions should be made in the
specifications for add -alternates and deduct -
alternates. She noted that the estimates are
over budget and that construction depends on
how the bids come in.
Councilmember Blesener moved to approve the
plans and specifications for park
improvements, with the addition of provisions
for deduct alternates.
Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
AIR NOISE UPDATE Council acknowledged and discussed an aircraft
noise corridor update from Administrator
Lawell. Administrator Lawell reviewed the
report, informing Council on the March 7th
MASAC discussions and action on the corridor
issue.
Council also acknowledged a survey prepared by
the Administrative Assistant detailing the
approaches other communities neighboring the
airport take to address airport issues.
Councilmember Blesener observed that Eagan is
the only community surveyed which has an
airport relations commission. Assistant
Batchelder responded that the body is a formal
advisory commission to the Council. He
questioned that the approach is better than
the one employed by Richfield, which uses a
strategy group, consisting of consultants and
city staff, which meets regularly.
Councilmember Blesener stated that she is
concerned the Mendota Heights might be in a
much weaker position if relies solely on the
citizens group. She felt that the City needs
a more structured approach, whether it is
similar to Richfield's or a commission which
meets regularly and reports to the Council
regularly. She felt that something must be
Page No. 2760
March 20, 1990
put in place so that the City can get more
aggressive. She also asked the status of the
funding for the Braslau study.
Administrator Lawell responded that about
$25,000 has been spent and that the City has
contracted with Braslau for the second phase,
to take the City's proposal through special
committee. About 50% of the contract amount
for phase 2 has been expended.
Staff was directed to get more information on
the Richfield group, including its duties,
responsibilities, charter, budget and goals.
RECYCLING PROGRAM Council acknowledged the annual recycling
report for 1989 and commended the residents
for outstanding program participation.
SIBLEY PARK AGREEMENT The Council acknowledged a report from
Administrator Lawell and draft copy of a
tentative agreement with the school district
with respect to the proposed Sibley Park.
Councilmember Blesener gave Council a
background on the negotiations with the school
district. She felt that the proposed
agreement is fair and equitable to both
parties, and stated that the Park and
Recreation Commission unanimously recommends
its approval. She informed Council that a
design committee will be meeting to work out
final design for the facility and stated that
the matter is before the Council this evening
for discussion and reaction. She indicated
that a final draft of the agreement will be
brought before Council for approval on April
3rd. She informed the Council that the
proposed agreement has been very well received
by the school board and that they are expected
to adopt it in final form at their first
meeting in April.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that he would like
the City Attorney to prepare a letter
indicating that he has reviewed the document
and approves of it.
Councilmember Cummins expressed his concerns
over Sections 6, "Operation of the Facility,"
and Section 9, "Remedies. He was concerned
that the City's investment is not adequately
protected under the proposed agreement. With
respect to Section 9, Councilmember Cummins
N
Page No. 2761
March 20, 1990
felt that if o e of the parties fails to
appropriate fun s, it would be unlikely that
the court would order the City or district to
appropriate fun s which it feels are
unavailable. was also concerned that if
there is to be a 40 year agreement, there
should be some reasonable management
parameters. He felt the agreement
inadequately addresses how day to day
management will be conducted by the City and
the school district, and that the parties
might leave themselves open to minor
disagreements which may lead to�major
disagreement. 0-
Councilmember Blesener explained that each
party is always liable for yearly maintenance
costs but neither may be obligated to
maintenance costs beyond that level. She
pointed out also that the agreement contains a
specific performance clause.
With regard to dispute resolution/arbitration,
Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that Section 3
of the document provides that title and money
matters are not subject to arbitration.
Councilmember Blesener responded that the
committee which prepared the draft included
the language in the final sentence of Section
3 so that if either party wanted to do some
extraordinary maintenance or improvements, the
other would not be liable for the costs.
Administrator Lawell explained that the school
district was concerned that if the City builds
the improvement on district property, and at
some time during the term of the agreement
decides not to continue maintenance, the
district would have to take on 100% of the
maintenance.
Councilmember Anderson stated that he felt one
source of difficulty after the initial outlay
of the City to build the facilities is the
sharing in the cost of the maintenance. He
interpreted Section 6.3 to mean that there is
no way to anticipate how the parties will get
along on the maintenance sharing maintenance -
whether it is equal sharing or if the district
will pay more because it did not pay the
development costs. He felt the agreement
leaves proportionate sharing open.
Page No. 2762
March 20, 1990
Administrator Lawell pointed out that Section
6.2 provides for equal sharing of the costs.
He stated that/ -the disproportionate amount
would be capi items but that maintenance
would be 50150KY As an example, if the
district were to decide to install a batting
cage, the district would pay for it.
Councilmember Blesener stated that the dollar
amount in Section 6.3 will be filled in. She
stated that the district has
met a number of City needs which it originally
had problems with. She felt that the City
needs to be sensitive to the district's
concerns of some of the other issues. With
respect to Councilmember Cummins' concerns
over protecting the City's interest in the
short term, she cannot see that there is any
incentive for the school district to walk away
from the agreement.
Mayor Mertensotto suggested that a "good faith
dealing" clause be incorporated into the
agreement.
Councilmember Cummins stated that he would
like a clearance letter from the City's legal
counsel.
City Attorney Hart was directed to prepare a
letter with respect to the proposed agreement.
COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Blesener informed Council that
due to other commitments she must resign from
her capacity as the City representative to the
School District Community Education Council,
and asked that a candidate be appointed. She
stated that the School District would prefer
that a Council member be the City's
representative, or otherwise, anyone else who
has a good familiarity with the community.
Treasurer Shaughnessy informed the Council of
potential cuts in aids being considered by the
legislature.
ADJOURN There being no further business to come before
the Council, Councilmember Hartmann moved that
the meeting be adjourned.
Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion.
Ayes:
Nays: 0
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:40 o'clock P.M.
1 5
ATTEST:
Charles E. Mertensotto
Mayor
Page No. 2763
March 20, 1990
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
" • C "
LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 20, 1990
General Contractors Licenses
Al Herrmann Construction, Inc.
Environmental Design, Inc.
Hercules Home Insulation
The Snelling Company
Heating & Air Conditioning Licenses
Burnsville Heating & A/C, Inc.
Metro Air, Inc.
Gas Piping Licenses
Burnsville Heating & A/C, Inc.
MKD Plumbing
Excavating License
Marty Brothers Excavating
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning
Commission was held on Wednesday, February 28, 1990, in the
City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. Vice Chair
Person Dwyer called the meeting to order at 7:39 o'clock P.M.
The following members were present: Dwyer, Koll, Dreelan,
Krebsbach, Duggan and Tilsen. Chairperson Morson was
excused. Also present were Public Works Director Jim
Danielson, Planning Consultant Howard Dahlgren and
Administrative Assistant Kevin'Batchelder.
APPROVAL OF Commissioner Duggan moved approval of
MINUTES the January 23, 1990 minutes.
Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
CASE NO. 89-04 Mr. Richard Bjorklund, Sr., representing his
BJORKLUND, son David Bjorklund, was present to discuss
VARIANCE his son's request for a rear yard setback
variance. He stated that the lot is a
corner lot where the homeowner desires to
front the house on the long side of the
property.
Commissioner Tilsen noted that the plot plan
indicated was -labeled preliminary. He
suggested that if, after completing final
plans, there is any reduction in floor plan
along the north/south axis, the variance
granted should be smaller on the north lot
line.
Commissioner Krebsbach questioned why
signatures of consent were not obtained from
the surrounding neighbors. Mr. Bjorklund
replied that his son left on vacation just
after his meeting with Planner Dahlgren and
that he was unable to obtain the signatures.
Vice Chair Dwyer stated that he had talked
to the owners at 562 Stone Road and that
they commented that they are anxious to see
the construction start and that they have no
objections with Mr. Bjorklund's request.
Commissioner Krebsbach moved to recommend
that City Council approve a twenty foot
(201) rear yard setback variance conditioned
upon Mr. David Bjorklund providing
affirmative signatures of adjacent neighbors
for City Council review.
Commissioner Koll seconded the motion.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
;February 28 ,; 1990
Page 2
CASE NO. 89-40 Commissioner Duggan moved to continue
FRYE - the public hearing to March 27, 1990 at 7:45
CAO VARIANCE o'clock P.M.
HEARING Commissioner Koll seconded the motion.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
CASE NO. 89-34 Vice Chair Dwyer opened the meeting at
MIST 8:00 o'clock P.M. for the purpose of ?
AMEND. TO ZONING a public hearing to discuss a request from
ORDINANCE & CUP Mr. Jerry Haarman of the Minnesota's Indoor
HEARING Soccer Arena Training Complex for an
amendment to the zoning ordinance and CUP.
Mr. Haarman, President of the Minnesota
Indoor Soccer, stated that they have a lot
of confidence in this project. He stated
that they would be a good corporate citizen
in Mendota Heights. He commented that they
have conservatively estimated that there are
32,000 soccer players in the Twin Cities
area. He stated that their hours of service
will be from 6:00 P.M. to Midnight. Mr.
Haarman further stated that at this point in
time there are seven investors. He stated
that they have been studying this project
for over twenty-four months and during that
time they have toured many markets in the
United States. 'He stated that they do have
a secondary use for the building but that it
is only a fallback.
Mr. Haarman then introduced Mr. Kirk Hagman
of Hagman Construction and Joseph Boslovich,
Architect.
Commissioner Krebsbach stated that there
have been other indoor soccer sites that for
one reason or another have been moved or
closed. She expressed her concern as to why
other indoor arenas have failed. Mr.
Haarman stated that they have all closed
mainly due to losing their leases. He
stated that none of them have failed due to
financial reasons.
In response to a question from a question
from Commissioner Krebsbach, Mr. Hagman
stated that in both the Bloomington and
Highway 55 soccer facilities, both of these
facilities ran inside existing gymnasiums.
He stated that that is not an ideal
condition for indoor soccer.
Mr. Hagman stated that they looked at both
the western and southern suburbs. He stated
that part of the problem in the western
suburbs is that the land costs are so
prohibitive that it does not make economic
sense. He stated that one of the things
they are trying to do here is to make some
economic sense. In response to a question
February 28, 1990
Page 3
from Commissioner Krebsbach, Mr. Hagman
stated that they definitely anticipate
players from the western suburbs to commute
to Mendota Heights.
Mr. Haarman stated that this site is located
almost 20 minutes .from almost all of the
large soccer populations. Mr. Hagman
explained that they wanted some place where
there was less than a half hour drive time.
He stated that is part of the reason why
they located the site in Mendota Heights.
Vice Chair Dwyer then asked Mr. Haarman to
give a presentation on the construction
aspects of the property and building.
Mr. Hagman explained that they basically
had to put two hockey rinks inside the
building. He stated that 'a hockey rink is
eighty-five feet wide (851) and two hundred
feet long (2001). He stated that they have
two wings of the building that are
approximately two hundred twenty feet long
(2201) and one hundred ten feet wide (1101).
He further explained the size of the
construction. He stated that they are using
two different types of decorative concrete
block. He explained that they are using a
rock faced block and a scored block which
are two different types of texture.
He explained the different textures.
He stated that the texture and color "plays
on you" to help bring the size of the
building down. He stated that they also
have the building accented with pre -finished
metal which will bring some horizontal and
vertical lines to break the space down. He
stated that the center area (referring to a
map) is the support area and that they are
proposing to have a standing seam roof in
forest green. He stated that they have
gray, white and green proposed which are
classic colors that go together.
Mr. Hagman showed the layout of the soccer
facility to the Commission. He pointed out
the entrance and exit passages into the
parking lot. He explained that they
provided in excess of 130 spaces for the
cars. He explained that they do not
anticipate a lot of bus traffic mainly
because the teams consist of less than 15
players per team. He commented that if the
team would come all at once it would
probably be in a van. He stated that if
they do have bus traffic there is an
entrance (referring to a map) and that there
is some parking stalls for the buses. He
stated that they do have some flexibility to
handle the bus traffic. He explained that
the plan calls for the traffic to come off
of Northland Drive so they don't have any
February 28, 1990
Page 4
entrances onto Mendota Heights Road. He
commented that they felt there is less
traffic on Northland Drive than on Mendota
Heights Road and that Northland Drive would
be a better place to handle the inflow onto
the site.
Mr. Hagman explained that they are lining
the boulevard with trees along Northland
Drive and along Mendota Heights Road. He
stated that they are attempting to leave the
existing trees. He showed the MnDOT holding
pond on the map. He stated that they would
leave the trees in with vegetation and that
they would leave as many trees as they can
back along the lot line.
Mr. Hagman stated that they did a
preliminary layout plan. He stated that
they do not expect this to be a big
spectator sport. He stated that there is
enough seating for the normal crowd, i.e.,
parents and small crowds expected for a
tournament. He showed the two fields and
the main entry way, the snack bar and a pro
shop, washing rooms in the back and offices
on the map. He stated that this layout
would change some more once the plan is
refined.
Mr. Joseph Boslovich expressed his personal
concerns to the Commission regarding a long
driving distance. He stated that he likes
Mendota Heights accommodations for travel
time. He further commented that soccer is a
fast growing sport.
Commissioner Tilsen asked how many people
operate the facility and asked about the
supervision of the facility. Mr. Haarman
responded that there will be seven full time
employees and that if you take into
consideration the referees and score keepers
the number will go up to 14. He stated that
there will be either an assistant manager or
himself present there at all times to make
sure that it is properly supervised at all
times. He stated that they are concerned
with supervision as they are dealing with a
lot of youth.
Commissioner Duggan stated that he had
walked the site previously today and he
asked about the drawing concerning the
trees. He asked if MIST is working on an
option to purchase MnDOT's property. Mr.
Haarman answered no. He commented that the
MnDOT holding pond will stay there.
Commissioner Duggan stated staff's concerns
with the grading. He stated that he has
some concern that the building would be a
tight squeeze. Mr. Hagman stated that
February 28, 1990
Page 5
they had met today with Mr. Danielson and
that they had talked about the possibility
of raising the building. He stated that the
reason why they put the building at the
elevation at that level is because they do
have a situation where they are putting the
building down below the street some because
they are playing off between what happens at
this curb elevation and the back lot line
(referring to a map). He stated that this
could be handled with retaining walls. He
stated that under the soccer scenario the
problem is not very bad at all. He stated
that under the second use scenario they did
a lot of studies to find out what kind of
flexibility they have. He stated that they
could put a road in (referring to a map) if
they build a retaining wall in. He stated
that in Planner Dahlgren's notes he
suggested that they talk to MnDOT in
thinking that maybe they could do something
in terracing an weaving the wall. He stated
that they are willing to work with Mr.
Danielson and that they want to make sure
that he is satisfied.
Commissioner Duggan commented that a lot of
the soccer population is children and that
they will generally be playing from August
to May, which are more winter months than
summer months, he stated that lighting
was not indicated on any plans. Mr. Hagman
stated that they have not created a luminar
plan. He stated that they will have to
address and that he understands Commissioner
Duggan's concerns.
Commissioner Duggan stated that he was
pleased to see that the colors of the
building are more muted. Commissioner
Duggan stated that he is concerned in
with the amount of traffic. He offered a
suggestion of spreading the entrance and
exit another twenty feet further apart to
offset the possibility of accidents. Mr.
Hagman stated that they would be willing to
work that over Mr. Danielson.
In response to a question from Commissioner
Duggan, Mr. Hagman stated that there are
public bathrooms which are separated from
the locker rooms. Mr. Haarman stated that
the people who use these type of facilities
seldom use shower facilities and a locker
room facility. Mr. Boslovich explained the
restrooms and noted that the restrooms
will equipped for the handicapped. Mr.
Boslovich also explained that there will be'
restroom facilities in the locker rooms.
Commissioner Duggan questioned the type of
seating arrangement available to the
spectators. Mr. Hagman stated that the
February 28, 1990
Page 6
seating arrangement would only be on one
side. Mr. Haarman stated in touring the
Kansas City facility they noticed that most
of the people preferred to stand. He stated
that the amount of seating shown on the
plans is ninety and that appears to be
excessive. He commented that they will
probably propose to install one half of that
amount. He stated that there will be room
to install more seating if need be. Mr.
Hagman stated that the seating,would
probably be collapsible type bleachers.
Commissioner Duggan commented that the
building would not be used much for soccer
during the summertime. Mr. Haarman agreed
and said that they are looking at
alternative sports to lease out during that
time, i.e., karate, driving range for golf.
Commissioner Duggan asked how the building
would be cooled. Mr. Hagman stated
that air exchangers is one way to cool the
building down and that they are also looking
into roof top units.
In response to a question from Commissioner
Duggan, Mr. Haarman stated that they could
sustain the facility financially strictly on
using the facility for soccer during the
winter months.
There was a brief discussion between
Commissioner Krebsbach and Public Works
Director Danielson regarding the connection
of roads with respect to Highway 55 and
Highway 110 and the frontage road in front
of the City Hall. Planner Dahlgren
explained the conditional use procedure to
the Commission. Commissioner Krebsbach
questioned if they could preclude activities
in anticipation of secondary uses that may
not be appropriate. Planner Dahlgren
explained that the courts have allowed
communities to add reasonable conditions to
any conditional use.
In response to a question from Commissioner
Krebsbach, Mr. Haarman responded that there
will be a food service area. He stated that
they have not gotten very far in their
restaurant planning.
In response to a question from Commissioner
Duggan, Planner Dahlgren stated that to his
knowledge the City has had no proposals for
development of the site across from MIST's
site. He stated that it is true that
restaurants could be built on one or more of
those sites and that the land is properly
zoned for such use.
Vice Chair Dwyer stated that what the
Commission is considering tonight is a
February 28, 1990
Page 7
request to recommend an amendment to the
zoning ordinance. He stated that this is
presently zoned as an Industrial District
and that the proposal is that we add
participatory athletics to the industrial
zones. He asked staff that if the
Commission recommends approval will that
open a "pandora's box" to some other
industrial zone in the City. Planner
Dahlgren responded that it probably would
not.
Vice Chair Dwyer noted the concerns stated
in the staff memos about indoor/outdoor
dumpsters. Mr. Haarman stated that they
have not specifically discussed this matter
with Mr. Danielson. He stated that they
have the same concerns as does the City
staff. He stated that they would like the
dumpsters to be inside. He referred to a
map as to where the dumpsters could be
placed indoors.
Vice Chair Dwyer asked about the
construction time table. Mr. Hagman
answered that they would like to be open
this fall. He stated that they would like
to get started on construction as soon as
possible. Mr. Haarman stated that the
pressure on them to gain approval tonight
conditioned upon items needed to be done
with staff, is that it helps in putting
their mortgage in place.
Commissioner Dreelan asked about the roof
top heating and ventilating. Mr. Hagman
stated that they will probably have gas
fired units and that they will probably not
have roof top units. He stated that in the
event they go with a roof top unit that has
air conditioning they can set them on the
back side of the building. He stated that
they will be working with Mr. Danielson
regarding this issue. In response to a
question from Commissioner Duggan, Mr.
Hagman stated that the whole support area
would be air conditioned.
Commissioner Koll her concern with the
driveway access. She stated that there are
sharp turns off of Highway 55 and Northland
Drive. She stated that the entrance is too
close to the corner of the turn.
Commissioner Duggan concurred with
Commissioner Koll.
Commissioner Duggan asked if there is large
piles of dirt and if they would be willing
to seed or cover the piles to minimize the
dust. Mr. Hagman answered that they would
use the best method possible to minimize the
dust flow.
February 28, 1990
Page 8
Commissioner Koll asked Mr. Danielson about
the grade off of Northland Drive. Mr.
Danielson responded that he has talked to
them before and that he would like to see
them raise the building. He stated that
they have it too low on the site.
The Engineer for the project stated that the
reason why the building is at the elevation
it is at is because they were trying to
optimize the location of Northland Drive and
the existing MnDOT right-of-way on the back
of the site. He stated that it was done
this way because if the building were to
ever go to an office/warehouse scenario it
would minimize the height of potential
retaining walls in the back. He stated
that the building could certainly be raised
but that potentially the retaining wall
would have to be higher. He further stated
the difficult slope ratios they have had to
deal with. He stated that they discussed
with Mr. Danielson if there is a need
for retaining walls on some of these slopes
they are not opposed to them.
Commissioner Koll stated her concerns with
the concrete facing. She stated that in
that particular area everything else is the
dark brick. She stated that has been a
standard in the industrial development.
She expressed to Mr. Haarman and Mr.
Hagman that she encourages them and that the
City is fortunate to have this proposal.
Commissioner Koll stated that a concrete
building would probably stick out like a
knife. Mr. Haarman stated that the
concrete would be painted gray and white.
Mr. Hagman stated that the nearest building
next to them is the Unysis building. He
stated that they would have to go across
Highway 55 to run into a brick building.
Mr. Haarman stated that this project has to
make economic sense. He stated that there
is no way economically that they could
build this structure and use brick. He
stated that they looked at that originally
and that they just cannot do it. Mr.
Boslovich stated that, in his opinion, there
is nothing inherently wrong with using
concrete as the material. He stated that
using the materials described earlier that
the building promises to be very handsome.
He sited an example of a building that was
built using concrete block.
Planner Dahlgren stated that staff does not
have problem with the use as such. He
stated that the Commission should consider
making a positive action if they see no
problems. He stated that they do see some
problems with the site plan as presented.
February 28, 1990
Page 9
The first being that the building developed
this low is a mistake. A building that you
have to drive down to is always a marketing
problem. He stated that it is much better
if the building is above the street slightly
or at near the same grade. He stated
that an ideal solution is if they could get
an agreement from MnDOT to raise that
portion of the long spiked piece of land
that MnDOT owns. He stated that the secret
here is to get a site that has greater
depth. He stated that they are very
concerned about the elevation and the
steepness of those driveways. He stated
that some kid is going to get killed because
those driveways are very steep and they do
not have any space at the top that is flat
so you can stop before you hit the road. He
stated that this is a very severe safety
problem that Mr. Danielson has spoken to
them about.
Planner Dahlgren further stated that another
concern is the painted concrete block. He
stated that the City of Mendota Heights has
always pursued quality in all of its
development. He stated that most of the
industry that is being developed today is
being done with brick and is being done very
well. He stated that he is very concerned
about the ultimate impact on the aesthetic
environment of the City. He suggested
that we look at that very carefully to make
sure that we get the best product.
Public Works Director Danielson stated that
his main concern is with the grading plan as
presented.
Mr. Hagman stated that what he is
understanding through Planner Dahlgren is
that there is a real safety problem and when
he talked to Mr. Danielson he doesn't get
the same type of problem. He stated that
there seems to be some discrepancy between
the two of them. Planner Dahlgren responded
that there is no discrepancy. He stated
that they are both concerned about the
grades and the driveways.
Vice Chair Dwyer asked Mr. Hagman if he has
a dispute that there is a grading problem
here and a possible safety problem. Mr.
Hagman responded that he does not dispute
that there is a grading problem. He stated
that he has talked to Mr. Danielson about
working that out. He stated that if Mr.
Danielson feels that we need raise the
building then they are more than happy to do
SO.
Vice Chair Dwyer asked if there was anyone
present in the audience who would like to
February 28, 1990
Page 10
speak on this matter.
Mr. Bill Healey, 2473 Park Lane, questioned
what MIST would be doing with the other
property that they own. Mr. Hagman stated
that they have no use for it at this point.
In response to a question from Commissioner
Tilsen, Mr. Hagman stated that the Dakota
Business Center is made out of scored block.
He stated that if the Commission is going to
make a requirement for the building to be
built with brick it will essential kill the
project. Commissioner Tilsen commented that
what he thinks that Planner Dahlgren's
concerns is the surface appearance of
concrete block after several years.
Commissioner Tilsen stated that he shares
the same concerns about painted concrete.
Commissioner Tilsen stated that he is
concerned about the exits in the arena. Mr.
Boslovich explained the exits in the arena.
He stated that there are nine exits in the
building. He stated that each large arena
has two exits. He further commented that he
would like to encourage that the elevation
be as near to street level as possible.
Commissioner Krebsbach moved to continue the
public hearing to March 27, 1990 meeting.
Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion.
Mr. Haarman stated that they have put forth
a very good design and that they are not
building a cheap building.
AYES: 1, Krebsbach
NAYS: 5
Motion Fails.
Commissioner Koll moved to close the public
hearing on the zoning ordinance amendment.
Commission Duggan seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 1, Krebsbach
Commissioner Koll moved to recommend to'the
City Council that they amend the zoning
ordinance to allow participatory athletics
as a conditional use within the Industrial
Zone.
Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 1, Krebsbach
Commissioner Duggan moved to continue the
public hearing to March 27, 1990 at 8:00
o'clock P.M. for further input from staff
and the applicants with regards to grading,
drainage, exterior wall finishes and uses.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
February 28, 1990
Page 11
Commissioner Koll seconded the motion.
Commissioner Tilsen offered a friendly
amendment to Commissioner Duggan's motion
stating that the applicants propose their
own list of conditions to help guide the
Commission in understanding what they are
proposing.
Commissioner Duggan accepted the friendly
amendment.
Vice Chair Dwyer called a recess at 9:25
o'clock P.M.
CASE NO. 90-03 Vice Chair Dwyer opened the meeting at 9:35
CENTEX HOMES - o'clock P.M. for the purpose of a public
REZONING, CUP hearing to discuss a request from Centex
FOR PUD, WETIANDSHomes for rezoning, CUP for PUD and a
PERMIT Wetlands Permit. Vice Chair Dwyer explained
the hearing procedure to the audience and
the role of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Dick Putnam, Tandem Corporation,
was present to discuss Centex Homes request.
He stated that he is working with Centex
-Homes on this project. He introduced Mr.
Tom Boyce, President of Minnesota Division
of Centex and Kevin Clark, Project Manager.
For the benefit of the Planning Commission
and the audience, Mr. Putnam gave a lengthy
history and background concerning the
approval procedure to date for the
Kensington PUD. This included a slide show
and presentation of maps and sketch plans
relevant to the PUD.
Mr. John Huber, Chair of the Mendota Heights
Parks and Recreation Commission, briefly
explained the role of the Parks and
Recreation Commission in planning the park
within Kensington Phase II. He further
described the park plan. He stated that
Centex has been very good to work with.
Mr. Putnam briefly described the proposed
development within Kensington Phase II with
regards to the condominiums, manor homes,
townhomes and single family homes.
Vice Chair Dwyer then opened the meeting for
public comments.
Dan Nichols, 633 Hampshire Drive, stated
that he is stunned by the density of the
development. He stated that he is against
this level of density. He stated that when
he was looking to move to Mendota Heights
several years ago nothing was.mentioned
February 28, 1990
Page 12
about the condominiums or the smaller
townhomes described.
Vice Chair Dwyer questioned Mr. Nichols as
to who made those representations and Mr.
Nichols stated that the salesperson in the
Centex Home model home did. He further
commented that most of the people in the
room had never heard anything about
condominiums and anything at that level of
density.
Mr. Ridley, 620 Hampshire Drive, stated
there were several misrepresentations
regarding condominiums and the park
referendum. He also stated that he is
against the density level.
Ms. Hammel, 646 Pond View Terrace, she
stated that she is concerned with the
density level with respect to City services.
She also stated that she is concerned with
the amount of people it will bring into the
school.
Mr. Ecker, 2308 Field Stone Drive, spoke
against the rezoning proposed by Centex
Homes. He spoke on how the tax base for
Mendota Heights will raise. He further
stated his concerns with the density level.
He also commented on the possible -high level
of traffic this development may bring. He
further stated his concerns regarding the
increase of population in the schools. He
commented that he wonders what type of
person would be attracted to 350
condominiums, townhouses, manor houses.
Vice Chair Dwyer reiterated the concerns of
the residents with respect to supposed
misrepresentations made, density, possible
increases in the taxes, traffic problems and
school district and asked if there were any
comments different from those previously
stated.
Mr. Ecker, 2308 Fieldstone Drive, expressed
his concerns about the impact on the
environment. He questioned if there were
going to be studies done on the environment.
Public Works Director Danielson stated that
the City has done an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) along with the
initial application and an Indirect Source
Permit (ISP) has been done. He stated that
further studies will be conducted during
this process.
Don Pacdernik, 2472 Hampshire Court,
questioned if the plans that have been
referred tonight are a done deal.
