Loading...
2006-06-20 City Council minutesPage No. I June 20, 2006 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, June 20, 2006 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Huber called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The following members were present: Mayor Huber, Councilmembers Duggan, Krebsbach, Schneeman and Vitelli. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Councihnember Duggan moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Schneeman moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting, revised to move items 6a, NDC4 agenda and minutes, 6e, park celebration schedule and budget, 6f, Pilot Knob property taxes, 6i, resignation of Patrick Hollister, and 6i, SuperAmerica digital fuel sign, to the regular agenda, along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgement of the Minutes from the June 13, 2006 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. b. Acknowledgement of the May 2006 Treasurers Report. c. Acknowledgement of the Preliminary Report on Income and Expenditures for the 501h Anniversary Celebration d. Authorization for Staff to Develop a Policy for Liquor License Violations. e. Approval of Payment for Sanitary Sewer Backup Claim for 1025 Brompton Place. f Adoption of Resolution No. 06-47, "RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION FOR 50" ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION CONTRIBUTIONS". g. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated June 20, 2006. Page No. 2 June 20, 2006 h. Approval of the list of claims dated June 20, 2006 and totaling $291,798.93. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 NDC4 Councilmember Krebsbach asked what the NDC4 concern is on proposed federal legislation that affects cable broadcasting of government and public events. Councilmember Duggan responded that the major concern is it would any new person coming in could get a franchise for almost no money and would not be required to work under the same franchise conditions as the current franchise holder. Councilmember Krebsbach moved to direct staff to prepare a letter in support of the NDC 4 position with respect to the public service aspect of the legislation. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 2007 PARK CELEBRATION Council acknowledged a memo from Operations & Projects Coordinator Kullander regarding a possible event schedule and budget for the 2007 Park Celebration. Councilmember Vitelli suggested deferring discussion until Council considers the 2007 budget. He stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission is talking about a significant amount of money. He did not feel it is appropriate to select a 2007 Parks Celebration Committee when Council is not sure there will be enough money available. Councilmember Duggan stated that the proposal is due to the civic support for this year's festival. There were questions raised about whether it could be done again next year, and the schedule is just a preliminary idea. He agreed that there is a lot of money involved. Mr. Kullander covered all of the options for Council to pick and choose from as Council goes forward in the budget process. Councilmember Krebsbach recommended that Administrator Danielson consider the information during the budget process and that a committee can be formed after the budget is finalized. Page No. 3 June 20, 2006 Councilmember Duggan stated that he sees the projected cost of $10,000 for next year if Council agrees with the proposals and he can also see much of the cost being defrayed by the businesses. He does not anticipate that the city would contribute more than $5,000. Councihneinber Vitelli moved to table the matter until the budget process. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PILOT KNOB PROPERTY Council acknowledged a memo from Finance Director Schabacker TAXES regarding property taxes for the Pilot Knob property. Councilmember Duggan stated that the city acquired the land towards the end of last year and he was shocked by the $18,000 tax on the 18 acres of property. He stated that he would have thought that the owner would be responsible for more of the tax and that he would be shocked if Council would have approved this. Councihnernber Vitelli stated that property taxes have been prorated on all of the homes he has bought and sold. The city should not be paying taxes except for the time the land was city- owned. Ms. Schabacker responded that the tax statements she received are for taxes payable in 2006. The taxes payable in 2005 would have been payable at closing. Since the city purchased the site after July 1, it is not considered exempt until next year. The parcels are taxed as commercial property. City Attorney Diehm stated that when one buys a home, the taxes are prorated based on taxes payable in that year. Unfortunately, the city can only apply for exempt status before July 1 and is liable for the tax unless it can get the seller to pay the tax for a future year and that would be unusual. Councilmember Duggan stated that the property has been designated as MR, not commercial. He proposed sending a letter to the county indicating that even though it was zoned commercial, it has been designated residential and the taxes should not be this exorbitant. Mayor Huber stated that one -third of the $18,000 goes to the county, one -third to the city and one -third to the school district, so the city will get one -third of the money back. The county was a critical partner in acquiring the land. He stated that he understands what Page No. 4 June 20, 2006 Councilmember Duggan is saying but he would be uncomfortable going back to the county when it was such a critical part of purchasing the land, and each of the three entities receives one third of the tax. Councilmember Vitelli stated that perhaps the city could personally inform Commissioner Egan that Council was caught by surprise and ask if he can help. Mayor Huber stated that he would be uncomfortable doing that since Commissioner Egan was such a supporter of the city acquisition of the land, and he would instead contact the county assessor. After discussion, Councilmember Vitelli moved to authorize payment of the $18,000 in real estate taxes for the Pilot Knob site for taxes payable in 2006. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PERSONNEL Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Danielson regarding the acceptance of a contingent resignation from Patrick Hollister and requesting authorization to begin the replacement process. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he thinks Council needs to take a look at the job description and consider calling it Assistant City Administrator. The title Administrative Assistant sounds a lot like a clerical position. Council should take a look at the job description to make sure talented people, like Patrick, are attracted. Council needs to look at bringing in someone who could be a candidate to replace the city administrator at some time in the future along with some potential internal candidates. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would be interested in what the differences in the pay schedule would be. Councilmember Duggan moved to accept the contingent resignation with great regret. Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Staff was directed to prepare information to bring back to Council regarding an Assistant City Administrator job description. Page No. 5 June 20, 2006 SUPER AMERICA SIGN Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Hollister along with a report from the city planner relative to a request from SuperAmerica for a digital fuel price sign at the Highway 55 store. Councilmeraber Duggan stated that he was concerned because Council denied the Sibley sign. If a message is sent from the store to the sign, that is an electronic message board. The proposed sign is an electronic message board and the city would be opening the door to something else that it clearly shut the door on a year and a half ago. He stated that he cannot support the idea. Assistant Hollister stated that this was on the consent agenda at the last Council meeting because it is simply a request for a sign permit. Council raised a concern about the digital sign face and asked for an analysis of what distinguishes this from the Sibley sign request. Planner Grittman feels Council could approve the SuperAmerica sign and not be inconsistent with its previous decision on the Sibley sign because he went through the findings in the resolution denying the Sibley High School sign point by point and said that council could choose to find that this is not an electronic message or an animated sign, etc. he has provided a basis upon which council could approve the sign but council certainly is not obligated to approve a sign. Mr. Tim Guibe, from SLC Sign Services, present on behalf of SuperAmerica, stated that the gas price sign that is proposed does not flash or have any animation. All it does is show the gas prices. It is changed automatically for safety reasons and so that people do not have to go out in all types of weather to change the gas prices. They use scrolling signs now but they have to be cranked. Those signs are very old and maintenance is extremely costly. He stated that he can assure Council that there is no message and no flashing or blinking. Councilmember Vitelli moved to approve the sign permit request with the clarification that the sign will only display fuel prices. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Duggan moved to deny the sign request and direct staff to prepare findings. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the emotion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 1 Vitelli Page No. 6 June 20, 2006 POLICE OFFICER Council acknowledged a memo from Police Chief Aschenbrener APPOINTMENT recommending the appointment of Mike Shepard as a probationary �. Police Officer. Chief Aschenbrener introduced Mr. Shepard to Council and the audience. Mr. Shepard read the Police Officer Code of Conduct and introduced himself and his family and friends to Council and the audience. Mayor Huber administered the oath of office to Officer Shepard. LIQUOR LICENSE HEARINGS Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from Mr. Patrick Souen for renewal of the Mendota Liquor off sale liquor license. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Huber asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Randy Swenson, 775 Creek Avenue, stated that he is a former Boy Scout assistant scout master and Mendota Liquor was always very good with helping them by contributing cardboard boxes they saved for the scouts for fundraisers. They were always very helpful with the scouts. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Schneeman moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Councilmember Duggan moved to approve the issuance of an off - sale liquor license to Mendota Liquor. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from Ms. Kristen Kowalski for renewal of an off - sale liquor license for The Wine Market. Mayor Huber asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Randy Swenson, 775 Creek Avenue, stated that he is a former Boy Scout assistant scout master and Mendota Liquor was always very good with helping them by contributing cardboard boxes they saved for the scouts for fundraisers. They were always very helpful with the scouts. Page No. 7 June 20, 2006 There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Vitelli moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Duggan moved to approve the issuance of an off - sale liquor license to The Wine Market. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING ON PARTIAL Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing VACATION OF BACHELOR on an application from Mr. Michael Cashill for the vacation of a AVENUE portion of the unimproved right -of -way along his property at 806 Bachelor Avenue. Council acknowledged a report from Engineer McDennott. Councihneinber Krebsbach stated that the Trail Road neighborhood has always had a concern that there will someday be a connection between Wachtler and Trail Road. She asked if vacating this section will preclude that. Administrator Danielson responded that it would snake the connection more difficult. Mr. Cashill stated that he is building a home at 806 Bachelor Avenue. He stated that typically, the easement is 25 feet back from the curb and he is asking that the easement just follow the curve of the lot. He has a gravel driveway and people think it is a path into the park. He would like to put in lights and an address marker at the end of the driveway and they would have to be back about 50 feet and no one would be able to see the lights or the marker. Councilmember Schneeman stated that the city received a call from on of the neighbors who objected to the vacation. Administrator Danielson suggested another option would be to give Mr. Cashill a license to have the lights and marker on city property in lieu of granting the right -of -way to him. Mayor Huber stated that he would be totally opposed to connecting Wachtler and wondered if this option would be a better way to accomplish the salve thing as vacating the right -of -way. Page No. 8 June 20, 2006 Councilmember Duggan moved to grant a license to Mr. Cashill to allow him to place the address marker and lights on city property, with the understanding that the decision to handle the request in this manner should not be viewed by future Councils as wanting to protect the right -of -way for a future extension of Wachtler. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 06 -11, T- MOBILE Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Steven Carlson for T- Mobile for a conditional use permit, variance, wetland permit and ordinance amendment for a wireless communication facility at city hall. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. Assistant Hollister reviewed the application for Council. T- Mobile applied for conditional use permits for two different locations originally but withdrew the other application, for a location in Wentworth Park. T- Mobile identified some areas of low coverage and dead spots within the city that they wanted help in filling. The police department was interested in raising the profile of its antenna tower for future communications needs and the idea came about for T- Mobile to apply to place an antenna tower behind city hall. The Planning Commission recommended approval. The tower would be 120 feet tall and the police department would have use of the top spot for its communications needs. He reviewed the proposed ordinance language for Council along with some revisions proposed by the city planner. There was considerable discussion over the language in the proposed ordinance, particularly with respect to use of the tower relating to the principle use of the property. There was concern that the proposed ordinance is not tight enough. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that Council needs to hear why there is a need for that tall of a tower. Chief Aschenbrener stated that he consulted with PSC Alliance, consultant for the 800 MHz system, for height needs and they said that the city would need a tower of a minimum of 120 feet. Responding to a question from Councilmember Vitelli on whether it makes a difference whether the antenna is on the water tower for security reasons. Chief Aschenbrener stated that the water tower could be a viable solution for public safety needs. Page No. 9 June 20, 2006 Councilmember Vitelli stated that the antennas to serve the city needs should be put on the 200 foot tower that already exists rather than building a 120 foot tower in a residential area. The other benefit is that the city would decouple the city needs from the needs of T-Mobile and their business future and new owners and other things that could happen in the future. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would like confirmation from the police chief that the city needs a new antenna and tower. Chief Aschenbrener responded that 800 MHz, wi-fi or a blended solution will require that type of elevation to give the police department coverage within two years. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that Council should have information on what the financial benefit would be for the city co- locating with T-Mobile and what the additional cost would be for not having the tower at the police station Councilmember Vitelli stated that Chief Aschenbrener should ask the county if the location of the antenna for Mendota Heights and the county in general is viable if it is put on the water tower, what are some of the things that need to be put on the tower for connectivity and what would a ballpark cost be. Mr. Carlson stated that he is present on behalf of T-Mobile to propose a new communication tower to serve T-Mobile's need to improve coverage in a certain area of the city. He reviewed a map of existing T-Mobile coverage in Mendota Heights and those areas that have poor coverage. The tower was designed for a co-location tower to meet the city's ordinance. In addition to T-Mobile's use and the city use, there could be locations below the of the height of the tower for future carriers so they do not need to seek building another tower structure somewhere else. Future carriers would need to enter into an agreement with the city for ground space for their equipment and they would have to enter into an agreement with T-Mobile for use of the tower. The equipment building will be brick to match city hall, with a slanted roof with wood shakes to make it as accessory to the building as possible. T-Mobile could not identify any alternatives to give service to their customers west of I-35E between T.H. 13 and T.H. 110. They are getting about 100 dropped calls a day in that area and they have about 500 customers in the area. There are no existing towers in this area except for the police tower. Going any further south would be extremely close to the city's water tower. There is about an 80 to 90 foot drop in elevation from City Hall down to T.H. Page No. 10 June 20, 2006 13 and getting back up that drop with a signal is very difficult. An FAA consultant confirmed that there does not need to be any lighting on the tower. Councilmember Vitelli asked if other carriers would also have a dead spot between T.H. 13 and 1-3 5E. Mr. Carlson responded that Sprint and Verizon have antennas on Sibley High School so they may have better coverage in the Wentworth Park area. Mayor Huber asked if the public service was not on the tower, would that change the request for height. Mr. Josh Matthews, engineer with T- mobile, stated that they would continue with their application for 120 feet and move their antenna up to the top of the tower to help their coverage to the north. Councilmember Duggan asked if there are other competitors' towers in the area that T- Mobile could co- locate on but chooses not to. Mr. Matthews responded that T- Mobile is already on the water tower. They have considered co- locating on the tower on T.H. 13, but it is too low and would not serve the needs. Mayor Huber asked if there had been any level of discussion with other carriers to see if there is any level of interest in co- location. Mr. Carlson responded that when he started this process, letters were sent to all of the other major carriers and he has not heard anything back. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she needs to know why this is a better site than the water tower site and she needs more education on this from the public safety standpoint. Responding to a question from Councilmember Krebsbach, Mr. Matthews stated that if the height of the tower was reduced, it would reduce coverage to the neighborhoods along Highway 13 and the northern edge of 1-3 5E, and that may require another tower. Mr. Dave Longeman stated that he lives near City Hall now and drives this corner several times a day. He took a picture of city hall and drew a tower on it to show what the impact will be. There currently is an antenna on top of the water tower and that could �,. Page No. 11 June 20, 2006 handle all of the police concerns. He uses Cingular and has a signal. 1 He did not want to see a tower sticking up over city hall with large arms on it or several equipment buildings at city hall. He showed a photo of a stealth tower that would be a better option if something is needed. Mr. Mike Povolny, 1901 South Lexington, was present to oppose the proposed tower. He felt that cellular carriers are using 800 MHz as an excuse to get towers. He agrees with putting antennas on the water tower. The school district does not want any more antennas because they don't want the service traffic. He asked that Council spend a little more time to study this to try to use the water tower. The tower at city hall would be directly in his line of sight. Councilmeraber Vitelli stated that he opposes erecting a 120 foot tower in a residential area. He also believes that when the research is done, the best solution for the city would be to put the antennas as high as possible on the water tower. Third, he does not know how the city would deny three more cell companies building three more garages (equipment buildings) on the city hall site. He reminded Council that while it is considering a 120 foot tower, it just denied a twelve inch sign. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she is aware there is a problem with dropped calls. She wants what is best for public safety and for the safety and welfare of the city residents and she does not know what that is at this time. Mayor Huber stated that he would likely support the T- Mobile application, depending on what he hears on the public safety solution and the associated costs. He is not prepared to say right now that public safety has to go somewhere else. He felt that the city could develop a lease agreement that protects the city for a long period of time regardless of what happens to T- Mobile in the future. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would like to see if the water tower can be used for public safety. With the proposed tower at this height, particularly if more than one company were on it, would industrialize this part of the city. If a tower is to be approved, she would like it to be lower and for there not to be co- location with other companies. She would like real information on where the dropped calls are and if other carriers are reaching that part of the community. Council needs more information. Page No. 12 June 20, 2006 Councilmember Duggan stated that public safety is important and the police department needs to know Council is supporting them and their views. He wondered whether T- Mobile has considered stealth towers and whether the tower at St. Anne's could be increased in height. He would like to see an 80 foot tower at city hall and has not heard clearly from residents that there are dropped calls in this area as opposed to T- Mobile anticipating dropped calls. There are many questions that need to be answered. Councilmember Vitelli moved to table the matter to July 18 for further information. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 RECESS Mayor Huber called for a recess at 10:00. The meeting was reconvened at 10:05 p.m. STREET RECONSTRUCTION Council acknowledged a memo from Engineer McDermott regarding the proposed 2006 street reconstruction project. Administrator Danielson stated that at the last meeting, most of the people were opposed to full reconstruction on Woodridge. Engineer McDermott looked into what the price would be to do Woodridge without curb and gutter. The city's street reconstruction and rehabilitation policy is that the city contributes 50% of the cost of a project when curb and gutter is installed. There is no city participation without curb and gutter, and the cost to the residents would be double, or $16,000. Because this project is being assessed, the city must justify the cost of the assessment. The cost of the assessments must increase the value of the properties to the extent of the assessment. Engineer McDermott has contacted the League of Minnesota Cities and other engineers and none thought the city could justify the $16,000 assessments. The city has three options: do nothing, do the curb and gutter option at an assessment rate of $7,825 per lot, or do an overlay project at a cost of $4,800 per lot. Staff recommends doing the full project with curb and gutter. The engineering staff received an email today from a resident stating reasons to do curb and gutter. The individual is someone who lives on Woodridge Drive who strongly advocates curb and gutter and who stated that it will enhance the aesthetics of the neighborhood and provide consistency. Mayor Huber stated that one of the questions two weeks ago was whether the runoff that comes from Woodridge (if it does not receive Page No. 13 June 20, 2006 curb and gutter) could be adequately controlled if it runs into other streets and properties. Administrator Danielson responded that the longer the storm water stays in the street, the longer it builds up steam. If curb and gutter and catch basins are installed on Woodridge it will not run by the catch basins that are lower down. It is a large stonn water district and it would build up a long flow that during heavy storm events would go over stone basins. Staff thinks it is a good idea to install catch basins on and around Woodridge. Responding to a question from Councilmember Krebsbach, Administrator stated that he and Engineer McDennott visited the Hulse property and Engineer McDermott will work with Ms. Hulse to design a rain water structure there. He does not think any trees will need to be taken out. Civil Engineer Ruzek informed Council that the rain garden has not been designed in detail. Staff will work with the homeowner. There may need to be four to six trees of less than 12 inches in diameter may need to be removed. Councilmember Vitelli stated that Engineer McDermott mentioned in her memo that to make sure the city gets adequate resident input the project can be put off until 2007. That would give her plenty of time to work with the residents and do the design. Councilmember Duggan stated that he drove around the area today and Arcadia probably contributes almost as much water to Cascade as Woodridge does. The roads need to be done. He hates to impose things on people. Surveys have done in projects in past projects and he would like to have each of the homeowners asked which of the three options they want. The hill and overlay of 23 years ago has worked for the most part. The area has a chann and an ambience. Drainage is a problem and it must be addressed. He asked if there is a possibility of adding more drains and whether that would help. The bluff is very important and he has not seen a study on how this project would improve the drainage down to T.H. 13. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he came to the conclusion that curb and gutter would be best on all the streets and he completely supports the staff recommendation. The engineering staff has recommended curb and gutter and storm sewer to properly control the water runoff and the risk of serious erosion. He stated that Council received a rather critical and adversarial memo from Mr. Ed Page No. 14 June 20, 2006 Driscoll. What that leads him to conclude is if Council were gracious enough not to provide curb and gutter, as is the desire of some of the residents, the city could be challenged in court by some residents on the city policy that if one does not have curb and gutter the city will not pay half of the cost. The memo is clearly adversarial and it would be challenged if Council were to grant people their request for no curb and gutter. In order to control the water and erosion, the city should do what city engineering proposes. If Council does not follow their recommendations, Council is opening the city up to lawsuits on potential future erosion by the people who live downstream from Woodridge and Arcadia. The curb and gutter controls the water runoff and minimizes any future risk of residents suing the city. This is an extremely sensitive area on water runoff and the city must do something about controlling the erosion and water runoff. The city engineer has proposed that this be done in the 2007 construction season to give staff plenty of time to discuss where the curb and gutter will go and how trees are handled. He recommended that Council adopt the staff recommendation to install curb and gutter and that any costs the city incurs due to any requests for expert appraisals, legal costs and other expert advise be added to the cost of the project. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she has been on Council for at least four reconstruction project and Council always hears the same thing — that people do not want curb and gutter because of the ambience of the streets. She was in this neighborhood today and cannot believe how bad the streets are. They are the worst she has seen in all the time she has been on Council. She believes curb and gutter is most important because the city has been dealing so much with erosion there over the years. The slope above T.H. 13 is deteriorating. Mayor Huber stated that Council must snake sure it takes care of the people who are receiving the runoff. Waiting until next summer is a good accommodation as it will allow staff time to work with residents on their specific concerns. He believes the recommendation of staff should be adopted. He has a concern about the legal cost issue as recommended by Councilmember Vitelli. Councilmember Vitelii asked if the residents of the city should be responsible for payment of an expert appraisal if someone asks for an appraisal. He thinks the project should pay for it. Mayor Huber stated that typically in the past when these assessments have been set, Council has represented to the residents what their Page No. 15 June 20, 2006 assessments might be. When Council says $7,825 per lot to the l residents, that is their assessment. While he may disagree about whether or not a resident wants to challenge the city, he respects the fact that people need to do what they need. He is concerned about one neighbor's cost going up because his neighbor makes a legal challenge. Councilmember Vitelli stated that in his memo, Mr. Driscoll made the statement that "in preparation of the feasibility report has the city made a detennination the project will confer a special benefit upon the properties at least equal to any proposed assessment ?" Mr. Driscoll also asked what expert opinion has been secured. The city does not normally do that. If the city is requested for an expert appraisal on each of these properties, the project should pay for it. He does not want to pay for it in his taxes. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she wants to be clear on if Woodridge had an overlay whether that would cause a problem at the end of Woodridge. She would like the Hulse property discussed again. She believes that Engineer McDennott stated that can be handled without curb and gutter. Administrator Danielson responded that it is a difficult situation that will require some extra design consideration in dealing with the land owner. Mr. Ruzek stated that only part of the Woodridge Drive drainage goes across the Hulse property. If just an overlay were done on Woodridge, some larger rock could be put in to help minimize the erosion. Pipe would not be installed in an overlay project. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that part of the problem is homes built to close to the bluff line. If just an overlay is done there will be more water to manage. She is inclined to support a mill and overlay for Woodridge. Before voting on this issue, she would like to talk to Engineer McDermott specifically about Woodridge and the drainage and the accommodation that the Hulses would be willing to make, where the pipe would go, and to have a better sense of how many trees will need to be removed. Councilmember Duggan stated that he likes what Councilmember Krebsbach stated and would remind Council that on the infill issue related to larger subdivision of homes, Council delayed a decision. It is not critical to have a vote tonight. He would like to find out from the people what they want and go with the majority. Page No. 16 June 20, 2006 Mayor Huber responded there have been two public meetings on this and two opportunities for people to give their comments. In the past there has been difficulty with dueling petitions. That has pitted neighbor against neighbor. While he fully supports snaking sure the engineering of the project involves communication with the residents, he is not sure more public input is needed on curb and gutter or no curb and gutter. He supports the total reconstruction with curb and gutter throughout. He would support the recommendation that was presented to Council but would be willing to wait until Engineer McDermott is present. In previous reconstruction discussions there have always been clusters of residents that were against curb and gutter. There are probably six or seven people here who are against it, but there seems to be general support for it from the neighborhood taken in total. He stated that absent some different response from Engineer McDermott, he would vote for the recommendation. Councihnember Duggan stated that waiting thirty days for a decision is not unreasonable and he thinks the city should send a letter to all of the residents. Councilmember Vitelli moved to accept the engineer's recommendation. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. C Mayor Huber stated that the public hearing was formally closed two weeks ago. There is a motion to accept the recommendation, which includes on -going communication and discussion with the residents on specific aspects of the plan. Ayes: 2 Schneeman, Vitelli Nays: 2 Duggan, Huber Abstain: 1 Krebsbach Councilmember Krebsbach moved to table action to July 18 to allow the city engineer to respond to Council questions raised this evening. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PARKING ORDINANCE Council acknowledged a memo from Police Chief Aschenbrener regarding questions related to the ordinance restricting parking from 2:00 to 6:00 am. Police Chief Aschenbrener stated that this item was on the last agenda. There were several questions form residents. The ordinance Page No. 17 June 20, 2006 has been adopted, but the signs have not been installed. He reviewed his memo for Council. Councilmember Krebsbach asked what ordinances currently exist about parking on the street. The police have responded on a complaint basis. Chief Aschenbrener responded that the property maintenance code addresses parking, and another city ordinance stipulates that there is a 24 hour maximum on a city street and that is continuous and unattended. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she supported this ordinance because she wants the police to have something they could enforce and effectively resolve problems. She asked if Chief Aschenbrener feels that 24 hours gives the department enough of a basis to give someone a citation to manage parking on the street. She also asked how the rental permit regulation affects Vicki Lane. Chief Aschenbrener stated that 24 hour parking ordinance was not effective in the Vick Lane issue. The rental ordinance does not affect parking at all A ban on parking from 2:00 to 6:00 a.m. would address the specific issues that were presented to residents on Vicki. Councilmember Schneeman stated that the ordinance is not something Mendota Heights dreamed up. Many cities have stiff parking restrictions. She read a list of those cities. Councilmember Vitelli moved to end further discussion on this and move ahead to enact the ordinance and erect the signs. Councihnember Schneeman seconded the motion. Mayor Huber stated that he is aware of at least one house in the community that does not have a driveway. The house was built before an ordinance requiring driveways was adopted. Councilmember Vitelli stated that his view is that should be dealt with as a specific case. Council voted on this issue and he is tired of it coming up again and again. He thinks this is the right thing to do. Council always has the ability to make a change later on if the ordinance becomes a problem. He has had more calls in support of it than opposing it. Mayor Huber responded that he thinks there are some people who have practical difficulties with the ordinance. This will affect the Page No. 18 June 20, 2006 whole city and there should be an opportunity for public input. He thinks it is bad for a government not to have public input. His preference would be to take an incremental approach, gathering citizen input and going after some streets where there is a particular problem. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she has had several calls and conversations with people who are concerned about the ability of their adult and teen children to park on the street and asked about a permitting process. She would like to explore pen-nits so people can park in front of their house. She would also like to see how the rental ordinance can be strengthened. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she does not think the rental property that is a problem. Many young mothers came up to her at the 50th anniversary celebration and asked her to support this. There are not a lot of sidewalks in the city and it is hard for families with small children because they have to ride their bikes in the street. Something has to be done. Councilmember Duggan stated that he thinks Council acted with incomplete information when this was adopted. Council chose total rather than partial coverage, where partial coverage would have made more sense. Council did not ask what the impact would be on everyone else except whether it would impact the situation on Vicki. He suggested that a committee be created, headed by Ralph Dumond, and a park commissioner, a police staff member, a city staff member and a planning commissioner, to study this and come back in a month with a recommendation. That would give the community a chance to