Loading...
2003-09-16 City Council minutesPage No. 1 September 16, 2003 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF NIINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, September 16, 2003 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. hxt) 0117:y:11119 Q� 90 Ayes: 5 Nays:0 The City Council, audience and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilmember Duggan moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councihnember Duggan moved approval of the amended minutes of the regular meeting held on September 2, 2003. 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, Airport Relations Commission minutes, 6h, Wagon Wheel Trail traffic safety, 6k, Pre - Trial Diversion Agreement, 6m, park contribution formula, 60, Stoven variance, and 6p, Dakota Communities variance, to the regular agenda, along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the September 9, 2003 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department monthly report for August. Page No. 2 September 16, 2003 c. Acknowledgment of a memo regarding a change in the bid award for the engineering Ford truck from Inver Grove Ford to Superior Ford because Inver Grove Ford could not provide the agreed upon financing rebate. d. Acknowledgment of a progress report on the Wagon Wheel Trail culvert replacement project. e. Acknowledgment of probationary period completion and approval of the appointment of Richard Griep and Michelle Henne- Malkes as firefighters. f. Adoption of Resolution No. 03 -86, "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MENDOTA HEIGHTS TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH DAKOTA COUNTY FOR MUTUAL AID FIRE SERVICES." g. Approval of replacement signage for the Amoco Station at 2030 Dodd Road along with authorization for issuance of the required permits. h. Approval of a critical area permit to allow construction of a garage addition at 635 Sibley Memorial Highway, and authorization for refund of the critical area application fee. C i. Adoption of Resolution No. 03 -88, "RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, AND APPURTENANT WORK, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE BUROW POND (JOB NO. 200307, IMPROVEMENT NO. 2003, PROJECT NO. 1)." WANTJ 911 W.111 Q I 916T V 91 MCHO I I pnew 11 1 I "• I • I `1 ` k. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated September 16, 2003. 1. Approval of the List of Claims dated September 16, 2003 and totaling $317,372.33. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3 September 16, 2003 ARC MINUTES Councilmember Krebsbach asked for clarification on Ms. Green's comments in the minutes regarding the night take -off process. She asked whether there was any discussion about no flights in the evening. Administrator Lindberg stated that she will check her notes from the meeting and clarify the discussion for Council. Councilmember Duggan asked how the question/complaint form will be made available. Councilmember Vitelli responded that the form is available through the MAC and the forms are also passed out at the public meetings. If someone wants to make input, MAC will also mail the forms. Responding to a question from Councilmember Duggan, Administrator Lindberg stated that she will provide copies of the Power Point presentation to all of the Council members. Councilmember Duggan moved to acknowledged the minutes of the August 10, 2003 Airport Relations Commission meeting. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: S Nays: 0 WAGON WHEEL TRAFFIC Council acknowledged a memo from Police Chief Aschenbrener STUDY regarding traffic safety on the s -curve on Wagon Wheel Trail. Mayor Huber stated that there is no parking on the south side of Wagon Wheel in the s -curve area and there is fishing done on both sides of the road. In the memo, Chief Aschenbrener talks about the long term as to what may ultimately happen with Wagon Wheel. The chief is suggesting that Council try to address some of the safety concerns that were raised during the discussions over the culvert replacement/fishing enhancement. It was discussed that no parking be changed to the north side of the street and also that "no fishing" signs be posted on the north side. Parking would be allowed on the south side and if people obey the "no fishing" signs there would be no need to cross the street. Chief Aschenbrener stated that no parking does not start until well into the curve coming from west to east. Several options were discussed. If the roadway is improved, no parking on both sides of the street will be an issue and most likely people will park in the Page No. 4 September 16, 2003 right -of -way, which would be an improved lawn for most of the residents. The number one complaints are pedestrian safety and speed. The recommendation for no parking on the north side and posting it no- fishing should address the ability to keep people on one side of the road. He stated that he could not find any pedestrian/vehicle accidents in the area at all. Mayor Huber asked if it would make sense to keep the no parking on the south side. Chief Aschenbrener responded that he recommends allowing parking on the south side until an MSA road section is constructed there. Under his recommendation, all parking, pedestrians and fishing would be on the south side. Responding to a question from Mayor Huber, Administrator Lindberg stated that staff has contacted all four of the home owners who would be impacted by the parking ban. If Council agrees with the recommendation, staff will prepare an ordinance for the next agenda and that would allow time for the residents to respond. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the fishing along the road is causing the problems. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she likes the solution that is proposed but has had many phone calls from people who live on the north side of the road who are concerned that someone will be killed there. They feel that a walking trail is needed. Chief Aschenbrener responded that he researched whether the city could control fishing but could not find anything that would let the city ban fishing from both sides of the road. He will research it again when the road is built to MSA standards. Councihnember Vitelli stated that he thinks the recommendation is an excellent proposal. PRE -TRIAL DIVERSION Council acknowledged a memo from Police Chief Aschenbrener AGREEMENT recommending that the city enter into an agreement with the Retailers Protection Association in providing a diversion program for people who have issued a dishonored check. Councilmember Schneeman stated that the memo indicates that only misdemeanor level checks would be diverted. She asked what constitutes a misdemeanor level check. Page No. 5 September 16, 2003 Chief Aschenbrener responded that checks in the amount of $500 or less would be diverted. Everything else would be prosecuted. Councilmember Duggan moved adoption of Resolution No. 03 -87, "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MENDOTA HEIGHTS TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE RETAILER PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (RPA) FOR PRE -TRIAL DIVERSION." Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PARK DEDICATION Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Hollister regarding FEES a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission to increase the existing per -lot park dedication,fee. Mayor Huber informed the audience that Council is discussing raising the existing $1,500 per residential lot park dedication fee to $2,700 per lot. He stated that the recommended fee appears to put the city towards the high end of the cities of similar size. Shakopee's fee is in the same range and Rosemount's fee appears to be considerably higher, but all of the other cities in the LMC survey are lower. Councilmember Duggan stated that he wonders if Council could set a fee of 2 '/2 percent of the value of a new home and 10% of the market value for commercial/industrial. Mayor Huber responded that his concern with that suggestion is that someone could do a subdivision and not build on a parcel for 20 years. Councilmember Duggan stated that he does not think that $5,000 per lot would be unreasonable when he looks at what the city needs and what the value of the city is. Councilmember Krebsbach pointed out that Maple Grove charges $2,600 per unit and Brooklyn park charges $2,700 per lot. Mayor Huber stated that he would not agree to a $5,000 per lot fee because he feels that would be way too much. Councilmember Schneeman agreed and asked why there is any reason why Council could not raise the fee in the future if the fee is raised now. Page No. 6 September 16, 2003 Assistant Hollister responded that Council could raise the fee to $2,000 now and raise it again a year from now if it desires. j Responding to a question from Councilmember Vitelli, he stated that park dedication fees are used to help pay for capitol improvements to the park system and are collected at the time of subdivision. The park dedication requirement applies to Town Center as well. He stated that the city took the position some time ago that Town Center would contribute the ponds and land. Also, the Town Center platting process is done, so a change in the policy would not apply. Councilmember Vitelli asked how many lots are there yet to be platted in the city. Assistant Hollister responded that the city is involved in litigation now with a substantial land owner and that could be a considerable number of lots. There is also the property currently under EAW consideration. He stated that if Council raises the fee tonight, the developer would likely argue that he applied under the old fee and the city should adhere to that. Otherwise, not many new lots are crated in the city. He could envision one or two new lots a year because infill is sporadic. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that lots in the city used to be much less expensive. The value of the lots has increased considerably but the city has not increased the park fee. Lots sell for well in excess of $100,000. The value of property has increased so much that she did not think increasing the fee would be onerous. She felt that $2,700 per lot would be in keeping with several other communities. Councilmember Duggan stated that industrial properties are charged a fee of 10% of market value. As values increase, a $2,700 per lot fee is small. The Parks and Recreation Commission has many projects planned that the city does not have money to fund. He stated that upgrades and expansions of parks is funded by everyone in the city. Mayor Huber stated that he will vote against the recommendation. He would have to convince himself that the Council two years ago was off by about 100% when it increased the fee to $1,500 per lot and it seems to him that $2,700 is on the high end of fees charged by cities of a similar size. Councilmember Schneeman also felt that $2,700 is high and stated that she will not vote for it. She could agree to a $2,000 per lot fee. Page No. 7 September 16, 2003 She pointed out that Council does not know what land values are in the other cities in the survey, so Council does not know what those cities are charging. Councilmember Duggan moved adoption of Resolution No. 03 -89, "RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 91-94, ESTABLISHING A PARK CONTRIBUTION FORMULA." Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 2 Huber /Schneeman CASE NO. 03 -43, STOVEN Council acknowledged a memo and proposed resolution of denial (as directed by Council on September 2) with respect to an application from Mr. Dan Stoven for a size variance for a garage addition at 825 Bluebill Drive. Councilmember Duggan stated that the resolution states that the structure is out of character with the neighborhood, but he feels it should state that the proposed addition is out of character. Councilmember Duggan moved adoption of Resolution No. 03 -91, "A RESOLUTION DENYING A SIZE VARIANCE FOR A GARAGE ADDITION AT 825 BLUEBILL DRIVE" as amended. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 03-45, DAKOTA Council acknowledged a memo and proposed resolution (as directed COMMUNITIES by Council on September 2) from Assistant Hollister with respect to an application from Dakota Communities for a setback variance for a dumpster enclosure at 2031 Victoria Road. Councilmember Duggan asked whether the resolution should stated that it is understood that the enclosure is for two dumpsters. The discussion on September 2was that there were three dumpsters but the enclosure is for two dumpsters. Councilmember Schneeman stated that if Dakota Communities wants to enclose more than two dumpsters they would have to come back to Council. She pointed out that two of the dumpsters on the property belong to Dakota Communities and the other belongs to Royal Redeemer. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 8 September 16, 2003 Assistant Hollister stated that Dakota Communities is looking for an enclosure around the two dumpsters they own. He stated that he will amend the resolution language. Councilmember Duggan moved adoption of Resolution No. 03 -92, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AT 2031 VICTORIA ROAD" as amended. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a memo and proposed bid award resolution from Engineer Mogan regarding for the Burow Pond improvements. Mayor Huber informed the audience that only one bid was received. Engineer Mogan indicated that the bid is slightly lower than the engineer's estimate and that it appears to be reasonable. Councilmember Schneeman pointed out that Engineer Mogan stated in the memo that he checked with other communities about the contractor, Gartzke Construction, and received favorable reviews. Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of Resolution No. 03- 93, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND RELATED WORK TO SERVE BUROW POND (JOB NO. 200307, IMPROVEMENT NO. 2003, PROJECT NO. 1.)," awarding the contract to Gartzke Construction, Inc. for its bid of $37,117. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. HEARING: FREEWAY Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing ROAD AREA ASSESSMENTS on proposed assessments for the Freeway Road neighborhood street reconstruction improvements. Mayor Huber asked for questions and comments from the audience. Ms. Jennifer Otto, 1954 South Lane, stated that she has been in favor of the Town Center development and everything and that she loves the new development. She has two issues that have to do with the quality of the work being done. First, the lack of notification when she could not use her road. She had over $500 in car repairs due to the condition of the roads. The were not properly marked and she Page No. 9 September 16, 2003 was not notified. Secondly, her property has had to take the most filing of any property. The drainage ditch has been filled in twice. There were four foot ditches. She is glad to see they have been filled in but disappointed with city engineering because they did not check the quality of the fill that was put in. It was full of clay and asphalt chunks. She stated that the called the PCA and spoke to Ms. Katie Culkin and was told that putting asphalt in a ditch is not appropriate fill in a yard. It will not grow grass, trees or flowers. She stated that she has 88 feet of fill and some of it goes back fifteen feet. She sent a two page letter to the city and had people come out and talk to her from the city. The PCA person said she called the city and they agreed the fill would be taken out. She stated that she only saw one load of fill go in. The area is to be sodded tomorrow and it is filled with chunks of asphalt plus clay soil — there is no top soil. She stated that the city engineer and a city inspector came out with employees of the contractor and they are not responding. She has not received anything in writing. The rocks in the fill are huge in addition to the asphalt. The contractor will put sod down tomorrow but she will be responsible for it. She stated that she needs to deal with this in some way and that she will pay for the work that is done but does not want the quality of the fill that was taken out to be replaced with what has been used. Ms. Otto showed Council some pieces of asphalt that were in the fill. Mayor Huber recused himself from the discussion because Ms. Culkin is his niece and he does not want there to be any question about how Council is proceeding. Acting Mayor Krebsbach asked if there are any other residents who want to comment on the fill. Ms. Lori Dempsey, 1958 Knob Road, stated that there are a lot of rocks in the fill and her property is now where near the point of getting sod yet. Engineer Mogan stated that the city owns a sixty foot right -of -way and roughly thirteen feet behind the curb is within the city right -of- way. He stated that he is not sure the contractor is ready to lay sod on South Lane but part of the specification is that the contractor is supposed to till the subgrade and remove all rocks that are on the surface that are two inches or larger. That is typical in the industry as far as sodding goes. Acting Mayor Krebsbach asked about the bituminous chunks. Page No. 10 September 16, 2003 Mr. Mogan responded that the sod people say that the root structure is for grass is no greater than six inches. The general contractor did the boulevard restoration and the sod people place the sod. Acting Mayor Krebsbach stated that it seems to her that as long as Ms. Otto has that extensive area of fill, the general contractor should be brought back in to look at the fill. She asked how much fill there is. Mr. Mogan responded about four inches. Acting Mayor Krebsbach stated that there should be at least six inches of soil free of the large rocks and the bituminous should not be there. She asked Engineer Mogan if he can get the contractor to remedy that. Engineer Mogan responded that he will do that. Responding to a question from Councilmember Vitelli, Engineer Mogan stated that the boulevard is city properly and what is typically done is the standard of the industry, which is six inches of topsoil. He did not think the city should spend additional money to do what is not typically done. I Administrator Lindberg asked whether it would be acceptable even in terms of the MPCA standard to have some asphalt mixed in with the soil. It would be impossible to get all of it out, but the pieces of asphalt Ms. Otto showed are much larger. Acting Mayor Krebsbach stated that even though the city owns the right -of -way in the boulevard, the city will try to do the best it can for the residents and should specify exactly what will be done. Engineer Mogan stated that he will meet with the property owner and have the contractor remove anything that is found that is not acceptable for grass and replace it with acceptable soil. The contractor will get rid of the rocks to meet the criteria for top soil and put the top soil back down. The soil that was put down came from the project area. Councilmember Vitelli stating that starting tomorrow staff will have the contractor remove all of the fill because it is so full of bituminous and then have it replaced with fill that does not have any bituminous. There will be rocks some rocks, but appropriate top soil will be put down. Page No. 11 September 16, 2003 Engineer Mogan stated that what he found out there is perfectly fine for grass — it came out of the boulevard area. Councilmember Duggan asked what oversight the city uses and if the city inspectors can go out and look at the area to see if grass is growing next spring. Engineer Mogan responded that the area can be prepare the area for sod and the best thing that can be done is after the fill is placed and before the sod goes down, the fill can be tilled to get rid of all the rocks that are large enough to create problems and then lay the sod. Councilmember Duggan asked if other properties will be looked at as well as the Otto and Dempsey properties. Engineer Mogan responded that as the area is tilled up, he will look at what is tilled up to determine what is there. He stated that under the contract, the sod contractor is responsible to water the sod for thirty days and after that it is up to the homeowners. If staff sees that the sod has not rooted in thirty days, it is a problem the contractor will have to correct. He stated that part of the reason the sod has not been placed yet is because it has been so dry. Acting Mayor Krebsbach stated that Council is aware that there is one neighborhood that had lots of problems with sod after street reconstruction. She stated that Engineer Mogan should do everything he can to address the problems now. Ms. Otto stated that right now she does not have a lot of confidence in city engineering. The contractor is tamping down the boulevards now and the soil that was placed would ruin a rototiller. She did not believe tilling will be done. She stated that she argued with Engineer Mogan about asphalt and he said it was fine. The contractor also damaged her elm tree. She stated that she is not feeling good about the city engineering right now. Acting Mayor Krebsbach responded that the City Administrator is to be sure that everything happens as promised. Administrator Lindberg asked if the city can have a report from the general contractor sent to the two people who have raised concerns tonight, and she would also like Ms. Otto to let her know. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she would also like to be advised by email from the Administrator. Page No. 12 September 16, 2003 Mr. Bob Kreuser, 693 South Lane, asked why the second coat of blacktop will not be done until next June or July. He asked why the property owners have to pay up front. Public Works Director Danielson stated that a second lift is normally done after winter to allow setline. The project is being assessed now in order to save a year of interest and save money on the project for the property owners. The city pays the contractor as he does the work. The majority of the contract has been paid, and there is very little work left. The city borrowed the money to pay for the work. Acting Mayor Krebsbach stated that property owners have the right to put the assessment on their property taxes so that they do not have to pay the full amount now. Mr. Kreuser stated that the property owners should not have to pay until next June after the second lift. Councilmember Duggan stated that the residents can pay the assessment in full within thirty days without interest. Otherwise, the first payment will be with property taxes in May and October, which is after the second lift. Mr. Kreuser stated that all of the neighborhood streets were widened to 33 feet. He asked why the streets in Town Center were not built to city code. Acting Mayor Krebsbach responded that Town Center is a PUD and Council went through it in terms of green space and impervious surface. Where the streets are narrow, Council determined it was necessary for the village look. There are many neighborhoods were the city ahs narrowed the streets from 33 feet at the request of neighborhoods. She did not recall anyone in the Freeway road area asking that the streets be narrowed. Councilmember Schneeman stated that the narrower streets also help control traffic. Mr. Kreuser stated that he also noticed that all of a sudden there is no parking on one side of the street on the frontage road or Freeway Road as they come into Town Center. Page No. 13 September 16, 2003 Acting Mayor Krebsbach responded that part of that might be so that parking does not spill over from Town Center. The neighborhood also did not want a trail extension on the frontage road. Ms. Maureen Behm, 673 Highway 110, stated that on the frontage road west of South Lane there is no parking on either side. Engineer Mogan responded that a street must be a certain width to meet MSA standards. If it is not that wide, it must be posted no parking. That was not explicitly stated, but he thinks the city needs to take a wait and see approach until after the development is in place for awhile. There can't be parking on one side of the frontage road within MSA guidelines because the pavement is only 26 feet wide. The street was restored to its original width because there wasn't much room to expand it. Administrator Lindberg stated that staff will look at the final plat and MSA standards and bring the matter back next meeting to discuss what can and cannot be done. Ms. Behm stated that she is wondering about the assessment price. She stated that her property already had curb and her main benefit is i ) that she got a street with no parking. Acting Mayor Krebsbach responded that it has been the policy that each lot is assessed the same amount for reconstruction projects. Engineer Mogan stated that in this project, all of the pavement was replaced rather than just an overlay. Attorney Schleck stated that the theory behind special assessments is that the improvement as a whole benefits all the properties. The idea is that the improvement to the neighborhood benefits everyone who lives along the street equally whether they have curb or not. It is difficult sometimes to equate this to an individual home owner. There are people who do not live on the street but benefit from it, and that is part of the reason the city pays for part of the project. Mr. Tom Norman, 674 South Freeway Road, stated that he would give the contractor a "c" for the project, but it is done. He would give the city staff he has dealt with a "b +." They were very helpful any time he had any questions and the water runs down his street now. He expressed appreciation to Council and the engineering staff. Page No. 14 September 16, 2003 Ms. Mary Stich, 667 South Freeway, stated that the construction was a lot better than the last time it was constructed. There were times this project got kind of bad, but it has to. The patch in her drive looks much better but the concrete does not connect. She stated that her concern is whether she will have a lake up to her driveway when it rains hard. She stated that she has a Norway Pine tree an the roots were exposed and the city has assured her that if it dies it will be removed. Engineer Mogan was directed to look at the part of the cement in the Stich driveway that does not connect. Ms. Michelle Towle, 636 South Freeway, stated that she thinks the contractor did a very nice job and she has no complaints. Everyone was very accommodating to all of the residents and she now has a very nice rock garden. She stated that she has a concern on the corner of South Lane and South Freeway. When the street was leveled, it changed the terrain of her properly. They used to have a lake in the front on South Freeway and now she will have on South Lane because the road has been raised. She stated that Engineer Mogan assured her that will be remedied somehow. Mr. Dan Norman, 1937 South Lane, stated that he has talked to three or four neighbors, and the contractor were already there at 5:30 raking. One of the neighbors told him that the contractor was going to start to sod tomorrow. He asked who will say what gets sod and what does not. One of the workers told him that there would be sod to the corner and beyond that there would be seed. Engineer Mogan stated that the question is whether it can be watered reasonably in that area, which was not a maintained yard. If Mr. Norman wants sod, the contractor will lay sod, but in some areas that are hard to reach with water, there has been better success with seed. Ms. Betty Anfmson, 1946 South Lane, stated that the other side of her culvert was not filled in and the main drain will take lots of water. She and her husband are concerned about whether the drain will handle the water. She stated that last spring there was a river in her back yard. Engineer Mogan responded that the situation is that the lot drainage is lower than the street elevation so it could not get proper drainage, so an inlet was installed to take the water to the storm sewer and that should take care of the problem. Page No. 15 September 16, 2003 Mr. Tom Towle, 636 South Freeway, stated that with the new surface on South Lane, the speeds people are driving is very fast. He asked if there is a way to get a stop sign or some other remedy. Acting Mayor Krebsbach stated that Council will refer the matter to the police department. Chief Aschenbrener responded that he believes the matter has already been addressed. Mr. Kreuser asked why the street that comes straight through from South Freeway to North Freeway isn't to code width. Engineer Mogan responded that what is different about the Town Center area is that the streets area narrower because they have sidewalks. It is a question of whether having sidewalks or wider sections so that people must use the street to walk on. There will be sidewalks on the west side of Oak Street in Town Center. Mr. Kreuser suggested that the mailboxes on Dodd all be moved to the other side of the street so that people do not have to cross Dodd to get their mail. He stated that he spoke to the mail delivery and was told that the mailboxes could be moved. Councilmember Duggan stated that the language in the first paragraph of the second page of the proposed resolution is difficult to understand. Attorney Schleck suggested amending the language to say that interest on the outstanding balance commences thirty days from the date of assessment adoption. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Duggan moved to close the hearing. Councihnember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 03- 94, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE FREEWAY ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT AND SURROUNDING AREA IMPROVEMENTS (IMPROVEMENT NO. 2002, PROJECT NO. 1)" as amended. Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Page No. 16 September 16, 2003 Nays: 0 HEARING: HOST APPROVAL Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on a request from Group Health Plan Inc. for city host approval on the issuance of Health Facilities Revenue Bonds. Council acknowledged a memo from Finance Director Schabacker along with a proposed resolution. Ms. Mary Durseth, from Briggs & Morgan, was present for the discussion on behalf of Group Health. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ST. PAUL WATER AGREEMENT 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 Schneeman seconded the motion. Councilmember Vitelli moved adoption of Resolution No. 03 -95, "RESOLUTION GIVING HOST APPROVAL TO THE ISSUANCE OF HEALTH CARE FACILITIES REVENUE BONDS SERIES 2003 (GROUP HEALTH PLAN, INC. PROJECT)." Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Lindberg regarding the status of the St. Paul Water agreement. Mayor Huber informed the audience that Council has been looking at the process of negotiating a change from the existing retail style agreement to a different retail style agreement. Council and staff have been working on it since February as has Bernie Bullert from St. Paul Water and his staff. It has been a very long but good process. Two weeks ago an agreement was circulated that outlined where the process was and a copy of unresolved issues including how the city gets out of the agreement if Council chooses to and where the city would go from there. The current agreement contains a clause that defines a process to begin negotiations to go to a wholesale agreement in 2010. Councilmember Duggan stated that he does not believe he recalls a clause in the 1976 agreement or the 1995 agreement. He felt the contract has been a continuing contract and stated that he has not seen a clause that the city must wait until 2010 to go to wholesale. i Page No. 17 September 16, 2003 Administrator Lindberg responded that the issue has been discussed (' ) with Mr. Bullert, and St. Paul Water is of the opinion the city is not able to go to wholesale until 2010. They are reading the agreement the same way Mayor Huber and the city staff read it. Attorney Schleck stated that Section 9 of the existing agreement states that a conversion to wholesale cannot take place for fifteen years from the date of commencement of the contract. He reads that to state that it shall not take place until fifteen years from the contract commencement which was in 1995. Councilmember Duggan stated that when one moves from contract A to contract B, he thinks the case can be strongly argued that the city can go back to 1962 or 1976 or start now because it is fifteen years older. He suggested that Council take that approach and put the onus on St. Paul to tell Mendota Heights it can do that legally and see how they might respond. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that Councilmember Duggan is wondering if the first negotiation with St. Paul is the over - riding contract, not the 1995 contract. She asked whether the city can ask St. Paul Water that question. She stated that Council is deciding tonight to ask in effect that the city be allowed to go to wholesale water before 2010. Mayor Huber responded that he is not the city attorney but that he does not see how Council could take a date from an entirely separate agreement and say it applies to this contract. The 1962 agreement had an automatic renewal, but the current contract was agreed to in 1995 and it clearly states that wholesale cannot take place for 15 years from the date of the contract. Councilmember Vitelli stated that Council is wasting too much time on the issue. What is being proposed is that Council ask St. Paul Water what its understanding is. Council should ask them if there is a problem. Mayor Huber responded that he is just trying to explain to the community where Council is at on the water agreement. The city entered into a memorandum of understanding earlier this year and staff, Council and St. Paul Water and its staff have been working on agreement for the past eight months. Negotiations got to a point a week and a half ago where Mendota Heights wants to include in the new agreement the same wording that was in Section 9 of the agreement the city is currently operating under. The reason that is Page No. 18 September 16, 2003 important is that while at one point it seemed that the parties were getting close on how the city could accept the proposed agreement, what was not clearly stated in that agreement but is clearly stated in the existing agreement is what the city can do. Mendota Heights does not have a neighboring city to get water from and the city is not going to start digging wells If St. Paul lets Mendota Heights out of the agreement but does not phrase in the new agreement how to get to a wholesale agreement, where would Mendota Heights get the water from. The existing agreement is a 20 year agreement. He asked Mr. Bullert to put the clause into the new agreement that was being negotiated and St. Paul Water declined. Mendota Heights must have that clause in the agreement. It is a very important clause that gives the city the avenue to negotiate wholesale water under the agreement. When St. Paul declined to put that wording in, he told them he cannot recommend the agreement to Council. The negotiations on the new agreement have ceased. The second issue he discussed with Mr. Bullert was whether St. Paul would consider opening negotiations for going to wholesale prior to the term of the agreement that is in effect. Before Council tonight is a letter to Mr. Bullert requesting whether St. Paul would consider negotiating a wholesale style agreement before 2010. If they come back in the affirmative, he would recommend that the city engage a consultant to study that option. If they come back in the negative, there would be no point in retaining a consultant at this time. He stated that he thinks what Council should let the MOU and negotiations end and send the letter requesting whether St. Paul would be open to negotiations on a wholesale water agreement. Councihnember Vitelli agreed, stating that the Council should make sure that the city has an opinion from the St. Paul Water Utility Board rather than from Mr. Bullert. He stated that Mr. Bullert lead the city to believe that there was an exit clause. Councihnember Schneeman moved to authorize City Administrator to transmit the letter to Mr. Bullert and the SPWRS Board of Water Commissioners to ask whether SPRWS would consider allowing the city to convert to wholesale prior to 2010. Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Huber stated that Council started the process because Mendota Heights residents are spending a lot of money on water and Council tried to save them that $200,000 per year. Council aggressively tried to get something to happen, but to accept the -- - agreement without the wholesale water clause would be trading a Page No. 19 September 16, 2003 contract that is not in the best interest of the residents for another one that is not in their best interest. Councilmember Schneeman stated that this has been a very difficult situation but Council has learned a lot. She complimented Mayor Huber and the city staff on their efforts. RUBBISH ORDINANCE Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Hollister regarding a request from Waste Management for an amendment to the rubbish ordinance to allow every other week recycling pickup. Council also acknowledged a letter from Waste Management. Ms. Jennefer Klennert and Mr. Gary Boyen were present on behalf of Waste Management. Assistant Hollister stated that Waste management is asking the city for an ordinance amendment to accommodate a new system they are going two. Every Mendota Heights resident has a choice of which hauler they want to use and there are twelve licensed haulers in Mendota Heights. The ordinance requires all haulers to pick up recyclables once a week. Waste Management is asking for an amendment to allow for the process of every two week collection for a one sort system. All recyclables can be dumped into a single 64 gallon cart rather than being separated into bags and placed in an 18 gallon bin. . Mr. Boyen stated that in February, 2002 Waste Management built a new facility in Minneapolis and purchased $8.5 million of hauling equipment that allows Waste Management to use the single sort system. The single sort system is easier for the home owner and gives them three times the capacity of the 18 gallon bins. Acceptance of the system has been phenomenal. Attorney Schleck recused himself from the discussion because he was previously employed by Waste Management for ten years. Councilmember Schneeman asked if there are other rubbish haulers who use the system and whether Waste Management is a franchise in Minnesota or managed somewhere else. Ms. Klennert responded that the management company is in Houston but all the managers are local. Councilmember Vitelli asked whether residents would receive the container free. Page No. 20 September 16, 2003 Ms. Klennert responded that it is included in the recycling fee. They can use the for old bin for storage or however they choose. If it is the property of the city, Waste Management requires that they keep it with their home. If Waste Management provided the old bin, they will pick it up. Councihnember Krebsbach stated that if Council amends the ordinance, the people would gave to go every other week with one bin for everything. Having it sit around for two weeks rather than having the recyclables taken at the same time as the trash could be a sanitation issue. Ms. Klennert responded that as long as it is cleaned out sanitation is not an issue, and it has not been a problem. Councih- ember Duggan was concerned about the impact of this on other recyclers in the city and asked if the ordinance has to say that those who prefer weekly recycling can still do it. Administrator Lindberg responded that the ordinance would just be amended to allow the twice a month pick up in addition to once a week. The haulers who want to stay once a week can do so. Councilmember Krebsbach felt that weekly pick up is important in terms of sanitation. Mr. Dave Stewart, from Highland Sanitation, stated that overall, single sort is a good program but a lot must be done. He takes his recyclables to a center that does not accept single source at this time. Approving the request would create an unfair playing field. There is also a possibility in the near future that everything (trash and recyclables) can go in one container. Councilmember Schneeman asked Mr. Stewart if he feels this would be a financial drain to his business. Mr. Stewart responded that he is trying to compete with someone who can go every other week and that is a savings on trucks and employees. There is no waste in source separation, but there is waste in what Waste Management is proposing. Councilmember Duggan asked Mr. Stewart if he has any sense from other independents that are looking forward to this system. Page No. 21 September 16, 2003 Mr. Stewart responded that it is a better way to handle the recyclables, but there is a pilot program in Australia that is doing a single source process. There are two other types of systems coming on line in less than two years. Mayor Huber asked if Burnsville is the only city in Dakota County that has adopted an ordinance amendment. Mr. Boyen responded that Hastings has also adopted one. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he supports the proposal — it is a change in direction and he thinks people would like it. Councilmember Krebsbach suggested that Council hold a public hearing. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she loves the idea but there are local haulers and she hates to put the onus on them and see their businesses depleted. She did not want to create an unfair playing field for the other haulers. Mr. Stewart responded that to some of the haulers it would probably not be too bad but to some of them it could result in an $80,000 to $90,000 loss. Councilmember Duggan asked if there is an analysis of savings in health benefits to companies that use the new system. Mr. Stewart responded that he would be paying $200,000 a truck versus $100,000 a truck. He cannot see how that many haulers are going to change. There will be some who won't want to change, but a company as large as Waste Management would have an advantage over the little companies. Mayor Huber stated that he would lean towards waiting six months to a year to see where the industry seems to be heading. Staff was directed to prepare ordinance language for a future public hearing. RECESS Mayor Huber called a recess at 9:50 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:55 p.m. Page No. 22 September 16, 2003 EAW — THE BLUFFS Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Lindberg regarding the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for "The Bluffs." Administrator Lindberg stated that Mr. Ron Clark has submitted an EAW and the city's consultant, Colin Brownlow from Barr Engineering, has submitted a letter that in his opinion the EAW is complete. The question Council must consider tonight is whether the EAW is complete. If Council determines it is complete, the city will publish in the document in the next EQB Monitor on September 29 and then a 30 day period of public comments is required. The city must respond in writing to each of the written comments and has 30 days from the end of the public comment period to make a decision. Mayor Huber asked if there is a timeframe for the city to respond to the comments. Administrator Lindberg responded that the city must respond in a timely manner prior to the final decision. Mr. Brownlow has been retained to assist the city in responding to the public comments. Council must make a decision on this matter by November 18, which is the last Council meeting prior to the end of the sixty day period. Attorney Schleck stated that given a normal Council meeting schedule, there are about 48 days because there is a 30 day public comment period and Council must make a decision before the end of the 60 days. Council could choose to conduct a special session. Unless a special session is called, that means Council has 18 days after the end of the comment period to respond to the comments. He felt it is important to clarify what Council is looking at tonight. Given the procedures set by statute and rules, the purpose tonight is not to decide on the merits of the responses to the EAW but rather to determine whether the EAW is complete. He stated that everyone will have an opportunity to submit comments during the 30 day period and they can even begin submitting them now. The question is not the quality of the answers in the EAW, but whether all the questions were answered. Councilmember Vitelli stated that absent a decision to have a special meeting, Council needs to make a decision on this development proposal. Attorney Schleck responded that what Council must decide is whether or not the development has a potential for significant Page No. 23 September 16, 2003 environmental effects. That is not necessarily the same as voting up or down on the development. Mayor Huber asked if Council were to decide that the project does have the potential for significant effect, where does it go. Attorney Schleck responded that council could decide that the project requires an EIS. That is a much more detailed review of the actual significant environmental effects. All Council is deciding with respect to the EAW is whether there is a potential for significant effects. Council could decide after the EAW that there will be significant environmental effects and simply order mitigation. The other thing Council cold decide is that there is no potential for significant environmental effects and the procedure would be over, keeping in mind that parties have the right to appeal to district court. Administrator Lindberg stated that if Council determines there is no potential for significant environmental effects, that does not mean the project is automatically approved. The developer has not received approval pending the EAW and would have to go through all of the normal approvals. Mayor Huber stated that if Council determines there is no potential for significant environmental effects, Council would have to make sure to clearly think through what starts the planning clock ticking again. Depending on the decision that is made on November 18, that will trigger the process to begin again. Councilmember Vitelli stated that the document Council received has a description of the proposed development. He asked how Council looks upon that inclusion as to the question later on of whether there is merit to the development. If someone were proposing a historical building and a heritage center Council might have a different conclusion on whether there is an issue or not. He asked how important the layout document of the development is as Council goes through the months of October and November to determine whether there is a need for an EIS. He stated that if it was a park, Council might consider there is no need for an EIS. If it were a fifty unit condominium Council might find there is the need for an EIS. Attorney Schleck stated that Councilmember Vitelli's question is as Council goes through the development proposal sometimes there are minor or major changes to a plan to accommodate issues other that Page No. 24 September 16, 2003 significant environmental effects. There is a provision in the rules that says the Responsible Government Unit shall make a decision with respect to substantially similar projects as to the completeness of an EAW. It is up to Council do decide whether a plan is similar enough to not require additional study. Councilmember Duggan stated that Council had an initial draft EAW and Barr told Council they did not answer questions complete and one of those questions was that documentation on the project was not complete. Councilmember Schneeman stated that when all the responses come in staff will compile them. She asked how the questions will be answered and whether there will be a special meeting. Administrator Lindberg responded that if Council determines the EAW is compete, she would suggest that anyone who would like to submit comments submit them in writing addressed to her as the City Administrator and they will be included as part of the public record. Dependent on the number of comments received, staff will be submitting them to the city's consultant for help and will also copy them to Council. Attorney Schleck suggested that staff and the consultant prepare the responses and submit them to Council for approval and then send them out. Mayor Huber stated that the city has a letter from Mr. Brownlow stating that the EAW is complete. If Council concurs with that, it should pass a resolution stating such. Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of Resolution No. 03- 96, "A RESOLUTION DETERMINING A SUBMISSION OF A COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS "THE BLUFFS," IN THE VICINITY OF THE NORTH END OF PILOT KNOB ROAD, PLANNING CASE 02- 50." Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CABLE EQUIPMENT Council acknowledged a memo from Building Manager Kullander regarding proposed modifications to the city's cable casting equipment. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 WENTWORTH PARK TENNIS COURT FENCING Page No. 25 September 16, 2003 Mayor Huber stated that some of the equipment will be funded through the cable commission and some by the city. Mr. Kullander responded that the city's portion of the cost will be financed by the fund that was created to hold the city's portion of the cable franchise fees. Councilmember Duggan stated that the biggest concern was the plasma display versus a 27 inch television monitor. A regular monitor would extend out 24 inches form the wall versus 6 inches for plasma. He recommended that Council seriously consider the plasma display. Mr. Kullander stated that when the building was designed, two locations were wired for television monitors, and purchase of those monitors was included in this proposal. One is in the lobby and the other is in the large conference room. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he fully supports the proposal and believes the upgrades are badly needed. The audio visual system is very old and it is terrible. He felt Council should approve the $18,000 expenditure, and if there are additional issues, staff should come back to Council. Mr. Kullander stated that he has some general guesses from NDC4 regarding costs, and that is what he has been working with. He included a 20% contingency in case they were wrong and more money is needed. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he thinks Council should approve the $18,000 and if it looks like it would cost significantly more, staff should come back. Councilmember Vitelli moved to authorize staff to coordinate and finalize plans with NDC4 and to issue purchase orders for the work or equipment necessary to complete the proposed changes, in an amount not to exceed $18,000. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a memo from Parks Project Manager Kullander regarding the replacement of the tennis court fencing at Wentworth Park. Page No. 26 September 16, 2003 Councilmember Schneeman stated that she looked at the fencing and thinks it really needs to be replaced and the recommendation is good. The fencing is 30 years old and is rusty. Councilmember Schneeman moved to authorize the issuance of a purchase order to Dermco- LaVine construction in the amount of $4,457.60 to replace the fencing at the Wentworth Park tennis court. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 COMPUTER UPGRADES Council acknowledged a memo from the Police Chief and City Clerk regarding the need for computer network re- design and recommending retention of a consultant to prepare an RFP. Councilmember Vitelli stated that the network system and email have been down a lot and upgrades are needed. He recommended increasing the maximum cost for consultant preparation of an RFP to $3,500. Councilmember Vitelli moved to authorize staff to request proposals for a consultant to review the existing network architecture and design a new system, for a cost not to exceed $3,500. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE Council acknowledged a memo and proposed revised Critical Area Ordinance from Assistant Hollister. Councilmember Krebsbach felt that the proposed ordinance is too onerous and asked whether it is a standard ordinance sent to the city by the DNR. Assistant Hollister responded that what the city planner has done is take the existing ordinance and input much of the language recommended by the DNR, which has review authority over the city's ordinance. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would like to table the matter and get the old ordinance to compare the new one to. She stated that the new ordinance is getting into fees to cover the cost of planning, staff, etc._ C Page No. 27 September 16, 2003 Councilmember Duggan stated that the new ordinance is not much different from the existing ordinance other than making the ordinance conform with the comprehensive plan. Councilmember Krebsbach asked what would happen if Council denies the ordinance revision. Attorney Schleck responded that to some extent Council's hands are tied. Council is required by statute to make the critical area ordinance conform to DNR requirements. Planner Grittman has done a good job of trying to do that and still allow the city to be as flexible as possible. If it is denied, the DNR will probably come to the city and ask why it is not complying with statute. They would have the right to sue the city for non - compliance. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that more than the bluff line is affected. She would like to compare the proposed ordinance to the existing one and have the discussion earlier on an agenda. She did not think people have read it. Councilmember Vitelli stated that based on comments tonight and at -� the last meeting, Council can talk about this as much as it wants and would be just wasting time. Councilmember Schneeman agreed, stating that Council should act on it tonight. That will give the city something definite to go on and to tell people. Administrator Lindberg stated that the proposed critical area ordinance has also been on the city's web site for people to review and there was also an article in the last newsletter. Councilmember Duggan stated that he has a concern on the documentation Council received from staff dated May 29 under definitions, where it talks about clear cutting substantially all trees. He asked what percentage that would be. He stated that the word "substantially" bothers him. If there is no idea of what was there, Council could be challenged by the issue — it would be up to the home owner and the people next to him and across from him. He asked whether the definition could be changed to 75% perhaps. Attorney Schleck responded that this is a perfect example of what he was talking about. Mr. Grittman has made a good effort to allow Council to make those decisions without restricting the definition to Page No. 28 September 16, 2003 the number of trees or percentage or diameter. If, in the opinion of the DNR it is clear cutting, that would violate state law and they would step in. Mr. Grittman has tried to leave Council some flexibility. He stated that he likes the word "substantially" because it does leave flexibility to Council. Councihnember Krebsbach stated that there is a lot in the fee4s, etc., and she would like to table the matter for two weeks and place it early on the agenda. Councilmember Vitelli stated that Council can start to nit pick the document and deny it, but Council is dealing with the DNR and Metropolitan Council and the city has submitted an application to the Metropolitan Council for $850,000 for funding for Town Center and needs cooperation from the DNR all the time. Councih ember Krebsbach stated that she wants to analyze the ordinance and compare it to the existing. Before she would approve it, she wants to analyze it more closely. Councilmember Duggan stated that on page six of the ordinance, which speaks to historical structures, he did not think that was applied to St. Peter's Church. Mayor Huber responded that he is willing to wait two weeks but asked that everyone get their comments to Administrator Lindberg to forward to Mr. Grittman for response. It was the consensus to table action to the next meeting. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Huber stated that the city has received a letter from Xcel Energy saying that they are not going to paint the new power poles. He asked if Council has any thoughts other than just to accept the response. Councilmember Vitelli responded that he did not agree with painting them because of all the evidence that was submitted that it was not a good idea. He stated that he is inclined to accept the Xcel decision. Councilmember Krebsbach asked what recourse the city has. Administrator Lindberg responded that she does not think there is any. The issue was raised during the litigation. The city could send a letter to Xcel requesting reconsideration, but she did not know what good that would do. Ms. Liz Petschel is urging that Council C Page No. 29 September 16, 2003 not roll over on the matter, but she did not know what recourse the city would have to require them to paint the poles. Councilmember Duggan suggested sending Xcel a letter saying that Council disagrees and see what happens. There are many people who have concerns, and at least sending the letter would tell those residents that Council is responding to their concerns. Councilmember Vitelli stated that the Dodge Nature Center does not want them painted. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she has heard they did not want them painted the color of the water tower. Administrator Lindberg stated that Ms. Petschel informed her that she spoke to representatives of the nature center and they have not taken a position on the issue. Administrator Lindberg was directed to send a letter to Xcel. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Krebsbach announced that the members of the Fire Department are going out to homes selling tickets to their annual dance. She stated that the dance is a fund raiser and encouraged people to buy tickets even if they do not plan to attend. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before Council, Councilmember Vitelli moved that the meeting be adjourned to closed session for discussion on the Birch property condemnation, with subsequent adjournment to 7:00 p.m. on September 30 for a joint Council/Planning Commission workshop. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 1 1 • �� • 1 1 1• Ka een M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: John J. u er May r