Planner Dahlgren stated that the basic
February 28, 1990
Page 13
density pattern was established and approved
by the City when they amended the
Comprehensive Plan. Planner Dahlgren
explained that zoning is different from the
Comprehensive Plan. He explained that a
Comprehensive Plan is a document which is
required under Minnesota law for all
communities in the Metropolitan area which
is the basis for zoning. He stated that the
land use plan designates the land use which
includes the density. He stated that in the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which was done
after the Southeast Area Study, that
amendment established the density pattern
for this whole area. He explained what the
pattern was. He stated that there was to be
single family homes at 15,000 square feet
per lot north of Mendota Heights Road. He
stated for the area south of Mendota Heivhts
Road and easterly was designated four units
per acre. He stated that the area to the
west of the powerlines south of Mendota
Heivhts Road over to Dodd Road was
designated at eight units per acre. He
stated that the existing ordinance for
multi -family housing in the City, at that
time, was about 10 units per acre. He
stated that the approximate density normal
for the R-3 District, the only multi -family
housing district in the City, was 10 units
per acre, in the process of this study the
Council decided to reduce that to eight
units per acre. He stated that substantial
traffic studies were done and showed that
the densities at that rate (4 units per
acre to the east of the right-of-way and
eight units per acre to the west of the
powerline right-of-way, that that would not
create undo traffic problems if Mendota
Heights Road and Huber Drive were
constructed. He stated that plan also
envisioned a substantial park plan in the
area. He stated that the actual area of
parks varied, as Mr. Putnam explained, based
on the bond issues that were passed and not
passed. Planner Dahlgren stated that with
the bond issue that did not pass ultimately
Mr. Putnam proposed a relatively large area
of parks to be dedicated. He stated that
when the plans evolved over time all were
done in conformance with those densities
established in the Comprehensive Plan. He
stated that these plans do not follow the
density pattern exactly because Mr. Putnam
has added a substantial amount of single
family housing south of Mendota Heights Road
in an area that was designated at four units
per acre. Planner Dahlgren stated that part
of the development is at a much lower
density than was established in the
comprehensive plan and parts of it are
individually a little higher, 10 to 12 units
per acre. He stated that the density
February 28, 1990
Page 14
required in the Comprehensive Plan deals
with the over all density. He further
explained that a hearing was held last year
on a concept plan for the whole area and at
that time this basic pattern of developing
with a looped street as a public right of
way was included in that plan and the basic
designation of these park areas plus the
trail area and these types of units were in
that plan. He explained that the concept of
using these different types of housing units
had been approved. He further explained
that the specific development plan to carry
on with the additional detail as represented
by the manor homes was what was being
reviewed tonight. He stated that to an
extent, portions of the plans are done in
terms of establishing the basic density
pattern, establishing the requirement to
build the looped street, dedicate park areas
and maintain the ponding areas and develop
single family housing. He stated that if
all of the development proposed meets these
density standards; that basically has been
decided. He stated that what is left to be
decided is the nature of the units, size,
materials, exact configuration of the parks
and facilities in the park. He further
commented that as a part of considering that
detail the final zoning must be considered.
He stated that the zoning will be applied
when they approve the final PUD. He stated
that theoretically if the development
conforms to the densities established in the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, then the City
has very little ability to change that
zoning pattern. Planner Dahlgren stated
that there were substantial public hearings
held during this process and that he
understands some concerns with those
residents who have moved in after all of the
public hearings had been held.
Mr. Pacdernik, 2472 Hampshire Court, stated
that he is concerned with the decrease in
market value to his home in the future. He
further stated that Centex did a fantastic
job in building his home and that they have
been great to work with but he feels
deceived.
Greg Schroeder, 594 Watersedge Terrace,
commented that had he know the apartments
were to have been built he would not have
bought in Copperfield. He further commented
on the homes.pictured in the slides Mr.
Putnam showed. He stated his concerns for
the market value of his home.
Harold Beale, 2463 Delaware Avenue, stated
that he has attended all of the meetings in
the last five years, he stated that he
understands that there has been no zoning
February 28, 1990
Page 15
change except for the areas that have been
developed. He commented that for all of the
acreage that exists is still zoned
residential. Planner Dahlgren stated that
was correct and explained that many cities
adopt a comprehensive plan and may leave the
underlying zoning as is and act on the
zoning at such time as final development
plans are approved. Planner Dahlgren
further explained that the zoning is a final
legal action that puts the comprehensive
plan into effect and most communities will
withhold that rezoning until the final
developments are prepared and approved -
usually in a case of multi -family housing in
the form of a PUD.
In response to a question from 2308 Field
Stone Drive, Planner Dahlgren explained that
in the State of Minnesota the comp. plan for
a City is required by law. He stated that
by law the zoning has to conform to the
comprehensive plan. He explained that when
a City adopts a comprehensive plan that is a
stage at which the basic issue of land use
and density are decided. He stated that
when the zoning portion comes along the
zoning districts need to be setup to conform
with the density and when the final
development plans are ready for review then
the zoning is applied to the land in
conformance with the comp plan. He stated
that'once you have adopted a comp plan and
densities when someone applies for rezoning
or development approval in accordance with
those land uses and densities the City has
limited ability to turn it down. He
explained that they have to have reasons
such as the layout does not work out right
or buildings are badly designed etc, for
turning down the design. He explained that
the developer has the legal right to those
densities.
Robert Prior, 2455 Hampshire Court, Vice
Chair Dwyer stated that the City had
received a letter from this individual,
stated his opposition and questioned whether
the comprehensive plan could be changed. He
commented that the people in the audience
are opposed to condominiums.
Glynnis Svendsen, 2300 Field Stone Drive,
discussed her calculations in reference to
density.
Mr. Putnam briefly explained the amount of
property left to develop is not very much.
He further explained the open land and who
owns it and what is proposed.
Ms. Svendsen commented that the density
level does not seem to work. She further
February 28, 1990
Page 16
stated she does not think that anyone has a
problem with the townhome concept. She
further stated that when you start looking
at the "C" word - condominiums - nobody is
happy.
Mr. Putnam questioned if the manor homes
that are under construction right now
are offensive to anyone. It was the
concensus of the audience that no they are
not.
Mr. Tom Boyce, President of Centex, stated
that they are not talking about building a
three story condominium that is up against a
freeway that HUD is going to own half of.
He stated that they have all seen pictures
of what they are proposing and they can see
first hand what they are building across the
way from their developments. Mr. Boyce
stated that the manor homes being built
right now are condominiums.
Mr. Putnam stated that the homes in
Hampshire are going to appear more dense
than the ones they are building because
there is all park in front of it. He
further stated that there seems to be a
feeling that when we say condominiums or the
"C" word it represents something completely
different. The only difference is that the
present manor homes are four and eight unit
buildings with an attached garage and the
ones that are being proposed are 8, 12, 16
unit buildings with a detached garage. He
stated that it is almost an identical unit
inside. He stated that it would look very
strange to have a lot of one thing built
over 80 or 100 acres. Mr. Boyce stated that
the present manor homes are at 8 units an
acre.
Mr. Jeff Laramy, 618 Pond View Court, stated
his concerns for his property value.
Susan Alt, 642 Pond View Terrace, stated
that she researched what was proposed for
the Hampshire Estates area before she bought
in Copperfield. She stated that they were
also mislead. She stated that she is
concerned with the density level.
Mr. Putnam stated that there is a lot of
property. He stated that he had just
informed a potential buyer in Copperfield
about the parks available to him. He stated
that they have talked at the Copperfield
parties for the last three years about what
is going on in the neighborhood. He stated
that the reason why there has not been a
single plan is because the plan has been
changed several times. He stated that the
reason why there have been so many plans is
February 28, 1990
Page 17
because it has not been finalized with very
good reasons, not Centex's reasons. He
stated that if the personnel in the model
centers get confused on pointing out that
townhouses go here and it turns out to be a
condominium building the reason is that at
one point in time it probably was suppose to
be townhouse. He stated that if you look at
the plans, we have been moving things around
the site to try and accommodate ourselves
and well as what the City has wanted. He
stated that they have taken as a mandate
that the City is looking for some active
parks.
A woman, resident of Copperfield, stated
that Mendota Heights is different than
Bloomington. She further read an excerpt
from the City's Comprehensive Plan. She
stated that she had some difficulty in
getting information from the City. She,
explained her concerns for increase in the
traffic. She asked what the target market
is for these homes.
Mr. Kevin Clark explained the'target market
for the homes, the approximate square
footage of the homes, the proposed base
prices of the homes and the proposed prices
of homes with options. He explained the
amount of manor homes that they have sold in
Kensington. Mr. Clark stated that they do
not sell to investors. Mr. Boyce stated
that they try to discourage investors.
John Siedel, 2459 Hampshire Court, stated
that he is disturbed to know that it appears
that the Comprehensive Plan is a tight and
stringent plan that we have to live by. He
stated that he is not excited about the
proposed parks because of the possible
problems they may bring, i.e. drinking and
parties.
Steve Gollinger, 686 Apache Lane, stated
that he inquired with the City in 1986 about
what was to be proposed for this area. He
stated that he feels maybe that the City has
mislead the residents.
Thomas Smith, 625 Hampshire Court,
questioned what benefit arises out of the
proposal by Centex for the high density
development. He further read an excerpt
from the Minnesota Real Estate Journal which
quoted Planner Dahlgren. He stated that he
does*not feel that this plan benefits the
City as a whole. He further read another
excerpt from the Journal which quoted Dick
Putnam. He stated that he is surprised by
the proposed condominiums.
Terry Berg, Copperfield Drive, stated that
February 28, 1990
Page 18
he liked the spaciousness and fields in the
City. He stated that he was also mislead
with regards to high density.
Commissioner Tilsen briefly explained that
the "battle" is with the City Council and
that the role of the Planning Commission is
to work with Centex to,get a product that
suits Mendota Heights as best as we can.
In response to a citizen's question as to
what can they do as concerned citizens,
Vice Chair Dwyer stated that the elected
officials of the City are sensitive to the
legal rights of the developer and that they
are also sensitive to their constituents.
He explained that they will have to take the
matter up with the City Council.
In response to a question from a resident,
Vice Chair Dwyer stated that the park land
has not been deeded to the City. The above
resident then asked if the park land had not
been made available to the City would the
City had approved this development if the
park land were not to be deeded by the City.
Planner Dahlgren surmised a guess, no,
because park land is a very important
ingredient here in as much as the City has
gotten themselves into a position where they
do not have adequate parks. He explained
that the developer is required to dedicate
10 percent of land for park when they final
plat. He stated that they have proposed
to dedicate much more than that because of
the extreme park need that the City finds
itself in.
Mr. Mc Inerney, 2355 Field Stone Drive,
questioned what the role of the Planning
Commission is. Vice Chair Dwyer explained
that the Commission serves as an advisory
body to the City Council. He explained that
the Council can abide by their
recommendations or it can listen to the
applicant's request and make their own
decision.
Bill Healey expressed his concerns with the
high levels of density and the air noise
issue.
A resident questioned whether Centex could
better regulate the prices of their homes.
Mr. Boyce responded that there is a limited
market in townhomes and that they cannot
regulate the prices.
Commissioner Duggan assured the residents
that the Commission would not spend long
hours on an issue if they felt that they did
not have a say so on what happens in the
City. He stated that the City works long
February 28, 1990
Page 19
hours on issues and tries to come up with a
reasonable compromise. He stated that we
are not going to satisfy everybody. He
stated that the developer's have legal
rights and that there are a lot of legal
contracts already in place. He stated that
he likes the idea of more expensive units
and that he does not like what he sees being
proposed. He also spoke on how the Centex
salespeople may have mislead the residents.
Commissioner Duggan moved to continue the
public hearing to March 27, 1990 at 8:00
o'clock P.M.
Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
SCHEDULING OF It was the concensus of the Commission that
JOINT CITY they meet with the City Council on
COUNCIL/PLANNING Wednesday, May 2, 1990 at 8:00 o'clock P.M.
COMMISSION WORK -for the purpose of a joint workshop to
SHOP discuss the zoning ordinance recodification.
ELECTION OF It was the concensus of the Commission to
OFFICERS reappoint Mr. Jerry Morson as the Chair of
the Planning Commission. It was also the
consensus of the Commission to reappoint Mr.
Mike Dwyer as the Vice Chair of the
Commission.
VERBAL REVIEW Public Works Director Danielson gave a
verbal review to the Planning Commission on
City Council action on Planning items.
ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Duggan moved to adjourn the
meeting at 12:10 o'clock A.M.
Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion.
Respectfully submitted,
Kimberlee K. Blaeser
Senior Secretary
MEMO
Date: 3-26-90
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Paul R. Berg, Code Enforcement Officer
SUBJECT: Building Activity Report for March 1990
CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE 90
BUILDING
1,541,220.00
13,215.71
0
PERMITS:
No.
Valuation
Fee Collected
SFD
6
911,189.00
8,238.65
APT
0
0
0
TOWNHOUSE
1
93,487.00
1,010.63
CONDO
0
0
0
MISC.
16
118,655.00
1,978.95
C/I
1
6,989.00
148.50
Sub Total 24 1,130,320.00 11,376.73
TRADE
PERMITS:
No. Valuation Fee Collected
14 2,237,696.00 19,735.03
0 0 0
1 93,487.00 1,010.63
0 0 0
32 224,568.00 3,936.10
7 71,924.00 1,315.88
-------------------------------------
54 2,627,675.00 25,997.64
YEAR TO DATE 89
No. Valuation Fee Collected
9
1,541,220.00
13,215.71
0
0
0
5
821,235.00
7,041 21
7
1,500,000.00
7,490.18
13
117,915.00
2,401.75
9
203,418.00
2,856.99
43 4,183,788.00 33,005.84
Plumbing
8
305.00
25
803.00
29
759.00
Water
5
25.00
9
45.00
17
85.00
Sewer
10
175.00
( 15
262.50
10
175.00
Heat, AC,
& Gas
15
943.10
33
2,120.10
38
3,515.50
-------------------------------------------+------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Sub Total
38
1,448.10
82
3,230.60
94
4,534.50
Licensing•
Contractor's
Licenses
20
500.00
254
6,350.00
275
6,875.00
-------------------------------------------+-----------------------...----------+..----------------------------------
Total
82 1,130,320.00
13,324.83
1 390 2,627,675.00
35,578.24
1 412 4,183,788.00
44,415.34
NOTE: All fee amounts exclude Sac, Wac, and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan check fee, and
valuation amounts.
CITY OF MPNDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
To: Mayor, City Council and City Admir6*or
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant
Subject: CASE NO. 90-07: Heaver Design and Construction
McManus Wetlands Permit
DISCUSSION
Mr. Keith Heaver presented a proposal for a Wetlands Permit
at the March Planning Commission for the McManus property
consisting of Lots 1, 2, 15, 16, Block 2, T.T. Smith's Subdivision
No. 3. The request is to allow the construction of a single family
home at 655 Brookside Lane. (See attached staff and planner
memos.)
The entire area of the Brookside Lane improvements is included
in a Wetlands District and every lot will require a Wetlands Permit
for development. At the time of subdivision, wetlands permits were
overlooked for the entire plat. The developer will appear at a
public hearing at the April Planning Commission for this blanket
approval, in the meanwhile, this individual lot is being considered
for a wetlands permit.
The Planning Commission expressed a concern about imported
fill for this lot.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission unanimously waived the requirement for
a public hearing. The Planning unanimously recommended that City
Council approve the granting of a Wetlands permit conditioned on:
1. The grading being completed as shown on the submitted proposed
grading plan.
ACTION REQUIRED
If City Council desires to implement the Planning Commission's
recommendation, they should pass a motion granting a Wetlands
Permit allowing construction of single family home on Lots 1, 2,
15, 16, Block 2, T.T. Smith's Subdivision No. 3 conditioned on the
the grading plan being completed as shown on the submitted proposed
grading plan.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Jaw
March 22, 1990
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James E. Danielson, Public Works Direc
Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assists
SUBJECT: Case No. 90-07: Heaver Design and Construction
McManus Wetlands Permit
DISCUSSION
Last,year the City completed Brookside Lane to serve the
Ivy Falls Creek Addition. This development is adjacent to
Ivy Creek. Ivy Creek is a waterway within the City's Wetland
Ordinance and all construction within a hundred feet (1001)
of the creek needs a Wetlands Permit.
In the Ivy Creek Subdivision area, the land surrounding
the creek has been also designated as Wetlands. This fact
was overlooked at the time of subdivision and a Wetlands
Permit was not included as part of the platting.
Amy and Tim McManus now wish to build a house on Lots 1,
2, 15, 16, Block 2, T.T. Smith's Subdivision No. 3. Please
see attached plans.
The entire area of the Brookside Lane improvements is
included in a Wetlands District and every lot will require a
Wetlands Permit for development. Staff feels that it makes
sense to consider the entire area for permits as a whole.
The McManus house and most of the development around
Brookside is within a Wetlands boundary. (See attached map)
Staff now feels that this Wetlands boundary was excessive.
The important Wetlands feature to protect in this area is the
creek itself. Commission members may wish to visit the area
to view the lay of the land.
The City's Wetlands Ordinance requires a public hearing
for Wetlands Permits for development in excess of one single
family lot. We propose to advertise for and conduct a public
hearing to consider Wetlands Permits for the entire
subdivision at the April Planning Commission meeting.
In the meanwhile, Mr. Heaver has two houses proposed for
construction where the homeowner has occupancy deadlines. He
has therefore applied for those permits on an individual
basis.
ACTION REQUIRED
Consider waiving the public hearing. Discuss the
proposal with the applicant and make a recommendation to the
City Council on the requested Wetlands Permit for Lots 1, 2,
15, 16, Block 2, T.T. Smith's Subdivision No. 3.
JED/KLB:kkb
PLANNING REPORT
DATE:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ACTION REQUESTED:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
27 March 1990
90-07
Heber Design and
Development Inc.
Northwest Corner of Brookside
Lane and Laura Avenue (see
sketch)
Approval of Wetlands Permit
1. This property consists of Lots 1, 2, 15 and 16 of Block 2 of Smith's
Addition, which was platted long before the Village was formed in 1956.
These lots are proposed to be utilized as a single parcel, creating a lot
with 120 feet of frontage and a depth of 270 feet. Thus, the lot far
exceeds the 15,000 -square -foot minimum. You will also note from the
map that a 20 -foot alley was originally platted between these pairs of
lots. That alley is in the process of being vacated.
Up until this past year, these lots had no street frontage. Last year,
however, a new plat was developed called Ivy Falls Creek Addition,
which replatted the property to the east. When the streets for this
plat were constructed (last year), the construction was extended easterly
through the old right-of-way originally platted along the south edge of
these four . lots. Thus, the four lots together now are a developable
parcel.
2. One of the reasons that the land in this area was not developed for so
many years is that the land has been low and wet. Thus, when the
wetlands area plan was developed in about 1975, the area in which the
lots were located was designated a "wetland". In order to receive a
building permit today, it is necessary to process a Wetlands Permit.
3. When Brookside Lane was constructed, the properties on either side
(north and south) were assessed for the cost of the street, storm sewer,
curb and gutter, and water and sewer. The decision to develop the
properties on both sides of the street was made when the plat and the
public improvements were approved by the Council and constructed.
Thus, there is no question that a permit has to be issued for residences
fronting on this -newly constructed and assessed street.
4. A considerable area of wetlands remains on the north part of this
property in question, which you can see by looking at the attached
wetlands map. The location of the property in question and the
location of another proposed residence by this same developer on the
easterly end of the wetlands is also shown on the wetlands map. This
is a part of the plat approved last year and is the subject of the next
application (90-08) submitted by the same developer.
Heber Design and Development Inc., Case No. 90-07 Page 2
5. Attached is a copy of the site plan submitted by the applicant showing
the dimensions and the exact location of the proposed house. You will
note that the house is proposed to be setback 35 feet from the street
rather than the normal 30 feet. There is no problem with the lot
depth of 270 feet. Though the additional 5 -foot setback in the front
places the home theoretically 5 feet further into the wetlands, we
suggest that this is not an important factor based on the scale of the
wetlands to the north. The house has a total depth at its maximum
point of 40 feet, thus the proposed setback is a total of 75 feet from
the front lot line.
6. The applicant notes that they do not propose to do any additional filling
beyond that which was done as a part of the road construction past
these lots. We assume that there will be some dispersion of soil from
the construction of the basement, but that no additional fill will be
brought in to further erode the wetlands to the north. This may be a
condition that would apply to the approval of the wetlands permit for
this property.
7. In summary, it appears reasonable to allow for the construction of a
residence on this site. Though originally a part of the wetlands, the
development of the plat to the west and the construction of Brookside
Lane commits the City to allowing the development u: residences on
both sides of the street as it now exists. A condition to an approval
might be that there be no additional fill hauled from the outside to
disturb the wetlands remaining on the northerly portion of the site.
:10
L:
,u�
a
. F-I;i IR 4 LI;
l'1%2 laB.
............. ........... ...
poplfrT
.. .. .....
/*
........... .
...................... ............................... . .......... ..
E T LANE
............... . .............
............
.. ........ ....... .. .
Alif: ;.A
..... ...... . .......... ............. ?
A............ ............ 4 .................
..............
. .........
..... .... .....
SUBJECT PROPERTY
.......... 90-07
NORTH T
... ......... .................
SCALE 1 =500'
I r%lr IN
K . i r%"Cclrlf%Kl
90-08
..... .....
.... ........
.......................M
V
7
E
1; r -r the -
... .......
......::...:..5..................i......
......... . . ............................
......
..............
V RID
......... .
-I r
. .. .............
.A.
r A K
............. . .... . .......
............._..__...........<
..................
................... ..
S 0 M E R S E T
C 0 U N T R Y
LU 8
a
nAliA
City of
1Heights
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
OF
PLANNING REQUEST n
Case No. 010-011
Date of A plication
Fee Paid 00 3 a a 1
a5 OD- a
Applicant Name: Heaver Desi gn & revel n mPn , Tnr- PH. 687 0882
(Last) (First) (N1n
Address: 875 Mendakota Court Mendota Heights MN 55120`
(Number & Street) (City) (State) (Zip)
Owner Name: Mc Manus Mr. & Mrs. Timothy
(Last) (First) (MI)
Address: 1635 Bayard Avenue
(Number & Street)
Street Location of Property in Question:
St. Paul MN 55116
(City) (State) (Zip)
655 Brookside Lane.
Legal Description of Property: Lots 1, 2, 15, 16 B1 2 of No. 3 T.T. Smith's Addition
Type of Request:
Rezoning
Conditional Use Permit
Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D.
Plan Approval
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Applicable City Ordinance Number
Present Zoning of Property
Proposed Zoning of Property
SF present Use S F
SF proposed Use SF
Variance
Subdivision Approval
XX Wetlands Permit
Other (attach explanation)
Section
I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional
material are true.
(Signature of Applicant) Keith W. Heaver
(Date)
(Received by - Title)
1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 452.1850
1 I
1
1 tccra vi -w,a
,m%TH's' Sue. o t
J
d
N
I
. PLvC°sR9 �
O}4VF114 ._
�RrtTfR- tlnF op 5TF-fcT 2
m �
1 CP
i
�
i
1
♦\
\1
`
�
` °
a o
�
� 1 Ib
♦ P�N'titi�V+ � 1
1
I I
�
z�o.o�l
1 I
CA
Mr. Keith Heaver
875 Mendakota Court
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Dear Mr. Heaver:
City of
Mendota Heights
March 23, 1990
Your application for w�`^' R:�)rffu will be
considered by the Planning Commission at their ne��x''t regularly
scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday,' ��.
The Planning Commission meeting starts at 7:30 o'clock P.M.,
here at the City Hall in the Council Chambers. You, or a
representative, should plan on attending the meeting, in
order that your application will receive Commission
consideration.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
Sincerely,
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
KLB:kkb
1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
City of
[it.JA Mendota Heights
Ll
March 30, 1990
Mr. Keith Heaver
875 Mendakota Court
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Dear Mr. Heaver:
Your application for a Wp,f [CLV,& PQ�-V`^ �+
will be considered by the City Council at their next
regularly scheduled meeting, which will be held,on Tuesday,
3 , Me The Council meeting starts at
7:30 o'clock P.M., here at City Hall in the Council Chambers.
You, or a representative, should plan on attending the
meeting, in order that your application will receive Council
consideration.
The Planning Commission recommended gppr-OU W t -f
-{ L, �f�a { n !�o cG
`LS
4-14
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
KLB:kkb
Sincerely,
--
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
To: Mayor, City Council and City Admini6lr
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant L
Subject: CASE NO. 90-08: Heaver Design and Construction
Lot 4, Block 2, Ivy Falls Creek
Addition Wetlands Permit
DISCUSSION
Mr. Keith Heaver presented a proposal for a Wetlands Permit
at the March Planning Commission for Lot 4, Block 2, Ivy Falls
Creek Addition. The request is to allow the construction of a
single family home at 685 Brookside Lane. (See attached staff and
planner memos.) Please refer to Case No. 90-07 for a discussion
of Wetlands Permits for this entire area.
The Planning Commission expressed a concern about the high
water mark at the 866' elevation. The proposed grade changes would
eliminate an area behind the storm water dike designed for
temporary storm water detention. Mr. Heaver indicated he could
abide by a condition to limit fill north of the existing 864'
elevation.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission unanimously waived the requirement for
a public hearing. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended
that City Council approve a Wetlands Permit for construction of a
single family home at Lot 4, Block 2, Ivy Falls Creek Addition with
the following condition:
1. That no fill be allowed north of the existing 864' elevation
as shown on the grading plan.
ACTION REQUIRED
If City Council desires to implement the Planning Commission's
recommendation, they should pass a motion granting a Wetlands
Permit for Lot 4, Block 2, Ivy Falls Creek Addition with the
following condition:
1. That no fill be allowed north of the existing 864' elevation
as shown on the grading plan.
J
c,
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 22, 1990
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James E. Danielson, Public Works Direc
Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assista L �j
SUBJECT: Case No. 90-08: Heaver Design and Construction
Lot 4, Block 2, Ivy Falls Creek Addition
Wetlands Permit
DISCUSSION
This is the second of two individual Wetlands Permits
being sought tonight by Mr. Heaver. Please refer to staff's
memo for Planning Case No. 90-07, McManus Wetlands Permit.
This lot, in addition to the comments noted on the
McManus Wetlands Permit, has a storm water dike that was
constructed along the rear lot line to provide a temporary
holding area for storm water detention. Staff feels the
proposed grading changes in the rear of the lot should be
altered to not allow fill north of the 864' contour.
ACTION REQUIRED
Consider waiving the public hearing. Discuss the
proposal with the applicant and make a recommendation to the
City Council on a Wetlands Permit for Lot 4, Block 2, Ivy
Falls Creek Addition.
JED/KLB:kkb
�J \J
l
PLANNING REPORT
DATE:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ACTION REQUESTED:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
27 March 1990
Heber Design and
Development Inc.
Northwest Corner of Brookside
Lane and Laura Avenue (see
sketch)
Approval of Wetlands Permit
1. Attached is a copy of the site plan indicating the location of this
property in question, which is Lot 4, Block 2 of Ivy Falls Creek
Addition. In addition, we understand that the applicant has submitted a
drawing showing the location of this property as it relates to the total
plat. Our base map has not been updated showing this replat of the
original Smith's Third Addition (referred to in report 90-07). However,
we have shown the location of this platted area as it relates to the
original plat.
2. The request is for a wetlands permit to construct a new residence as
indicated on the site plan referred to in paragraph one. - You will note
by examining the site plan that the northerlymost extension of the
residence is a total of 110 feet from the north line of the right-of-way
providing frontage for this lot. That would be the curve on Brookside
Lane. The topography shows that much of this land is high, going from
an elevation of 876 to 864. You will note that the street in front of
the house is to be graded at 882 and 880, and that portions of the.
yard will be graded to a maximum 882.
3. It appears that this rather substantial house will fit well into the lot
with a walkout to the north as shown on the site plan. Also, there is
a swimming pool proposed to be added on the westerly side of the lot
near the center. This is obviously on the high ground, which was never
part of the wetlands area. Based on the construction and the
assessment of the street fronting on this lot, it appears obvious that a
building permit should be issued. The house and pool are concentrated
to the high side of the site (south and west). It appears that the
proposal is a reasonable concept. An approval, if granted, could allow
the residence to be within 110 feet of the north right-of-way on the
frontage road and the pool and grading to be accomplished in
accordance with the site plan submitted by the applicant.
J
l'` 0y1057MAI
... . ..........
OT IN QUESTION
ORTH f
CALE 1 "=500'
F V�
SOMERSET
fl- 0 U NTR Y C L U 9
..............
F V�
SOMERSET
fl- 0 U NTR Y C L U 9
mi"
City of
� Mendota Heights
•
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
OF
> . PLANNING REQUEST .:.
Case No.. -AD -016
Date of Application
Fee Paid a a a
Applicant Name: Heaver Development, Inc.pg• 687 0882
(bast) (First) (MI)
Address: 875 Mend akota'Court Mendota Heights MN 55120
(Number & Street) (City) : (State) (Zip)
Owner Name: Heaver Development, Inc. Keith W. Heaver, President
(Last) - (First) (MI)
Address:
875 Mendakota Court Mendota Heights MN 55120
(Number & Street) (City) . (State) (Zip)
Street Location of Property in Question:
Legal Description of Property: LC+ 131 L 9 .
y Rd I e) Ofiff Adm-b(l) (-ca P�::r- J -h 14f Gv�eA/ — 35� aa-gO
Type of Request:
Rezoning
Conditional Use Permit
Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D.
Plan Approval
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Applicable City Ordinance Number
Present Zoning of Property SF Present Use
Proposed Zoning of Property SF Proposed Use
SF
Variance
Subdivision Approval
XX Wetlands Permit
Other (attach explanation)
SF
Section
1 hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional
material are true. rd��Wv &_�
(Signature of Applicant) Keith W. Heaver
(Date)
(Received by - Title)
1101 Victoria Curve -1Viendota Heights, AIN - 55118 452.1850
I�inv(�g p IGH (,OrlST(-uGC1ON)ItIG
• .o, g�a.o
\ pyAPos
app
L O \ y
a>�
t3'(: 1kr YrR- D ItiN '` cortsl; lWC ,_
oz,
0-7z
Sha
O
vtmo-wj
oz,
� w •41
City of
[AAAn. JA Alendota Heights
March 23, 1990
Mr. Keith Heaver
875 Mendakota Court
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Dear Mr. Heaver: r, ,��
Your application for � W �`^" '"S , will be
considered by the Planning Commission at their next regularly
scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday,' ` l�.
The Planning Commission meeting starts at 7:30 o'clock P.M.,
here at the City Hall in the Council Chambers. You, or a
representative, should plan on attending the meeting, in
order that your application will receive Commission
consideration.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
sincerely,
l�a
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
KLB:kkb
1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
MAAAAJA
Mr. Keith Heaver
875 Mendakota Court
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
City of
Mendota Heights
March 30, 1990
Dear Mr. Heaver:
La+ q
�j hac
Your application for a 2r �ay.�S Pe (-.I', •I + k 2 -
will
will be considered by the City Council at their next
regularly scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday,
l tctO The Council meeting starts at
7:30 o'clock P.M., here at City Hall in the Council Chambers.
You, or a representative, should plan on attending the
meeting, in order that your application will receive Council
consideration.
The Planning Commission recommended v 4 w L+4^
AI rdvI&L+LoK -i'Ge--+ hti 11 (o,e L(o�nracJ
(no(' k�- o4�- +t�-e ercls+� Q (evw-(ate 4-r-
me.
ro }e c,
i dl l LAA C CL I)O_ C L. '4 O7
S -I -o r vv-, Water
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
Sincerely,
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
KLB:kkb
1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
�
rch 28, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Adm for
FROM: Klayton Hs. Eckles
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Hiring of Temporary Engineer
DISCUSSION
Every spring for the past four years the engineering
department has hired between one and three temporary
engineers or technicians to help with the seasonal work load.
This has been a very successful practice.
Staff recently advertised and interviewed for a temporary
engineer to serve over this construction season, and received
an excellent response. Many qualified people applied. Shawn
Sanders is the top candidate of those interviewed.
Shawn is a recent civil engineering graduate from South
Dakota School of Mines and Technology. He has worked the
past two summers for Bell Galyardt & Associates, a consulting
firm, and is interested in municipal engineering. He has
experience in surveying and drafting.
Shawn is an excellent candidate for this position. He has
indicated that he would accept an offer of $10.00 per hour,
and he could start in early April.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve the hiring of Shawn Sanders
as a temporary engineer for a starting pay rate of $10.00 per
hour.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council concurs with Staff's recommendation, Council
should pass a motion directing Staff to hire Shawn Sanders as
a temporary full time engineer with a starting pay rate of
$10.00 per hour.
JOB OBJECTIVE:
SHAWN A. SANDERS
218 E. Custer
Rapid City, SD 57701
(605) 341-3317
A responsible entry level position in Civil
Engineering.
EDUCATION: B.S. Civil Engineering. South Dakota School of
Mines and Technology, December 1989
Overall G.P.A. 2.82/4.00
Departmental 3.28/4.00
EMPLOYMENT
Rapid City Journal, Circulation Department
Switchboard Operator: Answer the telephone
handling subscriber questions, complaints and
requests;.Deliver papers to carriers, to missed
customers and to newsstands.
(Spring 1988 to current)
Bell Galyardt & Associates Inc., Rapid City, SD
Assistant Surveyor: Rodman, notekeeper, and
instrumentman for various projects: Drainage
survey for Government housing project and
missile silos; Road survey on a federal highway;
Flood control and meander surveys on county
bridges. Worked in the office as a draftsman and
developed blueprints.
(Summer of 1987 and 1988)
Rapid City Area Schools, Building and Grounds
Department, Groundskeeper; Mowed and trimmed
lawns of city schools, performed small concrete
work and other odd jobs.
(Summer of 1985)
Various part-time jobs to finance education.
(1984 to 1990)
Earned 100% of college expenses.
HONORS AND
ACHIEVEMENTS: South Dakota Cement Plant Undergraduate
Scholarship, Dean's List
ACTIVITIES: Member of A.S.C.E., Student Chairperson of Rocky
Mountain Regional Conference Paper Contest:
Organized and coordinated event, 1988;
Intramural athletics.
REFERENCES: Available on request
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Admi i r
FROM: James E. Danie o
Public Works r
SUBJECT: MnDot Limited Use Permit For Trails
DISCUSSION
A portion of this summer's trail construction is proposed to
be constructed on MnDot R.O.W., adjacent to TH110 between Dodd
Road and Crown Point and adjacent to Dodd Road between TH110 and
the Standard Station. The State of Minnesota requires that
Limited Use Permits be executed wherever trails are proposed to
be constructed on their R.O.W. (See attached).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City enter into the attached
Limited Use Permit with MnDot allowing the City to construct
trails adjacent to TH110 and Dodd Road.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation,
they should pass a motion adopting Resolution 90- RESOLUTION
APPROVING LIMITED USE PERMIT BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FOR A PEDESTRIAN
WALKWAY.
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -
RESOLUTION APPROVING LIMITED USE PERMIT
BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FOR A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY
WHEREAS, a Limited Use Permit has been submitted to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said Limited Use
Permit and finds the same to be in order.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That a Limited Use Permit submitted at this meeting
be and the same is hereby approved.
2. That the appropriate City official be and is hereby
authorized to execute the Limited Use Permit on
behalf of the City of Mendota Heights.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights
this 3rd day of April, 1990.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Charles E. Mertensotto,
Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson,
City Clerk
M
S.F. 1918 (T.H. 110), and S.P. 1917 (T.H. 149)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
T,TMTT .D QSF PERMIT
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sec. 161.434 and Federal Aid
Highway Program Manual Volume 7, Chapter 4, Section 3, and Federal
Aid Program Manual Volume 6, Chapter 2, Section 5, Subsection 2,
a Limited Use Permit is granted to the City of Mendota Heights
hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant" for the purpose of
construction, maintaining and supervising a pedestrian/bicycle
trail within the rights of way of Trunk Highway No. 110 and Trunk
Highway No. 149 as shown on Exhibit "A", which is attached and
incorporated as a part of this permit. In addition, the following
special provisions shall apply.
1. The construction, maintenance, and supervision of the
pedestrian/bicycle trail will• be at no expense to the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
2. Before construction of any kind, the plans and specifications
for such construction shall be approved by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, through its District Engineer.
No permanent structures or advertising devices in any form or
size shall be constructed, placed or permitted to be
constructed or placed upon the State's Right of Way.
4. The Applicant shall furnish a performance bond acceptable to
the Commissioner of Transportation in the amount of Five
Thousand Dollars ($5,000) to cover any required work by this
Permit which remains undone by the Applicant. Said bond is
to be retained by the State until all work has been
accomplished pursuant to the submitted plans and
specifications.
.5. No commercial activities shall be allowed on State's Right of
Way -
6. All maintenance of the pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be
provided by the Applicant; this includes the installation and
removal of regulatory signs, and the enforcement relating to
the safe and proper utilization of the pedestrian/bicycle
trail.
7. This permit in non-exclusive and is granted subject to the
rights of others, including, but not limited to public
utilities which may occupy the State's right of way.
B. The Applicant will preserve and protect all utilities located
on the lands covered by this permit at no expense to the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
9. The Applicant shall construct the bikeway at the location
shown in the attached Exhibit "A" subject to verification by
the Minnesota Department of Transportation's District Engineer
so that the construction geometrics and procedures result in
bikeways that are compatible with the safe and efficient
operation of the highway facility.
10. The Applicant shall notify the Roadway Regulations Supervisor
Don Fashant, at (612) 779-1141, seven (7) days prior to
starting of its operations.
Limited Use Permit
S.P. 1917 and S.P. 1918
Page Two
11. The Applicant, upon completion of the construction of the
pedestrian/bicycle trail, shall restore all disturbed slopes
and ditches in such manner that drainage, erosion control
and aesthetics are perpetuated.
12. This permit does not release the Applicant from any liability
or obligation imposed by Federal Law, Minnesota Statutes,
local ordinances, or other agencies relating thereto shall be
obtained by the Applicant.
13. Any use permitted by this permit shall remain subordinate to
the right of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to
use the property for highway and transportation purposes.
This permit does not grant any interest whatsoever in land,
nor does it establish a permanent park, recreation area or
wildlife or waterfowl refuge facility that would become
subject to Section 4 (f) of the Federal Aid Highway Act of
1968, nor does this permit establish a Bike Trail or
Pedestrian Way which would require replacement pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes (1976) 160-264-
14. This permit shall be subject to cancellation and termination
by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for any cause
or reason, by giving the Applicant 60 days written notice of
such action. Upon cancellation of said permit the
pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be removed within 60 days at
no cost to the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
15. The Applicant for itself, its heirs, its personal
representatives, successors in interest and assigns, agrees
to abide by the provisions of Title VI Appendix C of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, to the end that in accordance with
the Act, Regulations, and other pertinent directions, no
person in the United States, shall on the grounds of race,
color, or national origin, be excluded from, or denied use of
the pedestrian/bicycle trail.
16. The Applicant will hold harmless and indemnify th State, its
Commissioner of Transportation and employees from liability
claims for damages because of bodily injury, death, property
damage, sickness, disease, or loss and expense arising from
the Applicants operations or its successors and assigns from
the Applicants use of the portion of highway right of way over
which this permit is granted.
17. The Applicant will hold harmless and indemnify the State, its
Commissioner of Transportation and employees from claims
resulting from the temporary or permanent termination of trail
user rights on any portion of highway right of way over which
this permit is granted.
Limited Use Permit
S.P. 1917 and 1918
Page Three
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
By;
District Engineer
Date Date:
APPROVED BY:
COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BLDG.
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155
By: By:_
Director, Office of Right of Way
Date: Date:
The Commissioner of Transportation
by the execution of this permit
certifies that this permit is
necessary in the public interest
and that the use intended is for
public purposes.
This instrument was drafted by the
State of Minnesota, Department of
Transportation, Reconveyance Unit
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
''��Marrch 28, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City AdmXJn4;A-ator
FROM: James E. Danieso
Public Works Dir
SUBJECT: Marie Avenue Trail
MSA Variance Application
DISCUSSION
There are two vertical curves on Marie Avenue associated
with the "steep hill" by Callahan Place that are not in
compliance with today's MSA standards. At the March 6, 1990
meeting, Council authorized staff to request a variance from MSA
standards allowing the curves to remain as constructed and to be
able to get MSA funding assistance for the Marie Avenue Trail
construction.
Staff has now learned that the MSA Variance Committee will
not meet until sometime in June. This means that the City may
not be able to get MSA approval for the project until sometime in
the middle of the summer. MSA rules do not allow an award of any
contracts until MSA approvals have been gained.
In order for the City to proceed with the project now, MSA
staff members have suggested that the City apply for a second
variance that would allow the City to apply for and receive MSA
funds after award of the contract.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City request a second variance
from MSA standards allowing funding of the Marie Avenue project
after award of the contract.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation
they should pass a motion adopting Resolution 90 -
RESOLUTION REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE M.S.A. STANDARDS FOR
MARIE AVENUE (T.H. 149, DODD ROAD TO DELAWARE AVENUE) M.S.A.
PROJECT NO. 140-101-01 (IMPROVEMENT NO. 89, PROJECT NO. 6B)
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO 90 -
RESOLUTION REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE M.S.A. STANDARDS FOR
MARIE AVENUE (T.H. 149, DODD ROAD TO DELAWARE AVENUE)
M.S.A. PROJECT NO. 140-101-07 (IMPROVEMENT NO. 89, PROJECT
NO. 6B)
WHEREAS, to promote safer pedestrian traffic, the City
of Mendota Heights desires to upgrade Marie Avenue (Dodd Road
to Delaware) in the summer of 1990; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to take bids on the proposed
walkway project in May in order to complete the project in a
timely fashion; and
WHEREAS, M.S.A. rules require that the state -aid
engineer approve only those plans that meet M.S.A. standards;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has already applied
for a variance to M.S.A. standards which will not be acted
upon until May or June; and
WHEREAS, M.S.A. standards do not allow a City to apply
for M.S.A. funds after a contract is let; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights wishes to receive
funding for segment "B" of the Marie Avenue project if the
variance previously applied for is granted,
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, to request a
variance to the M.S.A. Rule Number 8802.2800 subp. 2 that
provides that only those projects for which plans are
approved by the state -aid engineer prior to the award of
contract are eligible for state -aid construction funds.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights this 3rd day of April 1990.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By:
Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 3, 1990
General Contractors Licenses
Aren & Sons
Countryside Pools, Inc.
Daak Construction
M.J. Moser Construction
Rick Broten Construction
Sather Roofing & Alum. Siding
Worth Construction, Inc.
Heating & Air Conditioning Licenses
Fre rlc son Heating & A/C, Inc.
Twin City Plumbing & Heating
Gas Piing License
Fredrickson Heating & A/C, Inc
Excavating Licenses
Holst Excavating
Jacobsen Excavating
LeRoux Excavating, Inc.
Concrete Licenses
DayCo Concrete Co.
Stockness Construction
April 3, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
CLAIMS LIST SUMMARY:
Total Claims $ 99,708.96
Significant Claims
MWCC Monthly bill 32,996.41
Winthrop Weinstine Feb legal 6,760.77
Unusual Claims
Boyum Equipment plow wings 25,000.00
Braslau Associates Air Nois@, 5,130.50
Gun & ub WMO annual fee 1,322.00
Kraus Anderson sac refund 11,050.00
m
ID
.10
m
m
0-4 z
m �•
v
-!
or ID a
MCA
M
MCA
IT o
I Cn
C)
M
•" � r
0
m I W w W Www
0
M5
I NNn)rorp
n
1 �+�'µ µ
1, X-
N 9�,
7
y
7
L
z
y
7
91
7
O
7
in m
a
m-
a
v
aaaaaa
m
aaaaa
v
aaaaa
<
m wN
n n
tn
1A
n
N
µ
n
N
r7 n n n n v
n
N
ri -i -1 -1 -1
n
DI
A!
n N 0
Iu x
7
x
C
x
I I `S I I 'i
x
r1a2&
x
-!
�•
-1
N•
�
n n � Q Q 4
-t
-I d -•I � •i
-i
a
a 5
d z
y
z
DZ
z
ID
z
N
z
n)
z a+ z
Q
z 3
'3
a
4 n g n 0 0
3
3
=
30
r
a
n
ro
ro nro n nro
7
1a
Cr
7
0
7
�3
3 z z z 3 z
N0
A0
zr
0
z
ZT
j
Di
Ai
ID
AI
AI
S O 3 :
Al
FI
N
M
n
n
n
s
n
n
ID
x
z
x
x
x
n
m m w m m n
y
4
z
M
z
0
`
f
r
M C et M r1•
C
0
3
3
Dr y Dr y y
3
3
-
(D
ID
F
M
IIA
N 0)
N•
CF
tr
CJ
N
n
�s
N
i
N
5
Cn
5
5
W
5 5 5 5 5 5
ro
S µ 5 9 5
µ
5 5 5 5 5
a
co
L+
u
N F+ + N 4+
4+ Lo I+ L , µ
N N CQ { M
n
!
1 1
n
b
r r r r r
�1t•r1 t•r
Q
b
w
r
'W WJ>W W W
r)Nn)Nr)
NNrdoru
c
r.)
5
0
95 w0955
µµµµµ
µµµµµ
CA
Q
5
ISO 0 USCn
55555
55955
rt
5
5
5
55µ5µ5
591 51 51 9{
I
55 I 5µ
CD
r9w
5
5
L9
5
5
5
CDw0WµW
55 10555
van VCnr9
99555
CAW5•Dµ
99!A55
0
a
N•�
rt to
I
I
I
1 1{ 1! 1
I I! I I
i I I I I
5
LA
5
07w5wµW
V0)VCA'')
UIWµ•l µ
5
5
5
5510555
95556
55CA55
w
3v
AI N.
3 5
a D1
Q
rt r -
O N•
m
N•
w
7
K
N
Tl
b
3
3
- 333
Naaaa
'-113ro aro
--• - µms
as a
n
n
rt
tr
N
N
N N N w w w
a i i i:
a a
3
eta Lu N I.. Ir
n
n
n n n n n n
n n n
s
000 V, C.
Dl
A 0 N 0 m
•L y n 1 n
ID
I I I I I
<
N
N
m N N N N N
<<<<
0)
ti b
n
ro
ro
ro
rororororoLA
�nnnn
rti N
K
Oro
N
N N N N N N
ui N
O h
UI
2
U
olI
b
tt
bW co N 0% U,
O U, OO OO
Iljtia Ca
O 5 W Fl �q
b k0 N N
rt
M
O
N
{• 1 44
4, I
N
10 I t0
m I T
µ! N IU to
p I µ µ µ
µ!
U
N I Ln
5 1 5
Cn I V 1ptpV)µrA
m I µ555W
5 1 —No w
a
t)
Ch I CO
I
I R, to
I r• cn cn cn �
'MI µ
20
'o'
5 15
CO CO
J I P
t0 V W •L+ •1
µ 15µCA9 Dµ
t0
t0 1 CANw W0'l
U LA 0? V
w I� (D raW w
C
W
c
IO
ct
tD
N•
a
a
a
a
a a
a
z
a
11w
r
ro
ro
ro
to
ro ro
fD
cna
ID
i5
3
3
3
3
a 3
3
3 ro
3
w
ro
a
v
-I
-o
a
ro
a
v a v
a
*0
a
aro m 3
70
z
f+
0
I r
0 M
I u
0
!+ I >s
0
0 I
0
0"
I
ro 0 'n
, y
w
n
M
n;
n
M
5 1 5
n
M to I W
n M Q, I a to . n
M
V 1 V
n
M
CD I m m
x
n
5 's
7
1
7
•y
.i
y
3
y
7 y 7
y
T
y
7
n
ro
w
n
to
ID
n
ro
n
ro w bb ro
-
W
m
-
m-
<
m
wM
n
N
0
n
n
o
n
N
m
n_
N
n N y m n
N
0
n
N
0 0
ro
n
ro N
ID
r.
x
v
X
%
X
3
X << x
x
y y
Z
x
iO
a
s
a
c
a
M
M
z
ro
w•
z
ro
z
ro
W•z
ro . �•
z m -_ O. a•. z
ro
`a
z
ID
a. a
0
z
3
N.
,-
3
tO
c
a
b
c
3
�
c•'
3 N
70
r• � ,.
-0 w
�
a
c
ro
E
V-0
y
ti
3
or
a
'O
a
ro
3
3
a
N
W
3 ,' 3
w
a I "s or
M
A
3
a
tit
0 0
Y, `I1
z
3
a
ro
n
ID
n
^'
D
n
M
ID
n 0
p n y yr- ID
n
ro
n
ti
ro
n
i
w.
y
3
ro
,
ID
n
ro
t
ro ID
ro ,,
ro
Z$
.0
y
fp
n
ro
n
y
n
n y y
m
n
M M
0
x
0
x
M
x
N
x
X c c
x
x
ro ro
It
z
z
c N N
c
LLi
N
c
n i)
3
n
3
3
M
3
3- In 1n
=
3
0 0
a
a
a
a
a'' 0 0
(J'
a
3 3
ro
ro
ro
ro In
ro n n
m
ro
s 3
El
r)
c
µ
5
a z ro
V
N N
u,
n
n o
N. �-
M
00
N
Zi z
roro
ii
N N
5
ro
5
µ
5
M T
F+
cn
m
I
1
I
t
t
1 t
t
I I
n
.C•
•�
r
•r
r
rtl
ri
r r
0
cl
rp
w
w
ro
ro ro
5
r r
c
Ell
µ
5
5
ri ro
µ
ro roz
5
µ
cn
Uµ
5 5
5
cn Cn
�+
I
r V
I
•C•
I
5
I
5
I
•D
I I
5 5
!!
Cµ W
N
µ
ro
V
V
r4
5 5
n
CA
5
5
5
5
Si 5
5 C1
0.
M
!
!
1
1
I
I I
I I
ro
X
5
5
5 5
5
5
5 5
0
-n n
•
3 y
ro W
3
a N
0
Mr
y w.
N
M
M.
M
N
w.
'm�.
N•
•O
ro 10
ro ro
0
o
as
n
to
n
n
N
zz
I y
'n
N Nm
In
z
n
N
NN
<<
s
y y
0
r) m
M
n
E
N
K
]0
w•
K
�
•
N
a
ro
N
r
g
N
ro
N
Cn
I
M'
n
.
7
n; I r,;
I,ro,ro
;nicn
ro
cotta
VI V
I:nlcN•n
wlwu;
5
❑; ro
kI
tl
V V
V 1 V
9 1 1-tl
5 5
Cn Cn 0b
r�
i
5 1 5
5
1 5
I b
N i til
UI 15 CA
i
5 1 5
i
V 1-L,
0
h
Cn
5 1 5
OI
1 01
5 I 5
ro I ro
5 1 5 5
5 1 5
V 1 •.,
c
..ro
.r
ro
i
•
N I N
r0 I I W I W N I N w 1 N N
n �! r4 I W ra ri b 1 r+i Cn
5 1 5 5 I 5 5 I 5 U I 47 •b I U b 5 1 5
5 1 5 5 1 5 5 I 5 5 I 5 5 1 ry b 5 I 5
ED ca
xiu r+
!
V I V
I
Mj i W 0
M I M
M I a
CI'
V w
ti
OI
ID
N
N
N
m
C n -•1
ID
1 5
3
a
3
5
8
3
3
3 7 Oi
5
W.
v
ro -i
ro
-i
v
-4
v
-3
v
-1
v
-1
a rD a
v
�
Cv i Clt
I N
I N
1 N
I N
0 M
I N
ri w
I M
5 1 5
n
ct t0
I til
n it ED
l b
n
a V
I 14
n
c'I' N
l a a
n
ct CO
I Cn
n
et .b
I t,
n
vr
+••+
ID
m
ID
G9
01
a
0! G1
01
ri
N
[�
OI
N
n
O1
W N
Q
N
0
0 N
c
r)
N
0
r)
In
0 0
n
N
M
r)
N
a
11
N
Z
N
0
n, t0
Z�
r,
x
x
0
x
0 0
x
D
x
11
X
N11
x
J
M
-i
a
-1
a s
-4
tr
-t
eP
-i
w
a
z 5
13
z
IG
z Ol
n
z
IO
E
z
ID
`C K
z
0
DI
z
to
ct
0
z
3
8
yi
C 3
C
3
W.
C
3
ID 01
-'
8
v
3
N
r
g
s
`'
v
3 v
r
3
v
N
3
v
0) m
3
v
7
3
v
3
ro
<
a
it
y
a
cr
a
N
a
v
!+
tr
N
Q
z
a
D
@
n
w•
m n
ID
n
O)
n
ID
n
N
n
��
n
0)O
C9N
4
, 7
r
;
7
M
i
s
7
ID
;
7
a
-S
u
n
8
y
zr
O
0)
ID
01
01 ID
ID
ID
c
Oi
0
01
I)
1
0
x
Q
a
0
Z
11
0
N
r)
ti
x
0
x
0
x
x
<<
x
x
M
x
0
�•
z
tri
z
z
M
z
j 0
z
z
7-
<
3
i
C
ID 10
r
N
r
°v
ul
cr
m
u
m m
v
cr
Cr
ID
N
ID
c t
01
,NS
M
i
Cq
M
M
H
M
'; •'
N
M
(D
N
N
5
�0
b
V
U N
a
C0
W
n
5
N
W
5
N
b
I
v
5
N
a
5 5
N
CO
5
N
4
5
N
W
5
T
0
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
1
0
-0
47•
t
-
�
r
b
D
N
w W
W
W
W
c
5
5
5
a
wW
5
5
5
3
r)
5
•�
b
5 5
5
rn
C0
M
5
9
5
4.1 b
9
5
9
n
n
h
C
5
b
I b
b
C0
C0
0
N•
5
5
5
r0
5 5
5
5
5
a
t+
N
x
C•
C
5
b
r+5 n,
b
C0
CO
5
5
5
CO
os
5
5
5
0
n
a D,
ID w.
'
3 3
0
�r
y w .
N
i sr
.
N
M
cat
N
0
0
w u
m
'
0
W.11
n
m
11
61
Ul
ti
5
OI r0
01
Q
0
a
X
N
N
OI
Q
n
0
N
N
N
n
m
n
v
0
v
v
cI
00
3
r0
'
N
x
rr
p
X
N
ID
4
y
N I N
r0 I I W I W N I N w 1 N N
n �! r4 I W ra ri b 1 r+i Cn
5 1 5 5 I 5 5 I 5 U I 47 •b I U b 5 1 5
5 1 5 5 1 5 5 I 5 5 I 5 5 1 ry b 5 I 5
ED ca
xiu r+
!
V I V
I
Mj i W 0
M I M
M I a
CI'
ro ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
14 m
0 5H
r
W 5
ro M
µ 5 µ
5
�!
ro
a
a
a
a
a
a
r
a
r
z
a
�nw
rro
n
m
m
m
r
m
5r
m
5
cna
v
�s5 -
m
cn
!:n
m
5
5
b ro
cr
T
ti
.
9
9
M
—;
b
a
ro
v
a
m ra
70
a
r•) r.)
'U•
a
r.)
'0
a
r.)
a
a
5
v
a
d' v
•C
v
5
ro I ro
�l
n
n W
ct m!
I
m
h
n I
c+. cn I cn
s7
0 1
M tr t
h
n ro
ct W
1
I W
0
9 I ro
c4 h; I rJ
r1
n r
ct rO
I ro N
1•^ •A
0
n
ct
ID n
�' y
S
S
y
5
5
5
u
911
n
y
H
N X
�
X
V X
m
W 'o
tD
M
w M
In
M
H H
M
u
`
m
w a+
N 11
n
m
ZI
n
N N
n
N y
n
m
-1
n
N a
n
N
n
N
m
n
r;a
v
x
c
x
n
x
c
x
<
x
m
x
nn
x
y ..
x
to
a c
a
c*
a %
a I✓
a
N
a Z
a
a
n
b 5
N
m
z
�
z
Z
Z
w
z
z
3
1
3
n
r
X
cf
j
a
?
3
`f
13 D
3
-b
a
W c
3
ti 0)
3
-0
G1
3
7
3
•D
1? 70
a
13
3
U
N
3
Cr
w•
t7
'S
or
X
a
N
d'
`C
z
7
n 4
ID
h
z
ID
t7
ID
y N
To
Cl
n
N
r) N•
10
0
l< X
!D
n
9
n)
N
7 ID
7
c
11
7 tp
;
7 ID
Is
7
<
i
z' ct
i
7
wi
z
3
i
16 I
N
Cr
ID i
N
y
ID
ro
ID
0
N
ID
n N
n
U
"
n
n
n
n n
n
as
c�
I
x n
x
w•
x
N
x
x
'Il
x n
x
c. I 4a
x
N
n
,
z
cntcn
z
7
µtµ
z
mimes
z
z
I
5 5
zLa
W I ED
z
CB 1 •.19
z
3
C
5 1 5
m l m
b I b
5 1 S
d
S 1 5
c
7J
5! 5
W I W
5 1 5
m 1 m
5 1 S
ro 1 t m
c
! y
-s
.
3
Er
tr
ro
cr
U
U
a
t7
tr
N
0
10
ID
ID
10
N
0
'
N•
ro
ro
ro
r;
r;
ro
ro
ro
.t
n
m
cn
r
w
ro
µ
5
m
ro ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
14 m
0 5H
r
W 5
ro M
µ 5 µ
5
�!
ro
n
n
r
r
r
r
r
r
rro
r)
Cn
r
W
5r
W
5
W 4
m
cn
!:n
m
5
5
b ro
cr
9
9
tv
µ
•�
5
µ
h
C7
m
5
V
CO
td
ro
�
n
w•
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
cl
cl
V
1+
N
`<
Oti
5
W
1
C;
S
S
5
5
5
5
5
n
H
� •L
3 3
4 N
0
ct r•
y ..
N
ct
m
LEI
Ln
7
cf
N
ED
Il
n
N
N
N
N
`C
U •b
ro
y
<
N
<
y y
3
n
n
'0
n
s
l< X
M
N
N
i
N
n
X
7
tn
l[1
y
N N
N
�
cn
"
c�
I
N
c. I 4a
~ I H
I �
,
n
cntcn
rlro
o
51s
µtµ
5i5
mimes
5 i 5
N V
5 5
5 1 5
W I ED
t5) I ro
CB 1 •.19
3
5 1 5
m l m
b I b
5 1 S
W i W
S 1 5
GI I P m
7J
5! 5
W I W
5 1 5
m 1 m
5 1 S
ro 1 t m
c
! y
-s
.
N 1
u 1
�!
b
r 4 I r6
4• 1 4.
r.; I ro
es i 9
U7 i V]
CA I M n;
V Cn I Ln
N 1 to
rD I co
5 1 ri V
m 1 10
m 1 En
5 1 5 UI 5
r
5 .J I u;
LA I CA
5 1 5
ro I w CA
5; 5
rL 1 W
ro
ro
ro
ro
LO
ro
ro
ro
�'
ro
cna
ro
'f 9'.
CA
wz
a
a
v
a
o
a
a
a
v
a
v
a
a
a
11 rD
13
Cs
O w
I W
O W
I W
O W
I W
0 0)
I W W
O w
I W
0 ry
I ru
0 0)
f ro ro ro
ro n v
s` 9)
' Ln
n
It .11
I�
n
ct W
l w
n
ct N
I rtt
n
ct ro
1 u
n
ct 5
1 5
n
ct tD
I w
n
ct 4
I ro rA n
; Y.
n
5
z
at
7
!U
7
D.
n•
W
T
0)
S
ti
7
W
7
r
ro
-
r
rD
-
r
TO
—
r
ro
r r
ro
-
r
ro
r
X
ro
a a a
<
ro
W
ro
n
N
Di
n
N
W
n
N
D)
n
N
n
N
n
Nn
N
7 77
ro
n
N t0 -
ro
x
F
x
0
:$x
x
3 3
x
M
x
rD
x
0 0 0
Z
x
to
n
a
e
a
a
a
a
a
a
8
a
3 8 3
a
z 19
z
ro
0
z
ro
ro
z
ro
z
ro
nn
z
ro
r
z
ro
ro
z
ro
m N W
0
z
3
r
3
C
3
=
3
a
3
=
3
3
3
N N in
r
Cr
YJ
Cr
a
Cr
Cr
Cr
Cr
N
Cr
x X x
z
U
N
ro
Cl
rD
n
ro
rD
n
7
ro
n
a s
rD
n
ro
n
ro
ro
n
z Ci z
w
rD
S
Z,
11
7
7
a
S
7
zr
S
7
'S
,
:'
C fr C
3
r0
ro
ro
F
ro
7 2
ro
ro
ro
ct ct ct
r0
ct
ro
X
X
X
W
r
7 7 7
X
W
X
z
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
b
3
1
cr
ro
v
ID
m m
�n
.
m
W.
t°
w
w
w
is
w
w
ro
N
!
Ln
w
ro
5
to
ro
w
w
w
w
w
r,
ro
S
5
t r
5
ro
5
5 5
5
5
t0
5
03
M.
ii
L+
N K
fy
V
C9 9 to
rbH
1
I
1
I
1 1
I
1
1 1 1
n
r
r
r
r
.r ro
n)
r
r r r
0
W
rrr
c
W
5
5
W
WJ
.5i
K
Ln
5
w
5
F.
LA
5
U LA LA
I
w
I
r•+
1
5
I
�
I
5
r
•h
1 1 1
�•+ 5
n
n
µ
..
w
U
ni
W
5 5 5
0
w•
5
5
5
5
5
5
rA N 5
R
ct
ro
C9
W
V
ro
C9
5.
5
5
5
&
5
5
LA Cn 5n'A
n
s~
`
3 �
•
ro w.
Cs 3
nN
0
ct r
N
� M
ID
W
`
III
7 .
ct
N
7
<
8
3)i;
b3v
n
'[I 'p
'0
•Z)
10 W. Y
0
ID
rD
r)
in
0
0 O
Q
9 w rD
r0
<
0
:n
s s
w
M n
n
v
ro ro
ID
ro Ct
It
3 3
N
rD
0
N
y
N
rD w.
Cl
N.
N
Cr
ra
ro
N 1
u 1
�!
b
r 4 I r6
4• 1 4.
r.; I ro
es i 9
U7 i V]
CA I M n;
V Cn I Ln
N 1 to
rD I co
5 1 ri V
m 1 10
m 1 En
5 1 5 UI 5
r
5 .J I u;
LA I CA
5 1 5
ro I w CA
5; 5
rL 1 W
X 1 5 5 4
LO
�'
ro
I '
CA
47.
r
rJ
W
W
W
w
'a
U 'a 4 D
w•
C0 -"-
y 5
M
ni I r;
1 0) rj Ca Cn
Cn ! Ca
cn
u ca Ln Q
µ
M
Ln n
ro
!,1 N N
N
m
N
r
rrr
r.
L,rwr
m
r
rr o
m
N "0 ro
L4
m
r
CJ
CJ W
5
w�
5
Nr.`r
ry
S
Will
3 3
cn W ca 105
Ca
Cn Ca ct
.t
Cn J. rn
4
5 5
xm
a
U
�I }^ !
0
a
Cn
+ 5
a -•
I
'p
a
I' r
W ru ri)
D
-{
t
Cn
TJ
-4 1
F�
a' m 3
TJ
3
5
S
S5
7 7
CJ
! W
4 Ca
I LJ W CJ
LO 4a
n CJ
i W
CJ !
"U'31
N N
4 5 1
CW
m n 'a
ti+ y
M I.• ,..
::,
rt 1
5 5 5
Cl
ct U)
! Ul
n
rt iu
i aCJ C6 fA
C)
M �7
! �!
n
Mp
!
0,
n
r. Cn !
CnJ Cil
, z
n
5 i
T
4
3 3 3
4o
-
3
m
+
3333
m
=•
3
m
3
m
Is �.
n
In
W.
n
L1
Y•
n
N
m m m m
n
N
n
N
n
N
m m
m
n
rJ 14
a
x
Cs
x
x
MMMM
r,
x
b
x
rD
x
u7
m
z
m
z
m
m
z
m
z
m
LO
z
m
w
z
m
C.
z
3
0
=
W.
M
j
N ,D
.•.
.,
3
'4
'o
Li
3
v
M
�
•p
11
3
)
LF
�• u• `•
Or
Y}
tT
SJ '� N m
Cr
a
u
3
Lr
r'. n
z
Cr
S J rl
rD
7
�' �• F'
!o
0
,
m
7
N N N N
N
n
m
Cl
M
1D
n
N N
a
m
7
r
7
�•
i
MttMM
7
n
7
S
7
3
?
m L7
m
tom"
m
nl
mmmm
m
m
i
v
m
n
n
w D. m
n
t
n
n
n
ro
n
x
Fn
to
z
z
n
z
N
z
M
C
met ro
MctMM
C
m
J
- M la
i I '.
.�.,
N
J
.7 N
Cr
m m m
6
U
p n r, r_
or
m
m
rom
m
H
m
n7
s
N
r
0 0
n r1
W
n
iJ
W
rr
c•�
5
v7
ro
0)
cn
47.
r
rJ
W
W
W
w
'a
U 'a 4 D
w•
C0 -"-
y 5
M
ni I r;
1 0) rj Ca Cn
Cn ! Ca
cn
u ca Ln Q
µ
M
Ln n
ro
!,1 N N
N
n n M M
N
r
rrr
r.
L,rwr
r
r
rr o
b
N "0 ro
L4
Cn r Q. r
r
CJ
CJ W
5
55S
5
Nr.`r
ry
S
Will
3 3
cn W ca 105
Ca
Cn Ca ct
.t
Cn J. rn
4
5 5
m N
N N
f3
S 5 5
Cn
+ 5
S
5
Gs a
i
ry
I' r
W ru ri)
!
I i
m a
t
Cn
!
W
I I m
1 V
F�
555
Cn
5 5
5
S
S5
DI 3�3
N
1i'In zz
NLb
N
33 n
_S y v y
'a
U 'a 4 D
w•
'a
y 'L n
5 Cn ! W r -7
ni I r;
1 0) rj Ca Cn
Cn ! Ca
r I r
V 1 W til Z
ro
!,1 N N
N
n n M M
N
N
N N m
<
5 I S
7777
5 5
W I W
< a, Zi
nnn
rE3u3> ;
n< 0
d
N N _
n N
m
3 3
N N
y y
n
nn
7 7
LO 4a
N N
W I W
:ri I rJ W C�i
Cn I U
u1 I V r,; Cn
!
CJ ! W
40 I V1 W n; N
5 Cn ! W r -7
ni I r;
1 0) rj Ca Cn
Cn ! Ca
r I r
V 1 W til Z
4 0 M
5 1 S
r 1 5 N 5
ro ro
r l r
5 1 m Ell C,
Gg? rg s i Cn Cn
5 I S
I ¢, r r n S
5 5
W I W
5 i Cn Ca r
n n
y i
M
t
N
h
4
tl
v, n n
5 5 9 5
J7JU•G �U
'.I G�] p
r)
,l
ID
mm
m
nn
5
v
:1 rbr;
5
w
5
WwtJ WLJW V
�
y:. :}
s
�.
5 5
i:.
w s.. :v t., :-+ w ,�•
w M r K
Ai nim :*
0
N
5y..
m
LOA
3 a a C^-
cr
y
V
Z n -•1
ID
S
,�
•`.-555LA{3
55
N C�
W r? LA
r)
-P VCA
Q
s "v ti
5
;
u;
8
w.
C7
r
LA C1
�j
OEll wN
l -a U
r4 2 N.
N I - kal
17 m 3
-1
3
tY) 1 VLA
r4 ' vj
5 i b ry
5 i 5
d! LA L CO 4.1 LA •h G.
V 1
•. It, .b •4 L C
C,'. W
Q ru
I p 1
rD 0 J
.tj I LA ED
a
^,
cr p
1 V V
n
cf m
I rn
'1
rr S
1 LA LA
nC•
<r
i •b
Cl
ct
+; w W WW W w W
rl
I -Jn
i ru r:; r6
x
n
5,
J•
y
7
y
3'
7
L
7
2:
1
�a
m
'-`
1
D
w
33
m
-
i
m
33 33 3 3.;
r
rDD
Wu
�• h
C'I
4 Q
t]
N
W.
m
w. W.
t)
:n
W.
rj
61
u. w. w. w. w. ,.. w.
7
N
w. w
m
Q
M LO
cf x
'S ;
x
3
r
3 3
r.
3
r.
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
x
3 3q
3
r.
to
w
cr K
-{
3
-•I
3 3
rl
3
•.{
3 3 3 3 3 3
-i
- 3 3
,
a 5
7
QQ
3
m
z
u
mm
i
m
m
3
:�
m m m mm m
D
3
m
?
3
3
.n
..
3
'h
C
3
N N
z3
N
N N N n N If. A!
C
3
:4 3
,
w
U
3
m
Q
3
m
Q Q
-0
Q
3
L
0000000
3
a
zzcIt
�J
rf i
tr
N
CI
ct .r
ff
ct
r
M r. st t rt ct r.
t
Er
FD m
n
7 �r
m
C1
ci
rD
n
t 2'
m
n
'�
%a
n
y •a y •a a •a •a
m
n
C a
"}ri
ID
i
7
Q
7
i
7
,
7
`t
3'
i
7
W ^,• L
a
,
m
x'.
m
mm0ww0-Tm
m
u
m
m,
n
Q
n
,:
n
m
mvmmmmm
?
3 3 3 3 3 3
x
r
Q •n
n
-t:
u. w.
m
Q
Z
z
-fl
-t3
3
j
zr c,• r; ct M ct ct
-
u.
Lr
to
m
m
:�
N
m
•r�aaaaaa
m
� 3�
S
N
N N N
�!
A
LA
D
3 3 3„ 3 3
f l
nj
t
N
h
4
tl
v, n n
5 5 9 5
J7JU•G �U
'.I G�] p
r)
ID
mm
m
nn
5
v
:1 rbr;
5
w
5
WwtJ WLJW V
w W V .1
y:. :}
s
�.
5 5
i:.
w s.. :v t., :-+ w ,�•
w M r K
Ai nim :*
0
N
5y..
m
LOA
3 a a C^-
cr
y
V
�•5
"3
55
,�
•`.-555LA{3
55
N C�
W r? LA
r)
-P VCA
Q
s "v ti
5
;
u;
'355LA5
x, 5
N
w
aax'aaa
v, n n
J7JU•G �U
'.I G�] p
0 tn
ID
mm
m
nn
5
v
�r -r
u
•m a
a
;
ti
;
w
a, �,
m m ti ni m Ai
Ai nim :*
0
N
i
m
i a 3 3 a
3 a a C^-
cr
• i}
N C�
Q
C7
r
LA C1
�j
OEll wN
l -a U
r4 2 N.
N I - kal
0 C n; • .,
rU ! rJ
tY) 1 VLA
r4 ' vj
5 i b ry
5 i 5
d! LA L CO 4.1 LA •h G.
V 1
C,'. W
Cl ! -St
U 1 r U
5 i 5
.tj I LA ED
^,
rbni
5 1 :a
r 15•r
5 1 5
to ! LA5 C -a5'} Q)
5 155ti
a
r ft
a
Cn
•a
Cn
a
Cn
a
a
t•
a
i
a
5 5
i:j
a
�� f,,
Cy
FJ
5
lLl
�•,•
_ �
in m
a
U, 1 M
.•i m
m
nn
<<
<
m
o
5 1 5
5 1 5
n
i
i
J
I
i
j
I
UI
t it
I
n
(J
i
L,
•D •P
t• •i
ro
a
•Q
•'� 1J
41
-'i ti
I
:a
"1
•ij
a
Cy
•V'
`-'I
•Q
a
•TJ
=�
a
U I ,
5 CJ
g Cn 1 Cn
iG i;;
Q 5 I CR Cn
C. 5
i1 CR
0 Cn I CR
Q
C•^. ( CA
q 4.1 1 t`
Q
R 0
moi,
�` •L
CR i f,
C2
rT ? i D
C1
M ON I W W
C,
+ p
IV r`j
11
1 1
0, CJ
W
W 1 W
7
M i.•zr
W 5
5 5
5
t9
5 5
5 5
5
r
;J
;0
'0
@
- Q 0
m
N.
0 0
@
`L
@
I
m
L
m
G
m
CJ w
n
r?
@
Iq k Y,
N
fi R.
m
N C.
r)
D7
5 cv
m
I
m
N
m
m
id iU
In
A
a In M
-+
n 0
a -r
a
d
a
-•i
CL
r, 5
@ M
7
@
f
@ 7
L
m
P.
z
fn ^.
@
n
<
is
ij L7
3
A
3
a
N N
3
7J
N•8
7
'i
3
@
f
4,
rJ
a (A
U
M It
ti
-i
17
N
tit
Z
t"f
D
Cl ":
@
h tJ m
n,
m
@
Cl
T
"i
1
IO
i,
,Y
1
y
@
@Z,@
< <
m
In To
to it
II
m
Ti
m nx
5 1
x M
X'
x
X
n
@ @
m'm
m
i':i
a
w
_
z
c
n n
m it
Q
p C.
Lr
v
x
a
r;
Qr
4�
@
@
@
'b m
m
m
�
�
�
�
�
f �
CR
C1
C 9
Cn
CR
t•
i`
r q
•p
W
Cd
F.
b
u7
:`j
r ft
m 7
Cn
Cn
Cn
r 1
p
t•
•C•tj
i
CJ
5 5
i:j
5 fj
�.+
Cy
FJ
5
lLl
�•,•
_ �
in m
a
U, 1 M
.•i m
m
nn
<<
<
m
o
5 1 5
5 1 5
n
i
i
z M
I
i
I
UI
t it
I
n
(J
i
L,
•D •P
t• •i
•C
4'
41
•L
':, W
i d id
Cy
W CJ
i,J
ft,
ox
5
5 CJ
iG i;;
W
Cn
iu
Ui CR
CR u
moi,
C?
5
of
I
µ
1 I
5 9
1 1
0, CJ
W
I
W 5
5 5
5
t9
5 5
5 5
5
r
:y
a
t
I I
t 1
I
I
I
@
5
5 cv
9 55
5
m 7
s
5 1 5
i
S
3
fV I t0 W
5 I CR v'
CR I Cl
•C k•
m
5 3
y v
in m
1 5 5
U, 1 M
5 1 5
m
nn
<<
<
m
o
5 1 5
5 1 5
n
5 1 r
x
z M
n•
UI
t it
L,
d r
re
W CJ
C7 C1
J !
5 1 5
�: 1
CR i C1
•E• ! t
fV I t0 W
5 I CR v'
CR I Cl
•C k•
5 i 5
� 1 D
1 5 5
U, 1 M
5 1 5
.b i-t�
N I
5 i `3
zl 1 v
5 1 5 5
5 1 5 5
5 1 5
5 1 5
N I id
5 1 r
r:
IA
N
J^
ci•
C9
5 5
5 5
of 5
ro w ni 5 w 5 5
J 5
Or 5
U 2D
N w
I i!
w
•k• �.'tJ rrl (�' 1•+
tYJ
UI
n
W
N 0 N N in In N
i
L
5 1 5
a
5 1 5 CO 15 U 0 U C9 5 CR
r r
a
w
ra•rrr.�r•
i
.�
cr
a
w
'-`
a
f,J
w
a
5
z
-i
T
N
5
N
rD
5
rA
rD
C1
5
2
!
f.} :j
I
w
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
ww w. -www
1
�j
T
C•l
t4 rJ
r0
C i) -i
rD
`• 5
5 5
r4
3
rj N rj N rV rj r;l
fy
3
S
1 I
3
I l l i i I I
3
I
3
w
5565m.•w
5
2i u
rlw•
5 5
U
-i
5 5 !ti 5 5 C1: 5
U
a
U
a
U
a •F•
i
U
-•!
TI
••i
'b
a
C N a
U
3
Q)
rf.
r tro 1
to
0 JA
I r1
0 5
1 Q rR C8 ro Cq rJi r9
-_In
rq
I LA
n C•i
I rq
rD � ;.
w y
ry Ci
j wm
Cl
ct •S 1
,g
Cl
N• ID
I W
Cl
ct O
rD 1 0 CO M r*, 0) U
0
cr J
1 -J
C I
• •+ n
I M
Cl
n
t
0
5 i
7
•L
7
y
1'
7
ID
7
y
S
y
7
m
7
N rD
W
0
W
ID
4
ri)
Nr
r' r- r' r- r" I-
rD
L)
10
M
0
rD
<
:L
Cl -
n
UI
ct
n
Ul
cf
n
N
n
M
n
!.1
N
n
N
n
Ip
n
r0 0
x
x
x
r
x
mmrQU)I)lmm
x
x
x
x
r
a
a
-i
r;
n 5
Z.
ID
z
:D
rfj
z
•Ti
to (u) Ui G) Ul N Ul
z
rD
ct
z
"J
a
?
ID
Q
z
3
ID c
n
_
3
C
C
3
C
7u 77zr77
C
-
ti
C
3
c``
C
£
7
D• N 0)
3
U
a
U
U
.7
3
N G
0
rS
U
I
7
't) ID
.^l
!p
El
rD
rD
1-1
M
rl
Cl
Um m Io la I;, iA 15
0
-3
y
7
N
7
7
N
7
7 7 :1. 7 7 7 7
l
7
7
IG
ro
at
i'D
ID
3 Z I ; 'I ;
m
rD
n
�
n
Irk
n
n
n
U
n
ID ID rD m r[I ID rD
rj
'J
7
rD
n
x
x
'q
x
i
x
w 0 N 0 N N 61.
x
4
x
x
M
N N N In N N N
T)
z
z
z
n
z
'< '< '< l< l< Y '<
z
0
z
z
r1
rD
-
rT
-
1
r
3
3
N
3
4c„44444
3
'aa
n
rD
ID
N
m
0
N
C)
D
n
D
C
OI
m
r rl
r4
r9
In
r i
rA
r'j
5
47
CD
14
'In
r4l
r:
IA
N
J^
ci•
C9
5 5
5 5
of 5
ro w ni 5 w 5 5
J 5
Or 5
U 2D
N w
I i!
w
•k• �.'tJ rrl (�' 1•+
tYJ
UI
n
W
N 0 N N in In N
••' I ^`
L
5 1 5
Cr; ! U
5 1 5 CO 15 U 0 U C9 5 CR
r r
J~
w
ra•rrr.�r•
.,
.�
cr
N i,J
w
'-`
6i rJ ri iJ hi rV nj
f,J
w
5
5
w
rj ril '.j ry N N ru
N
5
N
5 CA
I
5
rA
5555555
C1
5
!
f.} :j
I
w
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
ww w. -www
1
�j
I
w
C•l
t4 rJ
5
wwwwwuw
s
5
5 5
r4
rj N rj N rV rj r;l
fy
U.
S
1 I
i
I l l i i I I
I
I
m rj
w
5565m.•w
5
w
5 5
CA
5 5 !ti 5 5 C1: 5
5
C�
r:
IA
N
J^
ci•
C9
y rL Ri ti 4� w D.
r+.
w n
Cn i w
r.i I N
w I" U I 5 J, m rj N r,l C9
CD 1 0
W I w
n
0
w 1 W 14 1 y 5 U 4.1 al A
n
n
•U
W
N 0 N N in In N
••' I ^`
L
5 1 5
Cr; ! U
5 1 5 CO 15 U 0 U C9 5 CR
OI 1 In
J I V
cr
t 4
'<
C
N
N
N
.b I tJ ..+ i•,. ... raj w CJ
4. i w
Cn i w
r.i I N
w I" U I 5 J, m rj N r,l C9
CD 1 0
W I w
C) 1 r
I
w 1 W 14 1 y 5 U 4.1 al A
W I W
N I to 1)
rD I w
tv I 4l
5 i 5 w I V N i4 •k• ru w V
••' I ^`
V 1 4 4
5 1 5
Cr; ! U
5 1 5 CO 15 U 0 U C9 5 CR
OI 1 In
J I V
cr
-n Cl
s..
a •L
1D w.
j
aN
0
�t r
N
m
Y•
ILl
J'
K
N
'n D
3
a 3 a 3 3 a a 3 3
n
<
7 7 7 7 7 7 n
O A
.t, ro
N y y ID N y D, N
�+•
Ln ! N
S i i i n
r i -Ln5 :
5W
co I ro
0 ! U00000W0
LU to Lh L. to t0
�W 4.,.LJ�
m
m
"0 •A
m
y
n
m
i
b
m
a
Q
p n p n q
m m
u; 15 tiJ w W to LR 5 -1 5
n n n n n n n n<Y•
5 1 5
St
St St St It .t ft• St
a 3
Q
n
3
N
m
ID
ro
., -n c
K
n
'A
a
'A
a LH
1
•U
a
'A
a
n
'A
a r l
t m 3
z
ro
va<
co
I Ln Cn mmmmmom
;x
n m
U:
n Ut
i U.
Di <Dim
n w I
N Crr 'n m Ln cr
0 n
N
�l 4
n
1 D.
Ln
i LR LR U LR U CA LR LR 0
C)
r
I r
n
o W
I w
7
c r!
r.) o) r,) rt) N
x
5 'S
�n•
C
uy
L
^J
r_C
'Ti
-
C
mCCCCCCaaC
m
-
C
0
a
m
r•••
LgC�Cn0w0
<
�
W M
3 z
F)
N
A
n
:A
n
N
n
N
n
N
c c a'
m
n
fJ W
�•�•
x
�•
x
Nu9NL9WWri)NN
x
N
x
N•
x
3 5 3 11 11 a
x
W
a
a
a
a
a
3) 5
�
n
z
:0
EEE EE EE EE
Z
m
Z
10
a
z
m
z z Z7_'L''
c
I
c
$
m m m m m m m m m
C
ID
_
-
_
3
m m m m m m
.
._
3
b
3
3
❑
N N N N In N N N N
3
It
N
U
n
-
U
££££££
3
n n
U
N
tr
�+ It It rt St n• 0 :t ct
U
rt
it
_+
Cr
N N N N 61 L9
Z
U
rn m
M
n
m
n
10
n
m
n
3
:D
n
v A 'A _U v A
m
7
C
15
?
0000nnn00
,
7
�
7
3
7
tli y r G, W a,
rt
m
m
oononnonn
m
m
e
m
roauav13
m
-> Y
n
n
a 3 a a � 8 s
n
n
n
m m m 'D FD M
DI Dl
x
W.
X
J j j 7 u z a v
x
X
x
W.
x
i `> i 1 • i
3
c c c c c c c c a
m
n
N N N n N N
-
a
m
oononnonn
Y
U
a
cr
D7 D, 0: D, D, 91 D m I
cr
LO
cr
n
U
N N
m
to
rtM 00 M M M it
m
m
Z
m
CI• St
j
`y
Y• w P. N. Y• W. N. r. W.
)
"i
N
m m
m
In
n n n n n n n n n
Ilp
m
U•
m
0)
mm
c:
z zcsz,; I
Ln
N
r
M
w
N N N DI UI N DI N tn
n
J
n
n
m
G)
Ln
m
Ul
55
Ln
5
LR
5 55 5555
r
5
W
5
rJ
55t05'Sti5
b
! !
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! I !
!
!
! I ! ! ! !
0
r`i
r
rrr c•rrrrr
r
r
rrrrrr
n
�5
r
f4ruriru ryfur;Nh;
CJ
r
t)n;rarvn;ro
W I
t+.. F, t+ t. u ., u
9
5
r r r r r r
5
555555555
5
W
555555
r
5
5
55555*•55:•+
5
5
55rD555
n
n
N
w
W
CO Mt,)0C*(D
n
Y.
5
5
5 5 5 5 5 N 5 5 5
5
5
5 5 5 5 5 5
a
M
!
1
I I I I I I I I I
I
t
11 1! I!
ID
{
i
ri
�![nL9w0� rN
W
W
to0C) 0 rom
5
5
55555LR555
5
5
555555
n
-n Cl
s..
a •L
1D w.
j
aN
0
�t r
N
m
Y•
ILl
J'
K
N
'n D
3
a 3 a 3 3 a a 3 3
n
<
7 7 7 7 7 7 n
O A
.t, ro
N y y ID N y D, N
�+•
Ln ! N
S i i i n
r i -Ln5 :
5W
co I ro
0 ! U00000W0
LU to Lh L. to t0
�W 4.,.LJ�
i)
-
"0 •A
N N N N N U! N N N
y
n
V m
i
b
<<<<<<<< a)
a
Q
p n p n q
m m
u; 15 tiJ w W to LR 5 -1 5
n n n n n n n n<Y•
5 1 5
St
St St St It .t ft• St
a 3
Q
n
3
N
m
ID
ro
., -n c
K
n
to
n m r* n n
W
5
rt
It Ls 1
n
n
A
C. rt r,; m n F.
z
ro
va<
X
w
;x
Di <Dim
r) n
x z
n
LJ I W
LL !
5 1 µ F+ W r.)
r.. 1,
N I rlt
n) ! µ
.t, ro
w I W
tv ! Wial W NLRrr014
Ln ! N
(v I U
r i -Ln5 :
5W
co I ro
0 ! U00000W0
14 ! 14
�W 4.,.LJ�
i)
y
9r
Ln ! LR
5 I Lnrrt0LnU!wt0w
N 10)
" i
0 1 4,5 W 14LR14
Q
W r4
5 1 5
u; 15 tiJ w W to LR 5 -1 5
LR I LR
5 1 5
C1 I Ln 5 07 LR -4 LR
w
m
K
5
a
D
a
a
m
a
ID �•
a
- zr
a
a
0 7 0
5 W
z
-1
.,1
'!t w
0
5
0
0
0
5
0
5
0
5 5 D
ID
�
0
N
C 0 -I
0
5
3
rD
3
0
i
3
rD
3
0
3
1
3
rp
3
`a 70
'0
a
'0
�•!
t!
a
'n
a
'0
a
'0
a
b
a
I
rD 0 a
'n
w
V
n V 1 V
1 V I V
r] V I V
O V I J
9 Cn I Ci+
0 � 1 us
0
to
M
0 Cn
r
1 UG�
0 0
5
b []
n r l I W
h
0 t4 1 r i
(1
cr I�+
n
ct 5 I 5
Cl
cr W I v)
CS
ct rA I (D(7
it 0a
1 4
CA
U I W
CA
5
5
7
ai
J
W
7
•L
L
7
y
V
�l
7
t 0
- �
0
— r
0
- r
0
v C
0
-
rD
r_
0
J CA n
C: C
<
0
w µ
u. r)
N
r)
N 0
r)
N 0
r)
N .•
n
N �•
0
N �
r)
N
S'
X
ru U)
s r,
x
rD
x
N
x
x
x
z
x
W.
r,
m
�• w
�
It
..I
5
-•I rt
-� K
a, W.
-{ W.
a M
-4
rt cr
a
�? 5
z
z
f w
z
rD
Z
� 10
z
0
a .10
0
z
z
m
,�
Y
C 3
N•
3
3 3
3
n -
3
-0
3
'o
3
T
3
3
tr tr
rr•
n'
7
rD
or
ur
m
rx
i
n'
El i3
z
n•
0
Ci Di
0
C) r
m
0 0
r0
C 1 Ci
m
0
i'l 03
r0
t1
0 10
W
rD
7 M
7 4
,
7 0
i
7 `t
,
7
111 ,,
3
i
0 o
m n
v i
m c
0 0
0
Mit
0
z
n m
n
n Nr)
n
v,
n
'I;
91
W
{N
�
f+•
u N
G C)
4
z
z
z n
G
It
t
to
4.
u
a
tr
a
rs 'D
v
tr
0
0
0
0 0
0
m
0
N IF,
0
i
i
'
i
i
i
i
K ct
�!
J
V
J
��t
V
m
m
rD 0
Cn
r
w
n,
µ
5
03
ro
0 m
J
Yl 3
D
Nn'
µ
m
n z n
ID �•
'0
- zr
a
y
0 7 0
5 W
5
rJu
5
5
5
0
I
5
r)
5
5 5 D
�
�
N
n
•n •n io
N
rD
N
0
i
0 0
rD
.D
0
1
0 0 ct
rp
3
n N
a
N
ru
w
w
w
w
5
to
5
w
5
5
w
V
w w w
ru
CA
7i 1 ru
t0
CA
r) I
CA
U I W
CA
M I cA
5
" i-
r0 W t
5 En Cn
10 1 co
5` 5
m i ro
V 1 J
fD ! 5 U b
ti
V
5 1 5
w
Cn i Crr
J
N! m w 4
m
5 1 5
5! 5
C9 1 CA
ro l ro
5 1 5
J CA n
5
5
5
�s
5
5
05 a
I I 0
r",
V
w
V
m
CO
J CA
5
5
5
5
5
5
so
Yl 3
D
Nn'
m
n z n
ID �•
'0
- zr
�•
0
0 7 0
N
,
p
0
n
r)
Q
�
�
N
n
•n •n io
N
rD
N
0
i
0 0
rD
.D
0
1
0 0 ct
rp
3
n N
a
N
ct
n
�n
7i 1 ru
r) I nj
r) I
W ca i w
U I W
Ur I to
M I cA
w l w
" i-
M I A)
5 En Cn
10 1 co
5` 5
m i ro
V 1 J
fD ! 5 U b
Cn ro l ro
tp tD
5 1 5
9 1 5
Cn i Crr
0) I Ln
N! m w 4
c J I J
5 1 5
5! 5
C9 1 CA
ro l ro
5 1 5
5! 5 CA
�s
M
N iv N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
y In In In In (n In In to In IInnn to M to to M to In
IN
NO IND w N ww N WOI'ADw V N.4w
C
N N
Li I-
V N w V C1
a
awl�.ti daNw wti
N)14N3
Nda N OINn wNO
V owo
0014» Io ll C?l U, U, Q
In I 1
Q Zo
I
ND w
N00000OC~100
00000 00 w O�
ba C rt b 4 3 In
H a tl
OOH
11 th (�
a 0
�W Ilh
IC tn rmr c
rt CD iT It
ror le III
p to a t l0 N to N V. m 0 b
ti. b N x nom o It N rA n h h (0
Z
Na b4
(b LI14
It
a � m
IC le h�I-b 1°, an' � (c Ic
rt
a m m o m y
mrt
~h H N a
m 1
-4rr, I
"o' o
n �
H
599
m
�w W wb w�a ;LlLOu cD b
b\\\cD\(o\ \m k b
ti ID" b
F1 NNNNtp
F w w w ti w h o_ h b
a.r 1
o N t
VV V
y I- ri.
IQ
0 m 1
414414 4441414
m 7.0
I1
rt I
W H.
N I
tCn I
CntoU
0
K D 1
4.1.b p.b.I,.b �tl
`S x'
C1
5 i
3m
m W.
3
n'
N
m m m
n
N
W. W. W. W. P. W. W. w
ro
n
n; �
m
mmm
x
Cszz z ;Ct -N:5 :3
CI
x
IU
.....
..�
..j
tt ct tt cI• cr rt• rr It M 0 ct
0.
ii 5
ID
3 3
z
m
777777.77 c'S7
C.
z
3
`3
33
'nnr,'a'ann-n n'nn
n
OL a a
3
W
o ri o v o o g q o o 0
N N N
a O' or O' Cr a c7 U 0' O c'
3
m 0 0
3
U U 'D 'D V 'O 'N 'O '0 "O 'CJ
z
a
i 1
rl
U
i]
U U D
M
M
Y 4+
7
y y y
`f `< K
zp}
3
i
in in to
2 M W 3 i 3 10 s i 3
sI• R N to 'O r ti. n m
u.
a
�7 o
to "a £ to
x
N C� L9
x
� m m m rp m m m N rp m
W. ti
Cs m C.
3) { K t
'D
4
n I; 7
pm
m
N N N N N N N N N N N
3
y
It 0 rr n cr
m
m
7 7 Zt I -i ' 3 3 7 3 7 3
s
'S
m m m ro m m III m m III m
4
4
CR
N iv N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
y In In In In (n In In to In IInnn to M to to M to In
IN
NO IND w N ww N WOI'ADw V N.4w
C
N N
Li I-
V N w V C1
a
awl�.ti daNw wti
N)14N3
Nda N OINn wNO
V owo
0014» Io ll C?l U, U, Q
In I 1
Q Zo
I
ND w
N00000OC~100
00000 00 w O�
ba C rt b 4 3 In
H a tl
OOH
11 th (�
a 0
�W Ilh
IC tn rmr c
rt CD iT It
ror le III
p to a t l0 N to N V. m 0 b
ti. b N x nom o It N rA n h h (0
Z
Na b4
(b LI14
It
a � m
IC le h�I-b 1°, an' � (c Ic
rt
a m m o m y
mrt
~h H N a
al
ULoQ
"o' o
n �
H
599
m
�w W wb w�a ;LlLOu cD b
b\\\cD\(o\ \m k b
ti ID" b
F1 NNNNtp
F w w w ti w h o_ h b
N
In
rt rt ka
11 11
ID ct
bHN �.
y I- ri.
IQ
5 5 5
m
ti w w
C C
I1
rt I
W H.
O O
b C
m to
b
CO 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 Pi 5 5
D
c. I mrurtR��wcammw
M
5 L9rD 5555 W"CnLnCR
b
In I 1
I I I 1 11 l i
r1
4 ! IO IOW
4" 1, b^
ru l t•1 sItb1`�l t
o
V 1 5S 5S5500505
WWW
�nir;rurorurun;ror,;ro
555
IUrON rOn;Np;r.;tOr;ru
�s
ULoQ
CR555555S55j'
y
599
n
En 4Cr
ro N w ru n; 19 E 0 r0
5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
a
cr
i
I I I I I I I I I!
m
f
T!
4EA
5m W r4595m�
3m
m W.
3
n Ul
It r
y u.
tn
0
a
7
In
33
'nnr,'a'ann-n n'nn
n
W.W.W.
ro ro m m m m m m m m ro
o
N N N
a O' or O' Cr a c7 U 0' O c'
3
m 0 0
3
N In N
m m In m m m ro m ID m m m D
O
U U D
M
M
Y 4+
N y
N
`f `< K
W. 7 m W m y = W.
n
in in to
2 M W 3 i 3 10 s i 3
sI• R N to 'O r ti. n m
u.
a
�7 o
to "a £ to
LO n K 7
W. ti
Cs m C.
3) { K t
'D
pm
m
3
y
al
I
•I I mvwCnn;WY�wr_n
r_n 1 AMY
c. I mrurtR��wcammw
5 mmC�
5 L9rD 5555 W"CnLnCR
b
i
�
,n
4 ! IO IOW
4 10r-;555SM0554
o y
Cn t CR 55
V 1 5S 5S5500505
c
Y
N
IU
April 3, 1990
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Introduction
Mendota Heights Police Department
Memorandum
Mayor, City Council,
Dennis Delmont, Chief
City Administrator
of Police
The Police Department is requesting that Council approve the permanent
appointment of Officer David Olson, who has just successfully completed his
one year probationary period.
David Olson was hired on April 1, 1989 to fill a vacancy in the Police
Department. He successfully completed our field training program of three
months working with training officer, Dona Currie; and, for the past nine
months, his performance on the Department has been more than satisfactory. As
he was appointed as a probationary police officer, we are now required to
either extend his probation, terminate his employment, or permanently appoint
him.
I request that David Olson, based on his performance over the past one year,
be permanently appointed to the position of Patrol Officer with the Mendota
Heights Police Department.
DJD:cb
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
���/� April 3, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Admini6i*or
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Birch Addition Final Plat
Case No. 89-45
DISCUSSION:
Council approved a preliminary plat for the Birch Addition at
their January 2, 1990 meeting. Mr. Birch has now completed his final
plat drawing (see attached). Mr. Birch is anxious to have the final
plat approved so that Dr. Koepke, the purchaser of Lot 1, can move
forward with his animal hospital addition.
Notice that there is an existing 5 foot wide platted drainage and
utility easement along the northeaster lot line of the previously
platted Einess lot. Dr. Koepke's building is proposed to be con-
structed over that easement and he will need to apply for an easement
vacation. Easement vacation require a public hearing therefore the
matter will need to be completed at a future meeting.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends that the Birch Addition final plat be approved
as submitted.
ACTION REQUIRED:
If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation they
need to pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 90- , RESOLUTION
APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR BIRCH ADDITION.
JED:dN
0
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR BIRCH ADDITION
WHEREAS, a final plat for Birch Addition has been submitted to
the Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said final plat; and
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the final plat of Birch Addition submitted at this
meeting is hereby approved.
2. That the appropriate City officials be and they are hereby
authorized to execute the final plat on behalf of the City
of Mendota Heights.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 3rd
day of April.
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Adminid r
FROM: Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
SUBJECT: Minnesota Volunteer Recognition Week Proclamation
The Minnesota Office on Volunteer Services (movs) has
requested that the City Council proclaim the week of April 22nd
as Minnesota Volunteer Week. A copy of the letter is attached.
A proclamation has been prepared and is attached for
consideration by the Mayor and Council.
Minnesota ONO on UOlunte8r Services
. oV`S March 2, 1990
Dear Mayor:
Celebrate Minnesota Volunteers! Governor Rudy Perpich has
proclaimed April 22-28 as Minnesota Volunteer Week to coincide
with National Volunteer Week. Our theme this year is Celebrate
Minnesota Volunteers to coordinate with the Celebrate Minnesota
1990 year-long series of special events designed to commemorate
our past, embrace.our present and prepare for our future.
We are asking that you and your city council and boards
contribute to this effort by saluting individuals who volunteer
in city services, and city employees who volunteer in their
communities. Doing so will encourage citizens to exercise their
responsibilities as well as their rights 'by participating fully
in the life of their communities. This will also underscore the
opportunities and rewards of volunteer service. Here are a few
ideas for your consideration:
- Participate in Volunteer Recognition Week activities of local
organizations;
- Proclaim Volunteer Recognition Week in your community; and
- Work with local media to highlight volunteerism efforts.
We have enclosed the following materials to assist you in
recognizing and encouraging volunteers in your community:
- Facts sheet for speeches or articles;
- Sample local proclamation;
- Brochure "on MOVS Handbook for Volunteer Recognition and.
recognition certificates signed by the Governor; and
- Catalogue of Celebrate Minnesota Volunteers recognition
items.
Most of the above items are designed for use throughout the
year, as well as during Volunteer.Recognition Week.
The Minnesota Office on Volunteer Services (MOVS), Department
of Administration also has additional materials which are
available upon request to help you Celebrate Minnesota
Volunteers:
- Governor's Proclamation;
- Ideas for recognition activities;
- Sample news releases and radio Public Service Announcements;
- Ad slicks for use in print media; and
- Information on recognition for youth in community service.
Please feel free to contact us if you would like further
assistance or information. We have also enclosed a brochure on
the purpose of MOVS and the benefits of membership, should you
wish to broaden your knowledge and support of volunteerism.
Thank you for joining us to Celebrate Minnesota Volunteers in
your community and throughout the state.
Sincerely,
.yet GL -�/
Laura Lee.M. Geraghty
Director
LLG:baf
Department of Administration
500 Rice Street, Saint Paul, MN 55155
Phone: 612-296-4731 (metro), 800-652-9747 (non -metro)
-.s
VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION WEEK
April 22-28, 1990
WHEREAS, Volunteers have enriched the life of our community
through their concern, commitment, and generosity of
spirit; and
WHEREAS, volunteerism embodies a spirit of giving and a spirit of
growth; and
WHEREAS, volunteers are a vital resource and have contributed to
the health, education, welfare, recreation, culture and
environment of Mendota Heights; and
WHEREAS, the hard work and commitment of volunteers has enriched
and vitalized our efforts; and
WHEREAS, we wish to Celebrate Minnesota Volunteers in Mendota
Heights, thanking them for their selfless efforts and
dedication;
NOW THEREFORE, I, Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor of the City of
Mendota Heights, Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the
week of April 22nd through April 28th as
Mendota Heights Volunteer Recognition Week.
Charles E. Mertensotto
Mayor
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor, City Council, City
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Easement Vacation
DISCUSSION
March 29, 1990
Admin' or
Mr. Ultan Duggan purchased two lots in Copperfield III to
construct a new home on. His new home is constructed in the
center of these two lots and across the lot line (see attached
map). The City's subdivision ordinance requires that drainage
and utility easements be established along all lot lines at the
time of platting. Because his home is over the lot line it is
also over an easement. The City has no longer any need for that
easement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City vacate the drainage and
utility easements located between Lots 6 and 7 Block 3
Copperfield III Addition.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct the required public hearing and then if Council
desires to implement the staff recommendation they should pass a
motion adopting Resolution 90- RESOLUTION APPROVING
VACATION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT.
G! r
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -
RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights is the current record owner of a
drainage and utility easement as described as follows;
Drainage and Utility Easements on the recorded plat of Copper -
field 3rd Addition between Lot 6 and Lot 7, Block 3 of the afore
mentioned plat, Dakota County, Minnesota,
WHEREAS, a notice of hearing on said vacation has been duly published
and posted more than two weeks before the date scheduled for the hear
ing on said vacation, all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said vacation on April 3, 1990,
at 7:45 o'clock P.M. or as soon as possible thereafter, at the City
Hall of the City of Mendota Heights; and
WHEREAS, the City Council then proceeded to hear all persons interest-
ed in said vacation and all persons were afforded an opportunity to
present their views and objections to the granting of said petition.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the vacation of the drainage and utility easement de-
scribed above, situated in the City of Mendota Heights, is in the
best interest of the public and the City, and is not detrimental
to the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. That the City Clerk be and is hereby authorized and directed
to prepare and present to the proper Dakota County officials a
notice of completion of these vacation proceedings, all in ac-
cordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 3rd
day of April, 1990.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
04,
257 8 1 7
1 3 il'z _ r1 2`?i3
.! . ,�s• �o � i _ 19 �,
9° 7' li I g776 97 3� m .� 7 yj•K
22 eT6�A l:z'y--raj 13 19 a 'S _ gi
FIELD, STONE '9 sc�y :2 n a -
1/ 3/ 48:16 d3 19 4' 3, 5' 76
/ / /� .i z o, m ��' ✓?•P 92 / 32 !J•I O'' IB
y 12 d 69 g
21 14
15
20 /Q� O. 9 I6 a
Q I 11 0 9.1p , _ 17
15 -
/ 163 t ? 10 0 �� . 100 O
A BO g. 90�0 ez.29 O
y 18 ?�
I S SSS \.3 i 9322 o g r 2? 49 33 2'/.i 98
to 0 b 91.09 1
/ Ory 1. /pa m I48 1
'
' `
17 jr.
LAJ
IC4S ' i6 J0
h q f 3
N ^ 9 \\ y n 4
I J a .s• m �, _ �1
by 5 ,: :;•�.�;:d •• y s ..519 202 43
f"T12
5
13 t t .9•:.•a,1� 159.79
' 4 Tl : • 1D 'J•
` gO � 8 � 1•V � .
i♦ ♦ J i q g2 � ,'..^ 0 a
1. 7 ` \ J�Jo
POND
\ 6y U 62 J 1 .'
ti z♦y �y25 0 s
t 5 / tib 10 '° \ a
$
a 9 e v 10 46.47
Jay9 ryryy
16
!OPq�O \, J F� �; •8dJ .;•/O
♦ 7 M1 \ v d ♦\
J3 FC 1
17,
''°s''e CT
6 M T yt 16 % 9 s T
279.97
e2-91♦�/♦� ♦PV \0 No4 ♦ \\ 206
{� •t� Q \ r j N ►6 �\ V —
v a PARK O'o �f J, (00.46 18.01 \ \ \ 165 179
D
m 2 9 N 196. 47 `I 10 \, \
� S , 1 •� \ 59 09
05
64c�
33.1 t 2 ryl 13 '
\ ^ / 3/�`.'•
8,329
o �
I i 5 ,♦ a�yti S`'\��I 14.80 14 `, e
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Admi r
FROM: James E. Danie
Public Works D rm
SUBJECT: Easement Vacation
DISCUSSION
One of the Kensington Manor Homea decks encroaches slightly
upon a public drainage and utility easement (see attached draw-
ing). Staff does not feel it will cause the City a problem to
have the area of encroachment vacated.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Centex's request for a utility ease-
ment vacation be granted.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct the required public hearing and then if Council
desires to implement the staff recommendation they should pass a
motion adopting Resolution 90- RESOLUTION APPROVING VACA-
TION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT.
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -
RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights is the current record owner of a
drainage and utility easement as described as follows;
That part of a 10.00 foot dedicated drainage and utility easement
along the southeast line of Lot 7, Block 2, Kensington P.U.D.,
Dakota County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the following de-
scribed line:afore mentioned plat, Dakota County, Minnesota,
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 7; thence North 45
degrees 45 minutes 59 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the
southeast line of said Lot 7, a distance of 94.50 feet; thence
North 44 degrees 14 minutes 01 seconds West, a distance of 10.00
feet to the northwesterly line of said easement, and the actual
point of beginning; thence South 36 degrees 12 minutes 02 seconds
West, a distance of 7.75 feet; thence North 53 degrees 47 minutes
58 seconds West, a distance of 1.30 feet and there terminating.
WHEREAS, a notice of hearing on said vacation has been duly published
and posted more than two weeks before the date scheduled for the hear
ing on said vacation, all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said vacation on April 3, 1990,
at 7:45 o'clock P.M. or as soon as possible thereafter, at the City
Hall of the City of Mendota Heights; and
WHEREAS, the City Council then proceeded to hear all persons interest-
ed in said vacation and all persons were afforded an opportunity to
present their views and objections to the granting of said petition.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the vacation of the drainage and utility easement de-
scribed above, situated in the City of Mendota Heights, is in the
best interest of the public and the City, and is not detrimental
to the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. That the City Clerk be and is hereby authorized and directed
to prepare and present to the proper Dakota County officials a
notice of completion of these vacation proceedings, all in ac-
cordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 3rd
day of April, 1990.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
A
A
. •� till+.ItASEMENT SKE"i"tCH
^-S /
Souhwst fine of Lot 7
-- —Southaost co-ner of Lot 7
Scae l'- 20 ftec
• denotes Iran fnonumerts set
+ denotes Ircn monuments "bund
I hereby Ge-tify tha: tN!' svevtiy was pfepw 3y rnt• or
under rty di(act srger:isi*n and that t am a duly
Register&&, La^d Surveyor under the !tors of the State
of Minreso!
Martin J. wet.*&! ..s Date
REQUESTED BY:
I CENTEX HOMES
IRRY avim
F
WESTWOOt3 s�1�S3ttrNA: S�iC�S tNC �
85YEC1Ngxypx�-,�4G,£s'.SOect"hP1,� MttS5�43(612}124•E?�7
Registration No. 12043
bra -«n by, LGB n'CO: 6 MaA,
CITY OF MENDOTA,HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor, City Council, City
FROM: James E. Daniel n
Public Works D' e
SUBJECT: Alley Vacation
DISCUSSION
March 28, 1990
Admin
Twelve lots that were part of the Sommerset Grade School
site were sold for development when Brookside Lane was extended.
The lots are being combined into three groups of four lots each
and developed as three single family home sites. There is an
alley that divides each new home site in half, this alley is not
needed by the City (see attached drawing).
A corner of lot 1 is needed by the City as an easement for a
trail extension (see attached drawing). Mr. McManus, the owner
agreed to dedicate that easement if the City would plant four new
maple trees along it. Staff had agreed to those terms and Mr.
McManus signed the easement however, when we attempted to file it
at Dakota County they informed us that we would also need to have
his wife sign the document.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends vacating the alley as requested subject to
the applicant dedicating the required trail easement.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct the required public hearing and then if Council
desires to implement the staff recommendation they should pass a
motion adopting Resolution 90- RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION
OF A STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY subject to Mr. McManus and his wife
signing the appropriate document dedicating the needed trail
easement.
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -
RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF A STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights is the current record owner of a
street right-of-way as described as follows;
That part of the following described property situated in Dakota
County, Minnesota:
That part of the recorded plat T.T. Smiths Subdivision No. 3
originally dedicated as a 20 foot alley between Lots 1 through 6,
Block 2, on the north and Lots 11 through 16, Block 2 of the
above mentioned plat.
and
WHEREAS, a notice of hearing on said vacation has been duly published
and posted more than two weeks before the date scheduled for -the hear
ing on said vacation, all in accordance with the applicable'Minnesota
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said vacation on April 3,1990 at
7:45 o'clock P.M. or as soon as possible thereafter, at the City Hall
of the City of Mendota Heights; and
WHEREAS, the City Council then proceeded to hear all persons interest-
ed in said vacation and all persons were afforded an opportunity to
present their views and objections to the granting of said petition.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the vacation of the street right-of-way described
above, situated in the City of Mendota Heights, is in the
best in terest of the public and the City, and is not detri-
mental to the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. That the City Clerk be and is hereby authorized and directed
to prepare and present to the proper Dakota County officials
a notice of completion of these vacation proceedings, all in
accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 3rd
day of April, 1990.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
FLUE
•
/O
w
.•
!3
••
GO
h
9 N
d
7
j
s
I
3
z
r
so
Lo
4
3
2
T ZI °
"low
FLUE
ao
LD
•
/O
w
.•
!3
••
GO
h
7
G
S
j
/•f/S
I
/G
i7
F8
so
Lo
4
3
2
T ZI °
"low
ao
LD
•
/O
w
.•
!3
••
GO
h
7
G
S
j
5
I
/
LI16
7
G
5
4
3
2
ao
LD
•
/O
w
.•
!3
••
GO
h
7
G
S
j
5
I
/
9 N
p
/r
y
T ZI °
"low
h
ao
LD
•
/O
w
.•
!3
••
GO
g
7
G
S
j
5
I
/
fZ 13 14. 15 /G
G GO •• LO
1 g 7 G S 4 3
i
1
;�$le�IC5'196:
- r Le S+ 4o vJ
/r — 1
n
2 —
0
/v !J b
0oOleSa La Gc
All
q Q�o7 tctif
G -11
111.1! Its„S I,4j
747n KAL- I Nco 1
1/ok/' r, - a - 3 " 2-'I t ro
11< 4 03 tt5 t15 '5
9
/O
//
I
!3
Iq
r
7
i
t4
I 3
-;z/
a
;�$le�IC5'196:
- r Le S+ 4o vJ
/r — 1
n
2 —
0
/v !J b
0oOleSa La Gc
All
q Q�o7 tctif
G -11
111.1! Its„S I,4j
747n KAL- I Nco 1
1/ok/' r, - a - 3 " 2-'I t ro
11< 4 03 tt5 t15 '5
td LO G
9- _ a
N $ G 7 1 Q N
n
3 ,RE VA � GE.Mf NT '
'
103.561 105 X los ^� /05
°
,
41d. Sa
E •�
REARANGEMENT2' OF h
BLOCK 9 TT. SMITH., T
b a
1y
132
v
1`
h
y
7
i
t4
I 3
-;z/
a
td LO G
9- _ a
N $ G 7 1 Q N
n
3 ,RE VA � GE.Mf NT '
'
103.561 105 X los ^� /05
°
,
41d. Sa
E •�
REARANGEMENT2' OF h
BLOCK 9 TT. SMITH., T
b a
— 11 a7 1 .on, ,nn o" P
I k-01
N •ii•) T—yam I �� `7 9 5 -,
y o
N SUBDIVISION NO. 3
132
v
1`
h
y
7
Z. 5 1
t4
I 3
z
/
— 11 a7 1 .on, ,nn o" P
I k-01
N •ii•) T—yam I �� `7 9 5 -,
y o
N SUBDIVISION NO. 3
-t4 li IE
1 � J
7E4 -s Go .. �o
Z 3 S G
f7
// Ao
`
9 B
312
p Sa
67 J•7 " ��C 15 ,- ' s 220 1.9.70
�0 13 C:1x:0 1 o OMIT n/ Q
l
ZOO. -5"4 %q
h
r Z bo 8 0 y
195 _• a" 0� 137, 014.7-gz
CJo
-11G�3 s: 0/' P �
o S M
132
v
1`
34.
V Z
Lp
dsJ
N.89P18.22•'E.180.
Lo
y
T ZI °
"low
h
4
=1 "j,
s
-t4 li IE
1 � J
7E4 -s Go .. �o
Z 3 S G
f7
// Ao
`
9 B
312
p Sa
67 J•7 " ��C 15 ,- ' s 220 1.9.70
�0 13 C:1x:0 1 o OMIT n/ Q
l
ZOO. -5"4 %q
h
r Z bo 8 0 y
195 _• a" 0� 137, 014.7-gz
CJo
-11G�3 s: 0/' P �
o S M
132
v
1`
34.
V Z
Lp
dsJ
N.89P18.22•'E.180.
Lo
-t4 li IE
1 � J
7E4 -s Go .. �o
Z 3 S G
f7
// Ao
`
9 B
312
p Sa
67 J•7 " ��C 15 ,- ' s 220 1.9.70
�0 13 C:1x:0 1 o OMIT n/ Q
l
ZOO. -5"4 %q
h
r Z bo 8 0 y
195 _• a" 0� 137, 014.7-gz
CJo
-11G�3 s: 0/' P �
o S M
132
v
1`
34.
V Z
dsJ
N.89P18.22•'E.180.
y
T ZI °
"low
h
4
=1 "j,
ti
2 W o
o
7
I:•.
3 �7
N m
N.8998� 23•E. c
N
209.06, �:
i,
180.00-
.9 �
m° JN m
g
7
c
H
3 a
.� ; �K
/
c
1
w
�
7� 2
RA
RT
N
CONE CT I O N _TYPICAL
SIGN BY OTHERSI
NO MOTOR I ZED V EH
Y \ 1
MH
C `
AVE(UNIMPROVED)
EMERSON \ F �,
WOODED AREA � • � ~ �\
SII
Q
Cr
.,
D
MH
N
CONE CT I O N _TYPICAL
SIGN BY OTHERSI
NO MOTOR I ZED V EH
Y \ 1
MH
C `
AVE(UNIMPROVED)
EMERSON \ F �,
WOODED AREA � • � ~ �\
SII
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
To: Mayor, City Council and City Admini6
From: James Danielson, Director of Public Works
Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistan�gD
Subject: CASE NO. 89-25: Dodge Nature Center - CUP for PUD
Continued Hearing
DISCUSSION
The Dodge Nature Center was before City Council on February
6, 1990 to explain their proposal for a new visitor center on their
property. The Council continued the public hearing until the April
3, 1990 meeting to allow the Nature Center to meet with MnDOT to
try to resolve an access problem with the site. The Nature has met
with MnDOT, however, did not obtain the access they desired.
The Dodge Nature Center has asked that this hearing be
continued until May 1, 1990 to allow them more time to work on the
access problem. See attached letter.
ACTION REQUIRED
Continue the public hearing until May 1, 1990 at 7:45 p.m.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MRS. OLIVIA IRVINE DODGE
PRESIDENT
PHYLLIS ABRAHAMSEN
AMY ANDERSEN
ALMA DERAUF
THOMAS DODGE
ELIZABETH S. DRISCOLL
CLOVER EARL
OLIVIA C. FORD
STANLEY H. GUSTAFSON
WILLIAM HUEG
SALLY KLING
IANTHA LEVANDER
DANIEL PENNIE
GEORGE C. POWER. JR.
GINNIE RECORD
ROBERT RIDDER
VICENTA D. SCARLETT
GORDON SHEPARD
ELLEN STURGIS
STEVEN TOUREK
WILLIAM WEST
JAMES M. MALKOWSKI
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
J
1
Aromas t7raife Dodge Nature eafier
1795 CHARLTON STREET
WEST SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55118
(6121 455-4531
March 28, 1990
Honorable Charles Mertensotto, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
City of Mendota Heights
City Hall
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Re: The Dodge Nature Center's
application for a CUP for PUD.
Dear Mayor and Members of the Council:
I am writing to request a continuance of our scheduled appearance at your
regular council meeting of April 3, 1990 to your regularly scheduled council
meeting of May 1, 1990.
In response to the previous Planning Commission's approval contingent
upon satisfactory access, and your continuance based on our explanation of the
project last February 6th, we have met with MnDOT representatives to explore
further agreeable alternatives for access to our planned building site. At that
meeting of February 23, 1990, MnDOT did give us some encouragement by
agreeing to one other alternative.
Because members of our Building Committee are out of town, we have not
yet been able to meet to consider this new information. Therefore, any appearance
at your April 3rd meeting would not be organizationally representative of the
DNC's final recommendation/proposal. In view of this, I am requesting a
continuance to your May 1st meeting.
We thank you for your work and look forward to presenting the exciting
plans we have to enhance the Dodge Nature Center and along with doing so,
enhance life and living for the people of Mendota Heights.
JAM: kJ
cc: Building Committee
ince 4 ly,
James M. Malkowski
)Executive Director
i
r
CITY OF MnUDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
To: Mayor, City Council and City Admin' or
From: James Danielson, Director of Public o
Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assis n �
Subject: CASE NO. 89-40: Frye - Critical Area Variance
DISCUSSION
Mr. and Mrs. Richard Frye were before the March Planning
Commission to present a compromise plan for a swimming pool
addition to their house located on 1845 Hunter Lane. (See attached
staff memos.) Their neighbors to the south, Mr. and Mrs. Katz,
have raised objections to the Frye's proposal and were represented
at the meeting by their attorney, Mr. Eric Miller.
Mr. Miller requested that if the variance were to be approved
that three conditions be placed upon the approval. They are:
1. That the exterior construction material match the house.
2. That no trees be planted to block the view.
3. That the roof pitch be changed from a slope 3:12 to 4:12.
The Planning Commission had no concern with the first proposed
condition as the exterior conditions were what was being proposed
by the applicants. The Planning Commission felt that one of the
objectives of the Critical Area Ordinances was to preserve and
promote tree growth along the bluff, however when they discussed
the condition with Mr. Frye they learned he had no intentions of
planting any trees anyway.
The Planning Commission discussed the problems that the third
condition would cause Mr. Frye and discovered that the 3:12 pitch
matches the pitch of the existing home and that the 4:12 pitch
would appear strange from the outside and would block the view from
the inside.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission praised Mr. Frye in for his efforts
to compromise and voted unanimously to recommend approval of his
requested twenty-two foot (22') setback variance from the bluffline
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the exterior of the addition match the existing house.
2. That no fill be placed in the setback region by the bluff.
That no trees or shrubs be planted that would block the view
along the bluffline for the neighbors.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct the public hearing. If the City Council desires to
implement the Planning Commission's recommendation they should pass
a motion granting a twenty-two foot (22') Variance to the Critical
Area Ordinance's required bluffline setback subject to the above
listed conditions.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 22, 1990
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James E. Danielson, Public Works Dire
Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assi' nt
SUBJECT: Case No. 89-40: Frye- Critical Area Ordinance
Variance
DISCUSSION
Mr. Richard Frye of 1845 Hunter Lane, appeared before
the November and December 1989 Planning Commission meetings
to request a variance to the Critical Area Ordinance's
required setback. Mr. Frye was seeking the setback variance
in order to construct an indoor pool within a proposed two
story addition.
The Planning Commission has visited the site and the
public record includes photos of the Frye property and their
neighbor's property. The Planning Commission recommended
denial of the original application and the Frye's delayed
going before the City Council in order to prepare a
compromise plan. When Council learned that a compromise plan
was being drafted, they instructed staff to return the matter
back to the Planning Commission for a new recommendation.
Staff has sent out notices regarding tonight's hearing
on the revised plans. The revision of the plans changes the
planning considerations. Because the revised addition is
further from the bluffline than the existing house, the
applicants would need a Critical Area Variance of twenty-two
feet (221). This would bring the existing house into
conformance and allow construction of the addition.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct the public hearing and make a recommendation to
the City Council on the requested Critical Area setback
variance of twenty-two feet (221) to the bluffline.
JED/KLB:kkb
PLANNING REPORT
DATE:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ACTION REQUESTED:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
27 March 1990
Richard H. Frye
West of
Southerly of
(see sketch)
Critical
Variance
Hunter Lane,
Orchard Place
Area Setback
1. Attached is a copy of the memo to the Planning Commission from
James Danielson and Kevin Batchelder summarizing the action taken by
the City Council relevant to Richard Frye's application. The Council
requested that the Planning Commission reconsider a revised proposal
because it has been substantially amended from the original application.
A new public hearing has been published for the March 27th meeting.
2. Also attached is a copy of a memo prepared by Kevin Batchelder,
Administrative Assistant, which is a listing of previously . approved
variances to the Critical River Corridor Area Ordinance and a copy of
that portion of the Ordinance dealing with variances and fees. . This
memo was previously distributed to members of the Planning
Commission, but is attached for your convenience. The Staff has met
with the applicant (on January 21, 1990) to review a revised concept
which included angling the proposed structure (to cover the proposed
swimming pool) away from the contiguous neighbor to the south (Paul
Katz) and substantially lowering the roof line by proposing a shed roof
oriented to the bluff versus the previously proposed gable roof design.
Since that time, Mr. Frye has amended the proposal so as to
substantially reduce the depth (east -west dimension) of the - proposed
structure by reducing the length of the roof line. Staff has met with
Paul Katz on Monday, March 19 after he had reviewed the plans with
his neighbors (the Frye's) over the weekend. You will recall that Mr.
Katz expressed concern regarding the impeding of his view from his
residence and property to the northeast. Certainly these views from
both of these residences are spectacular and both land owners have
taken steps to ensure the retention of these views by purchasing
property to the 'west, which consists primarily of the steep slope down
toward Highway 13. Part of that view is in the immediate foreground
of both properties in the form of a steep ravine. This is shown on the
attached site plan presented by Mr. Frye as a shaded gray area.
3. Attached is a
copy
of a site plan prepared by Paul McLagan,
surveyor,
for Mr. Frye.
The
footprint of the original proposal is shown
in yellow,
the footprint
of the
plan discussed with Staff on January 21 is
shown in
crosshatching,
and
the footprint of the current proposal is
shown in
green. Also
attached are copies of the blue -line drawings (two sheets)
Richard Frye, Case No. 89-40
indicating the south and
addition) and the basic
noted on the elevations
(and perhaps the Planning
materials will match the
Page 2
west elevations of the house (including the
plan of the proposed addition. One item not
is the use of exterior materials. We assume
Commission should ascertain) that the proposed
existing structure.
4. You will note from examination of the currently proposed site plan
(with the colors) that the current proposal is to angle the new structure
so as to be approximately 20 feet from the slope of the bluff. That
slope is shown on the drawing as a dotted line contiguous to the shaded
area, which is the ravine. You will also note that the existing house is
18 feet from the roof line, whereas the setback standard is 40 feet.
Thus, in order to add to this house at all, a variance to the existing
18 -foot setback must be approved. This will take the structure out of
the nonconforming class that now applies to the property as currently
developed.
5. The setback to the proposed structure to the west from the nearest tip
of the ravine (where the 24 -inch cottonwood is located) is 40 feet.
Thus, no setback variance is requested for this westerly dimension. The
setback to the westerlymost portion of the bluff line (where the 18 -inch
ash is) is proposed to be 50 feet. Thus, the setback of the proposed
addition varies from 20 feet to 50 feet, with that portion running
parallel to the ravine on the southwest side of the proposed addition
being that area for which a variance would be necessary at 20 feet.
Perhaps more important is the fact that in this current design, the roof
of the proposed structure is a =iot
roximately a 3
and 12 pitch to the west. Thist on the, west
side of the structure of approxi
6. In our conversations with Mr.te whether he
agreed with the proposed development plan or not. He did express his
extreme concern for the integrity of his view of the River Corridor and
his interest in maintaining that view for himself and others. We also
discussed the fact that the survey clearly indicates that a portion of
what appears to be Mr. Katz's lot extends some 8 feet into the Frye
property. This is noted on the site plan by referring to the location of
the retaining walls and the chain-link fence indicated on the site plan
and survey prepared by Paul McLagan. Thus, these two parties have
some mutual interest with which to be concerned in the future. Mr.
Katz noted that other property lines to the south of his land also has
similar problems of an apparent overlap of lot lines. We suggested to
Mr. Katz that it may be important for all of these parties to seek an
amiable solution to these lot line questions, rather than let them go for
possible future court actions.
7. It is apparent that the Frye's in this case have made a significant
effort to reduce the impact of the proposed addition to the west side
of their existing structure. It would appear from the layout that the
area on the west side of the house is an appropriate location for the
pool and its enclosure. Since the existing house is 18 feet from the
bluff line, it would appear that the 20 -foot setback proposed would not
significantly alter the view. This is a matter of opinion and depends
on where the view is observed. It is perhaps noteworthy to bear in
mind that the side yard setback for the house in question (though 18
Richard Frye, Case No. 89-40
Page 3
feet' from the line of the ravine) is some 27 feet from the south
property line. That is of course the dimension shown on the survey.
The distance from the house to the chain-link fence scales about 18
feet. A 10 -foot setback is required.
8. Staff has suggested to the applicant and his contiguous neighbor that -
the most appropriate solution is one wherein the two parties can get
together and agree. One would hope that this is possible.
9. If positive action is considered for this proposal, the condition that it
be developed in accordance with the plans as submitted may be
appropriate. In addition, some reference to the use of building
materials would be appropriate, presumably to match the existing siding
on the house. A condition that might assist in protecting the
contiguous neighbor's view might include an agreement on the part of
the applicant to not plant coniferous or a significant tree growth (of
that type) so as to impede the southerly neighbor's view of the River
Valley to the northwest. Obviously such plantings at maturity could
substantially block this view.
i '� [' .�- ,;_:�. �.�` - J `� ■ ,`\'CIF,. J
1 LA
- SUBJECT PROPERTY I
e.
NORTH T
• SCALE 1 H=400' •
i' w
L '
NUN ER-
^r. , • � s • CIR. N
• • WEST
`� - • C • p. h.
,!:�_ -� • • • VERONICA LA
1IVic
:•� r ••, • ter/ /' -.
z CENT R
u' % SITE
-_
I
VRONTA G EROA D
/ o
J
Q)
it1
I`
ILLJ
r
M.
HUNTER'
01 1 ot
4"1
BLUFF , Z,
// z C-0,7 3
/7
r -Z C
PH I LL I PS HILL
2
ADDITION
I SUBJECT PROPERTY
NORTH
SCALE 1u-200'
A
... .......
... ....... . ...
I . ...... ....... .
...... ..•..... .......... ....
032. -p
. . ..... ... ... ...
4-
oi
V
7 1-07 2 4Q
OAK POINT
Z (o 0 Lq I
zz
c 54 4e
79 i
ru HUNTER ;,:ROLE ,50
MIN 2C tu
2
S
A NE 1- 2 -UN
di -MALLARD ROAD
,
f
IEE 'o
00
2
j
t
b5 1,09
0 12
LL�o 06
1,57 53
�
5
7jo
q-cr
4., v�6 1) 8 i 0
.9, zo
7 5a.67 G E N Z 2
c-
9 6'tv 0
U L A N ql 23
Na
L A W 10
_j VERONICA LA.
2o
el 0
65 I 1 p
6 SG 9f L
ADD11T, N
3
N E 108 s 4 Z 3
w 1-35
IGZ Go 4
Z.
r
2
C"2
—�
rz
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
December 22, 1989
To: Planning Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistan
Subject: Report on variances -in the Critical Area Overlay
District
INTRODUCTION
At the November 1989 Planning Commission meeting, the
Commission requested that a report be prepared on variance
requests to the bluffline setbacks that are required in the
Critical Area Overlay District Ordinance. This report highlights
the requests that have been made since the Ordinance was adopted
in 1979.
This report does -not include modified site plan reviews that
have been processed, it only focuses on variance requests. As
the Planning Commission is aware, a modified site plan review
proceeds directly to City Council if all requirements of the
Ordinance are met, including the required forty foot (401)
setback from the bluffline.
DISCUSSION
I have attached Section V of the Critical Area Ordinance
that explains the requirements for granting a variance to this
ordinance. In Section 5.4, items A through G list the criteria
for granting a variance.
Since the Ordinance was adopted in 1979, the City of Mendota
Heights has been approached sixteen times by applicants
requesting variances. (Please see the attached list of CAO
variance requests.) Of these request, fourteen have been
approved, however, not all approvals have been for as much
setback as was requested. In some cases, the approval that was
granted, was considerably less of a variance than was requested
and the approval was a compromise between the applicant and the
City.
Not all the variances requested were for bluffline setbacks.
For instance, the applicants in Case No. 88-05 requested a
variance to the type of material allowed in building a retaining
wall. One request was for a variance to a front yard setback in
order to move the building envelope forward and away from the
bluffline.
The variance that allows the closest setback to the
bluffline was Case No. 88-04 (Huestis). The Huestis' were
allowed to build an addition to their house to within sixteen
feet (161) of the bluffline. This twenty four foot (241)
variance was in actuality an extension of six feet (61) from
their existing house.
Section 5.4, Item b of the Critical Area Ordinance states
that "the variance is proved necessary in order to secure for the
applicant the right or rights that are enjoyed by other owners in
the same area of the district." In the Hunter Lane/Orchard Place
neighborhood, variances have been granted to Hunter (Case No. 85-
01) and Cochrane (Case No. 87-01). In both cases a twenty foot
(201) variance to the bluffline setback was allowed.
The following text is a brief, case by case synopsis of each
CAO variance request since 1984.
1. FRYE — CASE NO. 89-40
This case is currently pending and is the stimulus for this
report. The Frye's are requesting a variance to the
bluffline setback in order to build a two story pool
enclosure as an addition to their home, which was built
before the Ordinance was enacted.
2. EAGAN POOL AND SPA - CASE NO. 89-36
A twenty foot (201) bluffline
Council for the building of a
compromise with the applicants
that would have been closer to
3. BJORKLUND - CASE NO. 88-05
4.
setback was approved by City
spa. This approval was a
after a pool was rejected
the bluffline.
This request was for a variance to the material used in
building a retaining wall and was approved based on its
natural appearance.
HUESTIS - CASE NO. 88-04
The existing house was twenty two (221) feet from the
bluffline at 649 Sibley Memorial Highway. A six foot (61)
extension was added,to an eighteen foot (181) variance that
was granted to bring the house into conformance with the
Ordinance and to allow construction of an addition. This
brought the total setback variance to twenty four feet (241)
thus allowing the addition to be within sixteen feet (16')
of the bluffline.
5. COCHRANE - CASE NO. 87-01
The City Council approved a twenty foot (201) setback
variance from the bluffline in order to construct a new home
at 1819 Hunter Lane. The applicants suggested a hardship in
squeezing their large, proposed home into a triangular
shaped lot. City Council also cited the twenty foot (201)
bluffline setback granted previously to Dr. Hunter.
6. OLSEN - CASE NO. 87-03
At 1254 Culligan Lane, the Olsen's request was to have an
eleven foot (111) setback variance to the bluffline for a
new home. This would have allowed the house to be built
within twenty nine feet (291) of the bluffline. The
Planning Commission recommended a five foot (51) variance
and City Council approved that recommendation. There were
also neighbor objections to the proposed height of the
house.
7. KREBSBACH - CASE NO. 86-05
The applicants received approval for a ten foot (101)
variance to the front yard setback of thirty feet (301).
This allowed the applicants to build the home closer to the
front of the property and away from the steeper grades in
the rear of the lot. This house has not been built.
8. HUNTER - CASE NO. 85-01
The applicant, Dr. Hunter of 1175 Orchard Place, requested a
thirty two foot (321) variance to the bluffline setback to
build a new home. The Planning Commission, on a 5-1 vote
recommended that City Council deny this request. Council
approved a twenty foot (201) variance to the setback as a
compromise to the applicant.
9. TAURINSKAS - CASE NO. 85-03
The applicant requested a fifteen foot (151) variance to the
bluffline setback at 1220 Knollwood Lane. This request was
approved. The stated hardship was that in order to meet the
thirty foot (301) front yard setback requirement, the
proposed house had to be pushed into the bluffline setback.
The applicants had signatures of consent from their
neighbors.
10. OPHOVEN - CASE NO. 85-07
This lot is the current Paster lot next door to Dr. Hunter
of 1175 Orchard Place. Paster currently uses a private
easement to enter this lot. The Ophovens had requested a
variance to allow the construction of a driveway from
Highway 13 in order to access the lot. The Ophoven's were
unable to obtain a private easement for entrance and it was
apparent the City would not approve such a steep driveway.
This case is still pending as the variance request was
unable to obtain approval and was tabled.
CAO VARIANCE
89-40
Frye
Variance
89-36
Eagan Pool and Spa
Variance
1988
88-05
Bjorklund
Variance
88-04
Huestes
Variance
1987
87-01
Cochrane
Variance
87-03
Olsen
Variance
1986
86-05
Krebsbach
Variance
1985
85-01 Hunter
85-03 Taurinskas
85-07 Ophoven
1984 - NONE
1983
83-02 Shaughnessy
83-03 Burow
83-16 Dodd Construction
1982
82-02 Design Forum
1981 - NONE
1980
(Never Built)
Variance
Variance
Variance
Variance
Variance
(Never Built)
CUP for PUD
Variance
Pending 30+1
Approved 20'
(4 ft. extension)
Approved
(Materials)
Approved 6'
(Extension)
Approved 20'
Approved 5'
Approved 10' to
front yard set-
back
Approved 20'
Approved 15'
Pending
(Sold Land)
Approved
Approved 16'
Approved
Approved
Bren Variance ?
McCarthy Variance ?
to the provisions of Ordinance No. 401.
1. Views of the water from vistas and public roads
shall not be impaired by the placement of busines:
or advertising signs.
2. Advertising signs may be located only on the
bluff side of public transportation routes which
are parallel and adjacent to the river front.
�C- All advertising ,signs, the location of which is not
in conformance with this section are deemed noncon-
forming uses and shall be removed within seven (7)
years of the effective date of this Ordinance.
4.3 Vegetation. Within -the Critical Area and specifically on land
forty (40) feet landward of the bluffline, the following stan-
dards.shall apply:
A. 'Clear cutting, except for any authorized public ser-
vices such as roads and utilities, shall not be per-
mitted.
B. Selective cutting of trees in excess of four (4)
inches in diameter at breast height*is permitted
provided that cutting is spaced in several cutting
operations and a continuous tree cover is maintained,
uninterrupted by large openings. In cases where the
existing tree cover has been interrupted by large
openings in the past, selective cutting should be
performed so as to maintain a continuous tree cover
in the remaining wooded areas.
C. The above cutting provisions will not be deemed to
prevent:
1. The removal of diseased or insect infested trees,
or of rotten or damaged trees that present safety
hazards;
2. Pruning understory vegetation, shrubs, plants,
bushes, grasses, or from harvesting crops, or
cutting suppressed trees or trees less than four
(4) inches in diameter at breast height.
S CTION V. VARIANCES
�5.1 Purpose. The :Council may grant variances from the strict appli-
cation of the provisions of this Ordinance and impose conditions
and safeguards in the variances so granted in cases where there
are practical difficulties or particular hardships necessarily
involved in the manner in which the strict letter of the regula-
tions of this Ordinance are carried out.
5.2 Applications. A written application for a variance shall be
filed with the Zoning Administrator and shall contain evidence
idequate to show the exceptional conditions and the peculiar and
aractical difficulties claimed as the basis for the variance.
?fifteen (15) sets of clearly legible, blue or black lined copies
or drawings and required information shall be submitted to the
Zoning Administrator and shall be accompanied by a receipt from
the City Clerk evidencing the payment of all required variance
fees for processing, as set forth in Section 6.1 and the bond,
when required by Council, in the amount so calculated in accor-
dance with this Ordinance.
Referral to the Planning Commission. Before the granting of any
variance, the application therefor shall be referred to the Plann-
ing Commission for study concerning the effect of the proposed
variance upon the Comprehensive Plan and on the character and
value of the Critical Area Overlay District, and for its recomm-
endation to the Council for the granting of -such variance from
the strict application of the provisions of the Critical Area
Dverlay District Ordinance so as to relieve such difficulties
or hardships to the degree -considered reasonable without impair-
ing the intent and purpose of the Critical Area Overlay Ordinance
and the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission shall re-
:ommend such conditions related to the variance as it may deem
advisable.
77ariance Approval Standards. In considering applications for
7ariance under this Ordinance, the Council shall consider the
idvice and recommendations of the Planning Commission and may
jrant variance from the strict application of the provisions
if this Critical Area Overlay District Ordinance and impose
:onditions and safeguards in the variances so granted, provided
:he following additional criteria shall be considered:
A. The conditions causing the hardship are unique to
that property.
B. The variance is proved necessary in order to secure
for the applicant the right or rights that are en-
joyed by other owners in the same area of the dis-
trict.
C. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to
the public interest or damaging to the rights of
other persons or to property values in the neighbor-
hood.
D. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to
the management policies of the Critical Area.
E. No variance shall be granted simply because there are
no objections or because those who do not object
outnumber those who do; nor for any other reason
other than a proven hardship.
F. Financial gain or loss by the applicant shall not be
interpreted as an unnecessary hardship.
(403) 13
G. The conditions which result in the need for the var-
iance were not created by the applicants design sol-
ution. The applicant shall have the burden of proof
for showing that no other reasonable design solution
exists.
5.5 Denial. Variances may be denied by motion of the Council and
such motion shall constitute a finding and determination by the
City Council that conditions warranting the issuance of the var-
iances do not exist.
5.6 Action Without the Recommendation of the Planning Commission. I=
no recommendation is. transmitted by the Planning Commission with-
in sixty (60) days after referral of the application for a vari-
ance to the Planning Commission, the Council may take action
without further awaiting such recommendation.
5.7 Revocation. A violation of any condition set forth or required
,by the City Council in granting a variance shall be a violation
of this Ordinance and automatically terminate the variance. A
variance shall become null and void one year after it was grant-
ed, unless made use of within the year or such longer period
prescribed by the City Council.
SECTION VI. FEES
6.1 Base Fee. To defray administrative costs for the processing of
site plan applications, or variance applications, a base fee of
One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per application shall be paid by
all applicants.
6.2 Additional Costs. In order to defray the additional costs of
processing said applications, all applicants shall pay the total
cost of staff and/or consulting time spent exclusively in re-
viewing the request and/or in processing materials for the appli-
cant's request, plus all material costs for said request.
6.3 Included Matters.
A. "Materials" shall include, but not be limited to
maps, graphs, charts, drawings, etc., and all print-
ing or reproduction of the same.
B. '"Staff and/or consulting time" shall include any and
all time spent in either researching for or actual
production of materials.
C. The hourly rate for "staff and/or consulting time"
shall be established and made available to the appli
cant by the City Clerk prior to the production of an
materials, and the applicant shall be given a reason
able estimate of projected time and/or material cost
6.4 Deposit. Fees shall be paid at the time applications are filed
with the City Clerk and are not refundable unless the applicati
(403) 14
is withdrawn prior to referral to the Planning Commission. '-A -
deposit to cover staff or consulting time and materials will be`
estimated and required by the City Clerk at the time the base
fee is paid_ Any portion of the deposit not spent to defray
the above-mentioned costs shall be refunded to the applicant
within thirty (30) days after the application process has been
completed. Any actual costs in excess of the deposit shall be
payable within thirty (30) days after receipt of the billing.
•CTION VII. MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
1 Inter -Community Review. In all cases where any proposed devel-
opment or action abuts an adjacent municipality, that municipa-
lity shall be formally notified of the proposed development or
action and given the opportunity to review and comment on the
proposal. Such notification as required in Section 2.4, shall
be mailed to the City Clerk of the abutting municipality.
(403) 15
J ,,
Case No. CAO O(I-'4(0
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Dakota County, Minnesota
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
OF
CRITICAL AREA DEVELOPMENT (Ordinance NO. 403)
Date of Application +Q • (D• $q
Fee Paid 1OO.(D(�
Receipt Number oZoZ$rJ
Applicant :r-ey n,C 0 1'
Name : }�
Last 1First _ Initial
Address: 1345 ""IU Lel �"1.{�, M N rjoltg
Number& Street City State Zip Code
Phone: LA 5-
�1
— M I
Home Work
Owner :
Name A5 Above-,
Last First Initial
Address:
Number & Street City State Zip Code
Street Location of Property in Question:
i MW
Legal Description of Property:
Loi- Cot 1 i�- �I poy
Type of Request: X Variance
Site Plan Approval
Modified Site Plan Approval
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING
March 14, 1990
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the Mendota Heights Planning
Commission will meet at 7:45 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday,
March 27, 1990, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101
Victoria Curve, to consider an application from Mr. Richard
H. Frye for a Critical Area Development Variance to allow
construction of a two story indoor pool within a back yard
area for the following described property:
Lot 2, Colliton Place
More particularly, this property is located at 1845 Hunter
Lane.
This notice is pursuant to City of Mendota Heights
Ordinance No. 403. Such persons as desire to be heard with
reference to this request will be heard at the meeting.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
MAkk
City of
JA Mendota Heights
March 30, 1990
Mr. Richard Frye
1845 Hunter Lane
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Dear Mr. Frye:
Your application for a tOM C-- ,
will be considered by the City Council at their next
regularly scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday,
&Py_� J , �( �( The Council meeting starts at
7:30 o'clock P.M., here at City Hall in the Council Chambers.
You, or a representative, should plan on attending the
meeting, in order that your application will receive Council
consideration.
The Planning Commission recommended CL pp ro ( o 22
o 4--cL, c u r r tv-.+- -e k 4-e 2' ) ✓i o -Fine cS
k -o �av oho-✓t+C& fo lo(occ Utev -
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
sincerely,
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
KLB:kkb
1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 452.1850
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 26, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Admini6lr
FROM: Klayton Eckles
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Feasibility hearing on the Garron site
Job 8420
Improvement No. 84-2
INTRODUCTION
The feasibility report for this project indicated that a
number of properties would be assessed as a result of the
construction. The properties that are proposed to be
assessed for this project are shown on the attached map.
The most significant issue which must be resolved is the
assessing of the cemetery land which is not dedicated to
grave sites.
DISCUSSION
In the feasibility report it was stated that the non-
dedicated cemetery land should be assessed just like all
other properties, as it is receiving benefit. Although not
dedicated as cemetery, this land is tax exempt. Therefore if
this assessment were challenged, there may be some difficulty
in proving benefit.
The cemetery has indicated that it would be opposed to any
assessments levied against the property (see the attached
letter). However, further discussions with the cemetery
attorney have taken place, and Staff has learned that the
cemetery is not necessarily opposed to deferred assessments.
Deferment of the assessments would not be a severe burden to
the.City, as TIF financing arrangements could be made to
cover the costs of carrying this portion of the assessment
obligation until the cemetery property is developed or sold.
Thus, we should plan on assessing this property, and give
serious consideration to a request for deferment from the
cemetery board. Note a that request must be made before the
City can defer the assessments.
In the event that it is not possible to levy assessments
against the non -dedicated Acacia land, TIF could be used to
cover the obligation.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council hold the public hearing and
implement the assessment procedures as described in the
feasibility report, with the understanding that a deferment
to the cemetery would be seriously considered if requested.
After designating the assessment methods Staff recommends
Council order Staff to begin preparation of plans and
specifications, subject to receiving an approved development
plan from the developer.
ACTION REQUIRED
Hold the public hearing and pass a motion closing the public
hearing and adopting Resolution 90- RESOLUTION ORDERING
IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
SANITARY SEWERS, WATER, STORM SEWERS, AND STREET CONSTRUCTION
TO SERVE THE GARRON SITE AND ADJACENT AREAS
(IMPROVEMENT NO. 84 PROJECT NO. 2)
IL
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION
OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SANITARY SEWERS, WATER,
STORM SEWERS AND STREET CONSTRUCTION TO SERVE THE GARRON
SITE AND ADJACENT AREAS
(IMPROVEMENT NO. 84, PROJECT NO. 2)
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the third day of
April, 1990, at 8:00 o'clock P.M. in the City Hall of the
City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota pursuant to resolution
duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights on the question of the proposed construction of the
following described improvements:
The construction of an extension to the City's sanitary
sewer system, including appurtenances and incidentals
thereto, and the acquisition of easements, and the
reconstruction where necessary of streets and easements
in the area hereinafter more particularly described.
The construction of an extension to the City's water
distribution system including appurtenances and
incidentals thereto, and the acquisition of easements,
and the reconstruction where necessary of streets and
easements in the area hereinafter more particularly
described.
The construction of a storm sewer system including
appurtenances and incidental thereto and the acquisition
of easements, in and for the area hereinafter more
particularly described.
The construction of street improvements consisting of
the acquisition of easements and the grading,
stabilization, drainage and bituminous surfacing, and
the construction of concrete curbs and gutters on the
streets to be situated in the area hereinafter more
particularly described.
WHEREAS, due publication of the notice of public hearing
on said proposed.construction has been attended to; and
WHEREAS, mailed notice of said hearing has been mailed
more than 10 days before the date of said hearing to the
owners of each parcel situated within the area proposed to be
assessed, all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota
Statutes, and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer reported that the proposed
improvement and construction thereof were feasible and
desirable and further reported on the proposed costs of said
improvements and construction thereof; and
WHEREAS, the area proposed to be assessed for said
improvements is situated within the City of Mendota Heights
in Dakota County, Minnesota and is more particularly
described as follows:
Those parcels North of LeMay Avenue, South and West of
State Trunk Highway 55, and East of State Trunk Highway 13.
WHEREAS, the City Council then proceeded to hear all
persons interested in said improvement and all persons were
afforded an opportunity to present their views and objections
to the making of said improvements.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota as follows:
1. That it is advisable, feasible, expedient and
necessary that the City of Mendota Heights construct
the above described improvements, and it is hereby
ordered that said improvement be made.
2. That the City Engineer be and he is hereby
authorized and directed to prepare plans and
specifications for said improvement.
3. That said improvement shall hereafter be know and
designated as Improvement No. 84, Project No. 2.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights
this third day of April, 1990.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Charles E. Mertensotto
Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
CARL W. CUMMINS, P.A.
Attorney At Law
2000 American National Bank Building
5th and Minnesota Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
(612) 223-5047
March 15, 1990
City of Mendota Heights
Mendota Heights City Hall
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118
Re: Proposed assessments for improvements on Pilot Knob Road
(CSAH 31 and CR31A)
Gentlemen:
This office represents Acacia Park Cemetery Association, a public
cemetery located within Mendota Heights,•Minnesota. The Cemetery
has received a Notice of Hearing on the proposed construction of
sanitary sewers and other street improvements on Pilot Knob Road
where it lies adjacent to the Cemetery.
For clarification, that part of the Cemetery property lying west of
Pilot Knob Road is and has been highly developed as a d'emetery and
for burial purposes. Approximately 250 burials take place each year
in the Cemetery.
The Cemetery also owns a large tract of land east of and contiguous
with Pilot Knob Road. Substantially all of this land is used for
growing sod and trees for the exclusive use of Acacia Park CemeteTy.
In addition, on this easterly tract there are two (2) homes each
occupied by a party charged with patroling and protecting the Cemetery
and its grounds. Furthermore, there is a storage building in which
cemetery equipment is housed.
It is the Cemetery's position that.the area west of Pilot Knob
Road is exempt from assessment by virtue of the fact that it is a
developed cemetery within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes•3O6.14,
and that the area east of Pilot Knob Road is also being used for
cemetery purposes necessary to the operation and existence of the
cemetery and therefore is also exempt.
May we remind the City of Mendota Heights that this matter was actually
litigated in the District Court of Dakota County about twenty•(2O)
years go. Judge Breunig ruled that both the Cemetery properties west
and east of Pilot Knob Road were being used for cemetery purposes and
were exempt from taxes and assessments.
Very truly yours, CWC:•dlr
.4-,�
Carl W. Cummins
January 31, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Klayton Eckles
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Garron Feasibility Report Update
Job No. 8420
Improvement No. 84, Project 2
INTRODUCTION
About 5 years ago Steve Gage of the Garron Corporation was
developing a commercial site north of Acacia Cemetery. An
extensive feasibility report was completed that examined
utility service to the Garron Site and all of the areas
surrounding the Acacia Cemetery. The feasibility report was
accepted by the Council and plans were ordered for the
project.
Shortly after the plans were ordered, the project was put on
hold by the Garron Corporation. No actions have been taken
to develop the site since that time, until now. Steve Gage,
now of Edge Commercial Real Estate, has requested that the
City again begin pursuing utility service to the site.
It has been over three years since the report was accepted
and the public hearing closed. Therefore a new hearing is
required. Since there have been a number of changes in the
area in the past 5 years, the feasibility report should be
updated.
The discussion in this report will be centered on the changes
that have occurred since the last feasibility report. The
original report is attached, and changes in it are included
in the margins.
DISCUSSION
The original report includes discussion of four phases of
construction. Phase One concerns the utilities for the
Garron Site. Phase Two is the looped water connection,
portions of which have already been constructed, and the
remainder will be constructed as part of the State
interchange project (scheduled for 1991-92 completion).
Phase Three has.already been completed as part of the Big
Wheel project.- Phase Four, the Furlong Addition, is
discussed in•separate memo.
The overriding factor that affects all these phases of
construction is the completion of the T.H. 13-110-55
interchange project. The interchange project has been on the
drawing boards for more than 40 years, and there have been
repeated false alarms of impending construction. This time
however, it seems the project will be constructed as planned.
The Mendota Bridge is to be reconstructed (with federal money
involved), which means the interchange project must also be
completed.
The construction of the interchange project will mean our
watermain loop will have to be built, Pilot Knob will have to
be upgraded to MSA standards (after the county turnback), and
the utility stubs and storm sewer stubs to serve the Lemay
area will have to be installed. The Garron Site and all of
its utilities should still stand on its own, but coordination
with the County and state will be necessary to avoid any
redundant construction.
It has been 5 years since the original Feasibility Report, so
the costs listed in it are somewhat outdated. Generally, the
construction costs have been raised by 15% to reflect
inflation. Watermain costs have been increased by 20% due to
possible oversizing requirements by the Fire Marshall, and
storm sewer costs by 48t to reflect the tighter standards for
holding pond design. The new estimated total costs for Phase
One construction are as follows:
ITEM
COST
Sanitary Sewer
$237,000
Watermains
$119,000
Storm Sewers
$75,000
Streets
$101,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $562,000
County Participation $56,000
TOTAL CITY OBLIGATION $506,000
Assessments
These costs are proposed to be split in the same manner used
in the original report. There is one very significant
difference between the revised funding proposal and the old
proposal. In the original proposal the City intended to use
T.I.F. funds to pick up the assessments for those parcels
that would not have an immediate need for the utilities (MAC,
Acacia non -dedicated land, and private parcels). The
rational was that these parcel owners would ask for
deferments anyway, so the City might as well pick up these
costs with T.I.F. funds.
Staff has reexamined this issue and has formulated a new
opinion and recommendation on the matter. Staff proposes
that all the property that can possibly be assessed should be
assessed. If the property owners ask for deferments, the
Council can consider each on a case by case basis. This
proposal would increase the assessed amount from 21t to 63%
of the total project cost (ignoring county participation).
The following is a summary of the new proposed assessment
breakdown, including assessments for Acacia non -dedicated
land, and private land:
PROPERTY T.I.F FUNDS ASSESSMENT TOTAL
Garron Site
Acacia Cemetery
MAC Property
(United Properties)
Private Parcels
SUBTOTAL
County Participation
GRAND TOTAL
$110,500
$173,000 $174,400
(dedicated) (non -dedicated)
$13,600
$186,600
$17,500
$17,400
$319,400
$110,500
$347,400
$17,500
$30,600
$506,000
$56,000
$562,000
This increased use of assessments and decreased use of T.I.F.
money is the only major difference between this report and
the original report.
Questions to Resolve
Council should address the following questions:
1) Is the proposed reduction in T.I.F. expenditures, and
corresponding increase in assessments an acceptable method
of dividing the costs?
2) Is the newly updated feasibility report with all of the
proposed changes
RECOMMENDATION
The installation of utilities to serve the property known as
the Garron Site, is both technically and financially
feasible, and therefore Staff recommends Council accept this
report and order a public hearing.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO /
March 28, 1990
To: Mayor, City Council and City Admin_i�-,-�or
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assista(��
Subject: CASE NO. 90-05: Foto Mark, Inc.
CUP for Mining
DISCUSSION
Mike Meagher, representing Foto Mark, Inc. appeared before the
Planning Commission to request a Conditional Use Permit for Mining
for the purpose of removing greater than 400 cubic yards of earth.
(Ordinance 401, Section 4.13) Foto Mark, Inc. wishes to build a
future addition to their building and desires to grade a recently
acquired lot in order to accomodate any future additions.
The Planning Commission expressed some concern about the use
of retaining walls along the north and south.property lines.
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended that City
Council approve a Cond`-ignal Use Permit for Mining to allow the
removal of greater than 00 cubic yards of earth with the following
conditions:
1. That the grading plans eliminate the use of retaining walls.
2. That a maximum slope of 3:1 be utilized along the north and
south property lines.
ACTION REQUIRED
If City Council wishes to implement the Planning Commission's
recommendation, they should pass a motion granting a Conditional
Use Permit for Mining greater than 400 cubic yards of earth
conditioned on:
1. That the grading plans eliminate the use of retaining walls.
2. That a maximum slope of 3:1 be utilized along the north and
south property lines.
j6,000 COM'.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 22, 1990
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James E. Danielson, Public Works Direc
Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assist t(r§)
SUBJECT: Case No. 90-05: Foto Mark, Inc. -
CUP for Mining
DISCUSSION
Foto Mark, Inc. recently acquired some additional land
to the west of their facility located at 2411 Pilot Knob
Road. That land had been used as a stockpile area for
surplus fill dirt from the surrounding developments. Foto
Mark now desires to grade that area flat in anticipation of
building a future addition to their facility.
Removal, or mining, of greater than four hundred cubic
yards (400 cu. yds.) requires a conditional use permit.
(Ordinance No. 401, Section 4.13)
Retaining walls are shown along the boundaries along the
north and south property lines. Staff suggests coordination
be done with abutting neighbors to continue slopes onto
neighboring properties to avoid constructing retaining walls.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct the public hearing. Discuss the proposal with
the applicant and make a recommendation to the City Council.
JED/KLB:kkb
PLANNING REPORT
DATE:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ACTION REQUESTED:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
27 March 1990
90-05
Foto Mark Inc.
West of Pilot Knob Road,
Northerly of Mendota Heights
Road (see sketch)
Approval of Conditional Use
Permit to Remove Fill
1. The original site upon which the Foto Mark building was constructed
was expanded several years ago to include an area of land to the west.
The property added has a higher grade then the original parcel. In
addition, when the original building was constructed, substantial amounts
of soil material were piled onto the rear of the regional site, thus
making the current grade higher than what previously existed.
2. Foto Mark Inc. now proposes to excavate. the site so as to prepare it
for expansion of their facilities. Accordingly, they have submitted :.
short statement dated March 2, 1990 which is attached and a site plan
indicating existing and proposed contours for the excavation. The plan
also indicates the proposed expansion for the building and accompanying
parking facilities.
3. Staff has reviewed the development proposal with Mike Meagher, Plant
Manager for Foto Mark Inc. The expansion and site development
program appears appropriate and conforms to Ordinance requirements.
The building expansion can occur without approval of the Planning
Commission and Council, though the proposed excavation requires a
Conditional Use Permit because it exceeds 400 cubic yards.
4. Before a
Building Permit is issued
for the structure and
for the
development of the site (presumably
following the excavation
at some
point in
time), a more detailed site
plan would have to be
prepared
indicating
drainage, utilities, revisions
for curbing the parking
lot (not
indicated
on this plan), and including a landscape plan.
5. With respect to the proposed grading, however, we have some concerns
about the indication of the method of terracing the site on the north
and south property lines. You will notice a detail drawing at 1/4" to
the foot indicating a series of stepped concrete blocks for retaining
walls is shown in the upper left-hand corner of the drawing. Concrete
block used in this way tends to deteriorate quickly and does not
produce an attractive result. Some other form of "keystone type" of
retaining wall, natural stone, or timbers offers a more effective and
attractive solution. The Planning Commission may wish to discuss this
with the applicant at the meeting.
r -
Foto Mark Inc., Case No. 90-05
Page 2
6. Technically the retaining walls as laid out in the site plan do not work
in the sense that the various terrace levels do not match the contours
of the contiguous properties to the north and the south. Obviously,
when the work is done in the field, it will have to be made to
conform to the contours of the contiguous properties. This will result
in less lineal footage of retaining wall than indicated on the site plan.
However, we assume that perhaps the plan as indicated is merely a
general symbol of the retaining wall and was not to be an exact
configuration of the lineal footage of retaining wall to be applied in the
field.
7. In general, the type and level of retaining walls proposed are better
done if constructed of "drywall". This means there is no mortar
between the joints, allowing the material to move with seasonal action
caused by frost. Some material not requiring to be painted and not
laid up with rigid mortar joints will likely be more successful. Another
part of the solution might be to make the terraced strip wider than the
10 feet indicated on the plans. There is obviously adequate space here
to utilize a greater width in the terraced strip. You will note that
parts of the terraced area are to be 12 feet high. Accomplishing this
in a 10 -foot wide strip is difficult resulting in more than a 100 percent
slope.
8. In summary, the proposed development proposed reasonable subject to
changes in the technique for accomplishing grade changes proposed along
the side lot lines.
.m.
City of
Mendota Heights
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
OF
PLANNING REQUEST
Case No. O
Date of Ap lication
Fee Paid 345- q() EfLE a 3 U LP
Applicant Name: FrAo `f1 az K T,,)a PH: 4�_S 4.— 7 7,7
` (Firsct)_ WD
`
Address: _Q "i 1 1 Ts' , 0_� K t� [�!°7 mP t0 dD'KtNeiC J AS Q -b
Aasac--Name:
Address:
(Number & Street)
(tet)
(City) (State) (Zip)
(First)
(Mn
(Number & Street) - (City) (State) (Zip)
Street Location of Property in Question: ',�;& M t? 0,S 4V lnt wr
Legal Description of Property:
Type of Request:
Rezoning
Conditional Use Permit
Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D.
Plan Approval
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Applicable City Ordinance Number
Present Zoning of Property _
Proposed Zoning of Property
Present Use
Proposed Use
I hereby declare that all statements made in this reques
material are true.
Variance
Subdivision Approval
Wetlands Permit
Other (attach explanation)
Section
(Date)
(Received by - Title)
1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
FOTO MARK
INCORPORATED
2411 PILOT KNOB ROAD
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55120
454-7777
March 2, 1990
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Dear Council Members;
Foto Mark Inc. is asking the council for the approval of a Conditional
Use Permit. This permit is to be used for the removal of fill from
this site. Foto Mark Inc. purchased approximately 3 acres in 1988
labled Outlot B Pabst Addition. This property was purchased to allow
Foto Mark to expand in the future. To prepare this property for future
expansion we must remove fill in the area shown on the blue prints.
When the original building was built, the area was excavated -and all
of the fill was placed on a hill behind our building. Foto Mark is
now asking to remove this fill and prepare the area for future parking
and buildine site.
Sincerely,
r ;
Michael T. Meagher
Plant Manager
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING
March 9, 1990
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the Planning Commission of
the City of Mendota Heights will meet at 8:45 P.M. on March
27, 1990, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria
Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota, to consider an application
from Foto Mark, Inc. for a conditional use permit to remove
more than 400 cubic yards of fill for the purpose of an
expansion for the following described property:
Outlot B, Pabst Addition
More particularly, this land is the rear portion of the
Foto Mark site located at 2411 Pilot Knob Road.
This notice is pursuant to City of Mendota Heights Ordinance
No. 401. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference
to the proposed conditional use permit will be heard at this
meeting.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING
March 16, 1990
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights will meet at 8:15 P.M. or as soon
thereafter as possible on Tuesday, April 3, 1990, in the City
Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights,
Minnesota, to consider an application from Foto Mark, Inc.
for a conditional use permit to remove more than 400 cubic
yards of fill for the purpose of an expansion for the
following described property:
Outlot B, Pabst Addition
More particularly, this land is the rear portion of the
Foto Mark site located at 2411 Pilot Knob Road.
This notice is pursuant to City of Mendota Heights Ordinance
No. 401. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference
to the proposed conditional use permit will be heard at this
meeting.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
MAkA.&
City of
, hiendota Heights
March 21, 1990
Mr. Michael T. Meagher
Foto Mark, Inc.
2411 Pilot Knob Road
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Dear Mr. Meagher: �Ui�.•�
Your application for a cj ( , will be
considered by the Planning Commission at their next regularly
scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday,ouJ-J -
The Planning Commission meeting starts at 7:30 o'clock P.M..,
here at the City Hall in the Council Chambers. You, or a
representative, should plan on attending the meeting, in
order that your application will receive Commission
consideration.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
Sincerely,
Ni�-tn
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
KLB:kkb
1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
.m .
Mr. Michael T. Meagher
Foto Mark, Inc.
2411 Pilot Knob Road"
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Dear Mr. Meagher:
City of
Mendota Heights
March 30, 1990
Your application for a
will be considered by the City Council at their next
regularly scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday,.*
A-prN 3, t 9 q c The Council meeting starts at
7:30 o'clock P.M., here at City Hall in the Council Chambers.
You, or a representative, should plan on attending the
meeting, in order that your application will receive Council
consideration.
me.
The Planning Commission recommended ,r_n,%So- CC. LV4,'i'coke.c9
vLOf- Lrs 1 V%4
" t !..9 wa. l 15 a L -D 4-{,.a,.+ -fZ
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
Sincerely,
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
KLB:kkb
1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
CITY OF MF•NDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
To: Mayor, City Council and City Adm6rN actor
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant(
ssistant OL13
Subject: CASE NO. 90-03: Centex Homes -Rezoning, CUP for PUD,
Preliminary Plat, and Wetlands
Continued Hearing
DISCUSSION
The Centex public hearing was ordered for the City Council
meeting of April 3, 1990 in anticipation of a Planning Commission
recommendation from their March meeting. The Planning Commission
continued their hearing until April to allow time for the developer
to meet with the neighborhood group to attempt to address some of
their concerns.
The Planning Commission also felt they needed more time to
adequately study and review the plans submitted by Centex.
ACTION REQUIRED
Continue the public hearing until the City Council meeting of
May 1, 1990 at 8:00 p.m. this being the first meeting following the
Planning Commission's April meeting.'
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 28, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Ad i for
FROM: Klayton H. Eckles
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Proposal to salvage acquired property
DISCUSSION
John Winzig, the purchaser of one of the homes out on Highway
55, has submitted a proposal to salvage and remove everything
in one of the other remaining two homes in the area (see
attached). The house (2161 Highway 55), is one that the Fire
Department is using for practice.
According to the Fire Chief, the Department is practicing in
the two buildings as of March 29. I talked to John Maczko
and he informed me that both the remaining houses are
incorporated into their training plans. Therefore, although
Mr. Winzig has been very cooperative regarding the home he
purchased and moved, it doesn't appear reasonable to allow
further salvage.
As a side note, Mr. Bill Nelson, the original person to bid
for salvage of these two houses, never signed an agreement
with the City and therefore never partook in any salvage
operations. He was recently notified that no agreement would
be honored in the future, as the Fire Department is
commencing with its training operations.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council deny the request from John Winzig
for salvage and clean-up rights for 2161 Highway 55.
March 20, i 9g0
Dear -City of Mendota Heights:
Sub jet-",
$100.00 Bid proposal to buy City owened house for salvage.
Located at 2-161 Hwy. 55. This bid is submitted by John v'Vinzig
710 Lone Oak Rd. Ea.gen Mn.
1. Buyer shall remove entire house and all related
debries that come from the salvage of said house.
Removal of debries such as shingles, siding, glass,
sheetrock ect. will be remove in 20 or 40 yard roll
off rubbish contaners.
2.Buyer agrees to comply with all City laws and OrdinanceE
regarding this matter. Buyer agrees to pla.ce•a 01000.00
bond in a.City escrow account to guarntee satisfactury
completion of the removal and clean up of said house.
Buyer will also fill basment.
3.Buyer shall indemnify -and save harmless the City of
Mendota. Heights, its officers, employees and assignees
from all suits, actions and claims of any charter
brought because of injuries or damages recieved or
sustained on account of the operations of said buyer.
Sin yrely,
John Winz i
g
.m.
March 20, 1990
City of
Alendota Heights
Mr. William Nelson
2311 Highway 55
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120
Subject: Acquired Properties
Job No. 8923
Dear Mr. Nelson:
This letter is to inform you that the City will be commencing
with its planned burning of the two City owned homes at 2143 and 2161
Highway 55. Therefore all City offers to allow salvaging of these two
structures are hereby canceled.
Note, that since no signed agreement was ever received, you do
not now and never did have any rights to the property. All City
offers were subject to a signed agreement. This point of clarifica-
tion is made because it appears you may have forgotten the terms of
the offer, based on your phone conversation with Guy Kullander on
February 26, 1990.
An unknown party or parties salvaged several items without au-
thorization (some of which you claimed to witness). Therefore the
City has increased its patrols in the area in an attempt to apprehend
the offending parties. We appreciate yourinput in this process.
I regret that you were not able to participate in the agreement.
Unfortunately it is no longer possible to allow citizens onto the
premises as the Fire Department activities make the site hazardous.
Thank you for your interest in the City bidding process.
Sincerely,
Klayton H. Eckles, P.E.
KHE: dfw
1101 Victoria Curve • Mendota Heights, AIN • 55118 452.1850
MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT
MEMO
,DATE: March 29,1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, Tom Lawell City Administrator
FROM: John Maczko, Fire Chi
SUBJECT: House Bums
I've been asked to bring you up to date as to. the status of our progress on the houses on the west
side of town. We have recently received our permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
to conduct the training burns. Our schedule as it stands now is use the homes for squad training
on forcible entry, ventilation, search and rescue, smoke drills and small controlled burns during
April and May this will cover approximately 10-12 training sessions. We anticipate the final
demise of the houses to be in late May or Early June. If you would be interested in participating or
observing the exercises please contact me and we will arrange something exciting.
JPM:jpm
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 30, .1990
TO: Mayor and city Council
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Admini.stlk r 4
SUBJECT: Janitorial Service at City Facilities
INTRODUCTION
Giveathe City's significant capital.investment in its
three primary buildings, -City Hall, Public Works facility and
Fire Station, quality maintenance and upkeep is of vital
importance. In the past, routine cleaning services at these
buildings has been handled individually at each facility with
varying degrees of success. Due to several recent
developments, itis desirable to revisit this issue to
receive additional Council input.
HISTORY
During late 1989, building maintenance at the three
primary City facilities was accomplished as follows:
city Hall.- Part=time staff.position responsible for
janitorial duties. Approximately 28 hours
per week.
Public Works - Public Works employees responsible for
upkeep of work areas in building. Common
areas were minimally maintained by Public
Works through the allocation of a few
hours per week.
Fire Station - Volunteer fire fighters responsible for
cleaning of facility.
During the development of the 1990 Budget, the issue of
building maintenance/janitorial duties was generally
discussed. Funds allocated through the budget are as
follows:
City Hall - $7,800 for continuation of part-time staff
person.
4) It would provide uniform maintenance and janitorial
services for city buildings. '
5) It would not require training of any personnel to use the
buffers or cleaning equipment.
6) Lambert being a firefighter is very familiar with the
fire station and the needs of the fire station so there
would,be very little time needed to train him.
7) Lambert has done an excellent job at the City Hall.
At the budget hearing there were some concerns expressed by
the Mayor and it was decided that we would not specifically name
a person and that we would talk to the issue later. With that in
mind, I pursued two other options. One being the possibility of
hiring someone else to perform the janitorial duties and the
other being the hiring of a contract maintenance firm.
V1 IN03IS thN0 h_*?
Option 1. Utilize Lambert.
Option 2. Advertise for the position.`
If this option is one that Council would like to
pursue, they should establish an hourly wage that this
person would receive for approximately 6 hours per
week.
Option 3. Contract Maintenance.
Note: We have tried contract maintenance for other ,
areas within the department (i.e. lawn care) and have
had poor success in getting reliable personnel. City
Hall also had poor results when they contracted janito-
rial services.
RECOMMENDATION
My recommendation is that the fire department utilize
Lambert for their janitorial services for the reasons stated
earlier in this memo.
ACTION REQUIRED
Council should deliberate the question and choose the
alternative that they feel would best fit their intent.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 27, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City trator
FROM: Klayton H. Eckles
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Local Water Resources Management Plan
INTRODUCTION
As part of the state requirements regarding Watershed
Management Organizations (WMO), the City must complete a
Local Water Resources Management Plan by August of 1991.
This plan covers issues and problems concerning storm water
quality and quantity within the City. We had intended to
complete our plan via a joint venture with the Dakota County
Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD). Due to some
unforeseen events it is now evident that Mendota Heights
should reconsider its options.
DISCUSSION
In December of 1989 Council approved an agreement which would
enable the City to work with the SWCD to complete our local
plan. The proposal by the SWCD had a maximum cost not to
exceed $32,000. The fact that city staff would complete
approximately one quarter of the work meant that the out of
pocket cost to the City would have only been $26,000.
Comparison bids were received from three private consultants
and the bids ranged from $39,000 to $54,000.
In early January the County Board approved the agreement, but
shortly thereafter the three SWCD staff members in charge of
completing the plan took employment elsewhere. Although the.
SWCD has partially re -staffed, this has delayed the project
and Staff now doubts that the project can be completed as
planned. The new staff members lack knowledge of Mendota
Heights and understanding of what we want in our plan.
Staff has met with BARR engineering, who had the second
lowest bid, and they have indicated that their bid of $39,000
still stands. BARR has completed a number of projects in and
around the city, including the Lower Mississippi WMO plan,
the Inver Grove Heights local plan, and the Ivy Creek study.
Staff has been impressed with the work performed by BARR thus
far.
Given these events, there are three options available to the
City:
1) The existing arrangement with SWCD could be pursued
despite the new SWCD staff and high city staff workload.
2) The entire process could be repeated, requesting proposals
from consultants, reviewing these, then choosing a new
consultant.
3) The project could be awarded to BARR for their original
bid of $39,000.
The last option holds the most merit. It can be accomplished
quickly, which is important now that the time available has
diminished. It is a reasonable bid, given that the other
bids were both over $10,000 more than this one. And this
option would require the least amount of staff commitment.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council direct Staff to enter into an
agreement with BARR Engineering for the completion of a Water
Resources Management Plan for a price not to exceed $39,000.
Staff also recommends Council take action to withdraw from
the agreement with the Dakota County SWCD.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council concurs with Staff's recommendation then Council
should pass a motion directing Staff to prepare an agreement
with BARR Engineering for the completion of a Water Resources
Management Plan for a price not to exceed $39,000.
Council should also pass a motion to cancel the agreement
with the SWCD and direct Staff to notify the SWCD of this
action.
o I n
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 30, 1990
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Admi;Lyr
FROM: James E. Dani '"���
Public Works it r
SUBJECT: 1990 Trail Constr tion
DISCUSSION
There are approximately 15 miles of trail to be constructed
within the park referendum funding. Six miles are proposed to be
constructed under this contract, the remaining to be constructed
within the park contruction and in later years. The plans and
specs have been prepared for this year's contract and the
attached drawings show their location. Completed plans and specs
will be available Tuesday evening for review if desired.
EASEMENTS
As part of this construction there have been a number of
easements to be acquired. All but one of these easements are now
signed and an alternate route can be utilized if that easement is
not gained.
DAKOTA COUNTY
Several Dakota County permits and funding are needed for
this work. We understand the permits are approved and to be
forth coming. -The funding will not be decided until after the
April 24th County Board meeting. The trail along Delaware Avenue
between TH110 and Huber Drive is proposed to be widened
shoulders, and the east side of Delaware is in Sunfish Lake.
Dakota County staff supports County funding of the Sunfish Lake
side however, Board approval is being delayed until the April
24th meeting to allow time for a comprehensive trail policy that
is now being developed. If the County will not fund the Sunfish
Lake segment at this time, we will delete that segment until a
later date.
MSA FUNDING
MSA funding is being sought for 5/8 of the costs along Marie
Avenue. A variance is being applied for to allow that funding
(see consent agenda). Should that variance be denied the costs
for this segment will need to be funded entirely by the
Referendum.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the plans and specs
for the 1990 trail construction and authorize the taking of bids.
Total estimated cost for this construction is $303,000 with the
proposed MSA share to be $42,000.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation
they should pass a motion approving the plans & specs and
authorize staff to take bids, bids to be opened May 4, 1990.
IF7*•W'1-
ME NDOTA
HEIGHTS
TRAIL
PROJECTS
SEPARATED OFF-STREET TRAIL
(Preferred - safest)
Varies
O cU�
wTDENED SHOULDERS (PAINT STRIPE)
(Used only when topography
restricts building off-street)
ON -STREET (NO PAINT MARKINGS)
(Only streets with low
traffic volumes)
c°�
a-[ Z
C)
• . �
•
11
�
W
. ,
/
1
vi
-
•- - W �
�!/
' 1 ~,
`
r
•
•
•
•
O
•
-
•�U
W
• •
'0
•
_
0-N
• • _• •
•
O
[J
[1
'
�J
• : • __ • •
/
Y
O
i (i
• •
• •
•
vi , • f CTU.
•
_ , •
O
• •
•
••
N
"s
..
H
O
�
❑ •
O
•
❑11
O
•
❑
Q
H w
p o a
O
N
x a �
w a w
H
O
o
o`a�o"
os0
�
/ ��r
.wed.■ '`
oa
ti 11-0
cao�
v
,i
�.
111,1.
I
�
. •
fWNd/
•
�
'KITS\�iQ���i
•
I
, �
a
:Il�h 1
•
•
13
❑
�
ii
W
O
r � � I ' \
�
❑
-11
1 1 • •
°0
U
3^184 8018uvm
Q
w
M 3
ft
�J
•.�.
H
Un
=J
• i
.
A3lS3M
•
• •
I
-
C�
•
•
I
• �
O
'
e
Q
• -
• •
lu
u
_
°
•
W
C1
• •'
0000
s d�
' - - - - - - •',
U)
H
pP_,
O
H
N
�C
%
�D
H
w
a
w
U
vaeeda
eve M'
sees „� ase.• ��n.
oil
.. ..
!! � ori �� �ie►��=,.4
J •
• �
o
W
O
•
-
•
0
H
4-
I V
X
°
10-.44
W
• s
•
•
O
Nb 3HAkii
O
\
1
H
• •
\
•i
,
•
� V. • t
\
VL
❑❑
❑
�
H
71
410'
-14
O
0
Q
w
o
W
D H
a w
O
L
a
z
H
�TE5 _POWER
-p
w
I Y MARSH
r
V
�-+
-PARK
0U
H
o
x_p
❑
•
•
.
❑
•
Z
o
wU
�
H
�
�
H
1
wQ
CP
H
rn
�TE5 _POWER
rrµnn�
V
I Y MARSH
w
�-+
-PARK
❑
•
•
.
❑
•
•
•
❑
CP
N
H
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 30, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Admi
SUBJECT: Air Noise Task Force Appointments
INTRODUCTION
As discussed by the City Council at our last meeting,
the City's proposal to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
(MAC) for a 180 day test of our aircraft fanning proposal has
been referred to a "blue ribbon" task force for further
consideration. As part of this proposal each participating
party is to appoint representatives to the task force. It is
the intent of this memo to discuss these appointments and our
approach to this issue.
DISCUSSION
Attached please find a letter from Mr. Nigel Finney, MAC
Deputy Director, concerning this issue. In the letter, Mr.
Finney reviews the recent action taken by the Metropolitan
Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) to refer this matter
to the task force. As pointed out in previous correspondence
to the Council, we had anticipated to receive from MAC a much
more detailed explanation as to the mission and procedures of
this task force. As you can see from the attached letter,
these details were not provided. Therefore, it is
recommended that any appointments made by the City to this
task force be done so under terms and conditions acceptable
to the City. A draft letter to Mr. Jeffery Hamiel, MAC
Director, setting forth these terms and conditions is
attached for your consideration.
It should be noted that the City of Eagan has already
appointed its representatives to this task force. Eagan has
appointed Mr. Jon Hohenstein, Assistant to the City
Administrator, and Mr. Dave Gustafson, Councilmember, as
their representatives.
One of the items included in our terms and conditions is
that each City be allowed to utilize additional personnel as
needed during the meetings of the task force. This would
include our ability to utilize our hired technical
consultants on this issue. Therefore, the issue of who is
actually appointed as our representatives is not a major
decision in that we anticipate utilizing as many individuals
as necessary during the course of the task force discussion.
Individuals who have been particularly active on this issue
in the past include the following:
1. Tom Lawell, City Administrator
2. Larry Shaughnessy, City Treasurer
3. Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant
4. Bob Collette, City Consultant
5. Dave Braslau, City Consultant
6. Bernie Friel, MASAC Representative
7. Mayor and City Councilmembers
RECOMMENDATION
Given our ability to utilize any and all of the above
listed individuals in this discussion, staff has no
recommendation as to the specific individuals appointed to
this task force.
ACTION REQUIRED
Council should review the attached letters and offer
suggestions as to the terms and conditions which are
acceptable for our participation in this task force process.
Should the terms and conditions prove acceptable, the Council
should make a motion formally appointing the two Mendota
Heights representatives to the task force and direct staff to
communicate this selection to MAC.
14 9 # M.%q
Attachments
fA4WAPdA'*'6 Cal& Pain
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 11700 TWIN CITY AIRPORT MINNESOTA 55111
PHONE (612) 726-1892
March 20, 1990
Mr. Thomas Lawell
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
St. Paul, MN 55118
Dear Mr. Lawell:
At the 3/7/90 MASAC meeting, MAC Executive Director, Jeff Hamiel, presented
MASAC with a proposal to transfer the topic of the Eagan/Mendota Heights
Corridor from the MASAC Operations Committee to a special MAC Corridor Task
Force to accelerate any possible resolution. Mr. Hamiel's proposal included
the following suggested membership:
MAC
Met Council
MASAC
Mendota Heights
Eagan
FAA
MPCA
1 member and chair
1 member
1 member (MASAC chair)
2 members
2 members
(advisory only)
(advisory only)
This proposal was moved as an official motion and was passed by the full MASAC
body (14 yes, 4 no, 2 abstain).
In order to proceed, with a regular meeting schedule for the MAC Corridor Task
Force, I am requesting that the City of Mendota Heights appoint 2 members,
each with an alternate and send me an official letter of appointment. The MAC
staff will schedule Meeting #1 as soon as all appointments are complete.
Sincerely,
Nigel Finney
Deputy Executive Director
Planning & Environment
/jd
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an equal opportunity emplover
OFFiCi LOCA{ I IG:• (ii 40 ,a1h AVE. S0. -rPk 1 iC.nb§i!:h.,_ Fi ,--f.iIN1,Lt; 1':J,->Gt?.l 1, A. U IVi.-iiia/..
Mr. Jeffery Hamiel
Executive Director
Metropolitan Airports
P.O. Box 11700
Twin Cities Airport,
Dear Jeff:
Commission
MN 55111
The City is in receipt of a letter dated March 20, 1990
from Mr. Nigel Finney requesting that the City of Mendota
Heights appoint representatives to the recently formed "blue
ribbon" task force. As per our recent meeting on March 16,
1990 it is the intent of this task force to fairly and
reasonably address the request of the City of Mendota Heights
for a 180 day test of our fanned corridor proposal. It is
the intent of this letter to inform you of the appointments
to this task force recently made by the City Council, and to
outline the terms and conditions we have mutually agreed will
apply to the activities of this task force.
As we discussed on March 16th, along with
representatives of the City of Eagan, it is the mission of
this task force to consider the recent Mendota Heights
proposal. It is hoped that through this task force we will
be able to reach a concensus as a group as to the
operational changes we would like to see for aircraft
operations departing runways 11R and 11L. As we agreed on
March 16th, discussions which take place before the task
force are to be fully public and will not be limited to only
the finite number of appointed members. More specifically,
each party will be able to utilize to any extent they wish
the services of technical consultants and other staff members
they wish to be involved in the process.
It is also our understanding that the procedures of this
committee will not include formal voting processes which
could result in majority and minority opinions on the issues
discussed. It is our mutual understanding that the purpose
of this task force is to develop a consensus, rather than to
just make a decision. It is further our understanding that
this task force will be operating under a tight time frame in
developing this concensus. At the MASAC meeting conducted
March 7th, you stated that the work of the task force
would be completed within 90-120 days. Thus it is our
expectation that the task force will complete its mission
sometime in June 1990.
It is further understood that any concensus developed
via this task force will be presented to the Metropolitan
Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) for their review.
Although this issue has largely been framed as one involving
two suburban communities, comments made by MASAC members
during the March 7th meeting indicated that other communities
could also be directly impacted by any test which may be
conducted. It is also understood that MASAC will be kept up
to date as to the progress of this task force at each of
their monthly meetings leading up to the final presentation
by the task force in June - July.
Based on the above understanding, on April 3, 1990 the
Mendota Heights City Council appointed the following
representatives and alternates to the task force:
Representative Alternate
er' POas°
As we have p ev ousl� dis ssed, the use of the task
force to address h corridor i sue is contrary to our
original expectati Ef MASAC c nsideration. The City
Council would like ehasi-s that our participation in this
process is premisedon the s ructure, procedures and time
table outlined above. Shoul your understanding of the
process differ in any ma ial way from that presented above,
please contact me as soon as possible. Please let me know
when we can expect the first meeting of the task force.
Sincerely,
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Tom Lawell
City Administrator
MTL:kkb
cc: Tom Hedges, City of Eagan
�=o
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
A/3 .
MEMO
April 3, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Admirer
SUBJECT: Air Noise Task Force Appointments - Additional
Information
INTRODUCTION
Mayor Mertensotto
Council consideration
Metropolitan Airports
on aircraft noise.
DISCUSSION
has suggested that staff prepare for
his suggested appointments to the
Commission (MAC) blue ribbon task force
As you may recall, MAC has requested that the City of
Mendota Heights appoint two individuals as their formal
representatives to the newly formed task force. Detailed
information regarding this request is included as item 9f in
your agenda packet for April 3, 1990. To summarize, MAC has
requested that the City appoint two representatives, along
with alternates, to represent the City during the course of
the task force endeavor. Mayor Mertensotto has suggested the
following appointments:
Representative Alternate
1. Mayor Mertensotto Joe Meagher -
2. Tom Lawell Kevin Batchelder
Mayor Mertensotto has suggested that Mr. Meagher be
included as an alternate representative to the task force
given his interest and knowledge of this subject. Mr.
Meagher has indicated to the Mayor that he is interested in
serving in this capacity and will be a willing, rather than
an obstructionist, participant in the process. Mayor
Mertensotto has indicated to Mr. Meagher that if appointed,
he will be serving as a representative, and at the pleasure,
of the City Council.
ACTION REQUIRED
Consider Mayor Mertensotto's suggested appointments to
the task force as part of agenda item 9f.
MTL:kkb
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
March 30, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Admi i or
SUBJECT: Consideration of Sibley Park Agreement
INTRODUCTION
It is the intent of the City and School District to
jointly develop and operate an athletic field complex for the
mutual benefit of both parties. This agenda item seeks
Council approval of a joint powers agreement between the two
parties to initiate this joint undertaking.
DISCUSSION
In past several years, it has been the wish of both
parties to jointly develop the proposed athletic complex.
Negotiations between the two parties have been ongoing, but
were recently intensified given the passage of the City's
park bond referendum in 1989. The negotiating parties have
recently agreed to recommend the attached agreement to their
governing bodies for final consideration. Recognizing the
negotiation process for what it is, the agreement represents
a compromise on behalf of both parties, each of which has a
strong desire to undertake the improvements.
Highlights of the proposed agreement include the
following:
1. The agreement contemplates operation of the facility
for a minimum of 40 years. This long term
commitment is representative of the dedication each
party holds to providing its constituents with the
best available amenities.
2. The agreement obligates each party to contribute a
minimum of $15,000 per year to assure high quality
maintenance and operation of the facility. Future
financial contributions to the facility will be
considered in a joint annual budget meeting held in
June of each year.
3. The agreement establishes the School District as the
primary entity responsible for maintenance and
scheduling. The centralized approach to operating
the facility should help minimize conflicts between
those wishing to utilize the facility.
4. The agreement establishes numerous avenues which
could be utilized to settle disputes which may occur
during the course of this agreement. The
negotiating committee believes that disputes would
be settled in accordance with the following
progression:
a. Administrative Negotiation
b. Mutually Acceptable Dispute Resolution
Committee
C. Binding Arbitration
d. Possible Legal Action
The negotiating committee feels that this progressive
approach to dispute resolution adequately protects the
interests of both entities.
It is contemplated that the School Board will be
considering approval of this agreement at its scheduled April
2, 1990 meeting. Representatives of the School Board have
indicated that they anticipate the agreement will be
approved at that meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of the negotiating committee
that the attached agreement be approved enabling us to
undertake this joint development.
ACTION REQUIRED
Should the Council concur with the above recommendation,
a motion should be made approving the attached agreement and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the appropriate
documents.
rVVVM"aq' 7
4
1.,
MAR -29-1990 14:25 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995 P.02
,end nden �Sc�i+ooC Dis�ric No. 197
Serving West Saint Paul, Mendota Heights, Lilydale, Mendota, Sunfish Lake and portions of Eagan and Inver Grove Heights
1897 Delaware /avenue • West Saint Paul, Minnesota 55118 • (612) 681-2300
MEMORANDUM
T O : School Board
FROM; Dr. Bruce R. Anderson 8 96
DATE., March 29, 1990
R E: JOINT EFFORT BY THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS / INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT 197 REGARDING ATHLETIC AND RECREATION NEEDS
In the fall of 1989 the School District administration met with representatives of the cities of Mendota
Heights, West St. Paul, and Eagan with the purpose of identifying oommon needs in the areas of athletic
and recreational facilities. A comprehensive report was produced as a part of that study. This report
identified the School District's need for improved athletic facilities at Sibley High School as well as the City
of Mendota Heights need for improved athletic and recreational facilities within the City of Mendota
Heights. It was determined that a joint effort on the part of the City and the School District could be of
benefit to both parties.
A joint City of Mendota Heights / Independent School District 197 Committee to study the athletic and
recreational needs at Sibley High School was established by the School Board. The committee has met
on several occasions, exchanged proposals and has arrived at a proposed joint powers agreement
regarding the improvement of the athletic facilities at Sibley Hlgh School.
The intent of the document is that the City and the School District will contribute land to the project, while
still maintaining ownership to that land. The City of Mendota Heights will finance all improvements to the
site. Those improvements will be as shown on the attached Exhibit A and will include the following:
One Baseball Field
One Soccer Field
Two Softball Fields
One Comfort Station
One Play Area
The ongoing operations and maintenance costs of the improved facilities will be shared equally by both
the City and the School District.
Kathryn L. Haight, Chair
Joseph P. Polski. Clerk
Dennis P. Barrett, Treasurer
Srvoe R. Anderson. Superintendent of Schoofs
"WE ARE A MEMBER OF AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMUNITY"
Patrice Bataglia. Director
Robert M. Doffing. Director
James T. Nikolai, Director
MAR -29-1990 14:25 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO
4522995 P.03
The proposed agreement is has been reviewed by the Board Committee established for that purpose, by
the District administration and legal council. The Committee and the administration recommend its
approval.
SUGGESTED RESOLUTION
I move approval of the joint powers agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and Independent
School District No. 197, as attached, for the improvement of athletic facies at Henry Sibley High School
MAR -29-1990 14:26 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995 P.04
This agreement made , 1994, between Independent School District No.
197, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, and City of Mendota Heights, County of Dakota, State
of Minnesota.
1. The District desires additional improved athletic facilities for its educational
curriculum and extracurricular programs at Henry Sibley High School, and the City desires
additional improved athletic facilities for its community recreation program and for the health,
welfare and safety of its citizenry.
2. Minnesota Statutes 471.15 through 471.19 and 471.59 authorize the District and the
City to enter into this agreement for the purpose of jointly establishing a new athletic facility to
be known as Sibley Park, including acquisition, equipping, operation and maintenance of land,
buildings, or other recreational facilities, and to expend the funds for the operation of such
programs which may be located at Sibley Park.
3. Each party desires to enter into a Joint Agreement establishing the responsibilities of
each of the parties regarding Sibley Park. Each party is willing to provide property for Sibley
Park. The City is willing to contribute funds for the development of facilities at Sibley Park.
Each party is willing to contribute funds for the maintenance and operation of the facilities.
4. Along with the stated objectives, each party shall be responsible for good faith
performance of this agreement and fair dealing with the other party.
For the reasons recited above, and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained
herein, the parties agree as follows:
1.1 District - Independent School District No. 197
1.2 City - The City of Mendota Heights
1.3 District Property - Certain parcels of real property as legally described on Exhibit A.
1.4 City Property - Certain parcels of real property as legally described on Exhibit B.
1.5 Sibley Park - The new athletic facility to be constructed as described on Exhibit C and
illustrated on Exhibit D. Final design and specification subject to revision as
mutually agreeable.
MAR -29-1990 14:26 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995 P.05
Section 2. Sce .4f Qgggription
2.1 By this agreement, the parties create a joint power and use program for public
education and recreation purposes within the boundaries of each political subdivision.
S_e.QhQn.3. Conduct of Aare
3.1 This agreement will become effective when executed by both parties.
3.2 in the event that controversies regarding this agreement arise, the City and the
District agree to submit their controversy to binding arbitration before the American
Arbitration Association or other dispute resolution process mutually acceptable to the City
and the School District., Provided, however, that controversies respecting the property
interests of either party or the payment of funds above the agreed upon amount set forth in
Section 6.3 by either party shall not be subject to arbitration.
Section 4. Contributions
4.1 The District agrees to make available the District property upon which a portion of
Sibley Park will be located (Exhibit A), and the City agrees to make available the City
property upon which a portion of Sibley Park will be located (Exhibit S).
4.2 During the duration of their agreement; ownership of the property Is and shall remain
in the names of the present owners of the property.
4.3 The City consents to provide the payment for the construction of: (1) a softball field
immediately north of the high school parking lot, (2) a soccer field east of the softball field,
(3) a baseball field north of the soccer field, (4) a second softball field north of the first
softball field, and (5) a comfort station. The City agrees to pay up to $354,000.00 for the
construction of such facilities and is responsible for the design, planning and construction of
the facility subject to review by the District. In the event the amount committed is
insufficient to complete all the proposed facilities, the facilities will be completed in the
numbered sequence above set forth. The District is not obliged to contribute funds for
facilities construction.
Section 5. Use and Availability
5.1. The City and the District agree that the District shall employ a scheduler: The District
and the City shall schedule their events by April 15th for the following 12 months. The
scheduler may then schedule non -District or non -City group or team activity if neither the
District nor the City has expressed a desire to use the Complex. The Complex scheduler may
deny access privileges to a group or individual for noncompliance with regulations
governing the use of the Complex.
MAR -29-1990 14:27 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995 P.06
5.2 The City and the District agree that the District's educational curriculum, extra
curricular activities and athletic teams shall have priority usage of Sibley Park for classes,
after-school supervised practices and regularly scheduled matches between the hours of
7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and for a maximum of four hours on Saturdays from August 15
through June 1 and the scheduler will schedule accordingly.
5.3 The City and the District agree that during other periods not referenced in 5.2, the
priority will be established as follows: 1: Organized Youth Programs of Mendota Heights;
2: Organized Adult Programs of Mendota Heights; 3: Organized Programs of the District; 4.
Organized Youth Programs of District residents; 5. Organized Adult Programs of District
residents; 6. Youth or Adult programs of non-residents. Priority will not be given to any
program that charges a non-resident fee to residents of the District.
5.4 The City agrees that the scheduler may decline to schedule an event when the parking
requirements for the proposed event could be expected to conflict with parking required for
a major District -sponsored event.
5.5 The parties agree that Sibley Park shall be treated as "school ground" as contemplated
by the alcohol control provision on Minn. Stat, sec, 624.701; that the District's alcohol and
tobacco policies and regulations, and any additions or amendments thereto, shall apply to
Sibley Park; that the area should be appropriately posted; and that the scheduler may
withhold access from groups for alcohol or tobacco violations. The City agrees to enforce
applicable statutes and ordinances in and around Sibley Park in the same way that they
enforce these ordinances on other school property.
Section 6. Opefatiop cf EadlitleS
6.1 During the term of this agreement Sibley Park shall be routinely maintained by the
District, unless other arrangements are mutually agreed upon. Schedules for routine
maintenance shad be agreed upon by the City and the District so as not to conflict with
scheduled use of the facility.
6.2 The City and the District agree that the cost of minor repairs, utilities and maintenance
of Sibley Park shall be shared equally. Minor repairs shall include turf and field repair,
trash collection and routine maintenance, and minor comfort station and irrigation system
repairs.
6.3 In June of each year the City and the District shall mutually develop a budget for the
operation and maintenance of the athletic facility for the following calendar year. It is the
intent of this budget to assist in planning for the expenditures and priorities related to
reasonable maintenance, operations, repairs, overhead and administrative matters related
MAR -29-1990 14:2B FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995 P.07
to the athletic facility. For such repairs and maintenance, each party agrees to contribute
in each fiscal year a minimum of $15,000.00, adjusted annually in accordance with
changes in Consumer Price Index -Urban (C.P.I.U.) as of May ist or as mutually agreeable.
Once each party has approved the proposed budget, the District shall invoice the City for its
agreed upon share in two separate installments due and payable one half in January of the
following year and one half due and payable the next following July.
6.4 The School District and the City hereby each grant to the other party and its
constituents easements across all parcels owned by each and comprising a part of the
athletic facilities for purposes of constructing, maintaining and using the facilities,
Including parking areas serving the facilities.
Section Z. Insurance
7.1 Liability: Uability Insurance. Independent School District No. 197 shall obtain a
comprehensive liability insurance policy covering any loss, damage or injury to any person
or property arising out of the use of the athletic facilities. The limits of the policy shall not
be less than Three Hundred Thousand ($300,800) Dollars per person and Six Hundred
Thousand ($600,000) Dollars per occurrence, or such other limits as may from time to
time be required under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 466.04 and amendments
thereto. The City of Mendota Heights shall be named as an additional insured. The parties
shall share equally the cost of such policy. This cost is in addition to that covered by
paragraph 6.2 herein.
ajZion 8. Term
8.1 The term of the agreement shall extend from the date hereof to June 30, 2030, and
shall be automatically renewed thereafter on an annual basis unless either party elects to
terminate the agreement subject to the provisions of paragraph 8.2 .
8.2 Six months prior to June 30, 2030, and thereafter six months prior to each annual
renewal date, either party may terminate this agreement by written notice to the other
party.
8.3 Upon termination of this agreement, the underlying property shall be conveyed as
follows: if the City desires to continue to use an approximately 360' x 360' parcel, or a
parcel modified in size as mutually agreeable, in the northeast corner of the Park for park
or recreational purposes, the District shall convey to the City for $1.00 District property
adjoining the City's property sufficient to comprise such a parcel. If however, the City does
not desire to continue to use such a parcel for park or recreational purposes, the City shall
convey to the District for $1.00 the City's property in the northeast corner of the Park, as
MRR-29-1990 14:29 FROM ISD x#197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995
identified In Exhibit B. Moreover, if, subsequent to a conveyance by the istrict to the City
as described in this paragraph, the City diswritinues itzs use yr ttie aW ivatety 360' x
360' parcel, or a parcel modified in size as mutually agreeable, for rkor ecreationai
purposes, the City shall convey to the District for $1.00 such parcel.
ftgQg 9. Remedies
9.1 In the event that either party fails to perform any obligation under this Agreement, and
such failure continues for 90 days after written notice from the other party, such other
patty may seek specific performance of this Agreement in addition to any other right or
remedy available at law or in equity.
This agreement executed the day and year first written above. -
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.197
By:
Chairperson
Clerk
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Mayor
C
ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO
Legal Description of District Property:
4522995 P.09
The North 480 feet of the East 473 feet of section 25, township 28 North, range 23 West,
except the North 230 feet of the East 234 feet of said section.
MAR -29-1990 14:30 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE TO 4522995
Legal Description of City property:
The North 234 feet of the East 234 feet of section 26, township 28 North, range 23 West.
4522995 P.11
Amount
$80,000
$10,000
$48,000
$4,000
$36,000
$50,000
$5,000
$24,000
$8,000
$20,000
$10,000
$295,000
$364,000
$115,000
$469,000
4:30 FROM ISD #197 DISTRICT OFFICE
TO
J
N
m
/
EXHIBIT C
Unit
i
,,,_M
Quantity
jLaft
Description
Price
1.
40,000
CY
Common Excavation
@
$2.00
2.
5
Acre
Topsoil, Seed,
@
$2,000
Fertilizer, Mulch
3.
2
Each
Softball Field
@
$24,000
- f=ully Fenced
-Seeded
4.
1
Each
Soccer Field, urge
@
$4,000
- Movable Goals
-Seeded
S.
1
Ead3
Baseball Field
@
$36,000
- Fully Fenced
6.
1
Each
Comfort Station
@
$50,000
- Approx. 1,000 S.F.
- Restrooms and Concession Area
- City Equipment Storage
- Drinking Fountain
7.
1
Each
Storm Sewer
@
$5,000
8.
4
Each
Irrigation
@
$6,000
9.
4
Each
Bleachers
@
$2,000
10.
1
Each
Playground
@
$20,000
11.
1
Each
Landscaping
a@
$10,000
12.
Sibley Park Construction
13.
Contingencies
and Engineering (20%)
14.
Subtotal
15.
Property Acquisition
Expense
16,
Total Cost
4522995 P.11
Amount
$80,000
$10,000
$48,000
$4,000
$36,000
$50,000
$5,000
$24,000
$8,000
$20,000
$10,000
$295,000
$364,000
$115,000
$469,000
MAR -29-1990 14:31 FROM ISD #19'r DlblklUl u1-1-IUt iu
0
3
'e"16
Wq
-�-. N'tix�iui3
`\ y�• aha ,:
t
� r 1
r 4. w i f
i• � l
1
e�ef1.. tF (dt'6Asbl
4Deelz 7J
i�
r
tl
t
•�.--- r00
w ti
1 t
r
t 1
1 1