respond and to attend a meeting and have their say. Councilmember Schneeman responded that Council is elected to make decisions and not put them off on someone else. I Councilmember Vitelli agreed, stating that he really opposes any proposal to have 8 or 10 people study this. Council voted on this and made their decision. There are people who have complained but there are also people who have called him to say Council has done the right thing. He feels this is the right thing to do for the city in its long range thinking. People who are questioning this and want to back off are not thinking about the long range. He asked if people want Mendota Height to be like West St. Paul. There are cars parked all over all day and night. Council made a formal decision and is waffling on it. Page No. 19 June 20, 2006 Councilmember Krebsbach stated that there are families that this becomes a hardship for and she would like to look at a permitting process. Councilmember Schneeman responded that the ordinance will be enforced on complaint only. If a neighbor does not complain about a car on the street, nothing will happen. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the ordinance should be uniformly enforced. The police should look the other way if they see a car they see parked on the street at 2:00 in the morning. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he looked at the total issue and the future of the city. He did not make his decision quickly based on the Vicki Lane problems. Councilmember Duggan stated that in his opinion Council did not really think about this as much as they thought they did. VOTE ON MOTION: Ayes: 2 Vitelli, Schneeman Nays: 3 Mayor Huber stated that he believes all of Council think there are some areas that need to be addressed. He thinks further study is in order, like a committee as suggested by Councilmember Duggan. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she would like to have Council represented on the proposed committee. Councilmember Vitelli pointed out that Council voted to enact a law. Mayor Huber responded that Council voted unanimously two weeks ago to put a hold on enacting the ordinance. It is not effective until it is enacted. Councilmember Duggan moved to create a subcommittee consisting of two Council members, a park commissioner, a planning commissioner, an ARC commissioner, someone from police and public works and two or three members of the public. Motion died for lack of second. Councilmember Vitelli stated that Council voted four to one to enact this ordinance and now it is in limbo. He asked Attorney Diebm what Council does now. Page No. 20 June 20, 2006 Attorney Diehzn responded that it is clearly neater and cleaner that Council repeal the ordinance if there is a question about the Council's decision to have this ordinance. It could be revisited at a future date when Council feels comfortable about enacting it. Councilmember Duggan moved to repeal the ordinance. Motion died for lack of second. Mayor Huber stated that he is comfortable having the ordinance stay in place pending review. He would like something definitive in 60 days. Councilmember Krebsbach stated she would like to recommend that staff come to Council with a plan to allow for permitting. The issue is where families need on street parking to that it is not just an automatic 24 hour parking all the time but perhaps two permits in a year. Councilmember Schneeman stated that staff can come back with a recommendation on how to handle this. She would like to see two Council members on a committee but does not want a huge, cumbersome committee. Councilmembers Krebsbach and Schneeman volunteered to serve on the committee. Mayor Huber suggested that there also be a representative from the police department, the city attorney, and a planning commissioner. Mayor Huber stated that there will be an opportunity for public comments when the committee recommendation comes to Council. Councilmember Duggan moved to form a committee. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 02 -11, FEFERCORN Council acknowledged an application form Mr. Ross Fefercorn for a Minor Amendment to a Planned Unit Development for an Outdoor Natural Gas Fire Pit for Building "E" at The Village at Mendota Heights. Discussion was tabled because Mr. Fefercorn was not present. Page No. 21 June 20, 2006 INFILL HEARING Council reviewed and made revisions to a draft letter inviting individuals to attend the infill hearing. CLOSED SESSION It was the consensus to conduct a closed session with legal counsel regarding the Par 3 litigation on July 18 at 7:00 p.m. FIRE DEPARTMENT It was the consensus to conduct a workshop at 6:00 p.m. on SALARIES August I for discussion on fire department salaries. ADJOURNED MEETING It was the consensus to conduct an adjourned meeting at 9:00 a.m. on June 28 to address planning commission cases that will be before the commission on June 27. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Huber expressed appreciation to Assistant Hollister for his service to the city, for his clear answers at Council meetings and for his consistently good advise and very good and thorough answers on issues. ADJOURN There being no farther business to come before Council, Councilmember Schneeman moved that the meeting be adjourned to 9:00 a.m. on June 28. Councilmernber Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:35 p.m. ATTEST: John J. Mayor Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk