Loading...
2000-10-03 City Council minutesOctober 3, 2000 Page No. I CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, October 3, 2000 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, was held at 7:30 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday, October 3, 2000 at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Mertensotto called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock p.m. The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers Dwyer, Huber, Krebsbach and Schneeman. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 MINUTE APPROVAL Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the minutes of the regular meeting lield on Tuesday, September 5, 2000. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Tuesday, September 19, 2000. Councilmember Dwyer seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting, along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the September 13, 2000 Airport Relations Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the September 14, 2000 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. c. Acknowledgment of the Building Activity Report for September. October 3, 2000 Page No. 2 d. Authorization for the Fire Department to conduct the annual Halloween Bonfire along with authorization for an expenditure of up to $600 for refreshments. e. Authorization for the issuance of a building permit for an outdoor trash enclosure at the A.R.R.T. building at 1255 Northland Drive. f. Approval of the landscaping and lighting plan for the Augusta Shores monument sign. g. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the September 26, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. h. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated October 3, 2000. i. Approval of the List of Claims dated October 3, 2000 and totaling $275,826.55. Councilmember Dwyer seconded the motiori. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TOM MALCHOW Mayor Mertensotto read a proposed resolution proclaiming RECOGNITION October 8 as Tom Malchow Day in recognition of Mr. Malchow's accomplishment of winning a Gold Medal at the 2000 Summer Olympic Games. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 00-79, "RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING OCTOBER 8, 2000 AS "TOM MALCHOW DAY" IN RECOGNITION OF HIS BECOMING AN OLYMPIC CHAMPION." Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto invited all residents to an open reception to be held in Tom Malchow's honor at St. Thomas Academy from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Sunday. October 8. He informed the audience that the event is being sponsored by the city in cooperation with St. Thomas Academy and Dakota Bank. Councilmember Schneeman stated that this is a real community event and Council would like to invite October 3, 2000 Page No. 3 everyone to come to the event and to bring their children. She stated that Tom Malchow will be present and his gold medal will be on display. CARPET REPLACEMENT Council acknowledged a memo from Building Manager Guy Kullander regarding bids received for replacement of the carpeting in the City Hall lobby. Councilmember Dwyer moved to award the bid for replacement of the carpeting in the City Hall lobby area to St..Paul Linoleum and Carpet Company for its low bid of $4,609.00. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 FIRE AWARDS Fire Chief Maczko recognized eleven businesses with fire safety award emblems for consistently and conscientiously emphasizing the importance of fire safety in the workplace. He stated that the purpose of the award is to recognize businesses in the community for providing a safe workplace environment. The emblems can be attached to previous plaques awarded to the following businesses: A.R.R.T, Center for Diagnostic Imaging, Ecolab, General Pump, L.C.S. Metal Stamping, Mendakota Country Club, Minnesota Knitting Mills, Patterson Dental Supply, Somerset Country Club, Specialty Equipment and Tempco Manufacturing. FIRE SAFETY MONTH Chief Maczko announced that October is Fire Safety Month. An open house will be conducted at the fire station on October 14, and the annual firefighters' dance will be held on October 20. He also informed the audience that the Halloween Bonfire site will be open on October 20. Residents can bring brush and branches and clean burning materials to the site until October 29 or until such time as the site is filled. TAX HEARING Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on the proposed tax rate for 2001. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that two years ago the Legislature adopted a law that states that if the tax rate for a city exceeds the previous year, a hearing must be held. The city must certify to the county by October 20 that an increase has been approved. He stated that the city's tax October 3, 2000 Page No. 4 capacity rate could potentially increase from 16.377 to 17.24%. The increase is based on last year's tax capacity. The current year tax capacity will be considerably higher, therefor the tax rate will be lower. He stated that Council has adopted a proposed levy at the maximum that could be adopted. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Dwyer moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Huber moved adoption of Resolution No. 00-80, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TAX RATE INCREASE FOR THE 2000 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2001." Councilmember Dwyer seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING — 2000 STREET Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose IMPROVEMENT of a public hearing on proposed assessments for the ASSESSMENTS 2000 Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Projects. Council acknowledged a memo from Engineer Mark Mogan along with the proposed assessment rolls. Council also acknowledged letters from Mike and Dee Reynolds, John Alton, and Frank Stifter and Charles Noel regarding the proposed assessments. Engineer Mogan stated that Mr. Noel objects to the assessment for his driveway improvement. Mr. & Mrs. Reynolds object to the $1,300 assessment for the rehabilitation project and recommend that the city pay for the improvements out of tax levies rather than assessments. Mr. Alton is not satisfied with work done on his driveway, and Mr. Stifter is also concerned about work done on his driveway. Mayor Mertensotto, stated that anyone who has an assessment objection must file a written objection. He asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Charles Reich, 1292 Sylvandale, stated that he submitted a letter objecting to the assessment because work, that was done was done poorly. His driveway cracked October 3, 2000 Page No. 5 significantly and the a contractor agrees that the work must be redone. The construction company would like to do the work in the spring, but he does not think the contractor should be paid until all work is done correctly. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the city has a warranty for the work and the contractor is responsible for defects. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that there have been cases in the past where Council has withheld a portion of the contract amount for poor work. Engineer Mogan stated that there are a number of cottonwood trees near the Reich driveway and the root structure caused the asphalt to break up. The contractor will have to cut off the roots to try to resolve the problem. The contractor will contact Mr. Reich to see if cutting the root and replacing the cracked asphalt will be acceptable. Mr. Reich responded that he does not think the contractor should just fill the cracks. He stated that there are many cracks. Mr. Mogan stated that the contractor will have to tear up the asphalt and dig up the roots. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the landowner is entitled to know how the city will take care of the problem. The city must have a positive plan of what will be done. Ms. Barb Hansen, 1260 Sylvandale, (wife of Frank Stifter) stated that their driveway was paved on June 21 and the contractor told them to stay off the driveway for three days. They did not use the driveway for five days and there are marks on it. Two weeks afterwards, they stopped a car on the driveway and the car left tire marks. She felt that the materials used were substandard. Engineer Mogan responded that the driveway is steep and has a western exposure and heats up quite a bit. When it heats up and a vehicle stops on the driveway, it draws the moisture down. He stated that it takes about two years for asphalt to cure. Mayor Mertensotto asked what the property owners are to do if cars leave marks on their driveway for two years. He October 3, 2000 Page No. 6 asked how a sealer will cover the marks. He stated that the city needs something in writing from the contractor. Ms. Hanson stated that her husband was standing at the base of the driveway and his shoes left heel marks. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city needs a written course of action that the contractor must take. The contractor may have to come back in a year or two and redo the driveway or at least seal it. Councilmember Krebsbach asked if the three driveways, for which complaint letters were filed, are close to each other. Engineer Mogan responded that they are close to each other and are all on the north end. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that perhaps a different mix of asphalt was used or a different crew applied it. Ms. Pat Randall, 902 Cheri Lane, stated that she has called the city a couple of times to state that in her opinion the project was poorly managed. The contractor began work on her driveway and left and three weeks later a different contractor came and finished her driveway. She stated that if she was managing the project she would not have accepted a different contractor. When the asphalt trucks drove off, they left marks in the driveway and there are holes in the asphalt. She stated that she would not have accepted the job but she was out of town. She also felt that the project took too long. She stated that she will not accept paying for the driveway. Engineer Mogan stated that he spoke to the foreman for Valley Paving and was told that he used the same asphalt formula for the driveways that was used on the roadways. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the last time the city had this type of problem, Council appointed a subcommittee to meet with the contractor. She recommended that there be a Council subcommittee to meet with this contractor. Mayor Mertensotto stated that tonight is the assessment hearing. Council must adopt the resolution to approve the October 3, 2000 Page No. 7 assessment rolls to begin the 30 day payment period in order to certify the assessments to the County on time. In the past, the city has held back a portion of the contract amount until the contractor provided the city with a plan on how everything would be taken care of. He stated that Council must set a procedure so that the home owners know what will be done. Mr. Mike Cossell, 889 Bluebill, stated that there are tire marks in his driveway even though he kept his vehicles off the driveway twice as long as was recommended. There are also footprints in the driveway. Also, two areas where he backed out of the driveway and turned the wheel left scrub marks. He stated that he asked the foreman to look at the scrub marks but he never came. He stated that he also has a problem with the sod about 40 feet along his driveway. He stated that if conditions get worse it will be unsightly. When it rained recently and the driveway surface got wet it crumbled. The most objectionable issue is the length of time the project took. He stated that when he agreed to contract for the driveway, he was told he had two options — either to pay up front or have a ten year assessment. Mayor Mertensotto asked if the contract has a penalty clause. Engineer Mogan responded that there is a penalty clause. He stated that it rained for 22 of the first 33 working days of the project. After that, the contractor was at the mercy of NSP, which was doing gas installation work. The project was to have been completed at the end of August, and based on the additional time NSP took and the rain days, it ended up being a month late. The penalty clause is for $200 per day. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council should appoint a committee to meet with the contractor and city engineering to get written statements on what he will do to correct the problems. City Attorney Hart stated that the normal course of events would be to perform a final inspection and hold back some percentage of the contract price, such as 100% to 150% of what it would cost for the city to contract with another firm to correct the problems. October 3, 2000 Page No. 8 Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city should withhold 150% of what it would cost to correct each of the driveways that have problems. Treasurer Shaughnessy informed the audience that if the assessment roll is adopted, property owners will have 30 days to pay the assessment amount without interest. After that time, the assessments will be certified for collection by Dakota County. Assessment interest will be 8.75% the first year and 7% thereafter. Engineer Mogan stated that interest on the driveway work and street rehabilitation are payable over ten years. The street reconstruction work is payable over 19 years. Ms. Marjorie Camitsch, 2361 Kressin, asked why her property is being assessed for storm sewer when she has curb and gutter and street but not storm sewer. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the storm sewer assessment is for the storm sewer for the neighborhood. The water will run along the curb and gutter to the storm sewer. Responding to a question from Ms. Camitsch, City Attorney Hart stated that the storm sewer assessments are handled a bit differently from other assessments. They are done on an area wide basis, not on how it benefits an individual property. Mr. Thomas McNamara, 2371 Swan Drive, stated that Lake Drive is much higher than it used to be and that affects how his driveway will slope. Lake Drive was widened from Swan around the corner and there used to be a ditch. He stated that he asked why the street was widened before it was paved and it turned out that parking is allowed now. The problem he has is that the city added five to seven feet of dirt near his trees and he is concerned that he will lose the trees. They are 30 to 35 year old evergreens and he is concerned about what he will be able to do for privacy if they die. The project began before he understood what was to be done. Also, the culvert was removed and his invisible fencing was removed and not reinstalled. October 3, 2000 Page No. 9 Mayor Mertensotto stated that some of the neighbors have asked Inspector Tom Knuth the reason why Swan Drive was widened at lake Drive. Engineer Mogan responded that one of the problems with Lake Drive is that there is very little elevation difference between the lake and the street. In order to get a pipe in that is large enough to carry the water, the street had to be raised. Since there was curb on the McNamara side of the street, the ditch was no longer needed, so it was filled in. Mrs. McNamara stated that part of their objection is that they were never told what the plan was so they could not plan for it and all of a sudden the ditch was filled. Also, they did not know Lake Drive was only going to be widened by her property and they lost 3,000 square feet of land. Engineer Mogan responded that it was always the city's intention to have an extra wide section on Lake Drive and to provide for an on-street pedestrian path on that side of the street. He stated that all of the improvements were within city right-of-way. City Attorney Hart stated that the right-of-way is fixed, and while the position of the street can change but the location of the right-of-way line does not move. Mrs. McNamara stated that the widened area is becoming a parking land for St. Thomas Academy buses and for activities at the school and it is always full of cars. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the widened lane was to be for pedestrian traffic. If buses are being parked there, the city can deal with that issue. Mr. McNamara stated that as a tree advisor, he understands it could take up to ten years for the trees to die. The storm sewer will do a lot of good, and he does not object to what was done but does object that he was not advised of what would be done. He was also concerned about how the potential future loss of trees will impact his property. Mayor Mertensotto directed Engineer Mogan to request the Sunfish Lake Forester to prepare a written report for Council. October 3, 2000 Page No. 10 Mayor Mertensotto directed the engineering department to resolve the invisible fence problem. He stated that buses should not be parked on Lake Drive or Swan Drive and directed the police department to monitor the situation. Engineering staff was directed to come up with solutions to all of the problems that have been raised this evening. Mr. Paul Maczko, 907 Cheri Lane, asked how it was determined that his property should be assessed $1,300. He stated that the first discussion was for $850. He stated that Cheri Lane only received an overlay and other cities pay for the cost of overlays. Engineer Mogan responded that Council adopted a street restoration and rehabilitation policy in 1994. Council determined at that time that the best approach would be to assess a portion of the cost for an overlay and pay for the remainder with city funds. When the street improvement survey was sent to the property owners, the cost was estimated to range between $800 and $1,200 per lot. The detailed estimate resulted in a $1,200 proposed assessment. Councilmember Huber stated that Mendota Heights has one of the lowest tax rates in the metropolitan area because it does not tax for street improvements each year. He pointed out that the city is paying half of the cost of the street project and the property owners pay the balance. Responding to a question from the audience about why all of Lake Drive was not widened, Engineer Mogan stated that there are only two properties east of Dodd that have driveways on Lake Drive. To build the street to 33 feet wide there would not make sense, because if there are only two driveways on that section of Lake Drive, parking should not be an issue. In response to a question from Councilmember Krebsbach, Engineer Mogan stated that the city sent notices to 200 property owners last November but only two property owners attended the public hearing on the proposed improvements. A notice was also mailed before the project began to inform property owner on what to expect and when to expect it. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 October 3, 2000 Page No. 11 Mr. Don Camitsch invited the Councilmembers to come to his home. He stated that his driveway has a 45 degree incline and it is very dangerous. His neighbor is also concerned. He stated that he tried to address the issue during reconstruction but no one seemed to want to listen. He stated that two or tree weeks passed between the time the contractor worked and the delay was not because of rain. He felt that the city did a terrible job of keeping people informed. Mayor Mertensotto stated that over 60 driveways were replaced in the project, which is a significant amount for a street reconstruction project. He stated that the city offers residents the opportunity to have their driveways replaced because it helps the residents and is much less expensive than if the work were done independently. He felt that perhaps Council should rethink whether driveway reconstruction should be offered. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the other side of the issue is that people believe that the city's contractor will be reliable, but the driveway work was done by a subcontractor. Councilmember Schneeman stated that Engineer Mogan did reference checks on the contractor with other cities and the city had to accept the lowest responsible bidder. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Krebsbach moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the city has not accepted the work from Valley Paving and that Council must receive a specific report from the contractor on what he will do with respect to the problems that have been reported. He informed the audience that the 30 day pre- payment period will begin with adoption of the assessment roll. After the thirty day period, the assessments will be payable to Dakota County with interest. Driveways and street rehabilitation assessments will be payable over ten years and street reconstruction will be payable over nineteen years. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 October 3, 2000 Page No. 12 Councilmember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 00 -81, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE YEAR 2000 STREET RECONSTRUCTION/REHABILITATION PROJECT AND SURROUNDING AREA IMPROVEMENTS (IMPROVEMENT NO. 2000, PROJECT NO. 1)." Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Councilmembers Krebsbach and Schneeman were appointed to serve as a Council subcommittee to meet with city engineering with respect to the problems that have been raised. ASSESSMENT HEARING Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on assessments for Alice Lane Subdivision No. Two improvements. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Engineer Mogan gave a brief presentation. He informed Council that he has spoken with the property owner and he does not have any objection to the assessments. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Krebsbach moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Dwyer moved adoption of Resolution No. 00-82, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE ALICE LANE SUBDIVISION TWO IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (IMPROVEMENT NO. 2000, PROJECT NO. 3)." Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ASSESSMENT HEARING Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on proposed assessments for Augusta Shores Addition public improvements. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Schneeman moved that the hearing be closed. October 3, 2000 Page No. 13 Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of Resolution No. 00-83, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE AUGUSTA SHORES IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (IMPROVEMENT NO. 2000, PROJECT NO. 4)." Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 00-35, HURLEY Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Jack Hurley for a variance to install a six foot fence within the front yard setback at 2465 Hampshire Court. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. Mr. Hurley informed Council that he is planning to construct a pool in his back yard and when he applied for a permit he discovered his lot has two front yards. The city's swimming pool ordinance requires a five to six foot tall fence around pools but the zoning ordinance only allows a 36 inch tall fence in his front yard. Mayor Mertensotto noted that there is a walking path along Huber Drive. He asked Mr. Hurley how far his property line is from the curb. Mr. Hurley responded that his property line is about fifteen feet from the curb. Councilmember Dwyer stated that he drives by this intersection everyday and while the zoning ordinance characterizes this back yard as a front yard, the Hurley proposal makes eminent sense. Mrs. Hurley stated that the Planning Commission recommended 30% opacity for the fence and that she and her husband originally wanted a solid fence. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would like to see a representation of what the fence would look like and would like a landscaping plan. Mrs. Hurley responded that they are proposing to add some lilacs on the outside of the fence and that there are many October 3, 2000 Page No. 14 trees on the interior side of the fence. She stated that the reason they cannot put the fence on the inside of the trees is because they only have about three inches of room to work with. The city planner did not realize there were so many oak trees on the lot. Councilmember Schneeman stated that there isn't much room in the yard to move the pool around. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that one of the reasons for neighbors' approval of the fence is so that they will see what the fence is going to look like. She noted that she appreciates that the Hurleys submitted photographs of similar fences in the city to give Council a representation of the proposed fence. She pointed out that the Hurleys have a small child should have the safety a fence would provide, whether there is a pool or not. Mrs. Hurley stated that the fence would be about 74 feet from the intersection and that it will not obstruct anyone's vision in any way. Mayor Mertensotto stated that no adjoining neighbor has objected. He stated that variances are granted based on hardship and the Planning Commission pointed out that the Hurleys could alter the size of the pool. He noted that the Hurleys submitted a list of eleven (through lot) properties in the city that have fences closer to a main thoroughfare that the ordinance allows. He felt that there should be a way to amend the zoning ordinance to allow six foot fences in situations like this. Councilmember Huber stated that he would vote against the request because he is not sure what the hardship is. There is very little space between the foot path and the proposed fence. The fence would be going up a berm and will appear to be eight to nine feet high. He also disagreed with using lilacs for landscaping because they will grow into the trail and they will not provide cover in the winter. He stated that he would prefer that the fence be placed inside the tree line because the screening is already there. The existing shrubbery is ground cover and that will not screen the fence. He wanted to see the screening extended through the ground cover if Council approves the request. October 3, 2000 Page No. 15 Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city planner feels that Council should amend the zoning ordinance rather than grant a variance. He felt that Council should find a way to accommodate the Hurleys and still follow the rules. City Attorney Hart stated that the hardship standard is one where alternatives have been proposed over the years, such as practical difficulty. The hardship has to prevent reasonable use of the property. If there are alternatives that provide reasonable use without a variance, those alternatives should be pursued. The practical difficulty approach considers the shape or size of the lot. If there is a way to accomplish installing the pool and adhering to the ordinance, that is what Council should do. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto about when they propose to install the pool, Mrs. Hurley stated that the pool company has ordered everything for the pool. Mr. Gritman stated that after looking at the lot he agrees there is no other place to put the pool and he recommended that either the application be approved or that the wording of the ordinance be changed. Councilmember Huber stated that his problem with the proposal is that the trees are going to get bigger. On one hand, the Hurleys say that the fence cannot be built right next to the trees because they need to allow for future growth. On the other hand, they are proposing to plant lilacs between the fence and the pedestrian trail. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she had asked for a professional landscape plan and that she would support a motion to approve the variance if it is for the fence as proposed and if there is a professional landscape plan. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the fence would still be on the berm. He agreed that Planner Gritman's recommendation to amend the ordinance would be a better approach. City Attorney Hart stated that he would be happy to work with the city planner to come up with language as quickly as possible but it does take time to amend the ordinance. Councilmember Dwyer stated that the hardship is the fact that this lot is set in such a way that the back yard is being October 3, 2000 Page No. 16 treated as a front yard. He also pointed out that one city ordinance requires a six foot fence for a swimming pool but another ordinance does not allow a fence higher than three feet tall on lots like the Hurleys'. Attorney Hart responded that from a legal perspective Council could in its discretion make a determination that the fact that the rear yard is considered under the ordinance to be a front yard is a practical difficulty that presents a hardship. Mr. Michael Sindt, 2455 Whitfield Drive, stated that the shape of a lot in and of itself creates a hardship. Councilmember Schneeman stated that this is an unusual lot and the back yard is not very large. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that there would need to be a landscaping plan and she would need to know where the fence would be located. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council could find that -- because of the topography and the existing vegetation and trees, there is a practical difficulty as far as complying with both city ordinances. Council could continue the matter and give the Hurleys a foundation permit that would authorize them to begin construction of the pool subject to resolution of the fence and landscaping, and then direct the city attorney and city planner to prepare a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance for consideration in two weeks. Council would not be varying the requirements of the swimming pool ordinance. Mr. Hurley stated that they will not go ahead with the pool if the fence has to be inside the tree line. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she thinks the Hurleys would be better off waiting for the ordinance amendment to be considered. She did not feel that Council should allow anyone to install a pool without a fence. Councilmember Dwyer stated that there have been some legitimate concerns raised this evening and he does not understand the rush. October 3, 2000 Page No. 17 Mr. Hurley responded that the pool contractor is already booked for spring and they would have to wait for construction. Mayor Mertensotto informed the Hurleys that Council cannot tell them where the fence can be located this evening. It would be better to wait. Council can direct the city attorney and planner to prepare proposed amending language for Council consideration. Councilmember Huber moved to table the application and instruct the city attorney and city planner to review the conflicting ordinance provisions as they relate to underground swimming pools in back yards. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 00 -36, Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Boyd RATCHYE Ratchye for a wetlands permit to allow expansion of an existing deck and stairway at the rear of his home within 100 feet of the shoreline of Rogers Lake. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. Mr. Ratchye stated that he would like to replace an existing deck and expand it. The deck would be about 70 feet from the shoreline, and the deck will not have a foundation. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city planner has recommended approval of the wetlands permit for the deck and stairway because there would be no negative impact. Councilmember Schneeman moved adoption of Resolution No. 00 -84, "RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS PERMIT TO INSTALL A DECK AND STAIRWAY TO WITHIN 70 FEET OF ROGERS LAKE AT 970 WAGON WHEEL TRAIL," with the finding that the standards of the Wetlands Ordinance have been met by the application. Councilmember Dwyer seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 00-38, SINDT Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Michael Sindt for a variance to install a 5'4" tall fence within the front yard setback at 2455 Whitfield Drive. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. October 3, 2000 Page No. 18 Councilmember Krebsbach recused herself from the discussion because she and Mrs. Sindt and both candidates for City Council election in November. Mr. Sindt stated that he lives on the corner of Whitfield Drive and Mendota Heights Road. The orientation of his lot is triangular. He built a fence with his sons and the construction was "red- tagged" by the city's code enforcement officer because he did not have a permit. He informed Council that he did not know a permit was required. The fence is cedar with a four and one half foot lattice base. The orientation and grade of the property requires that the family utilize the side lot. Additionally, there is a hot tub enclosure 30 feet from the edge of the right -of -way. There is a thirty foot drop in the grade of his property, so he cannot utilize most of his back yard. He has to orient his yard towards the walking path that is all along the side of his property. He stated that he tried to integrate the fence into the existing shrubs. He informed Council that he also discussed with the Planning Commission continuing the fence that he has already installed with a 3'2" picket fence. The fence that is in place is 5'4" tall. Because of the orientation of the lot, headlights from the traffic on Mendota Heights Road glare into his home. If his application is approved, it would alleviate this problem. Councilmember Dwyer stated that the side of the lot is being treated as a front yard. Mr. Sindt stated that he feels he could demonstrate that there is a hardship. This is the only lot in the area that is sloped and the only one where the patio is oriented to the walking path. Councilmember Dwyer stated that this type of situation should be addressed in the draft amendment that will be prepared by the city attorney and planner. Mr. Sindt stated that he would prefer a hardship finding. He felt that a hardship exists. Granting the variance would allow him to complete his fence. He stated that he has not been able to work on it for two months. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council can direct the code enforement officer to take no further action until the matter October 3, 2000 Page No. 19 is back before Council. Council should address the matter with the city planner. Mr. Sindt stated that the fence is less than six feet tall, so it is not covered by the building code. Mayor Mertensotto recommended that the matter be continued. He stated that the code enforcement officer will be instructed not to do anything since the matter is under consideration by Council. Councilmember Dwyer moved to table the discussion and direct the city attorney and city planner to address an amendment to the ordinance. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 ROGERS LAKE AERATOR Council acknowledged a memo from Parks Project Manager Kullander regarding funding for the city's share of the cost for installation of an aerator and fishing pier at Rogers Lake. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the DNR is funding $30,000 of the cost and is asking the city to contribute up to $7,000 of the projected $37,000 cost. Mr. Clifford Timm has donated $4,000 to the city for improving Rogers Lake fishing opportunities, and Mr. Kullander is recommending that the donation be used to help support the aerator and pier cost and that the $3,000 remainder be funded by the Special Park Fund. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he would prefer to fund the balance of the cost from antenna rental revenues. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that the antenna rental could be used or the general fund parks operating budget could be charged. He stated that the parks maintenance costs have been much lower than budgeted. Councilmember Huber moved to approve a line item transfer within the general fund for the payment of the unbudgeted $3,000 difference. Councilmember Schneeman seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 October 3, 2000 Page No. 20 STREET LIGHT Public Works Director Danielson informed Council that NSP has indicated that it can install a street light on Victoria at Douglas at no fee for installation. Councilmember Krebsbach staged that the city should let the neighboring residents know that a street light is planned. Council directed staff to notify the residents adjacent to the intersection that Council is considering installing the street light as the result of citizen requests. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before Council, Councilmember Krebsbach moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:01 o'clock p.m. kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor