Loading...
2001-12-04 City Council minutesPage No. 1 December 4, 2001 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, December 4, 2001 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. The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers Dwyer, Krebsbach, Schneeman and Vitelli. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Scluzeeman moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Schneeman moved approval of the amended minutes of the regular meeting held on November 6, 2001. Councilmermber seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays:0 Abstain: 1 Dwyer Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the amended minutes of the regular meeting held on November 20, 2001. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 Mertensotto CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember moved approval of the consent calendar for the meting, revised to move items 5d, Drug Task Force Agreement and 5h, ice arena study, to the regular agenda, along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgement of the minutes of the November 27, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the Building Activity Report for November. c. Authorization for the issuance of a temporary wine license to Royal Redeemer Lutheran Church in conjunction with its holiday concert fund raising event on December 8, 2001 along with waiver of the temporary liquor license fee. Page No. 2 December 4, 2001 d. Authorization for the issuance of a permit to Leroy Signs, Inc., for the replacement of four existing sign faces at Brown Institute (now Brown College). e. Approval to reschedule the January 1, 2002 regular Council meeting to Thursday, January 3, 2002. f. Acknowledgment of the cancellation of the December, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. g. Adoption of Resolution No. 01 -74, "RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DELINQUENT UTILITY CHARGES TO THE DAKOTA COUNTY AUDITOR FOR COLLECTION WITH REAL ESTATE TAXES," and Resolution No. 01 -75, "RESOLUTION CERTIFYING UNPAID WEED CUTTING CHARGES." h. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated December 4, 2001. i. Approval of the List of Claims dated December 4, 2001 and totaling $125,814.10. Councilmeimber Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 DRUG TASK FORCE Council acknowledged a memo from Police Chief Piotraschke regarding continued discussion on authorization to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with the Dakota County Drug Task Force for 2002. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, Chief Piotrasclnke stated that the city attorney has reviewed the agreement and indicated that there would be no waiver of the city's liability insurance. Administrator Lindberg stated that she was also concerned about the insurance coverage and contacted the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and was told that she should check with the city attorney. City Attorney Schleck stated that he reviewed the agreement as it applies to Minnesota Statutes and, from his research, has found that Page No. 3 December 4, 2001 there is nothing in the agreement where the city will waive its liability. The city needs to be certain it is covered in case there is a future claim. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Peter Tritz, from LMCIT, recently wrote an article in the League magazine regarding what is covered under LMCIT. He stated that he needs to know that the language in the agreement covers the city. Also, he asked why Mendota Heights is being asked to fund one- quarter of an officer when other cities that are much larger are contributing a smaller percentage of officer time. Chief Piotraschke responded that it was his understanding that when the former chief originally approached this with the county and discussed the city's participation, time percentages were discussed and Chief Johnson understood the cities' participation would be based on either' /4 full -time, %a full time or one full -time officer. He did not kriow why other cities were allowed to carne in later with smaller percentages. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the agreement terminates in a year and the police department can go through an eleven month trial to see how the agreement works out. He pointed out that if the city needs to send an officer, that officer will be sent in a vehicle. He asked if the participation will be on overtime. He pointed out that people working on overtime during non - emergency situations causes budget problems. Chief Piotraschke responded that his budget figures were based on the officer going on overtime and that it be 1/4 full time, but that the officer should be able to participate during the regular shift in most cases. Responding to a question from Councilmember Schneeman, Chief Piotraschke stated that the city participated in the task force for about 18 months starting in 1987 when the task force was in its infancy, but this would actually be a new participation by the city. Mayor Mertensotto moved to enter into the Drug Task Force for calendar year 2002 subject to further budget consideration and confinnation of insurance coverage. Councilmember Dwyer seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 4 December 4, 2001 HOCKEY ARENA Council acknowledged a letter from Mr. Frank Lang regarding fielding for a study on a joint venture hockey arena relationship between the city and St. Thomas Academy. Mayor Mertensotto stated that after Mr. Lang met with members of Council regarding cost sharing for the study, he went back to