1984-12-04CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AGENDA
December 4, 1984 7:30 P.M.
1. Call to Order. 7 ��
2. Roll Call.
3. Adoption of Agenda/. 4 '1W
4. Approval of Minutes, October 2 and October 16, 1984.
5. Canvas City Elec 'qn ReI�ouunt. (Seeattachedsummary.)
6. Consent Calendar
a. Acknowledgement of minutes of November 23rd Planning Commission
meeting.
b. Adoption of resolution authorizing final payment for Lot H, Ivy
Hill Second Addition improvements.
c. Acknowledgement of Code Enforcement monthly report for
November.
d. Acknowledgementof le ter from Mn/DOT regarding T.H. 110 speed
1 i mi t . vj ,t S V , 4
e. Acknowledgement of meter from Mn/DOT regarding T.H.
110/Lexington Avenue traffic signal operation complaint.
f. Approval of the List of Claims.
g. Ap
qyol of contractor licenses.
Azw
End of Consent alendar
7. Public Comments ._ ale TAIV-1
8. Unfinished and New Business
a. Case No. 84-21, Gra pendorf - Applica io for subdivision.
iG"a idn or wet tl'and rmit.
b. Case No. 8-4--2-5-, Rus pp p
(Recommend approval.) �
c. Memo regarding Garron fe sibility report. (tesolution
Attached) _� `.w i Ak.. C � Pd-�7 )
d. Memo regardin design featu es of Mendota Interchange.0-0 JV)tT
e. emo en n f comparable worth legislation. -'
(00
E
Agenda, December 2, 1984
Page 2
f. Memo regarding Step Pay Increase for Engineering Technician
g.R. Memo regarding 1985 pay and ben fi for non -organized
empl yees... _ A
Ceti a" /T
.g. Memo regarding summary Pj,-ufl—icat/i�b�n ,of Cable.
Communications
Franchise Ordinance.
M
i -H. Memo regarding to for first Council meeting in January.
9. Responses to Council Comments and Requests.
a. Memor g ding Marie Avenue speed mit.
10. Council Comments and Requests.
11. Ad ourn.
-fir M
7 Y �-
r,0t- -. .
r
Page No. 2122
October 2, 1984
A
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, October 2, 1984
( 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, 750 South Plaza Drive,
Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
Mayor Lockwood called the meeting to order at 7:38 o'clock P.M. The following members
were present: Mayor Lockwood, Council Members Hartmann and Witt. Councilwoman
Blesener had notified the Council that she would be late. Councilman Mertensotto had
notified the Council that he would be absent.
AGENDA ADOPTION Councilman Hartmann moved adoption of the agenda for the
meeting, including items contained in the add-on agenda.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
MINUTE APPROVAL Mayor Lockwood moved approval of the minutes of the July 17th
meeting with corrections.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the minutes of the August
7th meeting.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the consent calendar as
submitted and recommended for approval as part of the meeting
agenda, along with authorization for execution of all necessary
documents contained therein.
a. Acknowledgement of the Code Enforcement monthly report for
September.
b. Acknowledgement of the minutes of the September 25th
Planning Commission meeting.
t' c. Appoval of the List of Claims dated October 2, 1984 and
totalling $115,631.22.
d. Approval of the list of contractor licenses, granting
licenses to:
9age No. 2123
October,2, 1984
All Types of Masonry
Masonry
License
D and D Masonry
Masonry
License
Kitchens by Kren '8el, Inc.
General
Contractor
License
Northland Roofing and Gutters
General
Contractor
License
J. Paul Sterns Company
General
Contractor
License
Woodsmen Construction, Inc.
General
Contractor
License
/ e. Acknowledgement of Mo/DOT press releases and invitations to
the I -35O dedication ceremonies.
[. Acknowledgement of a letter from Multi8ranhiuo regarding
the Company's planned open house ceremonies.
g, Adoption of Resolution No. 84-66° "RESOLUTION &PPOINTIN(,
1984 GENERAL AND CITY ELECTION JUDGES." 4.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
BC&OZ@Q: VALLEY VIEW Mayor Lockwood opened the meeting for the purpose of a public
OAK EASEMENT VACATION hearing on an application for vacation of a utility easement in
the Valley View Oak Addition along with consideration of a
request for approval of the final plat for the Valley View 0uk
2nd Additiou,
Mr. Lawrence Culligan, the property owner, asked Council for
approval of the final plat as submitted uIou8 with vacation of"
an existing easement over Lot 17, Block l, Valley View Oak.
Mr. Culligan stated that a portion of Lot 17 is being ylatte'}
platted as part of the Second Addition in order to save oeverml
mature trees: the easement area is the south boundary of [o~
17. Mr. Culligan also asked the Council to approve u distri-
bution of assessments attributable to the new plat equally
against only Lots I and 2, with no ~assessments spread against
the Outlnt.
Mayor Lockwood asked for questions and comments from the
There being no questions or comments, Councilman Hartmann moved
that the hearing be closed at 7:55 o'clock P.M.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
/
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
� ~ ,
Councilwoman Witt moved adoption of Resolution No. 84-67,
"RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT IN VALLEY VIEW OAK ADDITION."
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
•
C
0
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
Page No. 2124
October 2, 1984
Mayor Lockwood moved adoption of Resolution No. 84-68,
"RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR VALLEY VIEW OAK 2ND
ADDITION."
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
It was the concensus of Council to direct staff to distribute
assessments to the new plat as requested by Mr. Culligan.
MARIE AVENUE SPEED The Council acknowledged and briefly discussed a report from
the Police Chief regarding a survey of speeds on Marie Avenue,
and directed that a copy of the report be sent to Diane
Kammerer.
HEARING - CASE NO. Mayor Lockwood opened the meeting for the purpose of a public
84-17, UNITED hearing on an application from United Properties for a
PROPERTIES conditional use permit for planned unit development.
Mr. Dale Glowa, representing United Properties, stated that his
firm proposed to construct three buildings on property located
at the southeast quadrant of Transport Drive and Mendota
Heights Road. The development would consist of two single
story structures of 25,000 square feet each and one two story
structure of 35,000 square feet. It is planned that the site
will be platted into three lots and that a pond with a jet
fountain will be located on the northwest corner of the site.
In response to Planning Commission recommendations, United
Properties will provide that the pond will be owned by the
owners of buildings two and three. He stated that his firm
will prepare a maintenance agreement and easement agreement for
the ponding area. United Properties will maintain the pond,
which will be an amenity to the site and will be fed from the
sprinkler lines to maintain a specific water level. He stated
that the pond will contain an overflow feature. The exterior
of the structures will be similar to the first stage of the
Mendota Heights Business Center.
Mayor Lockwood asked for questions and comments from the
audience.
There being no questions or comments, Mayor Lockwood moved that
the hearing be closed at 8:16 P.M.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the conditional use
permit for planned unit development for the Mendota Heights
Business Center 2, along with preliminary plat approval.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
Page No. 2125
October 2, 1984
CASE NO. 84-20, Mr. Fred Mike was present to request approval of a lot size
MIKE variance for Lot 7, Block 2, Guadelupe Heights Addition..
Public Works Director Danielson explained that in cases where
lots were platted before 1962 the Zoning Ordinance provides a
lot size minimum requirement of 10,500 square feet, and that
the subject property contains only 8,145 square feet.
After discussion, Mayor Lockwood moved approval of the lot size
variance to allow residential development on Lot 7, Block 2,
Guadelupe Heights Addition.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
CASE NO. 84-18, Public Works Director Danielson stated that the applicant
HUNTER proposes to divide a four -acre unplatted parcel of land located
on the north side of Orchard Place into three large lots. He
noted that the property is located within the critical area and
that the applicant may need to request critical area site plan•
approval for development on Lot 3 after his building plans are
developed.
Councilman Hartmann expressed concern over the proposed dual
purpose driveway access to serve two of the lots. He felt that
any plat approval should include the stipulation that th
driveway be centered on the proposed easement area.
After discussion, Mayor Lockwood moved approval of the
preliminary plat for the Hunter Bluff Addition subject tc,
construction of a 12 foot wide drive placed within the easement
area and submission of a $1,200 park contribution,
and with the understanding that preliminary plat approval i:.
not to be construed as including approval for a particular
location of a dwelling within the plat.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
LOT 2, WILLOW SPRINGS Mr. Terry Davern, from the Clapp-Thomssen Company, was present.
ADDITION relative to Lot 2, Willow Springs Addition. Mr. Davern stated.
that the property was given to Brady High School by Mr.
Callahan and that the school plans to sell the lot. Brady has
asked his firm to look at the property to determine what can be
done with the site. He stated that he has talked to two
developers who may have interest in the site but that both
parties are concerned over potential development costs which
would be involved if the property must be developed 'according
to City requirements. He felt that the school could develop
and sell the property but that it would need some changes in
conditions imposed by the Council on Mr. Callahan. Mr. Daverr
reviewed five concerns addressed in his letter to the Cit,
dated September 17th, and discussed these concerns with the
V
Council.
Page No. 2126 ,
October 2, 1984
Councilwoman Blesener arrived at 9:12 P.M.
As the result of the discussion, staff was directed to work
with Mr. Davern and school representatives on both the City's
and schools concerns over development of the site and the costs
which have been incurred by the City on behalf of the Callahan
planning applications and feasibility study preparation.
FIRE STATION
The Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from Fire Marshal
SPRINKLER SYSTEM
Lange recommending installation of a lawn sprinkling system for
the new fire station site. The memo indicated that two
proposals for a system have been received, the lowest being
$4,760 from Mitshulis Irrigation, and that a third proposal is
anticipated.
Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the installation of a
lawn sprinkling system, authorizing staff to proceed with the
project utilizing the lowest quotation received.
Councilwoman Blesener seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
MENDOTA POLICE
Mayor Lockwood moved to approve the 1985 contract for Police
CONTRACT
services to the City of Mendota.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
BUDGET CORRECTIONS
The Council acknowledged a memo from the City Treasurer minor
revisions in the 1985 Budget, along with revised budget pages.
Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the revised General Fund
pages of revenues and expenditures.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
STREET LIGHTS
The Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from the Public
Works Director relative to a request from St. Thomas Academy
for installation of street lights at two of the Academy's
entrances. Administrator Frazell stated that the school
representatives are extremely eager to have the lights
installed and that it is proposed by staff that the City will
bill the Academy the annual charges from N.S.P. along with a
small administration charge.
Councilman Hartmann moved to order the installation of two
street lights as requested by St. Thomas Academy, billings for
Ayes: 4 annual service to be as recommended by staff.
Nays: 0 Mayor Lockwood seconded the motion.
Page No. 2127
October 2, 1984
ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council,
Councilman Hartmann moved that the meeting be adjourned.
Councilwoman Witt`seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Robert G. Lockwood
Mayor
/
\
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:40 P.M.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
i7-
Page No. 2128
October 16, 1984
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, October 16, 1984
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, 750 South
Plaza Drive, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
Mayor Lockwood called the meeting to order at 7:40 o'clock P.M. The following
members were present: Mayor Lockwood, Council Members Blesener, Hartmann,
Mertensotto and Witt.
AGENDA ADOPTION Councilwoman Witt moved the adoption of the agenda for the
meeting, including items contained in the add -on -agenda.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the minutes of the
August 21st meeting with corrections.
Mayor Lockwood seconded the motion.
Ayes:
5
Nays:
0
Councilwoman Blesener moved approval of the minutes of the
August 28th meeting.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes:
5
Nays:
0
Counciman Hartmann moved approval of the minutes of the
September 4th meeting.
Councilwoman Blesener seconded the motion.
Ayes:
5
•Nays:
0
PROCLAMATION
Councilwoman Witt moved approval of a Proclamation
proclaiming the week of October 27th as Business Women's
Week.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes:
5
Nays:
0
Mayor Lockwood moved approval of a Proclamation
proclaiming the week of October 15th League of Women
Voters of Northern Dakota County Week.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes:
5
Nays:
0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Hartmann moved approval of the consent calendar
as submitted and recommended for approval as part of the
meeting agenda, along with authorization for execution of
Page No. 2129,
October. 16, 1984
all necessary documents contained therein.
a. Acknowledgement of the minutes of the September 18th
Park and Recreation Commission meeting.
b. Acknowledgement of the Fire Department monthly report
for September.
Cc. Acknowledgement of an update on the wholesale water
study.
d. Acknowledgement of the Treasurer's monthly report for
September.
e. Acknowledgement of a memo on the Public Works amended
work schedule. y
f. Acknowledgement of a letter from the Metropolitan
Council regarding water rate negotiations.
g. Acknowledgement of a memo on office hours for the Code
Enforcement Officer.
h: Approval of the list of contractor licenses, granting
licenses to:
Commercial Utilities, Inc. Excavating License
Premier Builders, Inc. General Contractor License
i. Approval of the List of Claims dated October 16, 1984
and totalling $330,890.75. w
j. Acknowledgement of a letter from Assistant City
Attorney Pearson regarding the Brooks lawsuit.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
BID AWARD Councilman Mertensotto moved the adoption of Resolution
No. 84-70, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER
AND WATER SERVICE TRENCHES CONSTRUCTION TO SERVE LOT H,
IVY HILL 2ND ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 84, PROJECT NO.
3)," awarding the contract to Ro-So Contracting, Inc., for
its low bid of $14,282.60.
Councilwoman Blesener seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
STOP SIGN REQUEST The Council acknowledged a memo from the Public Works
Director in response to a request from Robert Bergstrom,
Page No. 2130
October 16, 1984
13 Mears Avenue, for four-way stop signs at Mears and
Dorset. Several area residents were in attendance with
Mr. Bergstrom for the discussion.
Mr. Bergstrom stated that he has lived on Mears Avenue for
30 years and feels that the signs are definitely
warranted, especially because of significant traffic
increases in the area due to the high bridge closing. He
stated that there is a serious problem.
Mr. Bob Wolters stated that he has lived in the area for
twenty years, that over the years cars have driven across
his lawn, that the sight lines at the intersection are
terrible and that the intersection is very dangerous. He
stated that traffic funnels down both Dorset and Mears and
that the area is a shortcut to I -35E. He wondered,
however, whether installation of a four-way stop as
requested would result in traffic shifting to Staples,
creating more problems at the Staples/Dorset
interesection.
After discussion, Councilwoman Witt moved that staff be
directed to prepare an Ordinance amendment to designate
Dorset/Mears as a four-way stop intersection.
Councilwoman Blesener seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
It was the concensus of the Council to direct the police
department to begin monitoring traffic on Staples within a
week after the stop signs at Dorset/Mears are installed.
SCHAAK WAREHOUSE SALE The Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from the
Code Enforcement Officer regarding a request from Schaak
Electronics for approval of a warehouse clearance sale on
November 8th through the 10th.
The Council expressed its displeasure with the frequency
of sales being conducted by the firm. It was pointed out
that the Council may not look favorably on similar future
requests and that the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that
there shall be no retail sales in the Industrial District.
After discussion, Councilwoman Blesener moved approval of
warehouse sale request and directed that a communication
be sent to Schaak indicating the Council's displeasure.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
FINAL PLAT Mayor Lockwood moved the adoption of Resolution No. 84-70,
"RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR CLAPP-THOMSSEN IVY
HILL SECOND ADDITION."
Page No. 2131
October. 16, 1984
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CAROLAN VARIANCE The Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from the
Code Enforcement Officer describing a complication to the
setback variance previously granted for construction of
the Robert Carolan sunroom addition. Mr. Carolan was
present for the discussion and explained that the surveyor
who prepared the site plan for the original variance
application erred in his location of the existing home on
the lot. As a result, he requested approval of a 13 foot
variance rather than the 10 foot variance originally
approved on July 10th.
Councilwoman Witt moved to grant approval of a 13„ foot
sideyard setback variance to allow construction of a sun -
room addition at 1339 Medora Road.
Councilman Mertensotto seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
FINAL PLAT The Council acknowledged a memo from the Public Works
Director recommending approval of the final plat for the
Mendota Heights Business Center Second Addition. The
Council also acknowledged and discussed a memo from the
Code Enforcement recommending approval of building permits
for buildings proposed to be constructed on Lots 2 and 3
of the plat.
Mayor Lockwood moved the adoption of Resolution No. 84-71,
"RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR MENDOTA HEIGHTS
BUSINESS CENTER 2ND ADDITION."
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
,Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mr. Dale Glowa, from United Properties, was present for
the discussion, and answered Council questions regarding
the structures and the decorative pond proposed to located
within the plat. Mr. Glowa pointed out that this is not
a ponding area and therefore does not appear on the plat.
He assured the Council that United Properties will bear
the responsibility for maintaining the pond feature.
Councilwoman Witt moved approval of the requested building
permits subject to final approval of the plans by the Code
Enforcement Officer.
Mayor Lockwood seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Page No. 2132
October 16, 1984
INDUSTRIAL REVENUE The Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from
Financial Advisor Shaughnessy informing the Council that
the City has received a tentative commitment of $4,295,932
of Industrial Revenue Financing from the City of Coon
Rapids. Mr. Shaughnessy explained the details of the Joint
Powers Agreement with Coon Rapids and stated that
financing for reimbursement of $43,000 to Coon Rapids for
fees previously paid by Coon Rapids to reserve its
entitlement allocation will be provided by Alpha, Inc. and
Ralph Linvill.
After discussion, Mayor Lockwood moved the adoption of
Resolution No. 84-72, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF
COON RAPIDS, MINNESOTA."
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
AMBULANCE AGREEMENT Councilwoman Blesener moved to approve an ambulance
service agreement with Divine Redeemer Memorial Hospital
for the period from January 1, 1985 through December 31,
1988.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0 The Council acknowledged that while the idea of
subsidizing private enterprise is not desirable there are
no other alternatives available.
MEETING DATE CHANGE Mayor Lockwood moved that the meeting scheduled to be
conducted on election evening, November 6th, be
rescheduled to 7:30 P.M. on November 8th.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
.Nays : 0
P.E.R.A. Councilman Hartmann moved the adoption of Resolution No.
84-73, "RESOLUTION ON THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
SYSTEM," regarding PERA Board election procedures.
Councilwoman Witt seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mayor Lockwood moved adoption of Resolution No. 84-74,
"RESOLUTION CONCERNING APPOINTMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL," strongly recommending the appointment of
Kathleen Ridder as the District 15 representative.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
SQUAD CAR SALE The Council acknowledged a memo and tabulation of bids
Page No. 2133
October 16, 1984
received for the sale of three squad cars and the Fire
Chief's former vehicle.
Councilwoman Blesener moved to accept bids and authorize
the sale of a 1982 Ford, 1981 Chevrolet Malibu, 1979
Chevrolet Malibu and 1973 Plymouth Wagon to the highest
bidders.
Councilman Hartmann seconded the motion.
Ayes: S
Nays: 0
ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the
Council, Councilman Hartmann moved that the meeting be
adjourned.
Councilman Mertensotto seconded the motion.
Ayes: S
Nays: 0
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:43 P.M.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
ATTEST:
Robert G. Lockwood »-
Mayor
SUMMARY STATEMENT
NOVEMBER 21, 1984 RECOUNT
CITY COUNCIL ELECTION RETURNS
Precinct Precinct Precinct Precinct Total
Candidate #1 #2 #3 #4 Votes
Janet Blesener
739
497
533
834
2603
Carl (Buzz) Cummins
599
636
451
725
2411
Charles E. Mertensotto
615
573
453
742
2383
Write -Ins
C. Lerman
0
0
1
0
1
D. Gove
0
0
0
1
1
Undervotes
659
520
418
684
2281
Overvotes
2
2
0
4
8
Precinct Totals
2614
2228
1856
2990
9688
Ballots Cast:
Punchcard
Absentee (Paper)
1224
1046
878
1377
4525
83
68
50
118
319
1307
1114
928
1495
4844
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 27, 1984
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was called to
order by Chairperson Kruse at 8:07 o'clock P.M. The following members were present:
Kruse, Burke, Frank, Morson, Stefani and Ridder. Henning had advised the Commission
that he would be out of town. Also present were Planning Consultant Howard Dahlgren
and Public Works Director Jim Danielson.
APPROVAL OF
Minutes of the October 23 meeting had been submitted previously.
MINUTES
Commissioner Frank moved to approve the minutes as submitted.
Commissioner Ridder seconded the motion.
Ayes: 6
Nays: 0
>t
CASE NO. 84-21,
Mr. David Hansing, consulting engineer, and Mr. Floyd Unruh,
GRAPPENDORF -
were present for the application. Mr. Hansing advised that
SUBDIVISION
after the last Planning Commission meeting, new plans were drawn
RECONSIDERATION
up which conform to present R-lA zoning. He noted that the new
plan also includes the Erdrich property in the platting, and
that there could be three buildable lots on the Grappendorf
property. He also stated that no variances would be needed in
the new plat.
Chairperson Kruse advised the audience that this was not an offici
public hearing, but that the matter was being reconsidered at the
request of the City Council.
New drawings were distributed to the Planning Commission members
and the audience for their review.
' While the plans were being reviewed, Planner Dahlgren stated
that he felt it would be physically possible to put one house
on Lot 1, Block 1.
Chairperson Kruse expressed concern about the wetlands areas and
over the water storage area. He felt that wetland boundaries
should be established on the plat and on the deed.
The Commission expressed concern over the cul-de-sac, which is
probably a quarter mile in length, and the maximum length of
a cul-de-sac is 500 feet.
Planner Dahlgren felt that it was possible that ultimately the
cul-de-sac would become a permanent east/west road through the
plat. He also noted that the future plans of the Mairs property
should be of great concern to the Commission, especially in
regard to the cul-de-sac as proposed. Planner Dahlgren noted
that Lot 1, Block 1 would need filling and possible wetland
variances in order to build a home on it.
Chairperson Kruse asked for questions or comments from the
audience.
:�. Planning Commission Minutes, November 27, 1984 Page Two
6'
Mr. Mel Swanson, 1778 Ridgewood Drive, expressed concern over
the 18 inch culvert shown and the possibility of it freezing
Ms.Zaspel,1792 Ridgewood Drive, expressed her concern with the
wetland boundaries and where the water will go if the wetland
areas are disturbed.
Planner Dahlgren located the approximate location of the wetlands
boundaries on the map for the Commission and the audience.
Mrs. Alice Bradford, 1673 Delaware, asked if the proposed road
could be placed in a different position, for the benefit of the
northern property owners.
Mr. Paul Pontinen, 1760 Ridgewood Drive, stated that there is
standing water on Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 2, in the spring.
Mr. Ted Weyerhauser, who lives north of the subject property,
expressed concern over the wetland area and possible wetland
variances, stating that if any variances are given, they will
destroy the beautiful wetland areas on the property.
Mr. Donald Bauer, 1759 Ridgewood Drive, asked who would be
assessed for improvements to the property.
Mr. Unruh stated that their total projected assessment costs
would be between $93,000 and $103,000, and that these costs
would be assessed over the 4 lots in the plat.
Mr. Tom Mairs, 1707 Delaware, the abutting northern property
owner, stated that he does not plan to take advantage of the
cul-de-sac nor does he plan to subdivide or develop his property.
He noted that he was not contacted with the second plan and only
had access to the plan at tonight's meeting. He wanted more time
to get expert advise, and he felt that anything done should not
be done lightly.
Mr. Mairs proposed to the Commission members the following:
1. That the Planning Commission recommend that the sale of Mrs.
Grappendorf's house, together with the approximate 1.3 acres
of land supporting her home should be approved to help Mrs.
Grappendorf solve some of her financial problems.
2. Recommend that the westerly lot (Lot 1, Block 1) of approximate
ly two acres, be annexed onto the Bauer's land as is, without
a road and without the necessity of a road. The Bauer's
have stated that this land will remain a wetland and will
serve as a water storage area, and that they have no use for
the proposed road.
3. That the Planning Commission recommend that the development
of the remaining land (all of it) and any further action
that land be delayed until such time as the following tak,
place:
Planning Commission Minutes, November 27, 1984 Page Three
a. Review by all residents in the area affected by the proposed
development (Marie, Delaware, Wentworth, and Dodd Road).
b. That there is assurance that there is compliance with the
wetland requirements.
c. That soil tests be conducted.
d. That a water flow assessment be made.
e. That soil borings be conducted.
f. That a water table level be determined.
g. The affect of the proposed fill on the property be studied and
reported on.
h. The length of the cul-de-sac is determined, and that
feasibility studies be done, showing whether this is practical
i. To further define and show on a map that the wetlands ordin-
ance is being complied with.
Mrs. Naren Bauer, 1759 Ridgewood Drive, agreed with all of Mr.
Mairs statements and suggested that until the litigation over Lot
1, Block 1, is settled, that no decision be made here.
Planner Dahlgren felt that it could possibly help the Bauer's
if a decision is made now, so that the Lot could be recorded
and the Bauer's could receive clear title to Lot 1, Block 1.
Mr. Floyd Unruh stated that the plans as proposed meet all City
requirements and he could not see how the Commission could deny
the plan as proposed. He stated that when he spoke to the
Public Works Director, he was told that the"creek" was not a
creek, that it was considered a drainage way, and that the 100
foot setback requirement did not apply to a drainage way.
There being no further questions. -or comments, Commissioner Morson
moved to recommend approval of the plat as submitted at this
meeting.
There was no second to his motion, therefore the motion failed
for lack of a second.
Commissioner Stefani moved to recommend that the subdivision be
into three parcels:
1. Lot 1, Block 1;
2. Lot 6, Block 2;
3. The balance of the Grappendorf property, with the stipulation
that some allowance be made for future right-of-way for
extension from the current cul-de-sac to the northerly line
of the Grappendorf property.
Commissioner Burke seconded the motion.
Planning Commission Minutes, November 27, 198F4 ?age Four
Engineering Consultant Hansing.stated that he felt the motion
was completely out of order.
Planner Dahlgren suggested a further recommendation that the
parties involved try to find a more detailed solution for the
remainder of the land in the plat.
Chairperson Kruse offered a friendly amendment to recommend
that the wetlands boundaries be more defined in the drawings.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 1, Morson
Abstain: 1, Ridder
CASE NO. 84-25, Mr. and Mrs. Warren Rush were present to request a wetlands
RUSH, WETLANDS permit to allow them to construct a single family home on Lot 3,
PERMIT Willow Springs Addition. Mrs. Rush noted that the proposed home
will be located 57 feet from the wetland area and that she had
obtained written approval from her contiguous neighbors. She
stated that fill will be placed on the front portion of the lot.
Chairperson Kruse pointed out that according to the plan submitted
about six feet of fill is to be placed at the side and rear of the
house also, and he expressed concern over that situation.
After a considerable amount of discussion over filling and
clearing of the property, Commissioner Morson moved to recomme
approval of the wetlands permit in accordance with the plans
submitted at this meeting, waiving the public hearing requirement,
and subject to appropriate measures being taken, subject to
approval of the Public Works Director so as to prevent the
erosion of fill northerly into the creek bed.
Commissioner Frank seconded the motion.
Ayes: 6
Nays: 0
The Commission suggested that Public Works Director Danielson
recommend to the City Council acquisition of an easement for
the creek.
VERBAL REVIEW Public Works Director Danielson gave a verbal review of cases
that had been before the City Council.
MISCELLANEOUS The Commission suggested that the wetlands boundary for the
Grappendorf property should cover the 100 year storage area.
ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Commission,
Ridder moved that the meeting be adjourned.
Commissioner Burke seconded the motion.
Ayes: 6
Nays: 0
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:58 o'clock P.M.-
a
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
?_ November 28, 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Adnistrator
FROM: Edward F. Kishel
City Engineer
SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewers, Storm Sewers
and Water Service Trenches
Lot H, Ivy Hill 2nd Addition
Job No. 8421
Improvement No. 84, Project No. 3
INTRODUCTION•
The construction of the above improvements have been satisfactorily
completed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution accepting the
project and authorizing final payment included in the List of Claims.
ACTION REQUIRED:
If Council concurs with staff recommendation, Council should pass a
motion adopting Resolution No. 84- , Resolution Accepting Work and Ap-
proving Final Payment for Sanitary Sewer, Storm Sewer and Water Service
Trench Improvements to Serve Lot H, Clapp-Thomssen - Ivy Hill 2nd Addition
(Improvement No. 84, Project No. 3)
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING
FINAL PAYMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND
WATER SERVICE TRENCH IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE LOT H,
CLAPP-THOMSSEN-IVY HILLS 2ND ADDITION
(IMPROVEMENT NO. 84, PRROJECT NO. 3)
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Mendota
Heights on October 19, 1984, and Ro-So Contracting Inc. of Centerville,
Minnesota, has satisfactorily completed the sanitary sewer, storm
sewer, and water service trench improvements (Improvement No. 84,
Project No. 3) in accordance with such contract.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mendota Heights that the work completed under said contract is hereby
accepted and approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby dir-
ected to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in
the amount of $14,014.40, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 4th day
of December, 1984.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By ..
Robert G. Lockwood, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
MEMO
DATE: November 27. 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Paul R. Berg
Code Enforcement Officer
SUBJECT: Building Activity Report for November, 1984
BLDG PERMITS
SFD
APT
C/I
MISC.
SUB TOTA]
TRD PERMITS
Plbg
Wtr
Swr
Htg, AC
6 Gas P i,
SUB TOTA
LICENSING
Contract
Licenses
TOTAL
CURRENT MONTH
YEAR TO DATE - 1984
YEAR TO DATE - 1983
NO.
VALUATION
FEE COLLECTED
NO.
VALUATION
FEE COLLECTED
NO. VALUATION
FEE COLLECTED
1
136,556.47
867.08
46
5,211,721.30
35,785.74
61
6,7925185.06
47,056.92
0
0
0
3
6,750,000.00
28,749.60
0
0
0
8
231,285.00
1,892.35
54
2,996,498;00
19,128.81
38
4,806,228.08
23,449.93
9
110,140.48
1,436.75
140
2,979,205.75
21,838.84
119
807,512.37
10,572.62
.18
477,981.95
4,196.18
243
17,937,425.05
105,502.99
218
12,405,925.51
81,079.47
4
86.00
95
4,376.00
82
1,873.00
3
15.00
75
375.00
75
650.00
3
52.50
65
1,212.50
70
1,300.00
,e16
797.50
124
11,057.50
86
3,538:00
26
951.00
359
17,021.00
313
7,361.00
)r1s0
0
299
7,475.00
287
7,175.00 '
44
$477,981.95
$5,147.18
901$17,937,425.05
$129,998.99
818
$12,405,925.51
895,615.47
NOTE: All fee amounts exclude Sac, Wac and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan check fee and
valuation amounts.
��r1NESp�q
�° yo
a
"'Or
�QO
Or VtP�
Office of Commissioner
November 21, 1984
Minnesota Department of Transportation Nov 2 a 1984
Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55155
Honorable Robert G. Lockwood
Mayor, City of Mendota Heights
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120
Dear Mayor Lockwood:
SUBJECT: S.P. 1918 (TH 110)
Speed Zoning
612-296.3000
As requested in your October 5, 1984 letter, I have given serious thought
for a 45 miles per hour limit on T.H. 110 through the City of Mendota
Heights, but find that it cannot be justified. The study conducted by
the District which justifies 50 miles per hour as a reasonable and safe
speed included an analysis of roadway conditions, accident records, and
prevailing speeds of prudent drivers. Truck concerns, signal spacing,
and related accidents weighed heavy in lowering the limit from 55 to
50 miles per hour.
Speed surveys conducted along T.H. 110 show 50% of the motorists travel
at speeds of 50 miles per hour or greater and 15% travel at speeds over
55 miles per hour. These same surveys show that the mean speed of trucks
is 42 miles per hour less than the rest of the traffic. Truck traffic
is 9% of the 23,000 to 28,000 vehicles per day on T.H. 110 through the
city.
A common belief is that posting a speed limit will influence drivers
to drive at that speed. The facts, however, indicate otherwise. Research
conducted in many parts of the country and in Minnesota over a span of
several decades has shown that drivers are influenced more by the appearance
of the highway itself and the prevailing traffic conditions than they
are by the posted speed limit. Without our concerns about trucks and
the closely spaced signals, the prevailing speeds of the drivers on T.H.
110 tells us that the speed limit should remain at 55 miles per hour.
The prevailing speeds of these same drivers also tell us that 45 miles
per hour speed limit would be totally out of reach because 94% of drivers
are traveling in excess of that at this time.
An Equal Opportuniij, Emph.rer
Hon. Robert G. Lockwood
November 21", 1984
Page Two
If speed limit signs are posted for a lower limit than is needed to safely
meet the conditions, many drivers will simply ignore the signs. At the
same time, other drivers will stay within the posted limits. This generally
increases the conflicts between faster and slower drivers. Studies have
shown that where uniformity of speed is not maintained, accidents generally
increase.
Roadway conditions along T.H. 36 through North St. Paul may look similar
at first glance; however, there is clearly a 5 miles per hour difference.
Along T.H. 36, we not only have the truck concerns, closely spaced signalized
intersections, and related accidents, but we havi? schools, pedestrian
crossings, and other high volume non -signalized intersections. These
added roadway conditions reflect on the speeds of the motorists traveling
T.H. 36. Speeds along T.H. .36 are 5 to 6 miles per hour less than those
along T.H. 110.
The District will continue to monitor conditions along T.H. 110 and take
corrective action as necessary. Data are being collected to determine
if the warning flashers installed this year are producing the desired
results. Also, we are investigating possible design modifications which
may be desirable. It is expected that it will take a year or so before
a decision is made as to whether or not additional advance warning flashers
will be installed.
Please feel free to contact Mr. Kermit McRae, District Engineer, at 779-1178
if you have any questions in this matter.
Sincerely,
Richard P. Braun
Commissioner
0
Minnesota
;4:
i Department of Transportation
Q
District 9
+I- OF 3485 Hadlev Avenue North, Box 9050
North St. Paul, Minnesota 55109
Telephone 779123
November 16, 1984
Mr. James E. Danielson, P.E.
Public Works Director
City of Mendota Heights
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120
Dear Mr. Danielson:
SUBJECT: C.S. 1918
T.H. 110 & Dakota Co.Rd. 43(Lexington Ave.)
Traffic Signal Operation Complaint
In your letter of October 19, 1984, you asked us to investigate the problem
of left turning traffic off of County Road 43 "locking up" with each other.
We observed the operation of the traffic signal at T.H. 110 and County Road
43 several times specifically for the "lock up" problem at mid-day and during
the morning and evening rush hours. We did not see any problem with vehicles
"locking up" during these periods of time. However, we made these observations
a few days after the new sections of T.H. 35E and T.H. 494 in Mendota Heights
were opened to traffic and volumes were substantially lower. Before T.H.
35E was opened to T.H. 110, County Road 43 was a main route from Mendota
Heights Road to T.H. 110.
We will keep this intersection under observation and take appropriate action
if the problem reoccurs.
If you have any further questions or problems, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
M
If j/.
Michael L. Robinson, P.E.
District Traffic Engineer
4n Equal Opporftitd{r Employer
_ 1/04/84
CLAIMS
LIST
VY� 15-F.ngr
50-Rd&Bridge 90 -Animal
CHECK DEGIST: R
20 -Police
60 -Utilities
ire
70-ParksACCOUNT
IMOUrlT
VE,�100�
ITEM DESCRIPTION
N0. ITjy
" 175.00
FRAZ=LL K=VIN
DEC MI
01-4415-110-10
1 75.)0
A
983.00
BORROJ31WS 1F MINN
OFFICE EO
16-4620-850-00 '
803.31
BnRROUGHS OF MIND
UORKB=NCHESFS
16-4620-850-00
19783.00
*�
15.00
DYNOTECH
SP=EDJ=CHECK
01-4330-440-20
15.00
*i
100.00
RAYMO41) M%HOWALD
RFDPL FEE
01-3365-000-00
100.^0
*�
105.15
NORTIWEST=RN PRINTCR
FALL VL
01-4268-650-10,
17.43
NORTAWESTERN PRINTCR
FALL NL
05-4268-650-15
57.20
NORTiW_ST=RN PRINTCR
FALL NL
15-4268-650-60'
44.35
NORTRWESTERN 'RINTCR
FALLNL
16-4268-650-00
131.45
NORTIWE ST=RN PRINTCR
FALLNL
21-4268-650-00
355.25
*�
886.53
OFFIC= INTERIORS INC
=OLDING TABLESFS
16-4620-850-00'
1,821 .93
OFFICE INTERI ORS .INC
DESKS FS
16-4620-850-00 1.
29707.53
+✓
101.90
SUBURBRIN TIR--&SVC
TIRES/BALANCING
01-4330-440-20
197.80
SUBURBAN TIRE&SVC
TIRES/BALANCING
01-4330-440-2J'
299.7_1
*.
2,750.00
SUPERIJR 'RODUCTS
STACK CHAIRS
16-4620-850-00
267.60
SUPERIOR ?R ODUCTS
E0 SDLYS FS
16-4620-850-00,
39017.50
+�
5.53
SAE=] PR INT
COa IES
87-4490-812-00
5.53
*i
150.90
SYNIDI3TAR INC
SLIDE PROGRAM
01-4305-020-20
153.)J
*i
749.)7
TH!?M�SON PLBG
RPR SWR SVC
15-4268-475-60
740.30
*/
149914.43
RO-SO C�ONrIACTIV3
FINAL I84-3
94-4460-821-00
14,314.40
*/
64.00
CITY W ST PAUL
FILLAIR TANKS
01-4305-030-30
64.00
*i
11.05
ZAHL E3
GAS NOZZLE SPOUTS
01-4330-440-20 '
11.95
ZAHL r_0
GAS NOZZLESPGUTS
C1-4330-490-50
22.10
*i
W,
1050
AIR CJMM IVC
RPR POWER CABLE
01-4330-450-20
CHECK REGISTER
3U`4'r VENDO' ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO, I V.
253.00 ANDERSEN -7ARL F&ASSO CHANNEL POSTS 01-4420-050-50 55
253.31
3.59
AT &
T INFO SYSTEMS
NOV SVC
01-4210-020-20
61.33
5.33
AT &
T INFO SYSTEMS
NOV SVC
01-4210-050-50
5.3D
AT &
T INFO SYSTEMS
NOV SVC
01-4210-070-70
TOM
4.50
AT &
T INFO SYSTEMS
NOV SVC
01-4210-315-30
MI THRU 11/27
5.29
AT &
T IN= 0 SYSTEMS
NOVSVC
15-4210-060-60
87-441 5-81 2•-'L'_
23.98 +�
18.94
COAST
TO COAST
SCISSORS/CORD
01-4300-640-10
4'
4.82
COAST
TO CAST
TREE MRAP
01-4305-070-70'
41
10.)2
COAST
TO COAST
THERMOST ATT
01-4330-320-70
41
2.36
COAST
TO -'OAST
MICE TRAPS
01-4335-310-70
41
37.34 #/
74.15 CONT=L CRI3IT CORP DEC PYMT 01-4210-020' 2
118.65 CONT -:'L CP ---)IT CORP DEC PYMT 01-4210-11q2;
59.32 CONTEL CR. -)IT CORP DEC PYMT 05-4210-105-�,. 2'.•
252.12 */
1.601.00 OCR COR?. DEC RENT 01-4200-600-10
905.00 OCR COR'. DEC RENT 01-4200-600-20
1.664,33 DCR -'DRP. DEC RENT 05-4200-600-15
4.170.00 *,/
93.'!0 DENNIS DEL40NT DEC m1 01-4415-021-20
90.30 *i'
127.69
ICMA
RC
11/23PAYROLL
01-2072-000-00
61.33
ICMA
RC
11/23PAYRCLL
01-4406-110-10
1.88.99 •�
12.32
KVUTi
TOM
MI THRU 11/27
05-4415-105-15
5.06
KNUTH
TOM
MI THRU 11/27
67-4415-941-
33.36
KNUTi
TOM
MI THRU11 //27
87-441 5-81 2•-'L'_
47.74 *`
")U `I T
144.)0
1 44.0 * /
19.90
293.30
67.74
1 35.)0-
67.74
313.38 •/
9.00
9.03
9.00
27.30 *l
21,742.44
21 9742.44 .i
190.10
31 .45
103.40
79.55
237.60
642.217 ,
47.!10
40.00 *�
31.50
55.75
97.50
1 84 .75 w
CHE_ICK REG1STc__R
V=NOOD ITEM DESCRIPTION
L,-_ LS
LMCIT
HIP
3LAN
LMCIT
4?
'LAN
LMCIT
HP
3LAN
LMCIT
Hf'
'LAN
LMCIT
fi?'
'LAV
LEEF 9ROS INC
L E EF B R OS I`NC
LEAF BROS INC
METRO WASTE :ONTROL
MILLER 'DiNTING
MILL_? PRINTING
MILLER PRINTING
MILLER PRINTING
MILLER PRINTING
M!1f DEPT PUdLICSAFETY
MINN FIRE INC
NINN FIRE INC
MINN FIRE INC
DEC DUES
DEC INS
DEC INS
DEC INS
DEC INS
DEC INS
NOV SVC
NOV SVC
NOV SVC
3 INSTALL
FALL NL
FALL NL
FALL NL
FALL 'JL
FALL ML
OCT CONN CHG
R=C HGIGA U G E
RTC HG
SMOKE BOMBS
3.4) MINN MUTUAL LIF= DEC INS
10.7.0 MINN MUTUnL LIFE DEC INS
3.40 MINV ?MUTUAL LIFE DEC INS
3.40 MINN MUTUAL LIFE DEC INS
1.70 MINN MUTUAL LIFE DEC INS
ACCOUNT NO. INV*
01-2075-000-30
01-2074-000-00
01-4245-020-20
01-4245-021-20
01-4245-040-40
01-4245-050-50
01-4335-310-5J 3;
01-4335-310-70 3:
15-4335-310-60 3-
15-4449-060-60 1.`
01-4268-650-10 V
05-4268-650-15 2'
15-4268-650-60 21
16-4268-650-00 21
21-4268-650-00 2'
01 -4200-61 0- 20 84
01-4305-030-30 31
01-4305-030-30 3'.
01-4403-030-30 1;
01-2071-000-00 2'.
01-2074-000-00 2'
01-4245-020-20 2.
01-4245-021-20 2:
01-4245-050-50 2.
CHECK. REG1ST --- R
:.v0UNT
VE ND 03
OFFIC:
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOWNT NJ. INV..
3.4)
MINN MUTJAL
LIFE
DEC
INS
X11-4245-070-70 .2
5.10
MINN MUTUAL
LIFE
DEC
INS
01-4245-110-"' 2
1.70
MINN MUTUAL
LIFE
DEC
INS
05-4245-105, 2
32 .3 0
INDEX GUIDE
01-4300-020-20
B
37.73 * l
L E
2.46
MOT01 PARTS
SERVICE
WHL
STUDS
01-4330-440-20 1
2.46 *�
JR
NOV
SVC
14-4220-132-00
325.75
157.74
N1)RTH4EST=R N
BELL
NOV
SVC
01-4210-020-20
157.74
NORT FfWE?ST=RN
6E LL
NOV
SVC
01-4210-020-20
32.40
NORTiW=ST=,RN
BELL
NOV
SVC
01-4210-050-50
110..01
NORTIWESTERN
BELL
+SOV
SVC
01-4210-070-70
256.19
NIRT+IN_ST_IN
BELL
NOV
SVC
01-4210-110-10
256.19
N0RTiWE:ST_IN
BELL
NOV
SVC
01-4210-110-10
291.96
NORTHWEST -:'RN
87 -LL
NOV
SVC
01-4210-315-30
51,03
NORT-i,WEST RN
BELL
NOVSVC
05-4210-105-15
32.40
N)RTiWESTE2N
BELL
NOV
SVC
15-4210-060-60
931.73 */
215.00 OAK CREST KENNELS RET NOV 01-4221-800-
13).)3 OAK CREST KENNELS NOV BOARD 01-4225-800-
345.)) *-,
12.19
S&T
OFFIC:
PROD
CALENDARS
01-4300-020-20
8
19.24
S&T
)FF ICE
PROD
MISC SPLYS
01-4300-020-20
P'
3.04
S&T
OFFICE
PROD
MASKING TAPE
01-4300-020-20
P,
3.26
SRT
9FFIC=
PROD
INDEX GUIDE
01-4300-020-20
B
37.73 * l
L E
JR
NOV
SVC
05-4220-132-15
421.85
35.30
SELANDER )UANE
C
DEC
MI
01-4415-200-7,0
35.)0 + '
1,620.70
SHAU3H41ESSY
L E
JR
NOV
SVC
01-4220-132-10
122.30
SHAU34NES3Y
L E
JR
NOV
SVC
03-4220-132-00
173.Q0
SHAUGHMIESSY
L E
JR
NOV
SVC
05-4220-132-15
421.85
SHAUSHNESSY
L E
JR
NOV
SVC
14-4220-132-00
325.75
SHAUSH4ESSY
L E
JR
NOV
SVC
16-4220-132-00
29670.00 *�
14.99
SNYDER DR1G
STORES
FILM
01-4490-020-20 7;
CHECK PE'�ISTER
'I oull
V _:' N DO'
ITEM DESCRIPT10,11
ACCOUNT NO* 1MV..
9.99
SNYDER DRJG STORES
KEYS FS
01-4490-030-30
24.89
13.28
ST PAUL B))K&STAT
SPLYS
01-4305-030-30.'a
3.62-
ST PAUL BOOK&STA;T
RTN
01-4305-030-30
JM
39,73
ST 'AUL BOOK&STAT
SPLYS
01-4305-030-30
,"a-
44.39
1,892.55
TROSSEN WlIGHT ASSOC
OCT SVC RE FS
16-4220-850-00
1#892.55
13.95
UNIF3RMS UNLIMITED
CA:'
01-4490-030-30
0�
13.95
57,74
UNIT") C7VT TRUSTEE
DEC PREM
01-2071-000-00
LA
36*11
UNITED CENT TRUSTEE
DEC PREM
01-4246-020-20
01
13,75
UNITr_D CE4T TRUSTEE
DEC PREM
01-4246-050-50
0
13,76
U NT T _:' D CElT TRUSTEE
OECPREM
01-4246-070-70
LA
131.37
75.00
UNIT---) WAY -ST PAUL
DEC CONTR
01-2070-000-00
75.)0
152.90
UN IV OF MINN
TUITION WARD
05-4400-105-15
152.90
135.33
WESTERN LIFE: 114S CO
DEC PREM
01-4246-030-30
3-21
135.30
19630*75
W I NTH R 0 PW--- T -NST I NE &S
RE LIQ ORD
01-4220-120-10
45.00
WINTl1JPW_--TNSTINE&S
RE TRAFCONTSYS
01-4220-120-20
530.21'
W IN Ti R 3 PW-:* IINST I NE &S
RE LOWER HISS
01-4220-120-80
195.00
WINTIROPWErNSTINE&S
RE WAHLfKRAJNIAK
01-4220-120-80
11500*13
WI4TtiROPW:_'TlNSTINE&S
3RD QTR RET
01-4221-120-10
3x195.60
WINTl0PW;_'lNSTINE&S
3RD QTR PROS
01-4222-120-20
397.60
WINT-IROPW-:'INSTINE&S
RE FIRE RELIEF IIV
06-4220-120-00
50.00
WTNT'4ROPW--TNSTTNE&S
RE BROOKS
16-4220-120-00
95.))
T
WIjNlTiROPW:-TINsr A.NE&S
RE CABLE FRANCH ORD
23-4220-120-0s0
-562.50
WINTiR0PW:_"1'NSTINF:&S
RE HANSON
87-4220-120-00
CHF CK RE t, I3 T: R
= "OU '`1T V7 IDOL
89201 .65 t ✓
159555.44
FUN)
01
TOTAL
122.80
FUVD
33
TOTAL
2 * 169.3 2
FU40
05
TOTAL
397,60
FUND
06
TOTAL
421,85
FUND
14
IOTAL
229689,73
FUVD
15
TOTAL
99900.13
FUND
16
TOTAL
369.?5
FUVD
21
TOTAL
295.30
FUVD
23
TOTAL
5.06
FUVD
67
TOTAL
398.39
FUND
87
TOTAL
149014.44
FUVD
44
TOTAL
66,339.47 TOT%,L
MANUAL CHECKS
10641
10642
10643
10644
10645
10646
10647
10648
10649
200.00 Publicorp
39.90 P. Berg
500.00 U. S. Post office
2,465.85 St. Treas SS Fund
4,417.36 St Treas Pera
4,518.61 Dir Int Revenue
350.00 DC Bank
975.15 SCCU
21,596.50, City MH PR Acct
35,063.37
GT 101,402.84
ITEM DESCRIPTION
GENERAL FUND
WATER RE VENUE FUND
ENGR ENTERPRISE
FIRE RELIEF
CONSOLIDATED DEBT SERVIC
SEWER UTILITY
TID I79-7/81-4/82-2/82-6
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOO MENT
CABLE TV FRANCHISE
180-3 TH13 REALIGN/WATER
183.4183-4g GRYC/OAK CTY
I34-3 CL TROMP IVY HILL
REgr Shaughnessy
Refund Nov. Ins Deduction
Refill Postage meter
21/23FICA
11/9 PERA
11/23 FIT
11/23 Payroll Decutions
fl
Net Payroll 11/23
ACCOUNT N7. Ift
LIST OF 1984 CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 4, 1984
Astro Masonry
B & J Construction
B.O.Z. Concrete Construction
Bolduc Construction Company, Inc.
Bor-Son Building Corporation
Crawford -Merz Construction,Company
Gen -Erik Heating and Cooling, Inc.
Gen -Erik Heating and Cooling, Inc.
J and F Excavating
Lennox Builders, Inc.
McQuillan Brothers Plumbing
Bruce Nelson Plumbing and Heating
Bruce Nelson Plumbing and Heating
Lauren E. Nelson
Rayco Construction
Rocon Construction Company
S and W Builders, Inc.
Masonry License
General Contractor's License
Masonry License
General Contractor's License
General Contractor's License
General Contractor's License
Gas Piping License
Heating and Air Cond. License
Excavating License
General Contractor's License
General Contractor's License
Gas Piping License
Heating and Air Cond. License
General Contractor's License
General Contractor's License
General Contractor's License
General Contractor's License
,k,,
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor, City Council
FROM: Kevin D. Frazel ��?_
City Adminiat for and
SUBJECT: Grappendorf Subdivision
Case No. 84-21
November 28, 1984
James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
INTRODUCTION•
At their November 8th meeting, Council continued the Grappendorf subdivision
case to the December 4th meeting. The developer had informed the City that they
had dropped their rezoning request and were redesigning the plat to conform to
the existing zoning (R -1A). The Planning Commission, at their October 23rd
meeting had unanimously recommended denial of the rezoning request and therefore
the first preliminary plat layout was invalid.
DTM1.4gTnN-
The final plans for the redesigned plat were not available until the night
of the Planning Commission meeting, allowing for minimal staff input, the de-
velopers had not contacted the adjoining neighbors, thus affording them no oppor-
tunity to coordinate this proposal with their plans. Because of these two facts
and because this is an unusual piece of ground with a large wetlands surrounding
it, the Planning Commission has once again recommended denial of the plat as
prepared. Staff has reviewed the plat since that Planning Commission meeting of
;. November 27th, and finds that all the lots, as now designed, meet or exceed the
R -1A zoning requirements. Staff has not done an in depth review of wetlands,
storm water and utilities, because the developer/City Council has not reques-
ted/ordered the feasibility study. That study is normally ordered after the
preliminary plat approval. Staff would, in that study,.include an analysis of
the impact on the wetlands and a public hearing would be conducted on the find-
ings. It appears to staff that if the developer can work out an agreement with
the northerly neighbors on the best alignment of the north/south street and
agrees to dedicate the appropriate drainage easements for wetlands preservation
and protection, that the preliminary plat as presented is generally acceptable
for approval.
Although the Planning Commission did not approve the plat as submitted by the
developer, they did recommend approval of a temporary compromise, until some of
the neighborhood issues can be addressed. That compromise would subdivide the
property into three parcels, Mrs. Grappendorf's homested and immediately
contiguous property, the parcel purchased by the Bauers, and the remaining middle
piece which developer Unruh proposes to subdivide for sale as R -1A sized lots.
1
~
The Grappeodprf case has been somewhat confusing and complicated to say the
-least. At this point it a' ro.tbat Council has at least three options. ~
1. Approve the preliminary plat as proposed by the developer.
2. Approve an amended plat as recommended by the PleuuioQ Commission.
3. Deny the preliminary plat altogether.
Staff has not talked with the developer since the 9lauoioQ Commission
meeting to ascertain his preferences. We will attempt to do so before Tuesday
evening.
Because the rezoning request has been withdrawn and there is not a require-
ment for a public hearing at Council level on Preliminary plats, tonight's action
is not a formal hearing. If there are a large number of residents in attendance,
Council may wish to conduct this portion of the meeting as if it were a public
hearing and allow residents to he beard from.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Council needs to review 9lauoiuQ Commission minutes and public comments (Tom
Mairo is meeting with the neighbors on Saturday and will be at the meeting to
present their findings) and take action on the request.
E
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: 27 November 1984
CASE NUMBER: 84-21
APPLICANT: Eveline Grappendorf
LOCATION: Northerly of Marie Avenue, Westerly of
Delaware Avenue
ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of Preliminary Plat
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. You will recall Mrs. Grappendorf's application for rezoning and approval
of Preliminary Plat considered at the last regular meeting of the Planning
Commission. At that time the plat submitted would have required a
rezoning from R -1A to R-1 reducing the required lot size from 40,000
square feet to 15,000 square feet. Interested neighbors objected
strenuously to the rezoning and the resultant reduction in lot size, which
would likely have had far reaching effects on the future development of
property in the immediate area.
2. It was suggested at the meeting that the plat be reconsidered and the
zoning proposal dropped, amending the proposed Preliminary Plat so as to
develop lot sizes in keeping with the R-lA (40,000 square feet) zoning
regulations. One of the methods for accomplishing this objective would
have been to propose an east -west cul-de-sac on the northerly property
line, sharing such a public street extension with the property owner to
the north. The Preliminary Plat submitted for review at this time
suggests the development of such a cul-de-sac within the Grappendorf
property, but contiguous to the northerly property.
You will note that the proposed development now basically conforms with
the R -1A lot size requirements. This proposal is different too in that it
now includes the rear portion of the property immediately north of Mrs.
Grappendorf's house. This contiguous owner's property is now divided into
Lots 4 and 5 of Block 2.
3. It would appear that this Preliminary Plat proposal now conforms to City
standards, and is in keeping with the Planning Commission's basic
directive. the remaining problem, however, could be that of the reaction
of the property owner to the north of the Grappendorf parcel. Obviously,
the construction of the cul-de-sac as proposed (the east -west cul-de-sac)
allows for the future development of portions of the land to the north.
To our knowledge, this land owner has not been contacted regarding this
proposal. Thus, the Commission may have to await the results of the
Planning Commission hearing to ascertain this reaction.
One of the possible ways of handling this cul-de-sac is to have the
assessments deferred that would affect the land owner to the north until
CASE NUMBER: 84-21
APPLICANT: Eveline Oiipp4ndotl
Aw
N ' Page 2
i1.
such time as development is proposed. If this owner cared to develop
portions of his land now, obviously, that—could be accomplished if he so
desired. 1
4. At such time as homes are proposed to be constructed on Lot 1, Block 1,
and on Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 2, it would appear that a variance to the
100 foot setback to the creek line may be required. It would appear, that
under the circumstances and the given dimensions of the 8.1 parcel owned
by Mrs. Grappendorf, that reasonable building sites are possible for all
the lots proposed. There may be some problem with respect to the
development of Lot 1, Block I (the westerly most lot) inasmuch as there is
relatively little high ground on which to construct a residence. We
understand, however, that the potential owner of this property (the home
owner directly to the south) proposes to retain this land as open space
for the foreseeable future.
5. It would appear that the design of the Preliminary Plat as proposed has
made a serious attempt to develop within the existing regulations creating
a total of seven lots out of the two parcels that exist as of this time.
An important consideration is that of the future development of the
property to the north, and that land owners reaction to this potential.
6. Attached are drawings labeled 1, 2, and 3 which indicate the relationship
of the Grappendorf property to the development pattern in the area,
delineation of the zoning districts in the area, and the relationship to
the Wetlands System in this part of the City.
7
J;
t LAXEII�
UWECT.VROPERI
�• -r+ SOMERSET
,�' •. I • '. COUNTRY CLUB
. •,� GOLF COURSE
1'
� I +
�+ ' r• WENTWO TH %
1 N pv.Rtt I —
• /^, i
wcroorA Ncllwn
MR 3 OOIi COlM3E I \mit I / •� — •-
• • f • -----tit-� / � ) � . .
• ' • - •" r SUBJECT
•...� --/!/�'� �� ;PROPERTY
mrd - . • ._
_ I -��• �° V-8001
JAARX
CALLA
r
• !"'s .,In—
_J I • • •N•0• M•N .CIIOOI
mmco
t.
DRAWING 1
•1 I ,i�
WENTWOATN f
PARR
I ,
MENDOTA MEIOHTS
PAR J GOLF COURSE
(PUBLIC)
11 N 1
An\r
SUBJECT PROPERTY
V-aoo,
J�r
DRAWING 2
t r+
SUBJECT PROPERTY
V-aoo,
J�r
DRAWING 2
NOV, 2 61984
AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN REPLAT
WHEREAS: I. Eveline Grappendorf of 1769 Delaware, have made
application to the City of Mendota Heights for the
replat of property legally described as follows:
The South I of the North } of the Southeast i
of the Southeast i except the East 526.39 feet
of the North I of the South J of the North• i
of the Southeast � of the Southeast J; Seo. 249
Twp. 28, Range 23, Dakota County, Minnesota. and
WHEREAS: We, Terrance L. Erdrich & wife of 1737 Delaware, are in
agreement to join in with the above party and property
to replat the property legally described as follows:
The East 526.39 feet of the North * of the
South J of the North * of the Southeast J of
the Southeast 1; Seo. 24, Twp. 28, Range 23,
Dakota County, Minnesota. and
In exchange for 11,000 sq.ft. of Eveline Grappendorfs prop-
erty adjoining the latter described property, Terrance L.
Erdrich & wife agree to Assessment costs not to exceed
$20,000.00 which amount shall be their maximum assessment
share of the Street curb & gutter and Sewer & water costs.
HOWEVER: If total assessment costs assesst against the Grapp-
endort pproperty is $80,000.00 or less, The total cost
to Erdri h's shall not exceed 251 of the.total assesst.
HOWEVER: Terrance L. Erdrich & wife shall have the option to
withdraw, by certified letter, from this agreement if
the replat approval has not been completed by Dec. 1,
1985. This agreement shall remain in full force until
interested parties have been so notified.
And: Terrance L. Erdrich & wife shall incur no costs
to them from gngineering, Surrveying & Development
charges for the inclusion of their property in
the replat.
L) 2
Subscribed and s orn to before me this Day of 1
1984 �
o ary pu g FL OYD R. UNRUH
NOTARY P.UDLIC-MINNESOTA
yr COMMI..ION Z.XPIRi. OCT-
October 24, 1984
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR REZONING AND SUBDIVISION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights will meet at 7:45 o'clock P.M. on Thursday, November 8th, 1984, in
the City Hall Council Chambers, at 750 South Plaza Drive, Mendota Heights,
Minnesota, to consider an application from Mrs. Eveline Grappendorf, for the
rezoning and subdivision of property commonly known as:
The S11 of the Nl� of the SE114 of Section 24, Township 28, Range 23,
except the E 526.39 feet of the Nj of said S!j, Dakota County, Minnesota.
More particularly, this property is described as being 1769 Delaware Avenue,
(660 feet north of Marie Avenue).
This notice is pursuant to City of Mendota Heights Ordinance No. 401.
Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed rezoning and
subdivision of property will be heard at this meeting.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
C 0 October 25, 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City �inistrator
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
.•,14!SDBJECT: Case 484-21, Grappendorf Rezoning and Subdivision
.1 11 . DISCUSSION
On October 23rd, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consid-
er a rezoning and preliminary plat approval for the Grappendorf property, which
is located north of Ridgewood Drive. Mrs. Grappendorf has already sold two pieces
of her 8.1 acres without prior City approval.
1. She sold approximately two acres to Mr. and Mrs. Donald Bauer, who
live at the end of Ridgewood Drive. They bought two acres of wetlands
and indicate that they intend to keep it "wild". They bought the land
® thinking they had a legal piece of property, but the County will not
let them obtain title because they cannot show proof that the City has
approved the land division. The Bauers are presently in litigation with
Mrs. Grappendorf over this matter.
2. Mr. Michael Gustafson is purchasing Mrs. Grappendorf's homesite on a
contract for deed, together with approximately one acre of land. This
land division also has not been approved by the City.
3. The remaining 5t acres are being proposed to be divided into six more
lots.
There was a large turn -out for the public hearing and no one at the hearing
was in favor of the rezoning. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to deny
the rezoning and because the plat is proposed for R-1 density, also recommended
denial of the plat.
ACTION REQUIRED
Council should conduct the required public hearings and, based on input from
the Planning Commission, Council and public, act first upon the requested rezoning
and then on the preliminary plat.
JED:madlr
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
+ DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
OF
i PLANNING REQUEST
Applicant�
Name:, !' a d16 V�- V P..
Last First
;Address:
Number & Street City
Z;; ;Telephone Number:f �I�V-610
,
Owner
Name: C3'j'�,f�/� Pti e! 6✓ J FI/ e, 1 J 0
La First J
Address: / f76 9 //� /Ciue 1 �/ F
Number & Street City
Street Location of Property in Question:
Legal Description of -,Property:
�-yc — .2 /
Case No.
Date of Application 10 -2 -dl -71
Fee Paid "'J,3,5- c,2,0
-P
Initial
State zip
Initial
J tr �1 �f /lig 5S-1 Z. U
State zip
EW��
i
Type of Request:
t
i
Rezoning
Variance
Conditional Use Permit
Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D.
Minor Conditional Use Permit
j� Subdivision Approval
Plan Approval
Wetlands Permit
Other
3w
Applicable City Ordinance Number Section
Present Zoning of Property: 91,4
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Zoning of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Number of people intended to live or work on premises: A "; 5;
I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional
material are true.
Signature of 4plicAnt
Date
Received by (title)
NOTE: The -following plans shall be drawn and attached to this application:
A. Applicitions involving a Variance shall submit the following plans:
Date Received Initial
1. Site Development Plan
2. Dimension Plan
3.' Landscape Plan
4. Grading Plan
B. Applications involving a Rezoning-, Conditional Use Permit or Subdivision
shall submit the following:
1. Sketch Plan
2. Abstractors Certificate
(If the subdivision involves cutting of existing parcel into two or more lots).
C. Applications involving a Wetlands Permit shall submit the following:
1. A full & adequate description of all phases of the operation &/or proposed
physical changes.
2. A topographic map of the, area. Contour intervals shall be drawn at.. two (2)
foot intervals at a horizontal scale of 1" = 1,000' or larger.
3. A detailed site plan of the proposal showing proposed drainage, grading & landscap
4. A site design map showing the location of existing and future man-made features
within the site and to a distance of five hundred (500) feet surrounding the site.
a, CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Planning Commission
October 18, 1984
FROM: James Danielson and Paul Berg
Public Works Director Code Enforcement Officer
-SUBJECT: CASE #84-21, GRAPPENDORF, Rezoning and Subdivision Approval
r
-,-."";'DISCUSSION
Mrs. Eveline Grappendorf, 1769 Delaware, has been in on several occasions
:-,:over the past few years trying to sell all, or parts of her 8.1 acres of the
land she owns with her home that fronts on Delaware just north of Marie Avenue.
She has been unable to find an easy solution to her problem of land sale because
of the lack of public streets and utilities to the west half of her property.
Her problem is further complicated by a creek running through her property which
is part of the City's wetland system.
® Of recent, Mrs. Grappendorf has sold approximately two acres of the west
portion of her land (mostly wetlands) to Mr. and Mrs. Bauer, 1759 Ridgewood
Drive. She completed that sale without getting subdivision approval from the
City. She is currently selling her home with a small easterly portion of property
to Mr. Mike Gustafson. Mr. Gustafson is anxious for the City to approve that
subdivision so that he can complete negotiations and take possession of the house
and property.
Mrs. Grappendorf is now working through Floyd Unruh to subdivide her property
into 8 lots-. Of the new lots, Lot 1, Block 1, exceeds current zoning requirements
for area, but there is some question about constructing a dwelling on that lot due
to wetland ordinance provisions.
We understand that the Bauers, who have purchased that lot, intend to preserve
it in its present state for the near future.
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 2, are all less than the current 40,000 square
foot minimum required by R-lA zoning. Lot 5 is slightly less than the current
minimum, but with minor lot line adjustment, could comply with R-lA zoning
requirements. Lot 6, which contains the existing home, appears to comply with
all aspects of the curring zoning. Lot 7 complies with present R-lA zoning
requirements, however, there is a creek flowing through the middle of the lot,
which could make house placement difficult.
Ridgewood Drive presently exceeds the City's 500 foot maximum cul-de-sac
length. This new development would further lengthen the dead-end situation,
however, future plans would include extending Ridgewood to connect with another
street.
- 2 -
Park contribution for this subdivision would be for seven new lots, at
$600 per lot.
ACTION REQUIRED
Conduct a public hearing first on the proposed rezoning request, and then
on the preliminary plat which is.prepared using R1 zoning criteria, and based
on input from the Planning Commission and public, make a recommendation on the
two separate requests to the City Council.
JED/PRB:madlr
,—PLANNING REPORT
DATE:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
_DN REQUESTED:
"',,,y—,)PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
23 October 1984
84-21
Eveline Grappendorf
Northerly of Marie Avenue, Westerly of
Delaware Avenue
Rezoning from R -1A to R-1
Approval of Preliminary Plat
:t.'1. This property is an 8.1 acre tract with frontage on Delaware Avenue and 60
feet of frontage on Ridgewood Drive, which is a cul-de-sac extending
northerly from Marie AVenue. Copies of the attached sketches indicate
location and relationships to these two streets.
When Ridgewood Drive was platted with a cul-de-sac at the end, the
cul-de-sac was designed so as to provide 60 feet of frontage on the
southerly edge of the Grappendorf property. this was done intentionally
so that the cul-de-sac could ultimately be extended northerly through the
Grappendorf property, and possibly northerly from there to the various
larger tracts that front on Delaware. Ultimately, this street hopefully
will be extended in some fashion to Wentworth Avenue. The proposal to
extend this cul-de-sac north -south through the westerly end of the
Grappendorf property is in keeping with the long range street plan for
this portion of the City.
2. Within this past year, we have had conversations with representatives of
Mrs. Grappendorf and the owner of the single family lot immediately west
of the cul-de-sac at the end of Ridgewood Drive. The owner of that lot
has contracted to purchase the westerly 270 feet of the Grappendorf
property. In order for that property to be divided as a separate parcel
from the remainder, it is necessary for the parcel to have street
frontage. Thus, part of the purpose of this plat is to allow for the
platting of that lot which will be Lot 1 of Block 1 containing 88,830
square feet.
The apparent reason for this lot remaining so large is that it is under a
contract sale to the owner of the home to the south, Donald J. Bauer.
Rather than simply construct an extension of the existing Ridgewood Drive
cul-de-sac the Grappendorfs have proposed to extend another cul-de-sac
easterly from the extension of Ridgewood Drive, which you will notice on
the copy of the attached Preliminary Plat. This cul-de-sac is labeled as
Stanwich Avenue.
3. On the north side of Stanwich Avenue, the plat proposes to develop four
single family lots, each with 118.7 feet of width, with a land area of
15,074 square feet. Though these lots meet the R-1 requirements (100 feet
of frontage and 15,000 square feet of land area), this portion of the
CASE NUMBER: 84-21
APPLICANT: Eveline Grappendorf &Page 2
City, as' you know, is zoned R -JA, which requires 40,000 square feet of
land. Attached is a copy of a portion of the base map of the City of
Mendota Heights indicating the parcel arrangement in this part of the City
(see attached Drawing 1). You will notice that all the parcels in that
area are 40,000 square feet or more, including the plat directly to the
south served by the Ridgewood Drive cul-de-sac.
A rezoning of the entire parcel (8.1 acres) is a radical departure from
the existing zoning pattern that was established in 1962 when the new
zoning ordinance and zoning map were adopted. You will notice from a copy
of the Zoning map attached (Drawing 2) that the line between the R-1 and
R -1A Districts meanders through the easterly portion of the City. This
line was established by discussing the lot area policy with the then
owners of the properties in question. It was mutually decided among these
owners and -the City Planning Commission and Council at that time that this
was the desired line delineating the higher density area of the City from
that of the lower density. If the property in question is rezoned it
would obviously affect future policy with respect to the lot size standard
in this area of the City. It would thus seem fair and appropriate that
owners of land in the area of the plat (particularly to the north) be
involved in discussions regarding this future policy.
4. You will notice that only four lots are affected by the proposed smaller
lot standard. Though one of the four remaining large lots is proposed to
be platted at 36,962 square feet, the others are well over 40,000 square
feet. Having not reviewed this plat with the Grappendorfs as presented,
we are not certain of their philosophy in mixing the relatively small lots
with the very large lots proposed on the same plat.
5. Attached as Drawing 3 is a copy of the Wetlands System in this area of the
city. You will notice that there is a wetlands drainage system which runs
through the southerly portion of the property. This drainage system runs
east -west through approximately the center of Lot 7 of Block 2 (which
probably should be labeled Block 3). There appears to be a problem here
with respect to how the lot can be developed without placing a structure
astride the drainage system as it now exists.
One solution to this problem would be to move the Stanwich Avenue
cul-de-sac northerly to the property line contiguous to the Thomas G.
Mairs property. If this were done, approximately four lots could be
platted with a north -south orientation, thereby placing the wetlands
System in the southerly portion (rear yard area) of these lots. If such
a cul-de-sac were platted on this common northerly property line (If Mr.
Mairs agrees) the cost of the cul-de-sac to the Grappendorfs would be cut
in half. This revision to the plat would likely solve both the problem of
the ultimate development of Lot 7 as it relates to the Wetlands Ordinance,
and provide for lots large enough which would not require the rezoning to
R-1.
6. If it is decided that the rezoning is appropriate, it would suggest That
the plat be revised so as to not have to construct the Stanwich Avenue
cul-de-sac as long as proposed. To create the lots proposed from the
plat, their need only be 100 feet of frontage for Lot 5 as measured at the
building line which is 30 feet back from the right-of-way of the
cul-de-sac. Thus, the cul-de-sac could be constructed further to the west
CASE NUMBER: 84-21
APPLICANT: Eveline Grappendorf Page 3
with a g'reater portion of it on Lot 7. This would appear to eliminate
some substantial grading now proposed on the east end of the Stanwich
Avenue cul-de-sac.
7. In summary, it would appear as though the extension of Ridgewood Drive is
perfectly appropriate in accordance with past planning objectives in this
part of the City. The rezoning of the land to the smaller lot size,
however, is a broad issue which we carefully reviewed with affected
property owners inasmuch as it would likely dictate future lot size policy
in properties to the north as ' well. The implications on the Wetlands
System created by Lot 7 as now proposed to be platted is a serious
consideration which should be addressed now. We are not suggesting that a
Wetlands Permit be processed at this time, but that a solution involving
the platting of the land in a different way might be appropriate at this
dime.
ME
9
',mak - • SOMERSET `
%Rn.. AVENUE
�. `• I • •; �., a • COUNTRY CLUB
f
"•I ••. •�i H GOLF COURSEAITAVENUE
WENTWO{ TH r
PARK rt
1 aK• .` f � 1
' • i f
MENDOTA HEIGHTS j lt1 ,r, :'..' • n
PAR 3 GOLF COURSE r . tl �l ^••"'
N I PUBLIC)6ACHELDR AVENUE
r ..
• ' a SUBJECT
PROPERTY
1"-800'
..n,., .. • • f ♦ ♦ ` f • . t • � •fir •
MARIE AVENUE
CALL
f i a
• 2
4 f.
l ,
FREEWAY ROAD;i
j,( • � , i MtwrtV st�tcr
� 'w .1• •'r�{ I . • •. �'• Vii.
,Ysy. DRAWING 1
If
WENTWORTH
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PAR 3 GOLF COURSE
(PUBLIC)
.:SUBJECT PROPERTY
-800'
"577,
DRAWING 2
d�
g10 10
00/
Cl
SuBjecr Pno,
C
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHT
MEMO
November 29, 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Adm' 4Da�
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Rush Wetlands Permit
Case No. 84-25
nTQPITgQTnM
The Planning Commission unanimously approved the attached wetlands permit at
their November 27th meeting. It was suggested by the Planning Commission that a
drainage and utility easement covering the creek area be dedicated to the City.
Staff has prepared that document and sent it to the Rushs' for their signature.
RECOMMENDATION:
Subject to receipt of the drainage and utility easement Planning Commission
and staff recommend waiving the public hearing and granting a Wetlands Permit to
Lot 3, Willow Springs Addition (683 Marie Avenue).
"'" ACTION REQUIRED:
If Council wishes to implement the Planning Commission and staff recommenda-
tion they should pass a motion waiving the public hearing and granting a Wetlands
Permit to Lot 3, Willow Springs Addition to construct a home to within 57 feet of
the drainage way as depicted on the plot plan presented to the City on November
28, 1984.
1
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
OF
PLANNING REQUEST
Applicant
f(-jName: /-
Las/t/ n First
Address:
Number & Street City
Telephone Number: 22 V— o (,(l
Owner
Name: j`7 L
Last First
L `
Case No.
Date of Applicat on e)
Fee Paid \\
Initial
State
Initial
6-7a
Zip
Address: O / Z�:-, 57•- VW0G- /"(/V• S •S/ O 7
Number & Street City State Zip
Street Location of Property in Question:
Legal Description of Property:
ki>--/o r r) n I JL
Type of Request: Rezoning
—
Conditional Use Permit -
Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D.
-- Minor.Conditional Use Permit
Subdivision Approval
Plan Approval
Wetlands Permit
Other
...— ,. = f ..,..:n:. + - '>iiF-r... •.YDS i --.q: . J •- w.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEI`GHTS
MEMO
--- Novemhcr 20, 1984
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Danielson
P.W. DiraeLor.
and Paul. Berg
Code Enforcement Officer
SUBJECT: Case #84-25, Wetlands Permit for Lot 3, Willow Springs AdcliL.ion
ENT ROD UCTLON
Dick Bjorklund, Sr., on behalf of Patricia and Warren Rush, has subdiLted
a site plan and made applic'aLion for a wcLlands permit.
DfSCUSSION
The Rush's intention is Lo have Mr. Bjorklund construct a new home
on Lot 3, Willow Springs Addition, located at 688 Marie Avenue. This lot, which
:is 1.43 feet wide and 303 feet deep, contains 43,329 square feet. The new home
is proposed to he set hack 50 feet from the south lot line, 39'8" from the west
lot line, 22'8" front the vast lot line and 218 feet- from Che north IOL line.
The proposed setback d itit,lnc v from Chu rear of the new home to the creek
is 57 feet. The wetlands ordinance requires a 100 FOOL SeLbnc'k, thus requiring
approval of a 43 Foot: uncroachmem .
This home is Lo be hu i l t on Lhv remaining vacant. lot between Lhe
proposod Callahan subdi- i.sttnl ,Ind Che UXISLing home: along ;Marie Lu We 60St.
f�
The majority of the homes along Mar i.e Avenue to the east are setback an
average of 70 feat from Lhe right-nf -way. 1%then Mr. Goff consCructed his home,
he was gran Lod a front yard Setback variance to site his home with 60 feet of
setback. This was done to accommodate the creek that angles toward the front
lot lines. The Rush lot was also granted a variance at that same time, t,w_.have
a 50 foot setback.
Although a public hearing is required for a wetland permit, previsions have
been made in the ordinance for the waiving of the hearing in the case of a minor
development involving one or Lwo family dwellings. Mrs. Rush has promised to
present her site plan to the Adjacent neighbors and get signatures of concurrence
from them. At the time she made application, she had acquired Mrs. Pam Coff's
signature of approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Ma
Staff hds reviewed the site plan and, subject: to rvveipL of luLters of
concurrence from the adjacent neighbors, staff recommends waiving the public
hearing, and rerommPnd ins: npprova 1 to the City Cnunv i 1 .
ACTI0N RI111'IRMI
11 Pl,illi ing catilmissinn contur,s with :;Lill',; recommendation, It should waive
ht' 1)111, 1 ',t ht' 11- Ill;' 11111 1 et't Nrllllt'nd .fppl ftV.I I of Jilt- I-t'titlost ed wel kinds IWI-1111 L .
U
a4A/w,
lel,161�-
CONCURRENCE OF LOT 3 WILLOW SPRINGS ADDITION
�0V 2 8 1984
MRS. RUSH HAS SHOWN THE PLOT PLAN OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THEIR HOME
ON LOT 3 WILLOW SPRINGS ADDITION.
too,
0A
PLANNING RBPORT
DATE:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ACTION REQUESTED:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
27 November 1984
84-25
Warren Rush
North of Marie Avenue, Easterly of Dodd
Road
Approval of Variance to Wetlands
Setback
1. Mr. and Mrs. Warren Rush propose to build a residence to be constructed by
Dick Bjorklund, local contractor, on the subject property as located on
the attached sketches. You will notice on the sketch delineating the
Wetlands System in this portion of the City that the lot is indicated with
a gray overlay pattern. There is a tributary of a stream which ultimately
leads to Ivy Fall Creek which passes through the property. A more exact
location for this stream is as indicated on the attached plot plan (drawn
at 1"-200' scale) which is also attached to this report.
2. Last week at our regular office hour sessions at the City Hall, the
staff, Jim Danielson, Paul Berg, and myself reviewed this development
proposal with Dick Bjorklund and the Rushes. They propose to construct a
home which will be set back a distance of 57 feet from the creek. The
Wetlands Ordinance specifies a minimum distance of 100 feet. They are
therefore asking for a variance to this 100 foot setback.
3. You will notice on the site plan that the home is to be set back 50 feet
from the north right-of-way line of Marie Avenue. This distance was
previously established by the Planning Commission and Council in its
consideration of the development proposed on the property to the west.
On that property the setback was established at 40 feet. These setbacks
are dictated by the fact that the homes further to the east are set back
a distance of 60 feet. These setbacks carry out the intent of the front
yard requirements as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance.
4. The depth of the house (dimension from front to the back) is only 30 feet
and thus there has been an obvious attempt to keep the back of the house
as far from the creek as possible. Under these conditions, it would
appear that the placement of the home as proposed represents a logical
solution to the problem.
5. You will note that the basement grade is proposed to be at 90.4 feet,
whereas the top of the creek bed as indicated on the topographical site
plan varies from 84.1 (east side) to 82.4 (west side). Mr. Danielson,
the Public Works Director, has reviewed these grades and finds them
satisfactory for development purposes.
CASE NUMBER: 84-25
APPLICANT: Warren Rush
Page -i",
6. The 'Planning Commission and Council may wish to consider a condition to
the Wetlands Permit that appropriate measures be taken, subject to
approval of the Public Works Director so as to prevent the erosion of fill
northerly into the creek bed. The condition should also be attached that
the residence and development of the site be done in accordance with the
plot plan submitted and dated as of the Planning Commission recommendation
(date to be applied).
7. Attached is a copy of an air photo indicating the location of the
property in relationship to the existing homes to the east.
e
S4 .3 Lc
Lori 49 .
40 --1 1 7
S
0
zo h
i 9 h;
N
NI
yr,;at i1
i.1 0%1 L L C
�
� 9 V) ro a
VIEN
589,
a
—7
titGAN
t• L /OSG
ft
i 6$4,rt
i44,YF
C'AO
-2
j. 3
l
-
°
o
r
*
,�z.•s �
tt.fo.
.��
230. S
104
= t Jt.4
--1 !to
-
304
.779
4a
2 .{P
�
�
R
� u
N
• 4 ,04
Oi.Li
L /oyca'
.E' 8
Llici//a
yt/a//t'ci-
Z'4•
1.3 73
Z
4
0
`ofXC&PTto+J
°`" C,EKAL0 a { FEL -NA B. OuDWO V -IV c. �Lvl d -A1
-
Q�V
7 o OQ
`
3.3---- z
IL7
•
�_ Z$
1
o'
v
/
a,
h
r
�
r
N
4S00.
r
crS
4-
a
a
ti
Z S
LC.
^
2QL
Zd L
e
S4 .3 Lc
Lori 49 .
40 --1 1 7
S
0
zo h
i 9 h;
N
NI
M 0E w
VIEN
589,
—7
titGAN
ft
L
C'AO
-2
l
2
��
r
230. S
104
= t Jt.4
--1 !to
-
304
t
n
Z'4•
Z
4
Q�V
IL7
�_ Z$
r
�
r
N
N
r
�
a
ti
Z S
LC.
^
2QL
Zd L
+�
r
CAL-LAHA N
3 3 Z
in
8• 9
v o 0
5
k4Aef 6 -
16 2 o L. 'L. 0 i
30 h
N +i
Lo to t
PLACE
zo h
i 9 h;
N
NI
30 h
N +i
Lo to t
PLACE
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
November 30, 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council and City A;ii�ni 2 for
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Garron Feasibility
Sewers, Water, Streets
Job No. 8420
Improvement No. 84, Project No. 2
At the November 29, 1984 City Council meeting it was the consensus
of the Council to conduct a feasibility hearing for the public improve-
ments for the Garron property. Staff has prepared the appropriate
Resolution to order that hearing.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the hearing be conducted at the second regular
City Council meeting in January at 7:45 P.M.
ACTION REQUIRED:
If Council wishes to implement the staff recommendation it should
pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 84- , Resolution Accepting
Engineer's Report And Calling For Hearing On Proposed Sanitary Sewer,
Water, Storm Sewer, and Street Improvements To Serve The Garron Pro-
perty (Improvement No. 84, Project No. 2)
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S REPORT
AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER, WATER, STORM SEWER, AND�
IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE THE.GkRRGN" OP TY
(IMPROVEMENT NO. 84, PROJECT NO. 2)
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has submitted his report to the City Council
with respect to the proposed construction of the following improvements
to serve the:Ga� Property and ajacent areas, to -wit:
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 easementsin the areas hereinafter more particularly
described.
The construction of a storm sewer system including appurtenances
and incidentals thereto and the acquisition of easements, in and for
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 acqui-
sition of easements, and the reconstruction where necessary of streets
and easements in the area hereinafter more particularly described.
The construction of street improvements consisting of the acquisi-
tion of easements and the grading, stabilization, drainage and bitumi-
nous surfacing, and the construction of concrete curbs and gutters on
the streets to be situated in the area hereinafter more particularly
described.
WHEREAS, the area proposed to be assessed for said improvements is
situated within the City of Mendota Heights in Dakota County, Minne-
sota, and is more particularly described as follows:
The land abutting Pilot Knob Road (CSAR 31 and CR31A) extending
from LeMay Avenue on the South to its terminus on the North.
WHEREAS, in said report said City Engineer reported that the proposed
improvements and construction thereof were feasible and desirable and
further reported on the proposed costs of said improvements.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mendota Heights, Minnesota as follows:
1. That the report of said City Engineer be and is hereby re-
ceived.
2. That a public hearing on said improvements be on Tuesday,
January 15, 1985 at 7:45 o'clock,P.M. at the Mendota Heights City 4
Hall 750 South Plaza Drive in the City of Mendota Heights.
3. That the City Clerk, with the aid and assistance of the City
Attorney, be and is hereby authorized and directed to prepare a notice
of said hearing and to cause said notice to be published and mailed to
the owners of the property situated within said area, all in accordance
with applicable Minnesota Statutes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 4th day
of December, 1984.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Robert G. Lockwood, Mayor )Z;;
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
November 30, 1984
,�o �-
TO: Mayor, City Council and City AdmiAistrator
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Mendota Interchange Project
Job No. 8310
nTcrficcTnN
It was brought out at the November 29th City Council meeting by
City Planner Dahlgren that, within the Mendota Interchange Project, an
'at -grade intersection of Acacia Boulevard (CSAH 31) with Trunk Highway
55 would better serve the land in that area of the City. The present
design is a bridge overpass with no abdess to Trunk Highway 55.'
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Council direct staff to prepare a letter for the
Mayor's signature requesting Mn/DOT consideration of making Acacia
Boulevard an at grade intersection with Trunk Highway 55.
Because Acacia Boulevard is a County Road this request should be
coordinated through the County.
ACTION REQUIRED:
If Council concurs with the staff recommendation it should direct
staff to prepare the subject letter for the Mayor's signature.
1
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kevin D. Frazell
City Administrator
November 27, 1984
SUBJECT: Implementation of Comparable Worth Legislation
INTRODUCTION
The 1984 legislature passed a "comparable worth" bill, mandating all
political subdivisions of the State to evaluate and implement equitable compen-
sation relationships among its employees. The Metropolitan Area Manager's
Association (MAMA) has been working to comply with the law on a group basis.
The purpose of this memo is to seek Council concurrence for our participation in
the MAMA project.
BACKGROUND
Comparable worth has been called the equal rights issue of the 80's. Briefly,
comparable worth is a step beyond the already well established legal doctrine of
"equal pay for equal work". The concept is that jobs of comparable worth to an
employer (in terms of skills, qualifications, difficulty of effort, etc.) should be
paid comparable compensation. Its proponents seek to redress the issue of "female
dominated" positions (ie, nurses, secretaries, teachers, etc.) paying less than "male
dominated" positions (ie, custodian, laborer, etc.) when the furmer are equally
or more demanding than the latter.
The Stat legislature imposed comparable worth on the State agencies a couple
of years ago,;aud extended coverage to ail political subdivisions, including cities
in the 1984 session. Under the Act as adopted, the City is required to:
I
1. Establish equitable compensation relationships between female -dominated,
male'domi_iated, and balanced classes of employees.
2. Assure that compensation for all positions bears reasonable relationship
to one another.
3. Assure that compensation for all positions bears a reasonable relationship
to similar positions of other employers (ie., other cities, private
employers).
4. Use aIjob evaluation system to determine work of comparable value.
S. Meet Ind confer with exclusive representatives of its employees on the
devel{opment or selection of the job evaluation system.
I
For purposes of the above, the act defines "reasonable relationship" as:
2
1. Compensation for positions which require comparable skill, effort,
responsibility, working conditions, and other work related criteria
is comparable; and
2. Compensation for positions which require differing skill, effort,
responsibility, working conditions and other work related criteria,
is proportional to the skill, effort, responsibility, working conditions,
and other relevant criteria required.
Further, the City must:
1. Submit a report containing the job evaluation results to exclusive
representatives of the employees.
2. Report to the State Commissioner of Employee Relations by October 1, 1985,
on its plan for implementing the evaluaticn study and a timetable for
rectifying any pay inequities found.
After August 1, 1987, there is a cause of action and right to file complaints
with the State Department of Human Rights for failure to comply with the Act.
MAMA JOINT EFFORTS
For the past decade or so, the Metropolitan Area Manager's Association (MAMA)
has attempted to coordinate labor contract negotiations in the metropolitan area
suburbs. Similarly, MAMA has decided to tackle implementation of the comparable
worth legislation on a joint basis, in order to:
1. Achieve economies of scale for a professional study that would be pro-
hibitively expensive for individual cities; and
2. Most importantly, coordinate job evaluation efforts by individual cities
so as to avoid getting "whipsawed" with the results. Z"
Attached is a memo from William joynes, City Manager of Golden Valley and Chair-
man of the MAMA General Labor Relations Committee, describing MAMA's efforts to
select a personnel consulting firm to conduct the study on behalf of participant
communities. As indicated, they have selected Control Data Corporation, for the
reasons cited.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS' PARTICIPATION
Assuming that the cost to us does not significantly exceed the $3,500 - $4,000
indicated for smaller cities, it is my recommendation that we participate. My
reasons are as follows:
1. It is extremely important that the analysis be done in a highly competent
and professional manner. Most managers fully expect that there will
eventually be litigation over implementation of comparable worth, -,either
against individual government agencies, or against a large group of agencies.
Some of you may be aware of the Washington State case in which a federal
court has awarded over $1 billion in back pay to female employees of that
2. For the sake of all metropolitan municipalities, including Mendota Heights, it
is imperative that our efforts be coordinated and results similar. Dis-
similar job evaluation results in different cities would surely be a prime
cause for successful litigation.
-3-
3. The cost to hire our own consultant would undoubtedly be several times the
cost I indicated for participation in the joint study.
4. No one on staff has either the time or expertise to do the work in-house.
You may be asking yourself if this isn't what we did with the comprehensive pay plat
last year. Frankly, that plan probably would meet the requirements of the comparable
worth act, asifar as it went. However, it was solely a comparison of office, technical,
and managerial employees, all of which can be compared on a similar ranking system.
The Act requires that we do a comparison of all City employees; I simply do not have
the expertiselto compare the value of a police officer to a public works employee to an
office worker: Also, I would not have the time. Last year's plan was developed when we
had two Administrators on board, and I could devote hours of uninterrupted time; that
is a luxury we no longer have.
I would add, however, that the comparable worth requirements do not mean our earlier
efforts were in vain. As a result of the pay plan adopted last year, and changes made
in our publiclworks contract, I feel that we are much less vulnerable to findings of
significant pay discrepancy. More simply put, I think we are a year or two ahead of
where many cities will find themselves.
BUDGET IMPACT
As indicated in Mr. Joynes' memo, the expected cost for small cities will be
$3,500 to $4,000, depending on final participation. I will get more definitive
information at the December 4th meeting.
This expenditure was not anticipated at the time of preparing the 1985 budget.
The 1984 Administration budget includes a contingency line item of $10,460, none
of which has been used at this time. However, a $3,000 overrun in capital equipment
(for purchaselof the personal computer authorized by Council last summer) will have
to be covered This should leave adequate funds for the comparable worth study, which
can be encumbered if we enter the contract this year.
I
ACTION REQUIRED
I will get further information, including a more definitive cost, at the Dec-
ember 4th MAMA meeting. That information will be provided with the add-on agenda
for Tuesday's meeting, along with a specific action recommendation.
I will bell required to make a tentative committment at the Tuesday morning
meeting, subject to final Council ratification. If you have any strong feelings
about this, pltease give me a call Monday.
Respectfully submitted,
Kevin D. Frazell
City Administrator
KDF:madlr
enclosure
DATE: November 21, 1984
TO: All Managers, Administrators, Elected Officials
FROM: William Joynes
Chairman, MAMA General Labor Relations Committee
RE: MAMA Joint Comparable Worth Study
As many of you are aware, three months ago the Metropolitan Area Management
Association undertook a project to determine whether or not suburban cities
could jointly produce a study that would comply with comparable worth legisla-
tion enacted in the 1984 session. At that time, we asked cities to indicate
whether or not they would be willing to fund on an equal basis,'our investiga-
tion into that possibility. Some 57 communities agreed to do so at a cost of
approximately $200 per city. We estimated that amount would be'required to
develop our request for proposals and to screen various consulting organizations
who might wish to bid on such a joint venture.
Our desire to approach the study jointly was based on two reasons: First, the -
historical effort that MAMA has made in comparing wages and fringe benefits, and
the success we have had in keeping their levels consistent in the metro area.
Secondly, we felt that it was preferable for all MAMA cities to,have used a com-
mon approach in the event that future litigation occurs.
We are now at a point where a committee of managers made up of myself, Bob
Thistle from Coon Rapids, Jim Miller from Minnetonka, Jim Brimeyer from St.
Louis Park, and Jim Lacina from Woodbury, with support from Labor Relations
Associates, is recommending to the 57 cities the selection of Control Data
Corporation Business Advisors as the vendor to accomplish the job evaluation
study mandated by State law. A summary of the proposal is attached for your
information.
At a December 4, 1984 meeting of MAMA managers and administrators each of the 57
cities will be asked to indicate if they prefer to continue jointly or proceed
on their own with a separate study. To help cities make that decision, I have
attempted to provide more detailed background information on the screening pro-
cess, the rationale for the selection of CDC and the anticipated costs for the
joint approach.
SCREENING PROCESS
We began in August of this year by sending out a generally worded RFP to 18
firms locally and nationally who had done job evaluation work in the private and
public sector. We received ten responses from the initial request. After a
considerable amount of evaluation, six firms were selected to be interviewed
further. They included Haye Associates, Towers -Perrin -Forster and Crosby,
Control Data Corporation, Arthur Young and Associates, Hewitt and Associates,
Hallcrest-Craver Associates.
Those interviews were conducted in October at the League offices by the RFP com-
mittee and members of the staff of the League of Minnesota Cities. At the
conclusion of that process, three firms were felt to merit further scrutiny.
They were Haye Associates, Towers -Perrin -Forster and Crosby, and Control Data
Corporation. It was felt that Arthur Young and Associates and Hewitt and
Associates, while providing a viable approach to job evaluation, did ,not present
a system that would fully satisfy the requirements of Minnesota law. Hallcrest-
Craver was eliminated because we felt that with their staffing and current com-
mitments, a timely product might be a problem.
After that interview, the RFP committee developed a more detailed and specific
RFP, copies of which were sent to all interested cities. The three consulting
firms were asked to make a second presentation which took place on November 6,
1984: Invited to that meeting were all the representatives of organized labor
represented in the MAMA communities, representatives from private employee asso-
ciations and any managers or administrators who wished to attend. At the
conclusion of the interview, the selection committee was unanimously in favor of
recommending the CDC system. The CDC proposal at $345,000 was, admittedly, the
most expensive proposal we received; however, the unanimous feeling of the com-
mittee was that it was the one proposal that we felt would provide the best.and
most legitimate results and would be the most easily maintained system over..a
period of years.
RATIONALE FOR DECISION
I would like to briefly discuss some of the thoughts of the committee regarding
the selection of CDC which I hope will explain why that choice was made. First
and foremost, the Control Data Corporation proposal offers to do job evaluations
on all of a given city's positions. We originally thought the cost of doing
such a study to be prohibitive, and had suggested in the RFP that an evaluation
study that included 25 benchmark jobs would be more appropriate. CDC bid that
benchmark study but added that for a nominal additional charge, it would be a
simple task to do all of the positions in all cities. CDC Business Advisors'
computer capability makes the extension of the study to all individual positions
in each city, a relatively simple matter. The other consulting proposals did
not offer that capability.
A very strong argument for the selection of CDC was the extent of the data :==•
offered as an end product. First and foremost, after the study was completed,
CDC would provide each city with an evaluation report ranking their specific
employees based on a comparable worth scale. In addition, the MAMA cities would
receive a composite benchmark study which would provide evaluations throughout
the metro area for those jobs which were similar. An example would be that a
city would be given a relative point value for the position of patrol officer
within its own organization, and would also have the data to.compare that point
value to a metropolitan average and to specific patrol positions in neighboring
cities. This was felt to be a tremendous labor relation -personnel tool for all
cities and something beyond what we thought we would receive from the comparable
worth study.
Another very attractive feature of the CDC proposal was its ability to be
updated. Once the initial study was completed and in place, the system would be
able to provide, at a very nominal cost, adjustments over the years. For
example, if a city created a new position or added responsibilities to an
existing job, a new questionnaire could be filled out and submitted to CDC
outlining the tasks that position would perform. CDC Business Advisors would
recompute the job evaluation rankings for that city and provide a new point
value for the position.
19Z
Their estimate of what it would cost to re-evaluate a specific position or
incorporate a new one into the city, was $5 to $7 per occurrence. The other two
proposals did not offer such a capability.
Finally, a word about the conceptual framework of the CDC proposal. Their job
evaluation study is one that is referred to as a task evaluation approach as
opposed to a whole job evaluation approach which was proposed by the other two
firms. In a task evaluation, jobs are broken down into many small functional
tasks and those tasks are rated and a point total derived. A specific job and
its relative worth compared to other jobs in an organization is'determined by
the total of its task values. In the whole job evaluation approach, the job,
not individual tasks, is rated on its relative worth in various,categories.
With this method, certain jobs may have an inherent bias due to'
preconceived
ideas about their complexity or difficulty. An example might be an evaluation
of a bomb disposal officer. Most people's initial reaction is that the job is
worth a great deal because of the element of danger involved. When you evaluate
the job on a "whole job" basis, that danger factor tends to expand into all the
areas that you may be using to rank the worth of the job. In fact, the danger
in bomb disposal work may be present only once in a great while, and the
majority of the job may be very routine and non -dangerous. The,task approach
eliminates this type of halo effect because each separate function is evaluated.
In our example, the bomb disposal officer would be given fairly high points for
certain tasks like the diffusion of a bomb, but may receive routine marks for
other tasks associated with the work he or she would perform. The net result is
to provide a more accurate point total for all jobs surveyed.
For the reasons listed above, the committee felt unanimously that the CDC propo-
sal offered
COST OF THE PROPOSAL
Many cities have called requesting to know the estimated cost per city of the
CDC system prior to the December 4 meeting. At this time, it is not possible to
give exact dollar amounts. Obviously the total cost to each city will be depen-
dent to a large extent to how many cities select to cotinue with this joint
approach. Additionally, there are some other factors that will influence the
cost. There is a possibility that quite a large number of out -state cities will
wish to use the comparable worth study that MAMA has developed. We estimate
that 30 additional cities may participate. If they do choose to join us, then
the cost per city could be reduced significantly due to the economies of scale
achieved by a larger group.
We have also been contacted by the Metropolitan Airport Commission, the
Minnesota Utility Association, and the city of Thief River Falls, Wisconsin.
They have all expressed some degree of interest in participating.
While a firm dollar amount is not possible to determine at this time, I can give
you a range of the dollars we are talking about if we make some simple assump-
tions. If the 57 MAMA cities all agree to participate and the charges are based
on a formula which takes into account both a minimum value charged to each city,
and some factor for the number of employees, then the cost would likely range
from approximately $4,000 to cities the size of Osseo and Minnetrista, to an
N
-4-
amount somewhere around $15,000 for a city
outstate cities join in the study, the cost
small cities up to about $12,500 for a city
the size of Bloomington. If 25 to 30
range would be lowered to $3,500 for
of size of Bloomington.
CONCLUSION
We have asked that representatives of the 57 MAMA cities attend a meeting on
December 4 at 10:00 AM at the Brooklyn Center City Hall to provide us with a
decision as to their intent to participate or not with the MAMA study. We
realize that some cities will not be able to make firm committments due to the
fact that their councils may not meet before that date. It is my hope that with
the information provided you will be able to give us a good indication of what
your city intends to do. A similar meeting has been scheduled for members of
the Coalition of Outstate Cities on December 19 at 1:30 PM at the Golden Valley
City Hall.
Those of us on the committee have spent many hours involved in this selection
process. We believe that CDC proposal represents the best option for us to meet
the requirements of State law and will provide us with a personnel and labor
relations tool which far exceeds what we expected to obtain through this pro-
cess.
We strongly recommend that member cities join in the study.
I
Metropolitan Area Management Association
0It Compensation Study
6 Process Summary
The plan for development and implementation of a FOCAS (Flexible
Occupational Analysis System) job analysis and evaluation system
for 25 benchmark jobs defined by the MAMA Committee and for
subsequent evaluation of MAMA member cities' non -benchmark jobs is
summarized below.
FOCAS is a questionnaire -based job analysis and evaluation
system. FOCAS has been developed to provide accurate and
comprehensive information about jobs to support effective human
resource management.
The first step in the process is to develop questionnaires to be
used to gather information about what employees do. We will use
one questionnaire for each occupational group. The MAMA Committee
will identify one subject matter expert -and an advisory group from
each occupational group to work with Business Advisors. These
individuals will provide their job content expertise throughout
questionnaire development and job evaluation, and should be very
knowledgeable about jobs in their occupational area. Business
Advisors, together with a team of MAMA member cities' Personnel
Directors, will develop preliminary questionnaires based upon
existing job descriptions and the Business Advisors data bank of
task items. The Personnel Director' team will identify and
schedule employee workshops to be conducted jointly with Business
Advisors, to modify preliminary questionnaires. Questionnaires
will be finalized with the advisory group for that occupational
area,
Second, Personnel Directors will schedule and conduct meetings
with employees for them to complete the questionnaire for their
occupational group. In filling out questionnaires, employees will
indicate for each task that they do or do not perform it and how,
much time they spend on tasks performed relative to other tasks.
Third, Business Advisors will provide data entry from the
questionnaires and provide computer-generated position
descriptions for each employee who filled out a questionnaire.
This is a listing of tasks performed with time spent percentages.
The supervisor and employee will review and verify or modify the
position description. The Personnel Director team will collect
and return all modified position descriptions to Business
Advisors. Business Advisors will provide data entry and return
revised position descriptions to the Personnel Director team for
distribution to supervisors/employees. These will serve as final
position descriptions.
Fourth, Business Advisors will provide average, or benchmark,") ob
descriptions for the 2.5 benchmark jobs,identified by the MAMA
committee. Personnel Directors will identify employees making up
the -benchmark. Subject matter experts and advisory groups will
work with Business Advisors to finalize descriptions.
The fifth step in the process, task valuing, begins at the same
time as the second. Business Advisors will work with the
Personnel Director team, subject matter experts and advisory
groups to set up the task valuing process. The Personnel Director
team will identify and schedule managers for valuing meetings.
Business Advisors will conduct valuing meetings. In valuing
tasks, managers will rate all tasks about which they are
knowledgeable, according to one factor, complexity, importance or
unfavorability. Business Advisors will review average task values
with the subject matter expert and the advisory group to finalize
values. Factor weights will be statistically computed by Business
Advisors and finalized with the subject matter expert and advisory
group.
The sixth step is to combine results of the completed
questionnaires with task values to determine job value. Business
Advisors' computer analysis will compute job value by multiplying
time spent on tasks times task value and sum the products to
produce a point total. Business Advisors will provide job values
for the twenty-five benchmark jobs to the MAMA committee.
Step seven is to collect and analyze wage and benefit data from
public and private sector labor markets. The MAMA committee will
identify available surveys and work with Business Advisors to
define appropriate markets and to determine if a specialized
salary survey is desirable. If so, Business Advisors will conduct
a specialized salary survey. Final job hierarchies will be
constructed based upon job values and market data.
The eighth step is to analyze relationships among job values,`
current pay rates and market data. Business Advisors will provide
an analysis and alternative strategies for addressing pay
discrepancies.
Ninth, Business Advisors will provide individual job evaluation
points to the member cities.
Finally, Business Advisors will provide a report of methodology
and results and meet with the MAMA committee to present the
report.
kla112141
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor apd City Council
FROM: Kevin D. Fra 00 -
City
City Admin' rator
November 27, 1984
SUBJECT: Step Pay Increase for Engineering Technician, Guy Kullander
November 18, 1984, marked the three-year employment anniversary of
Engineering Technician Guy Kullander. According to the grade and step pay
matrix adopted by Council last year, a 3 -year employee makes the final
transition to the target salary, which is the level of compensation for a
fully trained and experienced employee.
In Guy's case, his salary will be making a 57 increase, from $22,215 to
$23,325. Because we were late in getting this change ratified by the Council,
a retroactive adjustment back to November 18th will be included on his next
paycheck.
ACTION REQUIRED
~" Approval to increase the annual compensation of Engineering Technician'Guy
Kullander to $23,325.
KDF:madlr
November 26, 1984
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
glow#]
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kevin D. Frazell
City Administrator
SUBJECT: 1985 Pay and Benefits for Non -organized Employees
INTRODUCTION
Each year, Council adopts a resolution establishing salaries and benefits
for the City's non -organized employees. Last year, we adopted a comprehensive
pay plan, with a Grade and Step matrix, from which we could derive annual sala-
ries. Attached for Council consideration are resolutions increasing the pay
matrix by 57. (as a 1985 cost -of -living increase), and establishing individual
salaries and benefits for all full-time and part-time employees not represented
by a bargaining unit.
5% ANNUAL INCREASE
I recommend that the non -organized employees be granted a 5% increase for
1985, for the following reasons:
1. Our public works employees will be receiving 57. under the second year of
their current contract.
2. A 5% increase is the level generally projected by other metropolitan
area suburbs for 1985, and several contracts have been settled in that
range.
3. The Consumer Price Index is projected to end the year in the 4-5% range,
and national management consulting firms are indicating increases of 5-
6% to be reasonable and likely (see attached excerpt from St. Paul
Employers Newsletter).
FULL-TIME INDIVIDUAL SALARY INCREASES
Section 1 of the second attached resolution adopts a specific schedule of
1985 salaries for all full-time employees. All except the City Administrator are
from the matrix. Of those, all except the Clerk/Receptionist are at Step E of
the matrix, that being the "target salary" for a fully trained employee of three
years experience. Steps F and G are reserved for a merit system, should the City
ever decide to adopt one. The Clerk/Receptionist is at Step C, the one-year
level, and will move to Step D or her two-year anniversary in July, 1985.
My salary, at $40,500, is as discussed with Council on November 20. This is
an 8% increase, and will serve to bring my compensation closer to the metropoli-
tan average for cities in the 5,000 - 10,000 population group.
PART-TIME INDIVIDUAL SALARY INCREASES
Section 2 of the second resolution establishes the rate of compensation for
our four "permanent part-time" employees. Each is 5% above 1984 compensation.
VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER RATES
Section 3 of the second resolution provides a 50 cent per hour or approxi-
mate 8% increase for the volunteer firefighters. They have not had an increase
since 1980.
HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
Section 4 of the second resolution establishes the maximum health and hospi-
talization contribution at $155 per month. The non -organized employees are
oo currently at $135, the police and public works bargaining units at $145. The
�F�S.9S Public works employees will be receiving $155 under the second year (1985) of
their contract.
.z
P Although the proposed increase
6 7.7Y tial 15%, I feel it is justified to
17 Y.90 units. It is my strong contention
choosing not to belong to a union.
CAR ALLOWANCE
for the non -organized employees is a substan-
bring them to parity with the bargaining
that employees should not be penalized for
Police Chief Delmont has requested an increase in his monthly car allowance
from $90 to $120. Most cities provide their Chief with a 24 hour car. Because
Dennis resides in Maplewood, it was agreed at the time of his hire that the
Chief's car would stay at the office, and he would receive a $90 allowance as
compensation for the times he is called back to Mendota Heights (beyond normal
once per day transportation).
Over the past year, the number of times he has had to come back has in-
creased, due to new activities such as Crime Watch, Aircraft Disaster crises,
Dakota County Chiefs, etc. The additional $30 is requested for this purpose.
Recreation Director Selander has requested an increase from $35 to $40 per
month, in recognition of the increased cost of operating a car. He has not had
an auto allowance increase for several years.
BUDGET IMPACT
All of the above salary and benefit increases were anticipated and included
in the 1985 budget already adopted by Council.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council concurs with the above recommendations, it should pass motions
adopting the attached resolutions.
Respectfu ly sub'tted,
Kevin D. Frazell, City Administrator
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -
RESOLUTION AMENDING PAY CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE FOR
NON -ORGANIZED EMPLOYEES TO REFLECT A 5% ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT FOR 1985
WHEREAS, beginning in 1984, the City adopted a comprehensive grade and step
pay matrix for its employees not represented in a bargaining unit; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to annually review that pay matrix for adjustments
related to cost -of -living and other general economic trends; and
WHEREAS, based on comparisons with settled labor contracts for other City
employees, salary trends in other metropolitan area suburbs, and salary projec-
tions by private consulting groups, it appears that a 5% upward adjustment in the
pay matrix for 1985 is reasonable and defensible.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights, that the Grade and Step Pay Matrix attached hereto as Attachment A, is
hereby adopted to replace the Grade and Step Matrix included as Appendix A of
Resolution No. 83-113, adopted by the City Council on December 20, 1983.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 4th day of
December, 1984.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By
Robert G. Lockwood
Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
* Target Salary
RESOLUTION --
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
EMPLOYEES PAY CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE
GRADE AND
STEP MATRIX
1985
GRADE
A
B
C
D
E*
F
G
I
11,220
11,781
12,370
12,988
13,638
14,320
15,036
II
11,781
12,370
12,988
13,638
14,320
15,036
15,788
III
12,370
12,988
13,638
14,320
15,036
15,788
16,577
IV
12,988
13,638
14,320
15,036
15,788
16,577
17,406
V
13,638
14,320
15,036
15,788
16,577
17,406
18,276
VI
14,320
15,036
15,788
16,577
17,406
18,276
19,190
VII
15,036
15,788
16,577
17,406
18,276
19,190
20,149
:4 VIII
15,788
16,577
17,406
18,276
19,190
20,149
21,157
IX
16,577
17,406
18,276
19,190
20,149
21,157
22,215
X
17,406
18,276
19,190
20,149
21,157
22,215
23,325
XI
18,276
19,190
20,149
21,157
22,215
23,325
24,491
XII
19,190
20,149
21,157
22,215
23,325
24,492
25,716
XIII
20,149
21,157
22,215
23,325
24,492
25,716
27,002
XIV
21,157
22,215
23,325
24,492
25,716
27,002
28,352
XV
22,215
23,325
24,492
25,716
27,002
28,352
29,770
XVI
23,325
24,492
25,716
27,002
28,352
29,770
31,258
XVII
24,492
25,716
27,002
28,352
29,770
31,258
32,821
XVIII
25,716
27,002
28,352
29,770
31,258
32,821
34,462
-. XIX
27,002
28,352
29,770
31,258
32,821
34,462
36,185
XX
28,352
29,770
31,258
32,821
34,462
36,185
37,994
XXI
29,770
31,258
32,821
34,462
36,185
37,994
39,894
XXII
31,258
32,821
34,462
36,185
37,994
39,894
41,889
XXIII
32,821
34,462
36,185
37,994
39,894
41,889
43,983
XXIV
34,462
36,185
37,994
39,894
41,889
43,983
46,182
XXV
36,185
37,994
39,894
41,889
43,983
46,182
48,491
* Target Salary
r -
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION FOR CERTAIN
EMPLOYEES FOR 1985 AND ESTABLISHING CERTAIN OTHER BENEFITS
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a grade -and -step pay system for cer-
tain full-time employees of the City; and
WHEREAS, based upon recommendation of the City Administrator, Council has
determined the appropriate placement of each City position on a Grade, and the
incumbent employee on a Step; and
WHEREAS, it is also necessary to set salaries for certain part-time em-
ployees, as well as fringe benefits for full-time employees and certain part-time
employees.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the following schedule of salaries be implemented effective January
1, 1985, for full-time employees:
Employee
Position
Salary
Kimberlee Henning
Clerk/Receptionist
$12,370
Carol Bakka
Police Secretary
16,577
Diane Ward
Engineering Secretary
16,577
Mary Ann DeLaRosa
Senior Secretary
20,149
Shirley Shannon
Accountant
21,157
Guy Kullander
Engineering Technician
24,492
Tom Knuth
Senior Eng. Technician
28,352
Paul Berg
Code Enforcement Officer
28,352
Richard Ploumen
Public Works Superintendent
32,821
Kathleen Swanson
City Clerk
32,821
Dorance Wicks
Police Sergeant
34,462
Gene Lange
Police Captain
36,185
Dennis Delmont
Police Chief
39,894
James Danielson
Public Works Director
39,894
Kevin Frazell
City Administrator
40,500
2. That the following schedule of salaries be implemented effective January
1, 1985 for part-time employees:
Employee Position Salary
LeRoy Noack Fire Chief $328/mo.
John Maczko Assistant Fire Chief 181/mo.
Duane Selander Recreation Director 746/mo.
Edward Kishel City Engineer 20.54/hr.
3. That the following hourly rate of pay for volunteer firefighters be
implemented effective January I, 1985: '
'
O - I year $5.50
l - 5 years 6.00
5 years and over 6,50
Captain 7.00
4. That the City's maximum contribution toward health and hospitalization
insurance premiums for full-time employees not covered by a labor
contract shall be $155 per month for 1985.
��
��
5. That monthly car alluwauc��A ^or the folIowioQ_tmn�employe�� obell be
amended as follows:
MONTHLY
EMPLOYEEPOSITIONCAR ALLOWANCE
�z
Dennis Delmont Police Chief $I20
Duane Selander Recreation Director 40
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 4th day of
December, 1984.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF M80IOIA HEIGHTS
Robert G. Lockwood
Mayor
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk .
0
•
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
November 28, 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council and City A�I sn for
FROM: Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
SUBJECT: Summary Publication of Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION
Given the extraordinary length of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordi-
nance, I have asked the NDC -4 legal counsel to provide us with an ordinance
summary for publication in the City's legal newspaper. I have received and
reviewed the seven page summary and believe that it meets the statutory require-
ment that the public will be clearly informed of the intent and effect of the
franchise ordinance. The summary also designated numerous locations where the
complete ordinance will be made available for public inspection, as is also
required by Statute.
Continental Cablevision will reimburse the City for all publication costs
incurred by the City.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Council pass a motion to authorize publication of the
attached summary of Ordinance Number 211.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council concurs in the recommendation, it should move:
Approval of the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 211, Codified as
Ordinance No. 203, "An Ordinance Granting a Franchise To Continental Cablevision
of Northern Dakota County, Inc., to operate and maintain a Cable Communications
System In the City of Mendota Heights; Setting Forth Conditions accompanying the
Grant of Franchise; Providing for Regulation and Use of the System; and Prescrib-
ing Penalties for the Violation of Its Provisions," determining that the summary
clearly informs the public of the ordinance, and directing that the City Clerk:
1. submit the summary for publication in the Sun Newspaper;,.and
2. provide that copies of the ordinance will be permanently available
for public inspection at the locations described in the final para-
graph of the summary.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 211
(Codified as Ordinance No. 203)
All ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO CONTINENTAL CABLEVISION OF
NORTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY, INC., TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A CABLE
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS; SETTING
FORTH CONDITIONS ACCOMPANYING THE GRANT OF FRANCHISE; PROVIDING
FOR REGULATION AND USE OF THE SYSTEM; AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES
FOR THE VIOLATION OF ITS PROVISIONS.
THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE ABOVE -REFERENCED ORDINANCE. A PRINTED
COPY OF THE FULL TEXT OF THE ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION BY ANY PER-
SON DURING REGULAR OFFICE HOURS AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK.
The City of Mendota Heights has joined in studies conducted by the Northern
Dakota County Cable Cbm=ications Conudssion (the Commission) in order to pro-
cure cable television services that will best serve the communication needs of
the individuals, municipalities, associations and institutions within the Cable
Service Territory comprised of the City of P7endota Heights and immediately
surrounding communities. In awarding the Franchise, the applicant's technical
ability, financial condition, and legal qualifications were considered.
Continental Cablevision of Northern Dakota County, Inc. (the Company) will
reimburse the City of all cost incurred in awarding the Franchise and will hold
the City harmless for all costs and losses arising out of the grant of the
Franchise.
The Company will be permitted to install equipment along and upon the
streets of the City for the purpose of operating a Cable System. The Company
will apply for all required permits.
-1-
The Franchise will be in effect for fifteen (15) years and
will include the terms of both the Franchise ordinance and the
Company's offering. The Franchise is non-exclusive and will
cease to be in effect if the Company fails to obtain a
Certificate of Confirmation from the Minnesota Cable
Communications Board.
The Franchise comports with the minimum standards set forth
by state law including providing one (1) channel each for non-
commercial use by the general public, local government use, and
public leased use. Personnel and equipment will be provided by
the Company free of charge, except that such costs may be
assessed for programs longer than five (5) minutes.
Rules pertaining to access channel use will be prescribed by
the Company.
The Company will make available the minimal equipment
necessary for the production of programming for the non-
commercial public access channel and will make available addi-
ti,6nal equipment upon need being shown.
The Company will participate in interconnection in accordance
with Minnesota Cable Communications Board rules. The Company
will install cable underground where other utilities are
underground; however, the System will not be operated to inter-
fere with construction or operation of public works, or other
uses of streets. The Company will repair any damage done to the
street.
-2-
The Company will maintain records available to the public,
with the exception of personnel records.
Each year the Company will file an annual report with the
Commission documenting the activities of the Company including
financial matters, subscriber contracts, and access rules. At
the same time, the Company will provide a report of results of
the FCC performance tests.
The Company will maintain an office within the Northern
Dakota County Cable Service Territory which has been approved by
the Minnesota Cable Communications Board and will be able to
receive subscriber complaints on a 24 -hour -a -day, 7 -day -a -week
basis. The Company will maintain a repair force capable of
making a repair visit within 24 hours of a request by a
subscriber. Vehicles of the Company will be clearly identified
and will display the local telephone number of the Company.
If a subscriber does not obtain satisfactory resolution of a
complaint by notifying the Company, the subscriber may refer the
complaint to the Commission to assist in resolution of it.
The subscriber service contract must be approved by the
Commission and must include a description of all services,
rates, and charges, along with instructions on use of the
System, billing and collection practices. The contract will also
be submitted to the state attorney general, for certification of
the compliance with the Minnesota Plain Language Act. The
contract will be no for longer than twelve (12) months duration and
will contain instructions for filing complaints and for
-3-
obtaining information from the Company. The Company may offer
special rates to senior citizens or handicapped persons who meet
certain income requirements.
The rates and charges set forth in the Company's Offering
will remain constant for two (2) years. If a subscriber.termin-
ates a service for failure of the Company to provide the service,
the Company will refund a pro rata share of the charges or rates
paid by the subscriber for the services not received.
All rates shall be subject to regulation by the City, the
state, or its agencies, as may be applicable.
Service requests for maintenance or repair shall be performed
-4
at no cost to the subscriber, except that if repair is needed
because of damage caused by the subscriber, actual costs for time
and material will be charged to the subscriber.
All rate changes must be approved by the Commission, which
approval will take into consideration the profits derived from
the System, the quality of services provided, the rate of return
of investment and other factors that the Commission may determine
reasonably relevant.
The rate change request will be made by the Company by
submission of a proposal to the Commission along with documen-
tation of pertinent financial information. The Commission will
hold a public hearing within three (3) weeks of receipt of the
request.
The Commission may undertake periodic evaluations of the
System, to determine if changes in the system are required to meet
-4-
the needs of the Member Cities or to maintain a state-of-the-art
System.
The Company will pay to the Commission an annual franchise
fee of five percent (5%) of the gross System revenues to pay the
costs of administration of the Franchise and coordination of
4
public access services.
In the event of non-compliance by the Company with the terms
of the Franchise or the Company's Offering, the City may seek an
injunction, or may seek monetary damages payable from the perfor-
mance bond or the security fund which the Company is required to
furnish to the Commission.
The performance bond will be maintained in the amount of Five
Hundred Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($500,000.00) during construc-
tion of the System and may be reduced at the Commission's option
upon completion of construction or may be increased by the
Commission if additional System is to be constructed. The pur-
pose of the performance bond is to assure construction and opera-
tion of the System as contemplated by the Franchise.
The security fund will be maintained in the amount of Fifty
Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000.00) through the term of the
Franchise, as security for performance of the Company's obliga-
tions under the Franchise. Damages may be drawn from the
security fund for failure to comply with various provisions of the
Franchise.
In the event that the Company or a Member City is dissatisfied
with a decision of the commission under the terms of the
-5-
I
Franchise, the Company or City may appeal the decision to arbitra-
tion, in accordance with a procedure set forth in the Ordinance.
Throughout the term of the Franchise the Company will main-
tain I liability insurance covering officials and employees of the
Company and the Member Cities. The Company and its subcontrac-
tors will also comply with the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act.
The City will retain the right to revoke the Franchise for
substantial violation of the Franchise. Revocation would only be
accomplished after due notice and hearing has been provided to
the Company.
`unauthorized receipt of or tampering with cable service will
be a misdemeanor.
The City and Commission will have an opportunity to make an
offer to purchase the System in the event that the Franchise is
revoked, the System goes into receivership, or the Company is
considering transferring ownership of the System.
Individuals will be protected from discrimination and cable
line tapping. Information pertaining to the viewing practices of
a subscriber will not be given without that subscriber's per-
mission. Installation of equipment on private property will
only occur with the property owner's permission.
Minor deviations from the terms of the Franchise may be
requested by way of a variance application that must be approved
by the Commission.
Two (2) years before expiration of the Franchise, the Company
may apply for Franchise renewal. The City and Commission will
am
review the application, and will consider approval of the renewal
request, inviting additional proposals, or purchasing the System.
If the Franchise expires or is terminated, the City may
require the Company to remove, at its own expense, all equipment
from streets and public property within the City.
The Company will comply with all applicable local, state, or
federal laws. If any conflict exists, the Company and
Commission will negotiate to review the Franchise. If any part
of the Franchise is found to be invalid or is revised, the other
provisions of the Franchise will nevertheless remain in effect.
The ongoing administ*ration of the Franchise will be the
responsibility of the Commission, pursuant to the Joint Powers
Agreement to which the City is a party. In the event the City
withdraws from the Joint Powers Agreement, the City will assume
all obligations of the commission pursuant to the Franchise.
The Franchise will be published in accordance with City
requirements for adoption of ordinances and granting of franchises.
The Offering of the Company will be incorporated by reference
and made part of the Franchise. The Offering, along with the
Franchise Ordinance and any ordinance summary prepared, will be
permanently kept and available for public inspection at the
following location: City Administrator's office, City Attorney's
office, public library, Company's local office any school district
in city, Commission office and Minnesota Cable Communications
Board office.
-7-
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
IZID14
November 27, 1984
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kevin D. Fraz
t;
City Adminis t<ea
SUBJECT: Date for First Meeting in January
The first Tuesday in January is January 1st, New Year's Day. Therefore,
Council will need to set an alternate date for this meeting.
Normally, the first meeting in.January is the proforma business meeting,
dealing with issues like naming the City's official newspaper, selecting an
Acting Mayor, etc., We do not try to deal with many substantive items.
Council should select another evening later that same week, or the meeting
could be held the following Tuesday, January 8th. Personally, I would prefer
that we not set the meeting for Wednesday, January 2nd, since I may not have
returned from Christmas vacation in Kansas until late that evening. However,
if that date is most convenient for Council, it could be accommodated.
ACTION REQUIRED
To select an alternate date for the first Council meeting in January.
MEMORANDUM
November 30, 1984
TO: Mayor, City Council, City AdmiAfistrator
FROM: Dennis Delmont, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Speed Limit - Marie Ave. between Dodd & Victoria
Introduction
Alan and Cheryl Anderson, 721 W. Marie Ave. have asked that the City Council
request the State to study the speed limit on Marie Ave. between Dodd and
Victoria, in the hopes that they would lower it to 30 mph.
His tory
After reviewing Mr. Anderson's letter, and the memorandum by the Public Works
Director Jim Danielson, the Council took no action. It was referred back to
Staff for further study.
Mr. Anderson's letter points out that Marie Avenue is a long straight stretch
of roadway, and that in the area in question there are only four homes. He
speaks of a danger that he feels for his daughter, and that he has had vehicles
driving erratically in the area. He feels that some of the vehicles tend to
even exceed the current 40 mph posting. Mr. Anderson's primary concerns, as
indicated in the letter, are for vehicles that have swerved or driven near, or
onto, his yard.
We presented Council with information regarding the traffic surveys that we have
done on Marie Ave. in two different locations. Those surveys indicate that
Marie Avenue is not unusual insofar as the number of vehicles that drive over
the speed limit. It is unusual in the fact that it is a large, well-maintained,
very well traveled thoroughfare, and serves as a main traffic collector through
the City.
Alternatives
1. Refer the problem to the State of Minnesota for study as Mr. Anderson
has requested. This may result in a lowering of the speed limit, or
raising of the speed limit. It may also result in a study of Marie Ave.
from the point it enters Mendota Heights until Lexington where it
terminates. We may see the entire stretch raised as far as speed limit.
2. Deny the request and leave the situation as it presently exists.
3. Arbitrarily adjust the speed limit without consulting with the State.
Recommendations
I appreciate Mr. Anderson's concerns for the. safety of his child., Those concerns
are shared by just about every resident of the City, regardless of what street
they live on. Erratic driving, cars jumping curbs, are not necessarily caused
by the speed zone in the area, rather by the inattentiveness of the driver, the
willful disregard for safety by the driver, or as -Mr. Anderson points out,
unusual circumstances like wildlife running into the roadway. I believe that
Marie Avenue is improperly posted in that the speed limit is not consistent.
From an enforcement standpoint it would be easier to regulate if the speed limit
were consistent from Delaware all the way through to Lexington. I would not
expect the Council'to ignore Mr. Anderson's request, nor would I recommend that
we arbitrarily change speed limits in a hodge-podge manner. The result of that
type of action would be to defeat all the study and engineering that went into
the original design of the roadway system. If Council feels action should be
taken on the request, I would recommend that it be to refer the request tol,the
State of Minnesota for further study.
Action Required
This memo is for informational purposes only.
- 2 -
1;1.
t'I
TO: Mayor and City Co/ui
FROM: Kevin D. Fraz'
City Administrator
SUBJECT: Add -On Agenda for
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
ber 4, 1984
December 4, 1984
One consent calendar information item and two regular items are recommended
for addition to the agenda. One of the items is recommended for closed session.
Additional information is su mitted for Items 8a. - Grappendorf subdivision and
8e. - Comparable Worth.
3. Adoption of Agenda
It is recommended that the agenda be adopted with the addition of Items 6f.
- Acknowledgment letter from City of Eagan regarding Aircraft Noise Committee,
8j. - Consider resolution regarding Interstate Highway Funding, and 10 1/2 -
Closed meeting with City Attorney regarding pending litigation.
6f. Aircraft Noise Committee
Attached is a letter an resolution from the City of Eagan concerning air-
craft noise. At this time it is solely for your information. As noted, I will
be meeting with the City Man gers of Eagan and Burnsville on December 19 to
discuss the possibility of a joint committee.
8a. Grappendorf Plat
Attached is the most recent preliminary plat submitted by developer Unruh.
Essentially, the plat is as iecommended by the Planning Commission. This is
acceptable to Mr. Unruh and Mrs. Grappendorf, as an acceptable offer has been
tendered for Outlot A, presumably from area neighbors. As the purchasers of both
Outlots A and B intend to hale the property undeveloped, there will be no
petition for public improvemeInts.
It is recommended that Council approve the preliminary plat of Grappendorf
First Addition as presented.
8e. Comparable Worth
I attended the MAMA meeting this morning as indicated. There really was no
new information not already c vered in the previously submitted memo. Our cost
to participate will be around $4,000, depending on final participation by out -
state cities.
Of the approximately SO Cities in attendance, all indicated that they would
be participating. I continuelto recommend very strongly that we do likewise.
1
®.
Resolutions will be Sent to participating communities shortly after the
first of the year. Therefore, no formal action is required this evening. How-
ever, Council should indicate whether there is a consensus to participate_
8j. Consider Resolution Regarding Highway Fundi
For some time, it has been alleged that Minneapolis interests have been
lobbying the Governor to divert funding from 494 and 35E in Dakota County to
expedite I-394 and the commensurate parking garages in Minneapolis. Because
MnDot District 9 representtives have assured us that they consider it extremely
unlikely to happen, I havealnot bought it to Council for official action.
Attached are copies of the resolutions passed by Dakota County and the City
of Eagan. Since others in rhe County apparently feel it important enough to take
formal action, I felt it sh uld be brought to your attention.
If Council desires to stake action it should
ration of an appropriate re olution to be sent to
sioner Braun and the local leeislative deleeation.
10 1/2. Legal Claim - Robekt W. Moore Com
s a motion directing prepa-
ernor Pervich, MnDot Commis -
Attached is a confidenial memo concerning a legal claim against the City
for work done by the Robert W. Moore Company, in connection with the Ivy Falls
Creek Project.
It is recommended thatlCouncil meet in closed session with the City Attorn
to discuss our response.
2
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199
BEA BLOMQUIST
EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121
mayor
PHONE: (612) 454-8100
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A. SMITH
JERRY THOMAS
THEODORE WACHTER
November 29, 1984
Council Members
THOMAS HEDGES
City Administrator
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
KEVIN FRAZELL, CITY MANAGER
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
750 SO. PLAZA DRIVE
MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55120
Re: Air Traffic Noise Resolution
Dear Kevin:
Enclosed is a copy of a resolution that was approved by our City
Council at their last regular meeting held on Tuesday, November
20, 1984, adopting spec . ific conditions to help reduce air traffic
noise over the City of Eagan. One of those conditions, Condition
#1, suggests that a special task force be created blending Air
Traffic Noise Committee members from the cities of Burnsville,
Eagan and Mendota Heights to work on further solutions to the air
traffic noise demonstrating the cooperative spirit from northern
Dakota County.
The danger in all three (3) cities working independent of each
other is the proverbial shift of air traffic noise over each
other. Assuming the City of Eagan ails the loudest the air
traffic noise will be diverted over your communities and so forth.
I have arbitrarily set 2:00 P.M. Wednesday, December 19, 1984, at
the Eagan Municipal Center building as a time for a meeting when
we can discuss the issue of creating a task force.
Please confirm this time as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
C\ COW/" ---
Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator
TLH/sl
Enclosure
THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
RESOLUTION
AIR TRAFFIC NOISE/CITY OF EAGAN
WHEREAS, the _Federal Aeronautics Administration, together
with the Metropolitan Airports Commission, promulgated the use
of Runways 11L and '11R as primary takeoff and landing runways
for Minneapoli's/St. Paul International Airport, utilizing 105`
headings, running easterly of the airport; and
WHEREAS, the 105- headings promulgated in 1972 are not being
adhered by aircraft taking off and landing on Runways 29L and
11R, but no official change has been adopted to revise the
heading established by the preferential runway plan; and
WHEREAS, the preferential runway system impacts existing
and future development, the types of zoning and land uses currently
existing and proposed for the area, noise and safety factors;
and related issues; and
WHEREAS,the policies and procedures formulated by the preferen-
tial runway plan and promoted and adopted by the Metropolitan
Airports Commission, together with the commercial airlines and
the Metropolitan Airport Sound Abatement Council concerning
takeoffs and landings from the Minneapolis/St Paul International
Airport, have been repeatedly violated, including flying at
lower altitudes than designated in the regulations, and diversion
from designated corridors, and
WHEREAS, there are reasonable and viable corridors for landings
and takeoffs easterly from the airport; and
WHEREAS, theuiet hour or restricted hour
q policy promoted
and adopted by the MAC and the FAA covering nightime and weekend
hours is not being adhered to, causing unnecessary noise to
affected residences and businesses; and
WHEREAS, aircraft are flying diversionary patterns into
and"'out of Runway #22, rather than following the prescibed Cedar
Avenue corridor intended to reduce the impact upon affected
residences and businesses; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagan and its residents receive the
majority of all takeoffs and landings during the nightime quiet
or curfew hours; and
WHEREAS, ground runups at St. Paul International Airport
have- repeatedly created excessive and unnecessary noise and
violation -of prescribed and accepted runup procedures; and
WHEREAS, the air traffic counts taken during the weeks of
May 14 through May 18, 1984, May'21 through May 25, 1984, and
June 17 through June 22, 1984, indicate an excessive amount
of the landings and takeoffs occurring over the City of Eagan; and
WHEREAS the -Noise Abatement Runway Use Program, dated August
15,•1982, 3.I.(1), provides that 'Mendota Heights/Eagan procedures
with departures on 11R and 11L shall be issued heading 1050
which will ensure that aircraft will remain clear of the Mendota
Heights/Eagan ;noise sensitive areas unless minimum diversion
headings are needed -to separate parallel departures not on the
same route; and
WHEREAS an Eagan Noise Committee was appointed in the spring
of 1984, a number of meetings were held during the summer of
1984 and a fact finding report presented to the Eagan City Council
at the October 30, 1984, regular meeting; and
WHEREAS recommendations to control and regulate air traffic
noise over the City of Eagan were presented by the Airport Noise
Committee; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Eagan City Council
that the following conditions be considered for the purpose
of regulating air traffic noise over the City of Eagan:
1) Formulate an air traffic noise task force in several cities
to further study the impact of air traffic noise over com-
munities adjacent to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International
Airport and to specifically contact the cities of Burnsville
and Mendota Heights for the purpose of creating this task
force.
2) The task force will propose and submit through its local
city councils, local legislators, appropriate legislation
that will affectively serve to control safety and noise
issues created by aircraft flying over those northern Dakota
County cities.
3) Require that flight patterns over the City of Eagan be
on an agreed upon predetermined course and further that
flights be returned to the original flight patterns prior
to the two (2) year takeoff and landing experiment as imple-
mented by the Metropolitan Airport Commission.
4) Special measures be undertaken to restrict runups during
nighttime and weekend hours -and, further, to install all
reasonable equipment to reduce the noise impact from runups
at all times, including baffles, walls and other noise
abatement devices.
5) Impose reasonable penalties on pilots and airline commercial
carriers that do not adhere to appropriate guidelines and
regulations required for flights to and from the airport.
i
[A
6) Request the FAA and the MAC to require a steeper ascent
and descent of aircraft and, in addition, to exten'd the
105` heading on Runways 11R, 11L, 29R and 29L for a distance
of at least five miles from the end of the respective runways
to minimize noise impact.
Motion by: Wachter
Seconded by: Egan
Members in Favor: Unanimous
Members Opposed:
Dated: November 26, 1984 CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF EAGAN
ATTEST:
By:
City Clerk Mayor
CERTIFICATION
I, E.J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County,
Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and
correct copy of a RESOLUTION adopted by the City Council of
the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota on November 20,*
1984.
RESOLUTION
CITY OF EAGAN
COMPLETION OF INTERSTATES, I -35E & 1-494
WHEREAS, the construction of Interstate 35E and 494 is nearing
completion following years of delay and frustration; and
WHEREAS, the completion of these highways is important to the
transportation program of the metro region and the State; and
WHEREAS, Governor Rudy Perpich has played an important role
in clearing obstacles to the timely completion of these highways;
and
WHEREAS, competition for interstate funding is causing
Minneapolis interests to attempt to persuade the Governor to shift
funding from the completion of I -35E and 1-494 to construct
parking ramps for the 1-394 project; and
WHEREAS, Transportation Commissioner. Richard Braun has said
that the completion of I -35E and 1-494 should proceed as scheduled
and funds should not be shifted to 1-394.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Eagan City Council
supports the Mn/DOT schedule for the completion of Interstates
1-35E and 1-494; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Eagan City Council further
encourages Governor Perpich to resist efforts to shift funding
away from these interstate highways; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this Resolution be
forwarded to Governor Rudy Perpich, the Dakota County Legislative
Delegation and affected municipalities in Dakota County.
MOTION BY: THOMAS
SECONDED BY: SMITH
MEMBERS IN FAVOR: ALL
MEMBERS OPPOSED: NONE
Date: November 20, 1984 CITY COUNCIL
CITY OT EAGAN
ATTEST- ft .0 # �LL BY:
-11-�Vty Clerk /—Mayor -7
CERTIFICATION
I, E. J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota
County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of a RESOLUTION adopted by the City Council of
the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, on (\}r,,) �.R —F 19-R4 .
AE
City of Eagan
'Feagan
filo
dtV 0
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199
EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121
PHONE: (612)454-8100
November 27, 1984
THE HONORABLE RUDY PERPICH
GOVERNOR OF MINNESOTA*
ROOM 130
STATE CAPITOL
ST PAUL MN 55155
Dear Governor Perpich:
BEA BLOMQUIST
Maya
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A SMITH
JERRY THOMAS
THEODORE WACHTER
Councii Members
THOMAS HEDGES
City Adm"strotor
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at a
regular meeting held on November 20, 1984, a resolution was
approved encouraging your office and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation to commit the necessary funding allocation for
completion of Interstates I -35E and 1-494.
The completion of this interstate network is essential to the
economy of Dakota County, our metropolitan area and State of
Minnesota. Enclosed is a copy of our resolution.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
�kAZ W -1J'1
Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator
cc: Richard Braun, Commissioner, Mn/DOT
Bill Escher, Executive Director,
Dakota County Chamber of Commerce
All Northern Dakota County Cities
Enclosure
TLH/kf
THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
.bUAtW Uk'WUNTY CUMDLL551UN1;Xb
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Qct.o.ber....21. 1984
.. ... . .. .. .. ... ".
Resolution No.--_P7LK--
Loeding
Motion by Commissioner...... ... . ...... ... . . . ...... Seconded by Commissioner._
WHEREAS, the construction of Interstate 35E and 494 is nearing completion
following years of delay and frustration; and
WHEREAS, the completion of these highways is important to the transportation
program of the metro region and the State; and
WHEREAS, Governor Rudy Perpich has played an important role in clearing
obstacles to the timely completion of these highways; and
WHEREAS, competition for interstate funding is causing Minneapolis interests
to attempt to persuade the Governor to shift funding from the completion of
I -35E and 1-494 to construct parking ramps for the 1-394 project; and
WHEREAS, Transportation Commissioner Richard Braun has said that the completion
of I -35E and 1-494 should proceed as scheduled and funds should not be shifted
to 1-394.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners
supports the Mn/DOT schedule for the completion of Interstates I -35E and
1-494; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Board of Commissioners further
encourages Governor Perpich to resist efforts to shift funding away from
these interstate highways; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That copies of this Resolution be forwarded to Governor
Rudy Perpich, the Dakota County Legislative Delegation and affected municipalities
in Dakota County.
YES NO
Harris x Harris
Hollenkernp x Hollenkamp
Voss x Voss
Loeding x Loeding
Streeiland x Streefland
State of Minnesota
County of Dakota
1, C. D. Onischuk, duly elected, qualified and acting County Auditor of the County of Dakota, State
of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a resolution with the original
minutes of the proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners, Dakota County, Minnesota, at their
session held on the 93r!L_day now on file in my office, and have found
the same to be a true and correct copy thereof.
Witness my hand and official seal at Hastings, Minnesota, this _day of MY
K14
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: James E. Danielson
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Legal Claim - Robert
Ivy Falls Creek
Job No. 7838
Improvement No. 77,
HISTORY:
W. Moore Company
Project No. 14, Phase 1-B
December 3, 1984
In 1979, the City conducted a surface water drainage project along Ivy Falls
Creek from Delaware Avenue through the Somerset Country Club to Sylvandale Road.
The creek was cleaned and drop structures and holding ponds were built. One of
the ponds is on the westerly part of Somerset Country Club adjacent to Dodd Road.
The pond consists of a dike with a 48 inch outlet pipe set at a controlled
elevation to maintain a water level in the pond. So as to be able to drain down
the pond on necessary occasions, a 12 inch drain line was installed parallel and
adjacent to the 48 inch line but at a lower outlet elevation. The drain line is
valved to prevent draining the pond until needed.
This project was completed and accepted in August 1979.
DISCUSSION:
On March 12, 1980, the outlet pipe was found to be undermined and in danger
of a complete washout of the dike unless something was done soon. Robert W.
Moore, the original contractor, was called and came out immediately. Because of
impending rain fall, and after serious consultation, Bob agreed to take steps to
obtain equipment and materials to grout the washed out and undermined areas
resulting in a satisfactory repair which stands today.
Because of urgency there was no discussion of compensation because of a lack
of knowledge as to whether or not the grouting would work or if the dike had to
be excavated and rebuilt. After a couple of months, there seemed to be no other
problems so Bob submitted a bill for $1,933.33 for materials purchased and equip-
ment rented - no charge for his personal services, his equipment used or his
personal payroll.
On two occasions, Ed Kishel submitted letters recommending payment but staff
considered this as part of the contract warrantee and no payment was processed.
On February 4, 1981, Staff received a letter from Mr. Moore's attorney
requesting full payment of $2,836.33, which included costs incurred by Robert W.
Moore Company. The letter was answered by Sherm Winthrop, generally denying the
claim.
Now comes the Summons.
1
RECOMMENDATION
Because of pending court action, and because the project was accepted and it
is difficult to determine responsibility, it is staff's recommendation that the
entire bill be paid at this time.
ACTION REQUIRED:
If Council agrees with staff recommendation, authorization for payment is in
order. If not, we go to court with the possibility of losing. The City
Attorney has been given a copy of the Summons and relevant material and will
be in a position to respond to questions.
2
COPY
STATE OF MINNESOTA ' `, ' ` ' �� DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF DAKOTA 'Pili FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
-----------------------------
Robert W. Moore,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
City of Mendota Heights,
Defendant.
SUMMONS
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT:
You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon plaintiffs attorney an
Answer to the Complaint which is herewith served upon you within Twenty (20) days
after the service of this Summons upon you, exclusive of the date of service. If you
fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in
the Complaint. /I
Dated this day of 1984.
GEARIN do SHIELY, P.A.
1_�
Ztmes F. Shiely, jr.
torney for Plaintiff
500 Degree of Honor Building
St, Paul, MN 55101
(612) 227-7577
Attorney ID No. 100390
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
---------------
Robert W. Moore,
Plaintiff,
-vs- COMPLAINT
City of Mendota Heights,
Defendant.
---------------------------------------
Robert W. Moore Company, as and for its Complaint against defendant, herein
states and alleges as follows:
t.
That on or about March 1980, Robert W. Moore Company provided certain labor,
materials, and expense in repairing an overflow culvert in the vicinity of the
Sommerset Golf Course ponding basin pursuant to the emergency request of the City
of Mendota Heights.
II .
That the reasonable value of said improvements is $2,836.33 which includes the
following:
Item A mount
Rental of grout pump,
500.00
Grout
1,433.33
Labor of three men, nine hours each.
540.00
Use of truck. i
63.00
Tools present on the job, including
auger, hand shovels, barricades,
hose and pump.
100.00
Robert Moore's presence, inspection and
planning of the job.
200.00
Total $2,836.33
i
0
That no part thereof has been paid.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant in the
amount of $2,836.33.
Dated this a 3 'day of 1984.
GEARIN & SHIELY, P.A.
J es F. Shiely, Jr.
torney for Plaintiff
500 Degree of Honor Building
St. Paul, MN 55101
(612)227-7577
Attorney ID No. 100390
►~` 1.
WINTHROP. W E I N S T I N E & SEXTON
ATT0nNEYG AT LAW
SI•Eq.•All wlr. T.. I.Oo
2300 AMCMCAN NATIONAL (1ANK OUIL01NG 15121292-011(7
1+0HCgI wC1r.S T. r.[
n.p.,•s �. SC•TOu
'
SAINT ffAlIL,IAIfINF_jOTA 55101
—C-1.1) • .•r1(G
C. Tp1,NG•
----y w VIGL++
0-0 ++. oC •T+sOr+
T.IOw S w. .—I IV
f
D..no. C •r+U�5o�
March G, 1981
wC-01 wILC50•+ LEGGE
Mr. Daniel'L. Altwegg
t
Gearin and Shiely
Attorneys at Law
500 Degree of Iionor Building
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
Re: City of Mendota Heights - Ivy Falls Creek Drainage
Improvement Project (Improvement No. 77, Project
No. 14) - Robert W. Moore Company
Dear Mr. Altwegg:
We represent the City of Mendota Heights.
Your letter of February 3, 1981, addressed to Mr. James E.
Danielson, the City's Director of Public Works, relative to
the above -captioned matter has been referred to us for reply.
It is our understanding that on or about March 12, 1980, the
outlet pipe at the lower pond on the Somerset Golf Course was
found to be undermined and;that the Robert W. Moore Company
as the contractor on the project was contacted to correct the
situation. It is the position of the City of Mendota Heights
that there were no unusual circumstances contributing to the
pipe or culvert failure and that accordingly, responsibility
for the matter, including the costs of correcting the situation,
is that of the contractor, Robert 14. Moore Company.
If you have any questions or desire any additional information
in this connection, please do not hesitate to ask.
Very truly yours,
WINTHROP, WEINSTINE & SEXTON
By - Sherman Winthrop
S14: s r I
CC: r11-.
GEARIN AND SHIELY. P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
ROBERT A. GEARIN
JAMES F. SHIELY. JR.
DANIEL L. ALTWEGG
Or COUNCCL
JOSEPH L. MELZAREK
Mr. James 1:. Danielson
Director of Public Works
City of Mendota Heights
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Re: Robert W. Moore, Repair of Overflow Culvert
Dear Mr. Danielson:
900 OEGHEE Or NONOH SUIL01NG
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
46121 227.7577
February 3, 1981
F F , A+. R�r'0
Our firm has been retained by the Robert W. Moore Company in regards to repair
work performed on a Mendota Heights culvert. The Robert W. Moore Company has
Previously attempted to collect their out-of-pocket costs for this project and have
been unsucessful. The total out-of-pocket costs that the Robert IV. Moore Company
have incurred in regards to this matter are:
Rental of Grout Pump $ 500.00
Grout 1,433.33
Total $ 1,933.33
In lieu of payment of the above amount, the Robert W. Moore Company will have
no choice but to seek collection for the entire amount of out-of-pocket costs, labor
costs, and other incidental costs as detailed below
Rental of Grout Pump $ 500.00
Grout 1,433.33
Labor of 3 Men, 9 Hours Each 540.00
Use of Truck 63.00
"Cools present on the Job, Including Auger, Hand
Shovels, Barricades, Hose and Pump 100.00
Robert Moore's Presence, Inspection and
Planning of the Job 200.00
Total $ 21836.33
A response within 21 days of the date of this letter would greatly facilitate
matters. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Very truly yours,
GEAIII N API) SHIELY, P.A.,
Daniel L. Aitwegg
',4.{F +1 t' CD '�l i f3 ('5
El
23 September 1980
B[TT[NBURG sT[]LT[ & COMB, INC.
xwOo|[*C|� |w(|^1(xIS |1xwmix\
Mr' James E. Danielson
Pub |ic Works Di rector
City of Mendota Heights �
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120
Subject: Mendota Heights
Ivy Falls Creek
Improvement 77 Project 14
Phase i-8
8TSC Project No. 7838
Dear Jim:
Back in March of this year, the outlet pipe at the |cv^er pond on the Somerset
Golf Course was found to be undermined. Bob Moore, the Contractor on the
project in which the original pipe was installed, was called and because of
a forecast for rain stepped in and made repairs to prevent more extensive
This wasoutlinedto you in my letter of 5 June 1980.
A few days ago Bob called me and'indicated that the billings amounting
to $1,933.33 wer6 still unpaid' He also indicated that his attorney is recom-
mending legal action. Bob indicates that he is reluctant to take such action
'
unless absn|vcc|y necessary and asked that | discuss this matter with you in
an effort to have this claim paid and avoid legal action. He also reminded mc
that the billings included in his original claim were only for items he has
had to pay out for materials and outside services. He has made no claim for
his own services, employees he used in the two days it took to make the
repairs and for his equipment used.
!
I feel that the recommendation made in my letter of S June 1980 still stands
and ask that you look into the matter at your earliest convenience to avoid
legal action.
Ve truly yours,
|
Edward F. el
[FK/d[°
I
City of Acwtota Acights
BANK BUILDING
750 SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA 55120
TELEPHONE (612) 452-1850
June 9, 1980
Mr. Ed Kishel
672 Transfer Road
St. Paul, MN 55114
Dear Ed:
I have received your letter of June 5th, recommending payment to Robert
W. Moore, for work done on City Improvement Project No. 77-14, repairs to
overflow culvert located at the outlet to the west pond on Somerset Country
Club golf course.
The City feels there were no unusual circumstances contributing to the
culvert failure and can only assume that defective workmanship was the cause.
We feel that because of this fact, the City should not be liable to any payment.
The project is less than one year from final completion and Article 13, Section
M;
13.10, ONE YEAR CORRECTION PERIOD, would be applicable.
If you have any questions, I would be happy to discuss this with you
further.
_:rte•
Very truly yours,
James E. Danielson, P.E.
Director of Public Works
JED:madlr
5 June 1980
0ETT[NDUNG'TOVVNSEND S0OLTE & COK4Q. INC.
Mr' James E. Danielson K[C�K/EO
City of Mendota Heights '
750 South Plaza Drive 1��-
O
Mendota Heights, Minnesota �S|551-20 ~
Subject: Mendota Heights
Ivy Falls Creek
Improvement 77 Project 14
Phase 7-B
8TSC Project No. 7838
Dear Jim:
As you may recall, on March |%, 1988. the nutlet pipe at the lower pond on
the Somerset Golf Course was found to he undermined similar to that which
occurred on Marie Avenue. Robert W. Moore was the Contractor on the original
job and when contacted, came out to look over the situation the next day'
In that the forecast was for rain and the possibility of losing the entire
pipeline was real, a quick conference suggested the use of pumped concrete
into the voids as the best immediate method for repairing the damages'
There was no discussion regarding compensation mainly because no one knew
what it would take and the time element was important.
Mr' Moore comh charge, ordered the materials and supplied the manpower to repair the damage the following day, March 21.
-
` The cause of the undermining was not readily ascertainable but the corrective
work seems to be satisfactory.
The press of other work prevented us from delving into the cost for the cor-
rective work until recently when .e received the attached statement in the
amount of $1,933'33 from Mr. Moore.
Although the Contract For Phase l -B of the Ivy Falls Creek work has been
fioaled out as of August 1979, the entire project has not as yet been assessed
and some contingencies are included in the total financing which can absorb
these costs'
;
We feel that Mr' Moore did a good emergency job, is entitled to be compensated
for same, and herewith recommend that payment for the work be made.
Ve r truly yours, �
(! '
ROBERT W. MOORE COMPANY
General Contractor =21,
1325 De Courcy Dave ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55103
(612) 644-3773
City of Mendota Heights
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120
n N,r. Ed Kishel
{
....,,5:
DATE CHARGES AND CREDITS BALANCE
BALANCE FORWARD
PARTIAL EXPENSES
Repairs to Overflow Culvert
Somerset Golf Course Ponding Basin
Grout pumping $ 500 00
Grout $1,433 33
$1,933 33
Invoices enclosed
ROBERT W. MOORE COMPANY
1
('�/►/ �//� rAY LAST AMOVN•
yn ry• 1N THIS C...+w
.OW
SHIELY Coi6
,%CRL -,E COMPANY
%VwsjuoAflY of T64C J. L 4-ftLy CO.
RC44 - mra 6046uze
SOLD ROf) I.R
f W t4OGRC CC
TO I 325 C[COURCY OR[VC
ST rAUL 4N 'J5103
%A4111 PAUL. fAINN0,01A JSI(W
411.1;44014 641,-W.)l
INVOICE OATI
25� 16F7 3 St 110
FI NANCE CIIARGC 1 21 FCR MONTH ON ACCOUN
CUSTOMERS So DAYS UR t Ofit PAST CUE. ANNU
ORDERNO. 0000 RD TERMS: S-50/Yt) L5 DAYS 1. NET 30 PERCENTAGE RATE t2
03121 1-2 GROUT jOcbV Rt}
03/21 ZUkE 2 DELIVERY
03/21 kltTCR SERV
03121 STANDBY Cli�
n
24.00 4 5 c
24 -OC .2 .5C
1.2= 31.5L
1080. 0,
204. 0,
60. ("1
46. 1 -,
IF YCJU NAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDENG THIS INVOICqp ICAtL KAPEN ATI 646-6601
TOTAL YDS. *TAXABLE AMT. ON -TAXABLE AMT. DELIVERY CHG. I SALES TAX PLEASE PAY 0 -
24.00 108C.00 106.13 204.001 43.20 1 THIS AMOUNT 1433-33
DUPLICATE INVOICE
. GROUT, INC.
- P. 0. BOX 173
SOUTH ST. PAUL, MN 55075
451-2579
a .
Sold To Robert W. ;:oore Co.
1325 De Courcy !)r.
St. Paul, Mn. 55103
No.w ti"'J67
Dato x;/22/60
Shipped to -----
Golf Course
•
Your Order No. �Our Order No.
nate Shipr.cd Shipped VIi. ! f .r).ti, E Terni;;
Quantity j Ouantity --
Shipped d
ockOrdered Prico Per Amount—
Grout pumping service 3/22/80•
Pump w l man, 5 hours -- -_ .—_—.— 50400 250,. 0
-- 2 at'.c it
o teal men, 5 hours i - 50100
— - - ---------- -- - Total ----'- -- 500.0
• ..
Witsor.Jones (,, �op(��]Q /IilvoicE
Will 1...1Jon NFT
i
" 5074