2005-06-21 City Council minutesPage 1 of 34
June 21, 2005
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, June 21, 2005
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: Councilmembers
Duggan, Krebsbach, Schneeman and Vitelli.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience and staff recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of the revised
agenda for the meeting.
Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the consent
for the meeting, revised to move item 6f, NURT alignment,
6g, grant application, 61, final plat extension, 6m, digital sign
denial resolution, and 6n, 2005 street improvements, to the
regular agenda, along with authorization for execution of any
necessary documents contained therein.
a. Acknowledgement of the May 11, 2005 Airport
Relations Commission minutes.
b. Acknowledgement of the minutes of the June 14, 2005
Parks and Recreation Commission meeting.
c. Acknowledgement of the Fire Department monthly
report for May.
d. Acknowledgement of cancellation of the July Airport
Relations Commission meeting.
e. Acknowledgement of a memo regarding the use of
CDBG funds for removal of barriers in parks.
f. Approval of the purchase of a plotter from the City of
Prior Lake for the engineering department.
g. Adoption of Resolution No. 05-39, "A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF DAKOTA AND THE
Page 2 of 34
June 21, 2005
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FOR DISPATCHING
SERVICES."
h. Adoption of Resolution No. 05-40, "A RESOLUTION
REQUESTING THE COMMISSIONER OF
TRANSPORTATION TO COMPLETE A SPEED
STUDY ON MARIE AVENUE FROM VICTORIA
ROAD TO TRAIL ROAD."
i. Approval of list of contractor licenses dated June 21,
2005.
j. Approval of the List of Claims dated June 21, 2005 and
totaling $737,549.40.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
NURT ALIGNMENT Council acknowledged a memo from Operations & Projects
Coordinator Kullander regarding the alignment of the North
Urban Regional Trail at Dodd Road and Market Street.
Councilmember Duggan commented Council that Mr.
Fefercorn had indicated a preference for the trail on the south
side of the pond and the Parks and Recreation Commission
reiterated its preference for the north side. There was
concern in relation to a safety fence. If the trail is moved to
the south side, there can be a nicer fence but the city has to
pay for it. If it is on the north side, the county pays for it.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that Council wants to the
safest trail.
Further discussion was tabled until Mr. Fefercorn is present.
GRANT APPLICATION Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator
Danielson regarding the 2005 Metropolitan Council Livable
Community Demonstration grant application.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that he thinks Council should
discuss a strategy and he has asked staff to be prepared to
share their ideas on strategy with Council. The city should
also be in touch with Rick Aguilara and discuss who will
make the presentation and what will be said.
Administrator Danielson responded that the strategy is that
the city has received grant money in the past for the Town
Center project, that it is a good project, and that the city
needs more money. The but/for is that but for the money
Page 3 of 34
June 21, 2005
from the Metropolitan Council, this project would not go
ahead. The city has spent the grant money that it received.
The original application was for more money, and the city is
applying for the difference now. The city has until January
to make the presentation. He and the former city
administrator made the presentation for the last grant
application.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that in one of the memos
there was an indication that Mr. Fefercorn would like to use
any remainder of the underground parking grant money for
lighting. She asked what the balance is and if that money
can be applied to construction of the other underground
parking.
Administrator Danielson responded that the balance could be
applied to the other underground parking.
Councilmember Duggan stated that he feels it would be
appropriate to do that since the funding was specifically
requested and designated for underground parking.
Mayor Huber stated that the city needs to make sure to use
all of the funds before the grant expires and that the funds
are spent in a manner consistent with the request that was
originally prepared.
Responding to a question from Co-Lu-icilmember Schneeman,
Administrator Danielson stated that the deadline for
submitting the application is June 30.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that if staff needs any
assistance, she will be happy to contact Mr. Aguilara.
Councilmember Vitelli moved to approve the application.
Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
MOEN LEUR FINAL PLAT Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Hollister
regarding a request from Mr. Todd Mohagen for an
extension to submit the final plat a PUD at 1-494 and 1-35E.
Mayor Huber stated that there was a requirement in the
planning process that required that the final plat be submitted
Page 4 of 34
June 21, 2005
by April 12. Mr. Mohagen is requesting that deadline be
extended to October.
Mr. Charlie Melcher, the project's engineer from Quality
Site Design, was present on behalf of Nomar Construction,
the owner of the property. He stated the he attended all of
the Council meetings on this matter. After the last meeting,
he met with the project architects and discussed with their
staff what the strategy would be. The first item of business
was to get the plans and specifications and developers
agreement together for city staff review. He is still in the
process of getting the plans and specifications approved by
St. Paul Water. He stated that he expects to get their review
letter some time in four weeks or so. St. Paul Water is
meeting to approve allowing Nomar to have water from
Mendota Heights Road. Secondly, he and the city engineer
have been passing information back and forth relative to the
developers agreement. To date, they do not have a
developers agreement put together to refer to the city
attorney. With the revisions that will need to be done in
response to the St. Paul water review letter, and getting the
city's engineering staff to review the plans, they could be
ready for plat approval in September, but early October
would be safe.
Mayor Huber stated that he does not remember St. Paul
Water ever holding tip getting final plat approval.
Administrator Danielson agreed, stating this will be a private
water line, so it is somewhat unique.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that a key question is on what
date it was submitted to St. Paul Water.
Mr. Melcher responded that he believes the request was
submitted to St. Paul Water about six weeks ago.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that it was submitted to them
at a time after which the time limit for the plat ran out. It
sounds like this project was put on the shelf, and that is why
everything is late. He asked Mr. Melcher how many hours
he has spent on this since Council gave its approval.
Mr. Melcher responded that he has been working at the
direction of the developers on this. Since Co-uncil approval,
Page 5 of 34
June 21, 2005
the site has been balanced, so he has probably billed over
$10,000 from an engineering standpoint.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that he is not sympathetic and
he feels they should reapply. He doesn't ever remember this
happening in the past. He stated that he would be willing to
grant another two weeks.
Councilmember Duggan asked if St. Paul Water has given
any indication of when they will be able to get approval. He
stated that the developer just gave the city a two line letter of
request with no details.
Mayor Huber stated that one possible avenue would be to
just let the timeframe lapse and take no action on the request.
Council could just say they did not meet the time limits and
the project is over. Council could consider asking them to go
through a reapproval process, just coming back to Council,
but in doing so with a project that lapses like this, it gives
Council concern over the ability of the developer to bring the
project to completion. He would like to have information
showing Council that the developer has the ability to do what
he says he will do.
Mr. Melcher stated that the developer owns the property and
he does not feel the developer has any wish to not go
forward. They would like to get it developed. That is why
he is working with St. Paul Water to get this through. If
there was a time lapse, that is something the architect and
engineering staff should be accountable to, and it would be
harsh to through out the money spent on architecture and
engineering.
Mayor Huber responded that he understands that Mr.
Melcher thinks it is harsh, but Council has approved dozens
of projects over time, and when something lapses as long as
this, it gives Council concern. Sooner or later, the city needs
to know that the developer can come through. When things
lapse this badly, it gives Council question over the attention
to detail and the ability the developer has to go forward. The
developer is asking Council to revive something that is
already dead. He stated that he is not inclined to give the
extension and may need to have the developer reappear
before Council to give Council a level of confidence that the
project will be completed.
Page 6 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Vitelli moved to consider the project lapsed,
and if the developer wishes to reapply that is fine, but he
must bring something to Council that gives Council
confidence that the project will move forward.
Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that her concern is that
the letter was not submitted to St. Paul Water until May 17.
Councilmember Duggan stated that he thinks the project
engineers should have sent the permit applications in time to
get things done. The application to St. Paul Water was
eleven weeks after the city approved the project and then the
developer waited eight more weeks to ask for renewal. He
can understand a short delay because of the private water
matter but he cannot understand why the engineer would
delay the request to St. Paul so long.
Mr. Melcher responded that after he got preliminary
approval in March, he sent the survey crew out to find the
watermain in April and then again to finalize the MnDOT
connection to 1-494 to survey where they were going to
discharge the storm water. From an engineering standpoint,
he was performing work as necessary. From the owners
standpoint, if they needed to send a letter requesting
extension in a timely manner, that was not done.
Mayor Huber stated that the developer has put Mr. Melcher
in a bad position and should have come to Council himself.
Councilmember Duggan stated that Mr. Leuer should come
to the next Council meeting and give Council a credible
explanation, or he will have to start the process over again.
Mayor Huber felt that Council should deny the request and
have them reapply. That does not mean the project is over,
but Council needs something more in the ftiture to prove the
project is going forward.
VOTE ON MOTION:
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CASE NO. 05-13, FRETSCHEL Council acknowledged a proposed resolution to deny
applications from Mr. Richard Fretschel to allow an
animated, digital sign at Henry Sibley High School.
Page 7 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Duggan stated that he wanted to be sure that
the language in the resolution coincides with the language of
the application itself, and he has been assured of that. His
concern was that if Mr. Fretschel had only applied for an
animated digital sign, that is what should be in the
resolution. He has been told that as part of the process, the
city planner and Mr. Fretschel had drafted language that
included the term electronic message board.
Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of Resolution
No. 05-41, "A RESOLUTION DENYING AN
APPLICATION FOR A ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
VARIANCES FOR AN ANIMATED DIGITAL SIGN OR
ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD SIGN AT 1897
DELAWARE AVENUE."
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
2005 STREET Council acknowledged a memo from Engineer McDermott,
IMPROVEMENTS along with the plans and specifications for the 2005 street
improvement projects. Council also acknowledged a letter
from Mr. & Mrs. Kevin Clark, 643 Sunset Lane.
Engineer McDermott stated that Mr. & Mrs. Clark question
the need for curb and gutter on Sunset and that was decided
when Council approved the feasibility report. The city
typically installs curb and gutter to improve maintenance and
keep the water from going under the pavement into the street
base. With the installation curb and gutter, the street should
not have to be reconstructed again in the future. When
maintenance is done, it will be either mill and overlay or seal
coat in 20 to 25 years.
Mayor Huber stated that when the city does curb and gutter,
it is the policy that the city pays part of the cost. When curb
and gutter is not installed, the property owners pay 100% of
the cost.
Mrs. Susan Clark stated that she has lived on Sunset Lane
since 1962. Her parents built a house there and her aunt and
uncle had a house there She and her husband bought her
friend's house on Sunset Lane because she likes the way the
neighborhood looks. She does not like the feel to look at a
street with curb and gutter. It looks like every other suburb.
Page 8 of 34
June 21, 2005
She likes Sunset Lane and Mendota Heights, which is one of
the reasons she and her husband settled here. The water just
runs down the street now.
Mayor Huber responded that Council ordered the project in
with curb and gutter. He understands that some people have
a question about the aesthetics of curb and gutter and do not
want it, and others do.
Engineer McDermott stated that the second issue that the
Clarks have is about the catch basin location. She stated that
she can look at it and if it makes sense to move it she will.
Their third item was that the Clarks own two lots and are
being assessed for two units. One of the lots is vacant, and it
has been past practice to defer assessments until vacant lots
develop if the owner requests deferment.
Mrs. Clark stated that the lot has always been in her family
as well. She does not want a house built on it.
Councilmember Duggan stated asked if the Clarks would be
assessed two units if they combine their lots into one.
Mrs. Clark responded that they tried to combine the lots for
tax purposes and the county said they could not do that.
Engineer McDermott stated that if the Clarks combine the
lots they would only be charged for one lot. If the property
was subdivided in the future, the assessment for the vacant
lot would be picked up at the time the lot develops.
Mr. William Gra-Lipe, 642 Sunset Lane, stated that he has
lived in his home for twelve years and has never had a water
problem and the drainage is great. He does not see the need
for curb and gutter. He does not care for the curb and gutter.
He stated that as far as the water getting under the street and
creating a problem, he felt that the street would not be in the
condition it is in if it had been maintained better over the last
ten years.
Responding to a question from Council, Engineer
McDermott stated that Sunset Lane is about 40 years old.
Councilmember Duggan stated that the city received a
communication from a resident in the area who was unhappy
about not being able to park their car in the driveway or on
Page 9 of 34
June 21, 2005
the street for a couple of days. He stated that staff should do
whatever it can to advise people when they are going to be
affected by construction and tell them that they will not be
disrupted too long.
Councilmember Vitelli moved adoption of Resolution No.
05 -42, "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS
TO SUNSET LANE (PROJECT #200212), IVY FALLS
AVENUE (PROJECT #200210), IVY HILL DRIVE AND
MAPLE PARK DRIVE (PROJECT #200506),
RIDGEWAOOD LANE (PROJECT #200508), AND
DODGE LANE (PROJECT #200214)."
Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Cliff Timm expressed concern over the safety on Wagon
Wheel Trail near the culvert where people fish. He stated
that Mr. Courtney Pince told him that he had nearly hit a
child a week ago. He fiirther stated that he enjoys seeing
people fish but when they come with a carload and let the
children play in the street it is dangerous. The city needs to
work on off -road parking and fishing, and he is looking
forward to working with Councilmember Schneeman on
that. He also informed Council that he talked to Senator
Metzen and Representative Hanson today about when Jay
Riggs is going to be replaced at Dakota County Soil and
Water so that he can work with someone on rain gardens.
He feels that there should be rain gardens at St. Thomas
Academy and will work with them on rain gardens and the
goose problem. He has been working on a project of trying
to discourage geese with dogs.
FIREWORKS Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator
Danielson regarding the Fourth of July fireworks. Mr. Steve
Watson was present on behalf of Mendakota Country Club.
Mr. Watson stated that ten years ago Mendakota Country
Club, in conjunction with the city, started hosting the July 4
fireworks. Initially the country club supported the funding
and the city provided public safety. In 1999 the fireworks
cost $8,800, and it has gone up to $12,000. Two years ago
Mendakota asked the city for some financial support and the
city contributed $1,500. This year the cost rose from
Page 10 of 34
June 21, 2005
$10,000 to $12,000, and he is asking Council to consider
some additional funding.
Councilmember Duggan moved to authorize staff to
participate in co-sponsoring the July 4 fireworks and to
authorize a payment of $2,000 to Mendakota Country Club
to assist in the cost of the fireworks.
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Council acknowledged a memo from Engineer McDermott
regarding the Local Surface Water Management Plan.
Engineer McDermott informed the audience that the city
recently retained Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates
(BRAA) to update the city's surface water management plan.
She introduced Mr. Bob Barth, from BRAA, to Council and
the audience, who reviewed the report and answered
questions from the Council.
Councilmember Krebsbach commended BRAA on the report
and the aerial photography.
Mr. Barth stated that the plans are a statutory requirement.
In Mendota Heights' case, there are unique aspects including
the wetlands map, and the intent is to resolve the wetland
boundaries. The other is updating surface water models and
updating the maps and converting them to software.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Duggan
regarding population estimates, Mr. Barth stated that the city
should update its ordinance to reference the current
estimates. He further stated that BRAA has recommended
other changes to the ordinance.
Councilmember Duggan stated that Council is fairly certain
that nothing will happen to the Garron property and that
some of the focus areas have changed since the study was
done.
Mr. Barth responded that he will get more information from
Engineer McDermott on those.
Page 11 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that it is noted in the study
that Lake Augusta has no outlet, but that water is coming in.
She asked Mr. Barth what his recommendation is.
Mr. Barth responded that with respect to landlocked lakes,
the issue is degradation. The Metropolitan Council is
making 25 cities go through non - degradation analysis. His
recommendation is that if a landlocked lake works, the city
should leave it alone.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the recommendation
for Wentworth Park is to construct pre- treatment ponds, but
he is not recommending that for Valley Park.
Mr. Barth responded that the treatments ponds for
Wentworth are to improve the water quality. He also
recommended buffers for Friendly Hills Park. He stated that
the assessments were very preliminary by BRAA's wetlands
staff and city engineering is reviewing them and the city's
park people need to review them.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that there was also a
recommendation to eliminate mowing to the edge of the
pond to reduce the geese problem. She further stated that in
time the city will need to put in aerators in the ponds and that
they are very important to the city.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she and the Mayor
were both called by a resident in Kensington to look at an
outlet there. The lake at Kensington has four inlets or more
and that is not showing yip on the aerial photos for having
outlets designated.
Mr. Barth responded that the study does not show all of the
storm sewer. It is a watershed model, and the study is
showing how watersheds are connected.
Councilmember Duggan pointed out some errors in the
report. The study attributes the Mendakota Country Club to
Par 3 Golf Course and also had a different name for Acacia
Cemetery.
KOWALSKI MARKET Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator
STUDY Danielson regarding the market study for a market at the
Village at Mendota Heights.
Page 12 of 34
June 21, 2005
Mr. Keith Wicks informed Council and the audience that he
prepared the study for Bob Kowalski and RF Entities to
determine the feasibility of a proposed grocery store for the
Village at Mendota Heights. He stated that doing a market
study is a standard process in the grocery industry. The
market was assessed in terms of demand and competitive
structure. The store Mr. Kowalski is proposing was
discussed and assumptions for the 3,000 square foot facility
was done in detail so the forecast is limited to that specific
model. He stated that he also looked at a 4,000 square foot
facility. The store will be a specialty food store and will
have a featured quality deli and with meat and seafood. He
projects that this store will take about a 3% market share out
of the primary trade area.
Coimcilmember Krebsbach stated that she is very pleased to
see the store come in. She started that the residents she has
talked to want it. She feels it will be a destination if it also
includes a place to sit and eat or have coffee.
Mr. Wicks stated that the difference between the models is
that they both have a service meat and seafood section,
produce, core grocery, etc, and they both have caf6 seating
and sandwich activity. The retail model that Mr. Kowalski
is proposing will have a bakery partner and there could be a
coffee shop. The deli will drive the lunch trade and even
some evening meal trade. The marketing plan will have to
be to draw both retail food service and to draw the local
workers and business industry to have lunch.
Responding to a question from Cotmeilmember Duggan, Mr.
Wicks explained how he arrived at the weekly retail
potential.
Councilmember Duggan stated that the underlying
assumption is that the store would get all the business for the
trade area.
Mr. Wicks responded that the market model breaks the
20,000 population into neighborhood sections and that is
farther defined based on other operations within the area.
There is also a float factor for specialty retail and
convenience stores, and that is typically about 15 to 20% of
the market place. The rest share the over $750,000 of retail
food potential.
Page 13 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Duggan stated that he is looking forward to
the store being built and going to it when it is built.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that the city paid for part of the
study. Key to the city is the question if the market for the
3,000 to 4,000 square foot market is a viable business
potential at that site. He stated that the key issues are
whether the Kowalskis are excited and if they want to
proceed.
Mr. Wicks responded that it is viable in terms of the retail
sales potential. The model Mr. Kowalski has presented to
him makes sense. It works at this site, but there is a new
issue that came up recently that needs to be investigated
further.
Mr. Kowalski stated that one thing that needs to be made
clear Lip front is that it is not the Kowalski family market
project. It has nothing to do with the Kowalski Markets,
which do facilities of 18,000 square feet or more. He stated
that he was approached a couple of weeks ago by Mr. Ed
Paster, who is talking about looking for a grocery partner for
the shopping center. He stated that he does not want to go
forward with his market if he knows someone else is coming
in with a 7,000 to 10,000 square foot facility in the shopping
center. The goal for tonight was to just do a feasibility
study. Everyone wants a store badly. The study was done to
see if the model will work. If he proceeds, his next piece
will be to find financial partners and decide on a final
format. He showed a photo of a similarly sized market in
Atlanta and stated that he likes the format, which has seating
in the middle. He is proposing that the perimeter of the store
be small grocery, strong perishable, upscale perishable and
great service.
Councilmember Vitelli asked what Mr. Kowalski is going to
do in the next two months. He commented that the study is
encouraging.
Mr. Kowalski responded that for the last three months he has
been exploring this every day. He will take it to the next
level of seeking investors and getting an architect involved.
He has to finalize the design, and if the money and plans fall
in line, he will move ahead. He first needs to know what is
going on at the shopping center.
Page 14 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Duggan suggested that Mr. Kowalski get a
copy of the concept plan that Mr. Paster presented in the past
couple of years.
Councilmember Schneeman commented that when Mr.
Paster was at a past Council meeting, he said that at that time
the market would not support a fall sized grocery store.
Mr. Kowalski stated his brother did a feasibility study for a
large store and it would not work. Responding to a question
from Councilmember Schneeman, Mr. Kowalski stated that
he is more comfortable with the 3,000 square foot store, but
if an investor was willing to support a larger store (4,000
square feet), he would do that.
Councilmember Vitelli thanked Mr. Wicks for the study and
stated that he looks forward to working with Mr. Kowalski.
LIQUOR LICENSE HEARING Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a public
hearing on an application from Kristen and Robert Kowalski
for an off sale liquor license for The Wine Market, proposed
to be located in Town Center. Council acknowledged a
memo from the City Clerk regarding the application. Mr.
and Mrs. Kowalski and Mr. Ross Fefercorn were present for
the discussion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
The City Clerk informed Council that the license application
is complete and the background investigations were positive.
She informed Council that, under the ordinance, action on
new liquor licenses cannot be taken until the next regular
Council meeting.
Mr. and Mrs. Kowalski spoke briefly and responded to
Council questions.
Mayor Huber asked for questions and comments from the
audience.
There being no questions or comments, Councilmember
Duggan moved that the hearing be closed.
Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion.
Councilmember Duggan moved to table action on the
application to the July 5 meeting.
Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion.
Page 15 of 34
June 21, 2005
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
TOWN CENTER/NURT Councilmember Krebsbach asked Mr. Fefercorn about the
balance of the Metropolitan Council grant funding for the
underground parking that he wants to use for lighting. She
stated that she understands there is a small balance from the
underground parking in Building F and Mr. Fefercorn wants
to apply that to lighting in the parking ramp for safety. She
asked whether the balance could be added to the
underground parking for the other building.
Councilmember Vitelli noted that if the balance is applied to
the underground parking, Mr. Fefercorn might not meet the
timeline for funding this year.
Mr. Fefercorn stated that the underground parking is deep
and cavernous and to make it inviting, he thinks it is
important to have high quality lighting. Lighting was
budgeted and was always contemplated, but he did not know
how it would work out. The lighting would access the
underground parking and the access to the underground
parking.
Councilmember Vitelli asked when Mr. Fefercorn when he
estimates fully drawing on the Metropolitan Council funds.
Mr. Fefercorn responded probably in October. He believes
that both of the grants will be drawn down entirely by
December of this year.
Councilmember Duggan stated that at the last meeting Mr.
Fefeercorn told Council about the challenge of the NURT
trail on the north side versus his preference for the south
side. The Parks and Recreation Commission has reaffirmed
their recommendation for the north side because they see it
as bringing more people into the center. If it goes on the
south side, the city would need additional funding for safety
because of the embankment.
Mr. Feffercorn showed the alignment of a portion of the trail.
His concern is if it is intended to be a bike trail, there some
hairpin corners that will not be bikeable. Also, the
embankment is fairly steep, and federal standards require a
safeguard railing around the entire trail. It would be an
acceptable walking trail. If there are signs that say
Page 16 of 34
June 21, 2005
"dismount your bike and walk," he can get it, but if it is a
bike trail, he thinks there will be accidents.
Councilmember Duggan stated that as he understands it,
there will be bicyclists on the trail, but the primary use is as a
walking trail from Delaware into Town Center.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that she believes there
will be a lot of bicyclists using the trail as well and she
thinks it would be safer to have the trail on the south side.
Mr. Fefercorn stated that he wants to encourage pedestrian
traffic through the area, but does not want to encourage an
unsafe condition. That is why he suggested that the trail go
south of the pond. If the NURT trail gets built on the north
side, a less expensive trail could be built on the south side.
He informed Council that he is hiring Landform to survey
Outlot A again to be sure the grading plan is correct.
Engineer McDermott stated that she is trying to set up a
meeting with Dakota County and MnDOT to discuss NURT
trail options.
Mayor Huber suggested that perhaps there could be a fork, in
the trail where bike racks can be placed so that people could
get off their bikes to go into Town Center and not have to
bike through along the street.
Councilmember Vitelli asked staff and Mr. Feffercom to
meet with Dakota County to review the two options and
careftilly discuss the pros and cons of each.
CASE NO. 05-08, MENKE Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Dave
Menke, on behalf of the OPUS Corporation, for CUP for a
PUD, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning,
Subdivision, Critical Area Permit, CUP for Fill, and
Variances for a Multi-Family Residential Redevelopment at
820/840 Sibley Memorial Highway. Council also
acknowledged associated staff reports and letters from Ms.
Rose Huntley and Mr. & Mrs. Gary Sachs and OPUS.
Assistant Hollister gave a brief history of the proposed
project. He stated that at the last meeting, Council continued
the discussion to this evening and asked OPUS to work on
five issues. They were: adjusting the position of
condominium building B about 15 feet to the north; replace
Page 17 of 34
June 21, 2005
the pitched roof of the condominium buildings with mansard
roofs; eliminate the two comer units at the intersection of
Wachtler and T.H. 13; continued discussion on the cost
allocation for trail and storm sewer improvements; and, the
massiveness of the condominium buildings. OPUS has
submitted a letter of response to those issues. OPUS shifted
the position of condominium B, replaced the pitched roofs
with mansard roofs, eliminated the two twinhomes at the
intersection of Wachtler and T.H. 13, recalculated the
impervious surface coverage (27% now versus 28% with the
last plan), and met with city staff to discuss design options
for trail and storm water.
Mr. Menke reviewed the revised site plan, describing the
changes that have been made. At the comer of Wachtler and
T.H. 13, two units have been removed to create a greater
buffer and preserve some additional trees in that area, and
that also resulted in a reduction in the impervious surface to
27.3%. Building B was moved about 31 feet to the north and
rotated clockwise to expand the view comer for the home
owners to the south. With respect to surface water, the idea
that the project has detention in and of itself is a dramatic
improvement to the current conditions.
Councilmember Duggan stated that there was major concern
over moving Building B in relation to the site line for
homeowner five. The site line going north and west is
increased by moving B as proposed. He sees homes three
and four as having their site lines going through the middle
of the two buildings, and suggested there not be any big trees
there in order to preserve their view. He stated that the
height of the condominums last time was 48'10" and asked
what the height is now.
Mr. Menke responded that there will be low plantings in that
area. The mansard roofs reduce the building height by about
nine feet. Responding to a question from Councilmember
Schneeman regarding fill, Mr. Menke stated that the fill
areas will be generally in the center of the property and in
front of the homes and condominium buildings. The grade
will be increased anywhere from seven to ten feet to keep the
utilities above bedrock. The rear of Building B, there will be
about 10 feet of fill brought to the site. Responding to a
question from Councilmember Krebsbach, he stated that the
condominium buildings with mansard roofs will be 40'l 0"
Page 18 of 34
June 21, 2005
on top of the ten feet of fill. The Economics Lab building is
36 feet tall.
Mr. Becker stated that if the utility connection is made to the
existing utilities in T.H. 13, the buildings in the development
cannot be lower than the utilities that are serving them. The
utilities end up driving a lot of the design.
Councilmember Krebsbach asked if part of the complexity of
the project is because of bedrock and if the pond is so large
because it cannot go deeper. She also asked if the
condominiums will have underground parking and if they
would be on bedrock.
Mr. Menke responded that the pond is actually sized in a
minimal condition. The condominiums will have
underground parking. The base of the condominium will be
on bedrock, and they will dig down nominally.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that part of the reason the
buildings are so high is because they are being built on
bedrock. She stated that St. Peter's Church did not need any
variances — they built down. OPUS is malting no attempt to
go underground, but is raising the site eight feet. If the site
were not bedrock, OPUS could dig the building down.
Mr. Menke responded that they will need to do some
blasting, and there will be some ripping and removal of rock.
Mr. Tom Becker, project manager for OPUS, stated that the
bedrock is not limiting the size of the pond. There is
excavation of bedrock to get the pond in. He stated that he
met with the grading contractor, and there is quite a bit of
bedrock being excavated. The pond will be close to ten feet
deep. OPUS is bringing in the fill they are because they are
trying to achieve walk -outs for the townhouses.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that going 20 feet higher
than the building is equivalent to the four story Fairfield Inn
because OPUS is adding ten feet of fill.
Mr. Menke responded that Building A's footprint is on the
portion of the site has bedrock to a lower depth, so OPUS is
able to put seven to eight feet of the garage into the ground.
Building A will be closer to 41 feet tall.
Page 19 of 34
June 21, 2005
Mr. Becker stated that the existing grade for Building B is
much lower than the grade for Building A. Building A will
be nestled into the hill at about existing grade. That's not
possible for Building B because the existing grade is so
much lower.
Councilmember Krebsbach asked because is the fact that is
bedrock the reason why OPUS needs to get so many units.
She also asked how big an office building would be if OPUS
did offices on the site.
Mr. Menke responded that there is not really extraordinary
cost because of the bedrock. OPUS needs to maintain the
minimum density to make the project economically feasible.
The proposal is down to 112 homes now. At something less
than that, it would not be economically viable. Under the
ordinance, an office density for this site could exceed
500,000 square feet the building height could be as much as
45 feet. The current project is at 300,000 feet of density.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Krebsbach
about the office market on the site, Mr. Menke stated that the
office market is beginning to recover and the site is a campus
site setting, so a large user or two might find it attractive.
Councilmember Schneeman asked Councilmember
Krebsbach if she would really prefer large office buildings
on the site with parking ramps and loading docks.
Councilmember Duggan stated that Council does not know
that OPUS would come back with an office plan. This plan
would complete the more residential aspects of the area,
tying it in with the residential surrounding it. The industrial
area is on the other side of the city. He pointed out that
Assistant Hollister gave Council information at the last
meeting on what office development could occur on the site.
He questioned whether there is the need or demand for more
office buildings in Mendota Heights. He felt this is a quality
development and developer and there is a demand for
housing. The proposed development is attractive and
appropriate for this area.
Mayor Huber stated that he spoke with Mr. Menke during
the week about putting the two buildings together. He asked
Mr. Menke for his response.
Page 20 of 34
June 21, 2005
Mr. Menke responded that Mayor Huber asked him during
the week about connecting the buildings and moving B in an
easterly direction. His answer is that it is market driven. A
building footprint of 40,000 square feet or more would be
about twice the length of any traditional condominium
building and would not be acceptable in the market place
based on OPUS focus group meetings. OPUS would like to
continue pursuing the idea of the two smaller buildings.
Ms. Gail Sachs stated that she understands that St. Peter's
Church dynamited into the bedrock.
Councilmember Duggan responded that they did not. They
were concerned about damaging the historic church. There
is no basement under the addition.
Ms. Sachs stated that she appreciates the adjustments OPUS
has made but the offensiveness of the height is still there.
OPUS could blast the bedrock without worrying about
historic impact. -
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that this is a real departure
from how Council has guided this area. People expect
Cotmcil to take care of the bluffline.
Mr. Gary Sachs stated that from what he has heard on the
garage issue, if the garage is going to be 10 feet above the
existing grade, what will fill t hat in. The patios are at grade
level, and part of the garage will be above grade.
Mr. Menke responded that the image he showed takes into
account the raising of grades. There will need to be a slope
away from the rear of Building B, and none of the garage
will be visible.
Mr. Sachs asked if Council would want to wake up in the
morning with a 51 foot wall in their back yards. Building B
will affect two of the existing property owners, and that is
why they are trying to get it lowered or moved. Building B
will be 200 feet closer than the building.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Duggan, Mr.
Menke stated that the face of building B is about 200 feet
from homeowner 4 in Cherry Hills.
Page 21 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Duggan asked what the height of the trees
will be that OPUS will be planting to minimize the impact of
the condominiums.
Mr. Damon Farber responded that the trees that are being
added on the Schwab property will be 6 to 8 foot evergreens.
Then maples and oaks will be 8 to 10 feet in height and 2.5
inches in caliper.
Councilmember Duggan asked if OPUS will work with the
neighbors for judicious placement of the trees to soften their
view.
Mr. Farber responded that he will and also will meet with all
the neighbors and will add trees to their properties. He will
keep working with them to be sure to get the neighbors get
the best buffer they can to maximize their view. He will be
careful not to block the view between the two condominium
buildings to enhance the view of the neighbors.
Councilmember Schneeman asked if Mr. Farber will have an
arborist come in and look at what trees are worth saving.
Mr. Farber responded that he will save the quality trees on
the site and intends to save as many trees as possible.
Councilmember Krebsbach asked if the city were to consider
land rather than a cash contribution, what would that be.
Administrator Danielson responded that it would be about
2.5 acres.
Ms. Karen Sachs stated that if the two condominium
buildings were put together, they could be divided by
decorative walls to eliminate long hallways. Moving the
building 15 feet does not mean much. She stated that she is
confused about the Council's comments on keeping the city
spacious. This project is not spacious. She stated that once
the project is constructed, it will always be there and the
community will be forever changed.
Mr. Menke stated that if it is Council's desire to limit the
contribution towards a storm water fix, OPUS would request
that the cost related to the trail along Wachtler and T.H. 13
for establishing the proper grade, etc., be an offset to the
Page 22 of 34
June 21, 2005
park contribution. OPUS will figure out a way with to deal
with the storm sewer costs.
Councilmember Vitelli asked how much that would cost the
city.
Mr. Menke responded that there will be no cost to the city
for the Wachtler storm water improvement. The additional
work that is related to the trail will be done at the same time
as the Wachtler storm sewer, OPUS would use its park fees
for that. The trail would cost about $50,000.
Mayor Huber responded that the issue can be worked on in
the developer's agreement. Staff has not had a chance to
review the plan.
Attorney Schleck suggested that the city look at the exact
costs when there is an opportunity to look at them in detail.
Nothing is final until a developer's agreement is executed.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that he believes residential is
the best use for the site. He feels this is a reasonable use of
the land although that it is unfortunate that a couple of
residents will be affected.
Cotmeilmember Vitelli moved to adopt the proposed
resolution approving the proposed development.
Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she believes the
massiveness of the condominium buildings is due to building
on bedrock and that she fiirther believes this is a significant
change in the character of Mendota Heights.
Councilmember Duggan responded that Councilmember
Krebsbach approved a plan for double the density at the
Village at Mendota Heights. It is an uncomfortable situation
for the three homes that are negatively impacted by the
height of the buildings. He stated that he has not seen any
consideration for lowering the buildings or some other
compromise. He felt that the density is reasonable and that
the area will forever be changed with whatever goes on the
site. He is concerned with the height and massiveness of the
condominiuun buildings. OPUS is a good developer and he
is challenged with the view line the homes will see for the
next five years. He would have liked to have seen all
Page 23 of 34
June 21, 2005
townhomes rather than townhomes and condominiums. The
massiveness of the two buildings is still a hang-up for him,
but it is an outstanding development. He noted that Fire
Chief Maczko had expressed concern about the canopy
height and also recommended that there be no parking on
one side of the ring road.
Mr. Menke responded that the canopy height the chief
requested was in excess of 14 feet and that is probably not
achievable. He stated that he is exploring whether to
eliminate the canopies entirely. He has explored numerous
variations of site plans, and with respect to addressing the
massiveness of the buildings, the first proposal was for one
four story building a couple of months ago. The current
proposal is for two three story buildings with mansard roofs
to red-Lice their mass. He does not feel that a thirty-unit
building is a massive building.
Councilmember Duggan responded that there are homes
behind the condominiums whose owners have had serenity
for many years.
Mr. Menke stated that OPUS has accommodated
landscaping, planting trees on the homeowners' properties
along with moving the building, etc.
Councilmember Duggan asked Mr. Menke if he has explored
two story buildings rather than three story.
Mr. Menke responded that the height of the buildings gets to
density and OPUS needs 112 units in the development.
Responding to Councilmember Duggan's comments on
Town Center, Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she
spoke to take out some of the units and Council was not
amenable to that. More green space was added, and she
spoke many times to the quality of the project.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that OPUS is a quality
developer who came before Council a couple of weeks ago
and Council asked them to remedy five items. They have
remedied those items. They removed the two units that
Councilmember Krebsbach wanted removed and she is still
voting against the proposal. If he were OPUS, he would say
that he wants to put the two units back. He would let them.
Page 24 of 34
June 21, 2005
OPUS changed to mansard roofs at Council's request and did
everything else Council requested.
Mayor Huber stated that OPUS has made changes in
response to Council requests. He believes the current
buildings will not survive. There will be change. The
question is what that change will be. He thinks given where
the boundaries of the critical area are, that forces the height
back by the neighborhood.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that is something Council
could always address and Council has not explored offices.
She has thought long and hard about the development, and
she believes that the massiveness of the buildings is driven in
part by the bedrock. She questioned the appropriateness of
placing the condominiums when there is no option to dig
deeper. She stated that she has not explored the office option
yet.
Mayor Huber stated that there has to be a market. This is not
unlike the Sibley sign. That came down to the issue of
whether the city could stop the signs going elsewhere. The
central issue on this is the height/massiveness, and for him it
is more the height issue. He stated that what he is wrestling
with is whether another project would have a materially
different height. That is the unknown. If he felt confident
there would be a project coming forward materially different
in height, he would like to take a look at it. If the answer
was that they could change the height by five feet, that
would not help anyone if the city ends up with a less
desirable project. If there were not a significant difference in
height, then Council would have made the wrong decision in
denying this project. If there is a difference between height
and massiveness, he is more concerned about height than the
width.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that people have asked if
they could do multi-family at Lexington and T.H. 13.
Council needs to discuss this more as a concept and consider
the what ifs up and down Highway 13 once this type of
project comes in. This is a major change along the bluff.
Mendota allowed three units on T.H. 13 and there is no
vegetation there and it will never come back. Her two
reasons to vote against this is the height and the massiveness.
The width could be dealt with another way, but the height is
due to the bedrock. The second reason is that this will
VOTE ON MOTION:
Ayes: 2 Schneeman, Vitelli
Nays: 2 Krebsbach, Duggan
Abstain: 1 Huber
Page 25 of 34
June 21, 2005
change what happens on the bluff. It has always been single
family.
Councilmember Duggan asked if OPUS would consider
putting back the two units at Wachtler and T.H. 13 and
taking off the top floor of building B and the city could
consider contributing $80,000 of the park contribution
towards the storm sewer.
Councilmember Krebsbach asked if there is any way this
project could go if there were one condominium building.
Mr. Menke responded that OPUS did resurrect the old
concept plan. There is a threshold in the market place where
over fifteen units per floor is too big. Coming back to a four
story, 14-15 home per floor structure would need a flat roof.
That was not well received in the marketplace. OPUS has
considered it and has now come back to the compromise
solution and thinks it is the best attempt to arrive at a project
that has economics that OPUS can live with and
accommodates the needs and desires of the neighbors.
Councilmember Duggan stated that it bothers him that he
was not aware of the elevation of the additional footage
under building B. He is concerned about the massiveness of
building B. Removing the top floor would eliminate some of
the concerns of the neighbors.
Mr. Menke responded that this site plan takes into account
much greater setbacks in respect to private properties than a
standard office building would. One could put a very large
parking ramp where building B is.
Coimcilmember Duggan suggested that OPUS see what they
can do with building B to alleviate the stress for the people
behind it.
Responding to a question from Mayor Huber, Assistant
Hollister stated that he notified the applicant some weeks ago
that the application was extended 120 days, which puts this
out to August 2 before Council needs to act.
Page 26 of 34
June 21, 2005
Mayor Huber stated that his feeling is that OPUS is very
close to what is a project that he can support. He does not
mind thinking about it for two weeks.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that she lives in Cherry
Hills and does not want to see any commercial buildings on
the site. The existing traffic is twice as much to the site now
than there will be wider this project. If a commercial project
went in there, there could be a huge traffic problem. She
thinks what the neighbors have to look at now is terrible.
OPUS is so well known and so good, she wants to see
something worked out.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that there was concern
expressed about the bluff. Across the street from the site is
commercial — Diamond Jim's — which one could argue is an
eyesore. That site is probably zoned commercial. Whatever
Council's concern is over the bluff will be taken care of by
whatever Lilydale does in the next 20 years at that site.
Councilmember Duggan has asked OPUS to huddle on
different ways to do this. His argument to take out eight
units would cost $4 million. They have already removed two
townhomes. The nearby residents would like single family
homes, but the simple fact is that Ecolab is looking for the
best price for its property and it will not be single family
homes. It will be this type of development or an office
complex. wants to maximize the sale price of this land, and
it will never be maximized with 20 single family homes. He
thinks residential is the best solution for the site and that this
is a reasonable proposal from a very quality development.
He would hate to lose this opportunity to an office
development with a parking ramp that does not need any city
planning approvals. To minimize the need for critical area
permits, the buildings would be right by the homes that
Council is concerned about.
Councilmember Duggan stated that Councilmember Vitelli
raised the issue of the skyline at the last meeting. When the
photos are placed side by side to see the impact of and the
proposed building B, one does not see the horizon anymore
with the new building. He did not think that lowering
building B only and adding the two townhomes back is an
unreasonable approach except for finances.
Mayor Huber stated that his issue has always been building
B. Because of the denseness of the woods and the
Page 27 of 34
June 21, 2005
orientation of building A, it is not the same. He is not
concerned about building A and is not concerned about the
density. A willingness to keep working the issue and
spending time on it should not be viewed as a rejection of all
options. It is something he is still concerned about. The
building is going up 51 feet because of the ten feet of added
fill. He does not know how to get around that.
Councilmember Duggan agreed. The concern is to address
the concerns of the three people on Cherry Hill who have
enjoyed views that will e gone. He stated that he wants to
know what else OPUS can do.
Councilmember Vitelli asked if Council knows the history of
why the homes that back up to this have a lot of tree cover
and the Schwabs do not.
Mayor Huber stated that the issue is that a few trees will not
screen Building B.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that Mendota Heights has
always preserved the bluff. Council never voted on the Pilot
Knob project. She felt that condomini-Luns would be the best
on that site in order to leave open space for other kinds of
development. She asked staff to determine what
implications a project of this scale and multi family would
have on the undeveloped lots on the bluffs in Mendota
Heights.
Mr. Menke stated that he does not know if there can be a
conclusion this evening on what can work. OPUS made the
changes Council requested, and it is frustrating not to get a
commitment. He will have to huddle with his team and look
for some further direction from Council and staff.
Co-uncilmember Duggan moved to table discussion.
Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion.
Councilmember Vitelli asked if Council is asking OPUS to
do anything before the next meeting.
Mayor Huber stated that the height/massiveness is the issue
and he does not know what more to tell OPUS. They will
have to process that. Council will also have to think about
long range issues and what could possibly develop on this
site.
Page 28 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Duggan stated that if OPUS comes back in
two weeks with the same density and building B lowered, he
would support it. If they come back with 114 units and a
lower building, he would vote for it.
Mr. Menke responded that if OPUS solves the massiveness
issue, a greater impervious surface percentage would be
needed.
Mayor Huber responded that the building mass/density is
bothering Council and if that can be solved, Council should
consider a higher impervious surface and look at the
setbacks.
Mr. Menke stated that what he has heard from Council is the
desire to see some improvement to the massing of building
B, and to the extent that he can maintain the density, he will
huddle with his team and make some determinations.
Mayor Huber stated that he has heard many comments from
the community that they want this project.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that OPUS could move the
buildings further into the center to create more of a sense of
space outside of the development. A primary concern of
hers is the implications of this on the bluffs in Mendota
Heights and she has asked staff to respond to that. She stated
that the plan was fully developed before they came to
Council the first time.
Responding to the suggestion from Coimcilmember Duggan
that the condominium building be reduced to two stories, Mr.
Sachs suggested that OPUS remove six units from building
B and add three twin home units to replace them.
Mr. Menke reviewed the first concept plan that showed a
single condominium building. He stated that eliminating one
floor from Building B and putting in five more twin home
units may work. If that is a partial compromise the
neighbors would accept and OPUS is able to preserve
density, he can test it.
Mr. David Bergstrom, from Ecolab stated that he has been in
this process from the beginning. Ecolab feels like they have
been good neighbors and when they started this process, they
wanted to continue that by finding the group they thought
VOTE ON MOTION:
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
RECESS
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
ORDINANCE
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Page 29 of 34
June 21, 2005
was best for Mendota Heights. Ecolab had four firm offers
for the property. Ecolab did look at expanding on the site
but it did not make good economic sense. They came to the
city before talking to OPUS to get input from the city. The
city gave them some direction on what they thought might
work. It is a hard site to build on.
Mayor Huber responded that Ecolab has been a good
neighbor. Council is trying to get what is best for everyone,
and that sometimes takes time.
Mayor Huber called a recess at 11:00 p.m. The meeting was
reconvened at 11:05 p.m.
Council acknowledged a memo and proposed zoning
ordinance amendment for property maintenance from
Assistant Hollister.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that Council needs to make
sure they do not waste staff time, after this is made into an
ordinance, enforcing something that may not be enforceable
in the end.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she spoke to Code
Enforcement Officer Gill today and she thinks it is important
to la-low what the code enforcement officers think is
enforceable.
Mayor Huber stated that he is concerned about enforcement,
especially over the requirement that trash bins be kept in the
garage.
Attorney Schleck suggested that Council submit their
comments to staff for compilation and discussion by the
entire Council.
Councilmember Vitelli moved to table discussion to the next
regular meeting.
Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion.
Page 30 of 34
June 21, 2005
NEXTEL Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator
Danielson in response to a request from Nextel
Communications to increase the height of the city's radio
tower at City Hall and co-locate their antenna on it.
Administrator Danielson informed Council that staff was
recently contacted by Nextel. They have a need to improve
their service in this area and noticed that the city has an
antenna at City Hall and asked about raising that antenna.
They met with staff, and staff thinks it could be acceptable.
Mr. Larry Coleman, from FMHC on behalf of Nextel, stated
that there is a hole in the coverage from the Mendota Bridge
to where T.H. 110 intersects with 1-3 5E. He met with the
city planner and staff and discussed co-locating with the
police antenna, but that pole is not strong enough or high
enough for the Nextel equipment. Nextel would like to
replace that pole and would donate that to the city for
continued future use. One think Nextel would need prior to
going forward with construction designs is someone from the
city signing off on the site plan. That would not be binding,
but would indicate to Nextel's engineers that it is acceptable
to the city. He would then meet with the planning staff to
make sure everything complies with the codes. He proposed
that the rent be $ 1,000 per month.
Councilmember Vitelli responded that Nextel should be
thinking $3,000 per month. He does not see any benefit to
the city. The city receives $2,300 to $2,500 per month from
Nextel's competitors and $ 1,000 per month is an insult to the
city.
Mr. Coleman responded that this is a very low pole and is
not comparable to the water tower.
Councilmember Duggan asked if there will be any impact on
this antenna when the city goes to 800 MHz.
Administrator Danielson responded that the antenna is used
for the police department's internal communications, not 800
MHz. The county is looking at sighting antennas for 800
MHz.
Councilmember Vitelli asked how the city can defend $2,300
per month when lease renewals are tip on the other leases, if
Council approves $ 1,000 per month for Nextel.
Page 31 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Kxebsbach stated that one of the things she
learned at a national conference she attended was that when
firms put up poles in a city, the city should be sure they are
required by ordinance to take them down in the future so that
the city is not stuck with removal. She agreed that the city
should require $2,300 per month from Nextel.
Mr. Coleman stated that coverage from a 150 feet water
tower is worth a lot more than a 75 foot pole. He stated that
he does not have the authority to go higher than $ 1,000. He
would be happy to take it back to Nextel to see if they would
approve it or tell him to go elsewhere.
Councilmember Vitelli moved to respond to Nextel that if
they are willing to pay $2,300 per month as an absolute
minimum, Council would consider the request.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PARK IMPROVEMENTS Council acknowledged a memo from Operations and
Projects Coordinator Kullander regarding proposed play
structure improvements at Valley View Heights Park and
Mendakota Park.
Mr. Kullander informed Council that the Parks and
Recreation Commission recently looked at the projects they
would like to construct in 2006 to get them into the budget.
They reviewed two concept plans for improvements at
Mendakota and Valley View Heights parks. They propose to
purchase a space net for Mendakota Park. The equipment is
more expensive than the commission would normally look at
for the parks, but they thought it would be a real draw for the
park. For Valley View, they propose to use some of the
elements that were removed from Marie Park this year and
refurbish them and replace the existing wood timber
equipment that was installed in the park in 1988. The
estimated cost for the improvements to the two parks fits
within the amount the commission budgeted in its five year
plan. The commission is asking Council to authorize going
ahead.
Mayor Huber stated that he is okay with Valley View
Heights but he is not sure about the space net.
Page 32 of 34
June 21, 2005
Mr. Kullander responded that the space net is from the same
manufacturer as what the school district is putting in at
Somerset School. The one that is proposed is a bit larger,
costing $23,500.
Councilmember Schneeman stated that she would like the
commission and Council to take a tour of all of the parks and
trails this fall and look at the condition of everything. She
would like to wait and see how the new play structure goes
at Somerset before considering one for Mendakota Park.
She stated that she is in favor of the Valley View Heights
park improvements.
Councilmember Vitelli stated that he supports Valley View
Heights but does not support $50,000 for the space net at
Mendakota. The other concern he has is that the Mendakota
proposal displaces Ivy Hills Park, and he would prefer to
have Ivy Hills taken care of.
Councilmember Duggan asked if the city has received any
park contribution from the Village at Mendota Heights yet.
Mr. Kullander responded that all of the park contribution
will go towards ftinding improvements at Town Center.
Finance Officer Schabacker stated that the city has received
some park contributions from the Village at Mendota
Heights. They are received as the building permits are
issued, and $70,000 has been received to date. The $216,000
park contribution for the project is to be used for trails, etc.,
in Town Center.
Councilmember Duggan stated that he likes the idea of the
equipment that is being proposed for Mendakota.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would hold off
because of the cost and would like to be sure it passes the
safety test.
FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY Councilmember Duggan gave Council a brief -update on
plans for the 50"' Anniversary celebration.
COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Schneeman thanked the Mayor, Council,
city staff and commissioners for their energy and
commitment to the city's government. There have been
many major decisions to be made in the past few years and
Page 33 of 34
June 21, 2005
not one member of Council has cast a vote without a great
deal of investigation and thought. She stated that Council
works well together on the major issues and while there is
not always agreement, Council does well on consensus.
There is so much divisiveness in politics now that it is
wonderful to work so well together.
Councilmember Vitelli agreed, stating that the good thing
with this Council is that while Council members sometimes
disagree it never becomes personal.
Mayor Huber informed Council that he, Councilmember
Duggan and Administrator Danielson went to the MAC
meeting yesterday and the full MAC approved the 090
headings and now it will go to the FAA.
Councilmember Krebsbach responded that this is the first
concession MAC has made to Mendota Heights.
Mayor Huber stated that he received a call around 3:00 this
afternoon from someone at MAC who stated that Air France
is buying KLM and Northwest Airlines is looking for an
anti- trust exemption to be able to get into a global alliance.
They want Mendota Heights to support a Northwest Airlines
antitrust exemption and they need to know tomorrow. He
told them the city would not support it, and that there is no
way he would bring it to Council on three hours' notice.
Councilmember Duggan suggested that the city ask Glen
Toro to do a right turn cut from Delaware onto Huber at the
same time as the Delaware/T.H. 110 improvements are done.
He asked staff to contact the developer to ask when he has
plans to make the cut.
Councilmember Duggan informed Council that someone
contacted him to ask if the city would consider widening
Victoria Curve because of the danger related to all the traffic
to the Synagogue during the holy days and weekends and all
of the parking on the street.
City Attorney Schleck informed Council that the city was
successful and the Minnesota Supreme Court denied the
Allen appeal on the Pilot Knob site.
ADJOURN There being no further business to come before Council,
Couiicilmember Vitelli moved to adjourn the meeting.
Page 34 of 34
June 21, 2005
Councilmember Sch-neeman seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:45 p.m.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
ATTEST:
John J.
Mayor