St. Thomas and they are going to contribute $10,000 to the study if the city pays $15,000. The city commissioned a task force to study the arena proposal and make recommendations. Since then, the University of St. Thomas has indicated they would like to lease ice time, which is a new revenue stream, and will use ice when it would not otherwise be scheduled. Mr. Lang is willing to spearhead retaining Springstead for consultation services. Springstead has an expert in the field and has done many hockey facility financial studies. An architect will also need to be commissioned to sketch out a plan on what the arena would look like. The architect will then need to contact a contractor to see what it might cost. He felt this is a golden opportunity for the city if it is ever to have a hockey facility. Councilmember Dwyer stated that he and Councilmember Schneeman met with Bert McKasy and Frank Lang two weeks ago and indicated Council had an interest and that it is conceptually good for Mendota Heights. He stated that he took the position that St. Thomas would have to come up with a minimum of 50% of the study cost. He stated that he is willing to support the proposal on a $15,000 /$10,000 basis as long as Council has a better understanding of what it will go for. Everyone must have the same understanding that this is the funding of a needs assessment and concept plan drawn up by an architect and would lead to the third part of the study, which is how much it will cost. Council needs to la-low exactly what the $15,000 will be used for. He stated that he feels this is an opportunity for residents to benefit from the arena. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he also contacted Henry Sibley High School and they would like to build an arena but would have to use general obligation bonding. The city's concept would be to use industrial revenue bonds where the city would have no liability. Treasurer Shauglmessy responded that the bond holder would have the liability and the city would bear no liability. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that with revenue bonds the city would not go to a referendum. Page No. 5 December 4, 2001 Mayor Mertensotto stated that he does not think the residents would approve a bond issue referendum for this or any other purpose. Councilmember Vitelli asked why Council should be doing this if people will not support it. He stated that the people just voted down an educational referendum and now Council is discussing spending $15,000 for a study. He stated that he does not know much about ice arenas but he did not think there is one that pays for itself. Tax payers would eventually have to pay the bills. It has been clear that the way this would work, is that the city would issue a bond to help finance the facility and there would be revenue coming in for ice time. The first priority for the revenues would be to pay the operating cost. St. Thomas Academy wants the tax payers of Mendota Heights to take the risk, for any shortfall. If the arena is built, the residents could pay $25,000 to $100,000 per year. St. Thomas will not take any risk for that shortfall. At this point, St. Thomas' attitude is clear. He stated that the $10,000 will not come from St. Thomas Academy, but rather that Mr. Lang solicited the funds from individuals who support St. Thomas. He felt that between St. Thomas Academy and St. Thomas University, they should pay at least 2/3 of the study seed money. There is a benefit to the Mendota Heights families who have children that play hockey and would use it for figure skating, but at least 2/3 of the benefit of the facility will go to St. Thomas Academy and St. Thomas University. Mayor Mertensotto responded that Springstead is very reputable and the study will show if there will be an anticipated operating cost risk to the city. Councilmember Vitelli stated that companies do not make honey by giving negative reports. He stated that he would say no to city participation in the study cost until St. Thomas Academy and University participate at a higher level. He stated that he would be willing to tell the tax payers then that it is worth going forward. It is not the money, it is the signal that St. Thomas Academy and University are not willing to dig into their coffers. They are still of the position that they are not going to contribute anything other than the land. Councilmember Schneeman stated that the land is worth $1 million to $1.5 million and St. Thomas camlot levy to build the structure. Also, St. Thomas Academy is a non - profit. Page No. 6 December 4, 2001 Councilmember Vitelli agreed that the arena would have benefit to the city but Council is going down the path where the tax payers will be paying $50,000 to $100,000 a year to support it. Councilmember Dwyer agreed that arenas probably do not pay for themselves but neither do trails and parks. He sees the arena as being another recreational amenity that the city can provide. Tax payers pay for recreation amenities. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he is looking at the issue from a vision standpoint. There is no land available to the city for this purpose, and he did not know where else one could be built. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he is a graduate of St. Thomas University and his three sons went to St. Thomas Academy. They are tremendous institutions, but he his trying to represent the tax payers of the community. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that if in fact this is the route Council is going to take, funding through a revenue bond, and if the city would be obligated for the operating deficit, she would like St. Thomas Academy to put money into an escrow that could cover those costs over the life of the facility. She would prefer a three part process. She agreed with Councihnember Vitelli about sharing the cost. To build a hockey arena on property worth $1.5 million may not be a wise thing to do. She did not know that Council should consider that as offsetting the cost of the hockey arena. There could possibly be another site in the city that would be less expensive to build arena on that could be used by St. Thomas Academy, St. Thomas University and MHAA and the residents of the city. In order for her to support spending the funds, she would ask for a letter of commitment from St. Thomas University that they do in fact want to rent ice time and that it would be a three way commitment between the city and St. Thomas Academy and University. If it is, she would like St. Thomas to put money in escrow to cover operating losses. A sheet metal hockey facility cannot be built on a $1.5 million property — the arena will have to match the exterior of St. Thomas Academy and will be very costly. She asked Council to consider an escrow from St. Thomas and a letter of commitment from St. Thomas University as conditions to city participation. Councilmember Sclnzeeman stated that she does not think St. Thomas Academy wants any partnering. :She felt it would be good to get a letter of intent and commitment from the University regarding renting time. Page No. 7 December 4, 2001 Councilmember Dwyer stated that he thought the city had a letter from Mr. Lang stating that St. Thomas University was committing to both practice and games. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she wants confirmation from St. Thomas University itself that they do want to participate as a user of ice time. Councilmember Dwyer stated that, in terms of St. Thomas Academy putting money in escrow to cover operating losses, that is completely different from anything that has been presented to Council. They have told Council from the beginning that they would not cover any operating costs. They feel that is a cost to Mendota Heights to maintain a facility and for its residents. He felt it is premature to be discussing escrows. He felt that right now Council should find out if this is feasible, and in order to find out a study must be done. Mayor Mertensotto stated that St. Thomas Academy could come back and ask the city to issue revenue bonds on their behalf. Then St. Thomas would own the arena and it would be strictly under their control. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would not be opposed to that. She stated that the economic reality is that if St. Thomas Academy built it, they would want to sell ice time. She felt it would be better for St. Thomas to build the arena. Her rationale about initially thinking about supporting the idea since last fall is that the city participated in the Sibley Park. If the city contributed $1 million to the arena, the city would be getting a commitment to ice time for MHAA, the public schools and city residents. The Mayor has talked about forming a non - profit with St. Thomas Academy — if the city came forward with $1 million through a referendum, for the public use, that would be about one -third of the cost. She suggested that the city could put $500,000 into an escrow account to draw on for operating expenses. Mayor Mertensotto stated that if Council has any reservations about getting involved, Council should not go forward. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she does not think this is unique. Partnering has been done in many situations. She stated that she would look to the study to help Council determine needs and whether there enough ice time to support the costs. The study should answer Council's questions, and she would like to proceed with the study. Page No. 8 December 4, 2001 Mayor Mertensotto suggested tabling discussion for now. He stated that Council is possibly making a lot of assumptions that the city would have to pay operating costs. The organization that runs the facility would have that obligation. Mr. Rob Meyer stated that the West St. Paul hockey association runs the hockey program for Mendota Heights youth, and he talked to its commissioner about renting ice time. His comment was that he would be more comfortable with St. Thomas Academy owning the arena and MHAA renting ice tie. There are some options. Henry Sibley was talking about an arena and there has been discussion about a second rink in West St. Paul. The St. Thomas property that would be used is a jewel, but every rink, runs at a deficit. He stated that he does not lazow any rink that is not totally owned by a single entity, either public or private. Councilmember Dwyer stated that the simplest approach would be for St. Thomas Academy to use the city's bonding authority to build the arena. Councilmember Dwyer moved to table further discussion until such time as Mr. Lang and Mr. McKasy can be present. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PRESENTATION Metropolitan Council District 15 representative Carolyn Rodriguez was present to discuss any issues Council may have an update Council on the Metropolitan Council initiatives. She stated that the Metropolitan Council will continue to operate as it has in the past but is changing its structure and staffing. She informed Council that last week the Metropolitan Council approved the city's comprehensive plan and its critical area plan. Ms. Rodriguez then responded to Council questions. Responding to a question from Attorney Schleck regarding livable communities grants, Ms. Rodriguez stated that the city's application made the first cut but not the last cut and she would like to meet with city staff to try to determine why. BUDGET HEARING Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a hearing on the proposed tax levy and budget for 2002. Council acknowledged the proposed budget and a memo and resolution prepared by Treasurer Shaughnessy. Council also acknowledged a Page No. 9 December 4, 2001 memo from Mayor Mertensotto regarding the proposed levy and budget and Consumer Price Index, and information from Councilmember Vitelli regarding the Consumer Price Index Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that this is equivalent to the former truth -in- taxation hearings, but a hearing is not required this year. When Council approved the preliminary levy, they directed staff to schedule a hearing for this evening on the proposed budget. In September Council adopted a preliminary levy for $3,639,000. The proposed budget represented a 7.5% increase over 2001 and a levy increase of 23.4 %. The reason for the 23.4% increase is that the state eliminated HACA aid for school funding, which represents a $464,000 loss of revenue to the city. Since a Council workshop in September, the proposed levy was reduced by $85,000. The current proposed budget represents a 4.8% increase for General Fund operations and a 19.9% increase in the general tax levy. Mr. Shaughnessy reviewed the projected revenues and the proposed levy for emergency preparedness, legal contingency, Fire Relief Association, Infrastructure Reserve and the proposed levy to offset the PERA increase. The total proposed levy is $3,358,000. The 2001 levy was reduced by $464,000 in HACA aid that is not available to the city this year. Many communities are levying in addition to the state aid that they have lost. The 19.9% proposed increase is lower than the increases he has seen proposed by neighboring communities. Mayor Mel ensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Sten Gerfast stated that this is a very hard time for people and there will be a shortfall at the state and federal levels. It would be appropriate for Mendota Heights to do something that would not be a very big increase. He asked Council to hold the line and reconsider Town Center. Treasurer Shaugluiessy stated that everyone should have received their tentative real estate tax statements for next year. Mendota Heights residents will average a 30% reduction in their real estate taxes from last year based on the preliminary levy that was adopted in September. Iii 2002, the city will represent about 35% of the tax bill. Councilmember Vitelli stated that if his property tax is going down, whether he will be blindsided by some other tax going up. He stated that no one else is cutting costs. Page No. 10 December 4, 2001 Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that the school district will likely get its special referendum approved next time. The referendum that was recently defeated would have increased real estate taxes by $250 to $300 per year. What the state has done is take the aids from the cities and give them to the school districts by underwriting the school operating costs. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the state tools away over $200 million in HACA but put $140 million of that back in LGA for many cities. No one laiows where the other $60 million is. Councilmember Dwyer asked what the budget looks like compared to last year when the HACA loss is backed out. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that the proposed increase is 19.9% and 15% represents the loss of HACA. The increase in tax is about 4.3 %, which is offset by the new construction. If HACA were still available, the typical resident would see the same or a lower tax than last year. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he feels very comfortable with the proposed budget and recommends its approval as submitted. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he is not comfortable with the proposed levy or budget and opposes a 3.75% salary increase because it is not in line with the economy. He stated that this is not the time to increase taxes, and that the CPI for the last 12 months is close to 2 %. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that the regional CPI is up 4 %. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he has done a great deal of research and looked at the data from the Mayor that was included in Council's packets. He stated that the data represents October, but Council must look at what the employees have been dealing with for a year. The average CPI increase for the United States over the past ten months was 3 %, and in October the CPI for the Midwest was 1.3% as compared to last October. When the CIP information gets down to the Minneapolis /St. Paul metro area, only six months are included. The Bureau of Labor and Statistics in the MSP area during the past six months shows an increase of 4.2 %. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that in her history on Council, Council has always given 3% salary increases. Page No. 11 December 4, 2001 Councilmember Vitelli pointed out that medical insurance is up almost 19.7% and staff will be paying a 9% increase. He stated that he included, in the information he provided to Council, surveys of what companies are planning for salary increases. The private sector shows a 4.3% increase and the public sector is planning 4.2% The most recent survey of 1,000 CEO's 50 to 60% have not changed their salary packages even though the economy is changing. He felt that 3.75% is in the ballpark with public and private sector increases. Councilmember Dwyer stated that Council is dealing with a proposal to increase salaries by 3 %, 3.5% or 3.75 %. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that the cots of the arbitration award is more than is being discussed for the proposed budgeted salary increase. Mayor Mertensotto responded that every time Council increases salaries fractionally, the matrix is increased. The people who make more money get a higher increase than the ones below them in the matrix, creating a real problem. Because of the pay plan, people move with the group whether they perform or not. If the rationale for going to 3.75% is that without it those who earn less will see no increase because of insurance increases, the $15,000 in salary increase (for a 3% to 3.5% increase) could have been distributed differently among the employees. Councihnlember Scluleeman stated that she understands that if the increase is 3 %, staff will actually lose money because of the increase in insurance costs. She did not think that is fair and stated that there is nothing the city can do about the increase in insurance because there is a contract in effect for another year. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that in Council's workshop she stated that she preferred 3.5% versus 3.75 %, but in her tenure, 3% has always been used. Pay increases have always been across the board without performance review. She stated that Council could approve an administrative contingency and the Administrator could distribute it so that people would not lose money. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that the police department, through the arbitration award, is receiving a salary increase this year that is .5% higher than every other employee. If they stay at 3.5% next year and everyone else increases by 3.5% everything will be about equal. Page No. 12 December 4, 2001 Councilmember Vitelli moved adoption of Resolution No. 01-76, "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL 2001 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2002 AND ADOPTING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 2002." Councilmember Dwyer seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: I Meltensotto CASE NO. 01-38, NOEIMR Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Joseph Noeker for a 22 foot front yard setback variance to allow expansion of his existing attached garage at 1257 Delaware Avenue. Council also aclaiowledged associated staff reports and photographs of the Noeker home submitted by Mr. Noeker. Mr. Noeker was present for the discussion. Assistant Hollister reviewed the application and the Planning Commission discussion and recommendation. He informed Council that the commission recommended approval with the condition that there be a window on the east side of the garage, but the proposed approving resolution wrongly says the north side. Mr. Noeker agreed to the Planning Commission condition and informed Council that the exterior materials that will be used on the expansion will be the same as the rest of the house. Councilmember Vitelli moved adoption of Resolution No. 01 -77, A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TWENTY-TWO FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A GARAGE ADDITION FOR JOSEPH AND LEANN NOEKER OF 1257 DELAWARE AVENUE," with correction. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 01 -40, GOPHER Council acknowledged an application from Gopher State One Call STATE ONE CALL for a conditional use permit and setback variance to allow installation of a smokers' shelter at 2020 Centre Pointe Boulevard. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. Mr. Paul Anderson, from WCL Architects, was present on behalf of Gopher State One Call. Assistant Hollister reviewed the application and the Planning Commission discussion and recommendation for denial. He stated that Gopher State would like to install a detached accessory structure, which requires a conditional use permit. A variance would Page No. 13 December 4, 2001 also be required because the structure is proposed to be located on the lot line. Mr. Rancone, from Roseville Properties, attended the commission meeting and stated that his firm would prefer that the structure not be installed but that if it is approved, he would like it screened and landscaped to minimize its impact. Mr. Anderson stated that he was asked to by Gopher State One Call to accommodate the employees who smoke. Because the building is smoke free, they are currently required to go outside to smoke, and Gopher State is trying to come up with a shelter from the rain and snow for them. The building is surrounded on three sides by parking lot and there is a drive aisle and loading dock on the fourth side. There is no way to attach anything to the building. The south portion of the site, where the shelter is proposed, is screened from public view. Gopher State uses 10,000 square feet of the building and Honeywell uses the other 10,000 square feet. The shelter could be used by all of the employees. The Plamling Commission discussed additional landscaping, and Gopher State would be happy to entertain that, but it would have to go on the adjacent property. There is a seven to eight foot grade difference from where the shelter would be to the adjoining property parking lot, so it would be screened. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting and several of the members had gone to the site and watched to see how many smokers there are but saw very few. She asked how many people Gopher State is trying to accommodate. She also asked if the company has any smoking cessation programs available for its employees. The Gopher State general manager, also present for the discussion, responded that he has 110 employees and about 75% of them smoke. At any given tune, there would be anywhere from two to twenty people outside. Councilmember Dwyer stated that Gopher State is asking for a variance and needs to demonstrate hardship not of its own creation. The smokers are creating a problem and he did not think the city should step in and make it any easier for them. Mayor Mertensotto agreed, stating that approving the request would send the wrong message. Gopher State should instead work to establish a smoking cessation program for its employees. Councilmember Dwyer moved adoption of Resolution No. 01 -78, "A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND Page No. 14 December 4, 2001 20 'SETBACK VVARIANCE FOR A SMOKERS' SHELTER FOR GOPHER STATE ONE CALL OF 2020 CENTRE POINTE BOULEVARD." Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 FENCE ORDINANCE Council acknowledged staff memos and a proposed ordinance to amend the fence provisions in the Zoning Ordinance. Assistant Hollister reviewed the proposed ordinance and the Planning Commission discussion and recommendation. The commission recommended that the draft ordinance language prepared by the city planner be adopted with the exception that the maximum height remain at six feet rather than being reduced to five feet as was discussed at the joint Council/Planning Commission workshop. The commission also examined the swimming pool fence ordinance and felt that the proposed fence ordinance amendment would be consistent with it. Mayor Mertensotto stated that one reason why Council is considering an amendment is so there are no questions over interpretation of the regulations. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she was present at the Planning Commission discussion and they unanimously wanted to keep the fence height maximum at six feet. She stated that she also would like to keep it at that height. She stated that she has an autistic grandchild and he could have gotten over a five foot fence and into his neighbor's swimming pool. She did not think people would put up a six foot fence unless they need it and saw nothing wrong with a six foot height and that people should not be required to go through the time and $250 planning application expense to install one. She pointed out that Edina's maximum height is 8 feet. Councilmember Vitelli supported the Plam- ing Commission recommendation. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he does not feel the amendment solves anything and that fence height should be uniform or there will continue to be problems. Perhaps the city does not want five foot fences around pools. Councilmember Sclmeeman did not feel that a five foot fence around a pool is tall enough. Page No. 15 December 4, 2001 Assistant Hollister stated that the five foot fence around pools is the minimum required, not a maximum height allowed. The pool ordinance imposes a six foot maximum around pools. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she supports reducing the maximum height to five feet without a conditional use permit. Councilmember Dwyer moved adoption of Ordinance No. 365, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 401." Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 1 Krebsbach ZONING DETERMINATION/ Council ackriowledged a memo from Assistant Hollister with 780 SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE regard to a letter from Ms. Suzamze Dillon asking about the possibility of opening a spa/salon at 780 South Plaza Drive. The property is zoned B -1, and the use is not explicitly listed in the permitted or conditional uses for the district. Ms. Dillon and Dr. & Mrs. Stanley Haimes, owners of the property, were present for the discussion. Ms. Dillon stated that the ordinance allows offices of the professions or human care and her use fits both. She would like to do hair, nails, therapeutic massage and skin care. Responding to a Council question about licensing, she stated that she does not need a state license and that cities typically issue the licenses, as does West St. Paul where her business is currently located. Councilmember Dwyer pointed out that beauty salons are permitted in B -2 Districts and asked whether that is an obstacle for Council in determining that it is a use substantially similar to the B -1 uses. Administrator Lindberg responded that it depends on whether it is a beauty salon. If so, it makes sense that the business be in a B -2 district. Councilmember Dwyer stated that when the city fathers laid out the fonnat of the city, properties were zoned as B -1, B -2, etc., and Council early on said that beauty salons should be in B -2 and, by elimination, they do not go in B -1. Mayor Mertensotto noted that he is concerned about traffic conditions on South Plaza, particularly during the winter months, and asked what the hourly traffic count would be to the business. He was also concerned about expansion plans. Page No. 16 December 4, 2001 Ms. Dillon responded that a perfect count would be nine to ten cars per hour but she is not looking for expansion of her business initially. A perfect case scenario for her business would be seven operators. Right now she works alone but subleases one chair to a beautician. She has clientele who are under doctors' care, and she would be doing therapeutic massage for people under doctors' care. Responding to a question fiom Councilmember Vitelli, Attorney Schleck stated that the issue comes down to how Coimcil views the business being proposed. If Council believes it is a clinic for human care, it is allowed in B -1. If Council believes it is a beauty salon, it is not a permitted or conditional use in B -1 and would require an ordinance amendment. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she does not see the use as a clinic for human care. Mrs. Haimes stated that she and her husband want to sell the building and have had three potential buyers, this one, a cat clinic and the Tae Kwon Doe. She is in poor health and they would like to retire to Florida but need to sell the building. She asked Council to change the ordinance and let one of the buyers use the property. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she understands that the veterinarian, Dr. Stunner, plans to go through the conditional use process. Dr. Stunner, also present for the discussion, stated that in order to apply for a conditional use permit, he must first apply to amend the ordinance to include the use. He stated that he was before Council two weeks ago and when he left, his impression was that he needed an amendment to the district's conditional uses, and there would be two hearings before the Planning Commission and two before Council. The chance that someone will say no after he starts the process is a concern. Councilmember Schneeman stated that she would like to help the Haimes' and that they should be able to sell their building. Dr. Stunner stated that he has already retained a veterinary architect and would like to add 1,000 to 2,000 square feet to the building. Without moving any of the existing trees he could easily add onto the building and leave the parking the way it is. Page No. 17 December 4, 2001 Councilmember Krebsbach stated that he concern over the current request is that Dr. Stunner had started on a process that Council suggested and that she feels would be a good fit for the location. He is concerned that he could go through the process and get turned down at any time. The current request, with ten to twelve cars per hour would not be a good fit. Ms. Dillon responded that ten to twelve is optimum and if she starts the business at this location, she will start as a massage therapist. Attorney Schleck stated that it is important that everyone understand that Council is not malting a decision based on what they would like to see at the site. They are viewing this based on the city's zoning ordinance and what is being discussed is what the best way would be to apply the zoning ordinance to this property. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Ms. Dillon has told Council her background is as a massage therapist, but he felt that a cat clinic would be a less intense use for the site. Dr. Haiimes stated that he does not feel that traffic is a big problem because the building is located close to the highway. It is not as if there were traffic constantly passing by the building, and even the senior housing does not impact his building. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that South Plaza at Dodd Road feels all the traffic. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she wants to be sure Council is clear in its communication to the cat clinic. She stated that she does not want to discourage him from undertaking the process to make it a use. Councilmember Schneeman stated that both parties need to know that Council is going to permit one of the uses. Responding to a question from Councilmember Dwyer, Attorney Schleck stated that there is no application from either party. Council is only being asked to determine whether the proposal by Ms. Dillon is a hospital or clinic for human care. Councilmember Dwyer stated that Council would have no control if a doctor wanted to use the building. He has a number of clients who receive therapeutic massage paid for through no- fault. He did not have any trouble connecting that to a clinic, and if the use were only Page No. 18 December 4, 2001 therapeutic massage Ms. Dillon would not have to get Council approval. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he seriously doubts that Ms. Dillon's activity fits under clinic for human care. Councihnember Dwyer asked if Ms. Dillon is coming in under the guise of massage therapy, would she then be able to do hair and nails. Attorney Schleck responded that of the three uses that have bee proposed for this property, the important thing to convey to the potential applicants in all three cases is that a zoning ordinance amendment and conditional use would be required for any of the activities. The applicants would therefore have to go through two plamling commission actions and two Council actions. None of the uses is permitted under the zoning ordinance. He did not think it would be in the best interest of the city from a precedent standpoint to do anything else. He cautioned against making anything a permitted use and stated that Council is likely going to want to set conditions on the use of the property. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before Council, Councihnember Vitelli moved that the meeting be adjourned to closed session for discussion with legal counsel on a proposed purchase agreement for the Tom Thumb property. Councihnember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:05 p.m. athleen M. Swanson City Cleric ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor