Loading...
2011-09-06 City Council minutesMendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, September 6, 2011 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. C �7c � i 11111 C• Z•� � 7 Acting Mayor Vitelli called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Councilmembers Povolny, Petschel and Vitelli. Councilmember Duggan arrived late. It was anticipated that Mayor Krebsbach would be arriving. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Acting Mayor Vitelli presented the agenda for adoption. the agenda. Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Absent: 2 Councilmember Petschel moved adoption of Q" 'e • a kyl I 1 al 0i I Councilmember Petschel moved approval of the minutes of the regular meeting held on August 16, 2011. Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Absent: 2 CONSENT CALENDAR Acting Mayor Vitelli presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilmember Povolny moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein; pulling items G Adoption of "RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF DONATIONS FOR TREE j PLANTINGS ", J Adoption of "RESOLUTION ADOPTING PURCHASING POLICY ", and L Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 2 Appointment of City Representatives to the Robert Street Transitway Alternatives Analysis Study (RSTAAS) Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Committee a. Acknowledgement of the July 26, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes b. Acknowledgement of the August 23, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes c. Acknowledgement of the August 9, 2011 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes d. Acknowledgement of the August 10, 2011 Airport Relations Commission Meeting Minutes e. Acknowledgement of the July 2011 Treasurer's Report f. Acknowledgement of the August 2011 Building Activity Report g. Adoption of "RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT DONATIONS FOR TREE PLANTINGS" h. Approval of a Sign Permit for 2010 Centre Pointe Blvd. i. Approval of a Sign Permit for 750 Main Street, Suite 107 j. Adoption of "RESOLUTION ADOPTING PURCHASING POLICY" k. Authorize Solicitation for the City Insurance Agent of Record 1. Appointment of City Representatives to the Robert Street Transitway Alternatives Analysis (RSTAAS) Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Committee m. Authorization to hire Hristo Galiov to the Accounting Clerk position n. Authorization to promote Andy Quinlan to Maintenance Worker III o. Approve the Contractors List p. Approve the Claims List Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 ITEM G: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF DONATIONS FOR TREE PLANTINGS X1 Study Councilmember Povolny acknowledged the donators by reading their names, the number of trees donated, and the reasons for the donations. He also mentioned that the Kensington Park Playground Dedication is Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. Councilmember Duggan moved to approve item G: Adoption of "RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF DONATIONS FOR TREE PLANTINGS" Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 ITEM J: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ADOPTING PURCHASING POLICY Councilmember Duggan commented that there were two parts to this resolution. One was to eliminate ( ) the words "Made in the USA" on page 40, which he had no problem with. However, he was concerned Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 3 with some of the rest of the language and his proposal was to adopt the resolution and to work with City Clerk Sandie Thone to revise the language of the current policy. Councilman Duggan moved to adopt the recommendation as presented, which is deletion of 1.53 and the existing language of the Purchasing Policy, which is found on page 44 and top of page 45. Councilmember Duggan proposed he would work with City Clerk Thone in efforts to clean up the rest of the language so that it is more readily understandable and readable. The policy would then be submitted at a future council meeting. Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 Mayor Krebsbach joined the meeting. Mayor Krebsbach inquired of the councihnembers who would like to serve as an alternate on the Robert Street Transitway Alternatives Analysis Study (RSTAAS) Steering Committee. Councilmember Povolny stated that he would like to do that as long as there was not a conflict of interest. Mayor Krebsbach asked how there would be a conflict of interest. Councilmember Povolny replied that he does a lot of work for the light rail and he also does infrastructure work. City Attorney Tami Diehm commented she did not feel Councilmember Povolny's work would create a conflict of interest. Councilmember Duggan also stated that he spoke with Councilmember Povolny about this concern and he did not feel that there is a conflict of interest and recommended Councilmember Povolny because his knowledge and understanding of the engineering technical side of this would be invaluable. Mayor Krebsbach said that if the committees come to any kind of decision about what kind of equipment or materials, that would be the time for Councilmember Povolny to recuse himself, however, she believed their decisions would be more on the policy level as in something that would come to Mendota Heights and how would the city would fit into the whole picture. Councilmember Duggan moved that Councilmember Povolny be assigned as the alternate, subject to the deliberations between Councilmember Povolny and staff. Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 4 Councilmember Petschel commented that there have been in appointments made to the Transportation Advisory Board at the Met Council recently where people have one foot in the industry and another foot in the planning. She believes Councilmember Povolnys' skills match and exceed there. There were no public comments PUBLIC COMMENTS PRESENTATIONS • �•� ICS' �•� 9 WOR an Rely D. Assistant City Engineer Ryan Ruzek stated that the Knollwood Lane project is nearing completion. This project consisted of crack sealing and sealcoating of Cherry Hill Road, Upper and Lower Colonial Drive, Knollwood Lane south of Emerson, Ivy Lane, and Farmdale Road; and rehabilitation to Knollwood Lane north of Emerson, Knollwood Court, Medora Court, and Medora Road. He continued to date the contractor has replaced the curb and gutter, crack sealing and sealcoating is complete. They have removed the existing pavement and paved the first base course. They are anticipating paving the final wear course on Thursday and Friday, which will substantially complete the project. He explained the reason for the update is because when the existing pavement was removed they encountered really soft soil so additional soil correction was necessary, which was not planned for in the feasibility report. The project is now approximately 7 percent over the initial feasibility, or 13.5 percent over the contract amount. Plans are still in place to sit down with the contractor to discuss final numbers and costs, which have not been finalized. Final numbers will be available to present to the council at the first or second meeting in October 2011. Mayor Krebsbach asked if Public Works Director and Interim City Administrator Mazzitello had any comments. Mr. Mazzitello explained that it is not uncommon on a construction project to encounter unforeseen conditions. These were of such magnitude that it actually drove costs to some of the line items up over what was originally estimated. Although it is unfortunate it is a relatively normal occurrence on a construction project. Finance Director Kristen Schabacker stated that bonds have not been issued on this project so this situation can be taken into account when they are issued, which will be shortly. Mayor Krebsbach stated that she visited the site and noticed new curbing. She asked how it was determined to install new curbing. Mr. Ruzek replied that most of the curb replacement on this project was actually homebuilder installed curb. When the neighborhood was built driveways were not installed, so the builders had to put in the driveways and that was where most of the curb was replaced. Generally, they will look for settlements where the curb would catch a snow plow or if it has settled and is ponding water or collecting sediment. Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 5 Councilmember Duggan stated that people he had spoken with from that area are very pleased with it. He asked if the additional cost anticipated gets passed on to the homes that are there or is it absorbed other ways. Mr. Ruzek replied that this project, following the street assessment policy, capped the assessment for these properties at $3,000. They were actually being assessed less than what the city policy recommended. So the city absorbs the rest of the cost through bonding. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REPLACEMENT OF FUEL PUMPS, MONITORING /TRACKING SOFTWARE AND ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS Public Works Director and Interim City Administrator John Mazzitello explained that at the July 19, 2011 meeting, council authorized staff to solicit for bids for the replacement of the fuel pumps and the associated components. Staff requested bids from three different vendors, which were detailed in the council memo and resolution. The low bidder, Zahl - Petroleum Maintenance Company, as an addendum to their bid, offered some additional services that are also needed by the public works department, such as the lubricant pumps inside the garage and maintenance to the hoist inside the maintenance garage. The total for the additional services is $6,284, bringing the total requested bid award to $41,238. This total contract award is very slightly over the second low bidder; however, the city would be getting more services for the dollar. Staff requested council adopt the resolution awarding the contract for the replacement of fuel pumps, monitoring/tracking software, and associated components to Zahl- Petroleum Maintenance Company in the amount of $41,238. Mayor Krebsbach asked if going out to bid still keeps them as lowest bidder. Mr. Mazzitello replied in the affirmative as, on like items, Zahl was the lowest bidder. City Attorney Tami Diehm confirmed that she was comfortable with this. Councilmember Povolny asked what the extra $6,284 is for. Mr. Mazzitello answered that the additional services are the replacement of the lubricant pumps inside the garage; the oil and transmission fluid pumps and their hoses and handles; as well as maintenance to the hoist in the garage. These items were not included in the base bid. Councilmember Duggan moved for adoption of "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REPLACEMENT OF FUEL PUMPS, MONITORING /TRACKING SOFTWARE, AND ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS" Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Councilmember Duggan pointed out that the council is not obligated to take the lowest or highest bid, but the bid that makes the most sense and works best for the city. Mr. Mazzitello stated that according to the purchasing policy, because this was under $50,000, staff did not have to formally advertise and open sealed bids. Therefore, a best value could be applied. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mendota Heights City Council LIVIONNI&IIII • • C • '• '•' 4 9 m FWAN .. rA a 1' September 6, 2011 Page 6 Assistant to the City Administrator Jake Sedlacek explained this is a request for a variance at 667 First Avenue to complete a covered front porch over an existing deck at a single- family home. The property owner had constructed a deck to the front of the home, which was compliant with all city code. This summer they are seeking to complete a covered front entry. The setback requirements for the covered front entry are different than the requirements for the deck. Originally, the applicant came to the Planning Commission seeking to put a roof over the entire deck as it was constructed last year. That does require a variance and the Planning Commission recommended denial of that variance, finding there were other reasonable alternatives for this property. That public hearing was held on August 23, 2011. In response to the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has provided a revised site plan that still requires a variance, but is within the confines of the city's conditional use permit whereby a covered front entry is allowed. The council had three options for action: 1. Denial of the revised site plan 2. Acceptance of the revised site plan 3. Return the revised site plan to the Planning Commission for further review Councilmember Petschel commented that her understanding in regards to the denial was that although the setback for the covered front entry was correct in terms of what the ordinances allow, the amount of square footage in the covered area was going to require a variance. Mr. Sedlacek replied that she was correct in her understanding. The conditional use permit language allows for covered front entry up to five feet into the front yard setback with a maximum area of 50 square feet. Because of the length of the proposed front entry, there would have been 68 square feet of area within the front yard setback. Councilmember Petschel then asked if the revised plan included reduced square footage. Mr. Sedlacek replied that the revised plan still provided some form of coverage over the front of the porch, but the applicant's revisions to the plan included a solid roof over a portion of the deck and then extending out from that, a pergola over a section of the deck. So the roof itself would still be within the allowable front yard setback, with a total area of 14 square feet within the front yard setback, reduced from 68 square feet. That additional square footage is now under the pergola which is considered a landscape structure and therefore allowed in the front yard setback. Councilmember Duggan commented that he remembered when he was in the area previously the current entryway was challenging at best. When he was out there today he was happy to see it had been removed. Also he continued further down the street is a house that extends quite a ways out, so applying the string rule he believed this would qualify. His additional thought was that the combination Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 7 of the conditional use permit, this was such a minor request but is such an improvement, along with the new roof that the homeowner is installing, everyone in the community would benefit. Mr. Sedlacek explained that the string rule is an application in the city code to make sure that no single property extends too far forward from the neighbors. Traditionally it has been from the properties on either side of the parcel, a straight string from the farthest out points. That was revised in the most recent code update so it is now the average of the required setback and the two adjoining properties. For this particular instance, the properties are all at that same setback so they could come forward a little bit with the revised string rule. When staff considers a home that is down the block a little ways that would not necessarily count for this string rule. Councilmember Vitelli commented that if council does approve this, he wants to make sure that the Planning Commission receives feedback on why. He also commented that he did not see any hardship reference, which would be necessary in a variance. Councilmember Petschel asked if council is issuing a variance because it was her understanding that with the decrease in square footage, a variance would no longer be necessary. In response to Councilmember Petschel, Mr. Sedlacek replied that this is a variance request. This area could have been processed as a Conditional Use Permit; however, legal notice went out as a variance so staff would need to restart that process. Staff is comfortable with the variance because it is reasonable in the fact that it is allowed by Conditional Use Permit. In response to Councilmember Vitelli, Mr. Sedlacek stated that the Minnesota Legislature changed the requirements for a variance and now, instead of undue hardship the requirement is practical difficulty. The analysis needs to include whether or not there is a practical difficulty, which can be sited in allowing this covered frontage. Counsel Diehm indicated that Mr. Sedlacek is correct in his explanation. Councilmember Vitelli recommended a fourth item be added that addresses the practical difficulty, which is that there is an existing deck and if a roof is going to be installed it cannot be shorter than the deck. Mayor Krebsbach commented on her concerns about the council taking on too many of these cases because the Planning Commission does an outstanding job. If things were short- circuited to the council, then the council would be doing the work of the Planning Commission. She cautioned the council to be sure that they are not taking things that really should go back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Bob Suliwold of 667 First Avenue stated his belief that the revised roof covering would come within the Conditional Use Permit allowance. He stated that he had to do something with the front entrance to the house because it was a dangerous condition. His plans are to work with the roofer to re- roof the house and finish the entire project this fall. Councilmember Duggan commented that in reviewing the plans for the pergola and the extended roof, he believed it is not any longer than the extended roof of the neighbor directly to the east. What it does do, by having that roof, is it would protect the front of house, which had eroded from the rain in the past. Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 8 Mayor Krebsbach commented for clarification, that what the council was considering to approve was not the same as what the Planning Commission had denied. It is a revised plan. Councilmember Duggan moved adoption of RESOLUTION APPROVING A TWO -FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SET BACK FOR A COVERED PORCH. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 B) PLANNING CASE 1 DAN CARUSO PERMIT CRITICAL AREA •' REMOVAL OF 1 • 1 1► APPROVAL OF • • APPROVING PERMIT TO ' • THE HOME . WACHTLER AVENUE Assistant to the City Administrator Jake Sedlacek stated that this resolution has not gone to the Planning Commission but was brought directly to council pursuant to code language available in the critical area ordinance, which allows a minor site provision to be brought directly to council. Public notice was provided on this matter so if council would like staff to go through the standard public hearing procedure, that process has already started. Mr. Sedlacek explained that Mr. Caruso has requested a critical area permit to remove a home on Wachtler Avenue, just south of Highway 13. Mr. Caruso's primary residence is just to the north of the subject parcel, and then the home itself exists today. As Councilmember Duggan requested clarification earlier, there is an existing non - conforming situation with three accessory structures on the site. What the applicant requested was to remove the existing structures and then to establish turf in that area and maintain it as he would his yard. Staff felt that this qualified under city code language to be a minor request, improves the area in terms of impervious surface, and made no assumption relating to the aesthetic value of the critical area and the impact of removing this home. Mayor Krebsbach asked what the square footage of the house that would be removed. Mr. Sedlacek deferred the question to the homeowner. Mayor Krebsbach commented that she wanted to be very careful because of a previous situation that was supposed to be a remodel and it ended up being a teardown and a very large home constructed. That situation did not go through the Planning Commission either, and that can cause an undue set of conflicts and circumstances. She expressed her desire to know more about what this house was, if it was the primary structure, or if anything was happening to the primary structure. Mr. Sedlacek stated that what the council was reviewing tonight is simply a proposal to remove; there was no construction of any sort approved with this request. Once this application is approved, the applicant has permission to remove and if there is any type of construction to occur on this at any time in the future, that would require a new Conditional Use Permit for new construction. Councilmember Duggan asked, say in five years time, the owner chooses to sell this parcel would the new owner be able to build on it. Mr. Sedlacek replied that the parcel has 108 feet of frontage and a Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 9 structure could be built on it. Councilmember Duggan stated that his only concern is, according to the descriptions, the driveway would remain and what would happen to that if the parcel were sold. Mayor Krebsbach reiterated that as a policy she believes that anything that relates to teardown should go through the Planning Commission. She continued that this is not like a 32 square -foot deck; it implies that there will be new construction there. Not that the council would not favor it, but the Planning Commission has always been part of any process of any significance in the critical area and teardowns and rebuilds are going to be one of the major issues going forward. Councilmember Vitelli asked if this was not in the critical area what would the process be. Mr. Sedlacek replied that demolition permit would be required. If it were not in the critical area it would be just a matter of working through that with the code official. Councilmember Duggan inquired, depending on the size of the basement, if a fill permit would be required. City Engineer John Mazzitello replied that if the grading activity is attached to another permit application, the grading permit is considered applied for with the other permit. So had this project not been in the critical area, the applicant would have come forward and applied for a demolition permit where the grading would have been analyzed as part of that demolition permit. Mayor Krebsbach and Councilmember Vitelli had continuing discussions in regards to the need for demolition requests to go to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Vitelli stated that if demolition requests were required to go through the Planning Commission, then the ordinance would need to be changed. Mayor Krebsbach made her point that she was only referring to demolitions in the critical area and Councilmember Vitelli made his point that if this were not in the critical area, it would not be before the council or the Planning Commission. Councilmember Petschel commented that the statement Mayor Krebsbach keeps reiterating is that this is a demolition and a rebuild. This is only a demolition and if it was not in the critical area, the resident would not have to go through this process. She sees this as an improvement in the critical area in that there is an additional piece of green space with grass that filters the water better. Mr. Dan Caruso of 1238 Wachtler Avenue explained that the situation is that he and his neighbor were very close. His neighbor asked before he died if Mr. Caruso would take over his house and try to bring it into repair. This turned out to be more difficult than anticipated because the owner had not pulled any permits, things were not to code, and there were issues that were not repairable. Mr. Caruso came to the conclusion that the property is not repairable. He considered demolition because he did not think he could improve it. He found out the property was in the critical area when he applied for a demolition permit. The lot is approximately 110 feet wide and 600 feet deep. The footprint of the home is approximately 600 square feet or 20 feet by 30 feet. It has an attached two -car garage that is approximately 24 feet by 24 feet. The footprint of the property itself is almost too small for the size of the lot. Since Mr. Caruso could not improve it, he thought it would be better to demolish it, fill it, and make it so that it is a usable lot. Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 10 Mr. Caruso did ask if, at some point in the future, he decides to build on this parcel, how restricted would he be since this is in the critical area. Mayor Krebsbach replied that he would have the normal restrictions of any lot. Mayor Krebsbach commented that this is not about his demolition. It is that the council has always sent things to the Planning Commission. This is the second case that has come directly to the council and her caution is that they should be very careful about the demolition. Not that it would be denied but explained the Planning Commission provides an excellent service and they vet the application. Even though green space is going to be created temporarily, ultimately there is going to be a building there. There may not be a problem with putting a building there; she was referring to the process. She explained they were concerned about the council taking this and making a decision then how do they proceed the next time. Will the council arbitrarily take these and then all of a sudden they receive something that has not been properly vetted. Councilmember Duggan commented that the cover letter submitted by Mr. Sedlacek had the code sited. It stated that this request could come to the council. Councilmember Duggan asked how old the home is. Mr. Caruso replied that it was built in 1952. Councilmember Duggan asked if there was any asbestos in the home. Mr. Caruso answered that they have had the hazardous waste assessment and there was no asbestos present. There was less than 1 percent of lead trim paint on a couple of windows so all of the hazardous waste has been taken care of. Councilmember Duggan moved for adoption and approval of "RESOLUTION APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT TO REMOVE THE HOME AT 1256 WACHTLER AVENUE" Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 1 (Krebsbach) C) APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY LEVY FOR 2012 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ADOPTING 2012 PROPOSED BUDGET; RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED 2011 LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2012; AND RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL 2011 TAX LEVY FOR SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT NO. 1 COLLECTIBLE IN 2012 Finance Director Kristen Schabacker explained that this is the 2012 proposed budget, the preliminary levy, and the special taxing district levy. A workshop was held on August 2, 2011 and the recommendations from that meeting have been updated in the proposed budget. The proposed budget is as follows: 1. The general fund budget will increase by approximately 1.9 percent 2. The total city budget will decrease by less than 1 percent 3. The preliminary levy will be increasing by .43 percent or less than $27,000 The council was requested to adopt the proposed budget and the preliminary levy. Staff will certify that ( j to Dakota County and in November the county will send out parcel specific notices to the residents that will show what their property taxes are proposed to be. The final budget and levy will be discussed on Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 11 the December 6, 2011 meeting. At that time, staff and council will open for comments from any of the residents. Mayor Krebsbach reminded the council that what was voted on cannot be increased, but it could be decreased. Ms. Schabacker confirmed her statement. Mayor Krebsbach also stated that at the workshop led by staff, council reviewed every item that is in the budget. Mayor Krebsbach requested that what residents could expect on their tax statements be explained. Ms. Schabacker stated that the residents would see that their property values for their homes would probably decrease about 6 percent. For 2012, the state had repealed the market value homestead credit and they have implemented a new program that is the market value homestead exclusion. The tax rate is going to increase because of that exclusion but their taxes should remain flat, although she has not seen how that exclusion is going to be calculated. The levy is only increasing .43 percent. Mayor Krebsbach commented that this is the smallest tax levy seen in a long time. She also noted that this does include a small pay increase of 2 percent and a small increase towards healthcare of 5 percent. The increase in 2011 was also 2 percent, not 10 percent as seen in past years. There are no cut backs in service on this budget. Councilmember Vitelli commented that the levy increase is .43 percent, which he stated he is very proud of This equates to approximately $24,000 and there are about 12,000 residents in the city, which is $2.00 per person. Councilmember Duggan moved to approve "RESOLUTION ADOPTING 2012 PROPOSED BUDGET." Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Krebsbach stated that the preliminary levy would be for $6,228,442. Councilmember Povolny moved to approve "RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED 2011 LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2012." Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ms. Schabacker explained that the special taxing district no. 1 is for maintenance of the street lights in the industrial park; it is specific to those parcels and does not affect the residents. It affects only the industrial park parcels relating to the street light maintenance. Mayor Krebsbach asked if the amount is $45,000. Ms. Schabacker confirmed that this amount is correct. Councilmember Vitelli moved to approve "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL 2011 TAX LEVY FOR SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT NO. 1 COLLECTIBLE IN 2012." Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mendota Heights City Council September 6, 2011 Page 12 COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Petschel expressed her appreciation to the people that painted the Welcome to Mendota Heights sign at I -494 and Dodd. She stated that it looks very neat and clean. She also expressed her compliments on the new signage at the Par 3. Councilmember Povolny stated that he is very happy the budget is over and he is looking forward to the search for a new City Administrator to be done. It is a lot of work and has included hours and hours of reading. Councilmember Duggan expressed congratulations to Stan Linnell's son, Alex who traveled the entire length of the Mississippi River via a stand -up paddle board, which is a great accomplishment for a 21- year old. He expressed his appreciation to MnDOT for the speedy resolution of some of the delayed projects that confined and bound everybody in Mendota Heights into Mendota Heights. He also stated his appreciation of the new Par 3 sign on Dodd Road. He continued the repairs completed on Delaware are terrific, Wagon Wheel is ongoing, and Knollwood Lane is very happy with the progress and will be very pleased when it is done. Mayor Krebsbach joined in by stating that Dodd Road looks good and the new repairs on the streets throughout the city look good. She also stated that she likes the Par 3 sign and expressed her pleasure that it included the city logo. She wished everyone a great beginning of the school year. Mayor Krebsbach stated that council is meeting with counsel to discuss the current litigation between Mendota Mall Associates and the City of Mendota Heights. Councilmember Duggan moved that the council adjourn to closed session to discuss the current litigation between Mendota Mall Associates and the City of Mendota Heights. Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS ONGOING LITIGATION Present at the closed session to discuss ongoing litigation between Mendota Mall Associates, LLP v. City of Mendota Heights were Mayor Krebsbach, Councilmember Duggan, Councilmember Povolny, Councilmember Petschel, Councilmember Vitelli, Attorney Tami Diehm, Attorney Bob Alsop, Interim City Administrator John Mazzitello and Assistant to the City Administrator Jake Sedlacek. Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 10: Mayor Krebsbach Mendota Heights City Council ATTEST: t V Sandie Thone City Clerk September 6, 2011 Page 13