Loading...
1996-11-19 Council minutesPage No. 1 November 19, 1996 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, November 19, 1996 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. 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 Huber, Koch, Krebsbach and Smith. AGENDA ADOPTION Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Smith moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Councilmember Smith moved approval of the minutes of the October 15, 1996 meeting as amended. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the minutes of the November 5, 1996 meeting as amended. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Koch moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting, revised to move items o, Manna Freight, and q, List of Claims to the regular agenda, along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the November 12, 1996 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the Treasurer's monthly report for October. c. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department monthly report for August. d. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department monthly report for September.. Page No. 2 November 19, 1996 e. Approval to transfer $50,000 from the general fund balance to the Equipment Reserve Fund. f. Approval to issue a temporary on -sale liquor license to the Convent of the Visitation School for March 7 and 8, 1997 in conjunction with its annual Merrie Market Auction, along with waiver of the license fee. g. Approval if the sale of tax forfeit Parcel No. 27- 16400 - 133 -00 by Dakota County at public auction for non - payment of property taxes. h. Acknowledgment of a memo from Treasurer Shaughnessy and approval of the 1996/97 property and liability insurance coverage and deductible. i. Acknowledgment of a memo from Police Chief Delmont recommending that stop signs not be installed on Decorah Lane and Apache with direction to the Police Department to occasionally monitor speeds and to explore the cost and potential for use of a self - monitoring speed sign. j. Adoption of Resolution No. 96 -89, "RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FINANCING OF A PROJECT (LEXINGTON HEIGHTS APARTMENTS PROJECT), UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AS AMENED AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH." k. Acknowledgment of a notice of proposed water rate increase from the St. Paul Water Utility. 1. Acknowledgment of an update memo from Engineer Mogan on the status of the Bunker Hills street reconstruction project. m. Approval of the issuance of a permit to Oasis Market for a one by five foot pylon sign below the existing pylon sign at 1960 Dodd Road on the condition that the TCF Express Teller is located within the Oasis building and is accessible only during the regular hours of operation of the store. n. Adoption of Resolution No. 96 -90, `A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RULES AND RENTAL FEES FOR USE Page No. 3 November 19, 1996 OF CITY PARKS AND PROPERTY," with direction to the Parks and Recreation Commission to clarify Section 1 regarding refunds. o. Approval for the Engineering Department to purchase Eagle Point Software's RoadCalc 6.0 for $1,370, the cost to be charged equally against current and pending street improvement projects. p. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated November 19, 1996 and attached hereto. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 MANNA FREIGHT Council acknowledged a memo from Administrative Assistant Hollister regarding a request from Manna Freight for a minor revision in its building plan to change the access to the low roof to allow a warehouse interior wall mounted ladder to a vertical door positioned at the lowest point on the front of the building to facilitate access to the low roof. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the original proposal was approved with an internal ladder to allow access to the lower roof utility lines and that he understands that the proposal now is to add the door on the warehouse portion, well back from the front of the building, to give access to the roof. Councilmember Krebsbach asked if the four foot door will be a problem for fire fighting. Mr. Randy Giesen, project contractor, responded that the door is just for servicing the gas line and is according to code. He further stated that the door will be set back and will not be visible from the street, and that it will be the same color as the building. Councilmember Krebsbach moved to approve the modification as requested to allow an external four foot access door to gain access to the lower roof in accordance with the plans submitted and on file with the city. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 4 November 19, 1996 HEARING - TILSEN AREA Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public STREETS hearing on proposed street reconstruction/rehabilitation improvements to serve the Tilsen's Highland Heights area. Council acknowledged a memo and proposed resolution from Engineer Marc Mogan along with letters from Roger and Violet Noreen, Stanley Karon, Steve and Heather Ashley, and Phil Freeman, all in favor of street reconstruction. Engineer Marc Mogan gave the audience a background on the street rehabilitation policy and described the streets proposed to be upgraded. He explained that the existing, original streets were constructed to the rural street section design and 30 foot width and are approaching the end of their service life. He explained that preventive maintenance is no longer effective or prudent. He informed the audience that NSP would like to upgrade its gas distribution system in the area to current standards, and if the project is approved NSP would probably start its work in April. The proposed street improvements would begin around May 1, 1997. He explained how the project would be constructed and discussed funding. He informed the audience that the assessment proposed for street reconstruction with curb and gutter, after city subsidy to the project cost, is a uniform $3,700 per lot. He explained that he hopes to begin field work this winter and bid the project in February or March, and that construction would take from May until mid -July with sod restoration beginning in July. He stated that if the project is approved, the assessments would be collected over a 19 year period with interest during the first year at 8.75% and 7% for the remainder of the assessment period. Engineer Mogan informed the audience that in the street reconstruction projects which have been constructed, property owners have been given the ability to negotiate with the construction contractor for reconstruction of their driveways. He stated that while the city would assess the driveway replacement cost for the property owners, the city does not participate in cost sharing for driveway reconstruction. Responding to questions from the audience, Mr. Mogan stated that the grass center median on Lilac Lane will be maintained. He stated that the existing Lilac Lane has about a 21 to 22 feet wide bituminous surface in each direction with a ten foot median and the median will remain essentially as it is but will have curb and gutter against it. He stated that the north side of Karon Road is in Lilydale and the north side of Karon is not being assessed in the project. In response to a question from a lady in the audience who owns two lots, one fronting on Victoria and the other on Caren, he stated that Page No. 5 November 19, 1996 the city will only assess property that has access to an improved street. Responding to an audience question, Public Works Director Danielson stated that Dakota County will have to answer the question how far curb and gutter will extend to Victoria, since a county permit is required. A gentleman in the audience asked if the contract can require that construction begin and end on a date certain. He stated that the property owners care about the sod and do not want to be without sod until mid - October. Engineer Mogan responded that the contract can be structured any way the city wishes, but the cost would be much greater if the contract specified dates certain for sod installation. He explained that the best way to get a project completed early is to add a bonus clause, but it would be up to the neighborhood whether they want the added cost. Councilmember Huber stated that staff is very willing to communicate to the residents what the project status is and what is going on and will keep residents informed on the timing for the stages of the project as those stages begin. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that it appears that the neighborhood is satisfied with the proposed 33 foot street widths but that she feels if the neighborhood wants 30 foot streets (the current width), Council should look at it. She also asked if the NSP upgrade involves moving the meters, and stated that she would like people to be informed on what changes NSP is proposing. She asked if the city or the neighborhood is paying for the improvements to Lilac Lane. Engineer Mogan responded that the Lilac Lane improvement is part of the total project cost which will be split between the neighborhood and the city. He stated that the city standard rural section is a 30 foot wide rural surface, and adding curb and gutter brings the width to 33 feet, which provides parking on one side and space for two vehicles to pass on the bituminous surface. He explained that if the neighborhood wants 30 foot street rural section streets they can be constructed but the entire cost of the project would be borne by the property owners. Responding to a question about NSP installation of underground utilities, he stated that NSP would probably be interested in doing underground installation, but Page No. 6 November 19, 1996 it would be expensive and the neighborhood would then bear 100% of the cost. Responding to a member of the audience who asked if the streets could be 30 feet wide with curb and gutter if the neighborhood wanted them, Engineer Mogan stated that he does not know if 30 feet wide gutter to gutter is really wide enough. He explained that in a cul -de -sac situation it might be, but in the Tilsen area he does not see what the adverse impact would be if the streets were 33 feet. He explained that it appears that there is enough room to add the gutter on each side of the street beds. He stated that typical rural sections have ditches to carry surface water and right now in the area there is a compromise where the sod grows up to the blacktop and water ponds at the edge of the blacktop and saturates the sub - grade, destroying the structural integrity of the streets. Councilmember Smith informed the audience that under the city's street rehabilitation policy, the city does not mandate to a neighborhood how to do streets, but when the policy was developed, Council gave much study to what would work the best in the long run for the city. Based on that information, it was apparent that a street section with curb and gutter would give much better service in many ways and would improve the life of the street, improve drainage and reduce annual maintenance costs. Council felt it to be in the best interest of the city and the neighborhoods to promote curb and gutter and storm sewer, and in order to encourage property owners, Council adopted a policy whereby the city would pay half of the cost of the full standard street with curb and gutter and storm sewer. She further stated that the street width does not have to be 33 feet unilaterally if all neighborhoods cannot accommodate that width. She informed the residents that if a neighborhood decides it wants something other than the standard city street, it could choose the rural 30 foot width design, without curb and gutter and storm sewer, but that would not receive the benefit of any city contribution because overall, the city cost will be higher for maintaining that type of street. Responding to a question, Engineer Mogan informed the audience that reconstructing the streets as they were originally constructed would cost about $3,000 per lot, a simple overlay would probably cost about $2,500 per lot. He explained that the life expectancy of an overlay is ten to fifteen years, and the assessments would be collected over a ten year period. He stated that the city standard street has a life expectancy of twenty to twenty five years and the assessments would be certified for nineteen years. Page No. 7 November 19, 1996 There were several questions about specific drainage problems. Council directed the property owners to contact Engineer Mogan with their individual concerns and problems. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council decided several years ago to begin an infrastructure reserve fund to assist in the financing of street reconstruction projects. He explained that when Council talks about an urban section, it is talking about getting rid of culverts and ditches and having the surface water picked up in the street and carried to ponding areas. He explained that Council believes it is in the best interest of the city to construct urban section streets because they are easier to plow and last longer, which is why the city contributes half of the cost. He stated that the rationale behind uniform assessments is that each lot, regardless of size, uses the streets to the same extent. He suggested that the property owners let Council know if they wish the project to proceed. Mr. Joe Morgan stated that he supports the project and thinks it is a good idea. He asked how the estimate was arrived at. Engineer Mogan responded that the engineering estimate was based on the bids for the most recent projects, and that the estimate should be within five to ten percent of the low bid. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that if the bids comes in drastically different from the engineering estimate, Council would not proceed, but in any event the property owners will be assessed no more than $3,700. There was brief discussion over street lights, a request for speed limit reduction and a request for "one -way" signs at Lilac to prevent motorists from using the wrong lane. A gentleman in the audience asked if a cul -de -sac could be constructed without curb and gutter. Councilmember Smith responded that a project is hard to engineer with one part of the neighborhood different from the rest. Councilmember Huber stated that his preference would be that there not be a mix of construction types and that the project either be entirely with curb and gutter or entirely without. Page No. 8 November 19, 1996 It was the consensus of the property owners present at the hearing that Council should proceed with the project. Councilmember Huber pointed out that there have been no letters of opposition to the project. There being no further questions or comments from the audience, Councilmember Huber moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Huber moved adoption of Resolution No. 96 -91, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S REPORT ORDERING PREPARATION OF IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE TILSEN'S HIGHLAND HEIGHTS, TILSEN'S HIGHLAND HEIGHTS PLAT 2, TILSEN'S HIGHLAND HEIGHTS PLAT 3 (JOB NO. 9612, IMPROVEMENT NO. 96, PROJECT NO. 4)." Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Staff was directed to inform the neighborhood of NSP's plans. RECESS Mayor Mertensotto called a recess at 9:55. The meeting was reconvened at 10:00 p.m. CASE NO. 96-26, BECKMANN Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director Danielson regarding continued discussion on an application from Mr. Paul Beckmann, 1882 South Lane, for an 17 foot variance to allow installation of a ham radio antenna tower. Council also acknowledged a letter from Mr. Beckmann and correspondence from Mr. Garrett Lysiak, Owl Engineering, and R.W. Rentfrow, professional engineers retained by Mr. Beckmann, and letters of opposition from Mr. & Mrs. Ken Girouard, 1902 South Lane and Mr. John Thames, 656 Wesley Lane. Mr. Beckmann and his legal counsel, Mr. John Bellows, were present for the discussion. Mayor Mertensotto stated that discussion on the matter had been continued from November 5h because Mr. Beckmann was to submit information to the city and the city's consultant, Geoffrey Jillson, regarding design data for the proposed tower. Page No. 9 November 19, 1996 Mr. Beckmann responded that most of the information has been submitted to the city but there are some details still being worked on by his engineer. He explained that he has submitted the detail specifications concerning survivability and preliminary foundation design. Public Works Director Danielson informed Council that Mr. Jillson visited City Hall today and reviewed the information that had been submitted. He stated that Mr. Jillson estimated that 90% of the design detail has been submitted, and that Mr. Jillson's report is not yet available. Mr. Beckmann stated that the base itself is complicated because he wants to keep the tower away from the house as much as possible and the base is in the fill soil of the foundation. He explained that his engineer must make sure that it will not damage the integrity of the foundation of the home and that is what the engineer is currently working on. Public Works Director Danielson stated that he has notes on Mr. Jillson 's review and he will forward a copy to Mr. Beckmann tomorrow. He further stated that Mr. Beckmann has indicated that the rest of the information should be available early next week, which Mr. Jillson has indicated should allow enough time for his review and report to Council by December 3. Mr. Beckmann stated that the packet of information he has submitted to the city could be considered the description of the project at this point, and that it differs from the original proposal in construction materials. He explained that the tower was originally proposed to be aluminum but it is now proposed to be steel. The tower would be the same height, but the base will be reduced from 22 inches to 18 inches. Mayor Mertensotto asked if there are any changes other than the triangular width of the base and the steel construction of the pole Mr. Beckmann responded that because of the computations which have been done on the amount of antenna material that can be supported, the antenna area is slightly smaller. Additionally, the proposed location of the tower has moved four to five feet to the south, further from the closest (north) property line. He explained that it will be about 42 feet from the property line, in a location which will screen it more. Page No. 10 November 19, 1996 Councilmember Krebsbach asked what Mr. Beckmann does as an amateur ham radio operator. Mr. Beckmann responded that he engages in operation as he is federally licensed - in that part of the FCC description of the amateur satellite service. He explained that what he does is a service rather than a hobby, and as he submitted in his early application, there was a joint resolution of Congress that specifically dealt with amateur satellite service and which describes the activity he engages in. Mr. Beckmann read portions of the resolution for Council. He explained that he engages without pecuniary interest in the amateur satellite service, monitoring telemetry of satellites in orbit and assisting in the design and construction of satellites and enhancing the base of trained individuals in the United States. He informed Council that he has written on a satellite that will be put into orbit in April by gathering information from other sources. He stated that he has a very rudimentary station now that is not capable of communicating with satellites. Councilmember Krebsbach asked Mr. Beckmann why he needs the antenna if he is getting transmissions now. Mr. Beckmann responded that his purpose is to engage in the enhancement of reception around the earth. He clarified the statement by using the example that individuals can receive communications from Europe with a crystal set under perfect conditions, but he stated that he has very limited capability currently to engage in a similar practice at this time. Councilmember Krebsbach asked Mr. Beckmann if he is at the point that he is contributing to a writing about satellites. Mr. Beckmann responded that he is getting his information from individuals who are designing a satellite which has not yet been launched. He informed Council that he is constrained not to gain financially through amateur satellite service. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that in his letter Mr. Beckmann stated that he could accommodate his needs without the antenna by placing antennas on his home in different locations. Mr. Beckmann responded that he could do so but that the Mayor has commented on the aesthetic impact of antennas on the neighborhood. He stated that if he were to conform to the 25 foot height limit, it would require him to erect multiple antenna support structures in his and and on the garage. He explained that the Page No. 11 November 19, 1996 requirement is that the antennas have a clear line of sight to the satellite, so at 25 feet the roof of his house would obstruct that line, as would the roofs of his neighbors homes, so he would have to have multiple looking points in his yard to achieve what the tower would. Mayor Mertensotto asked whether Mr. Beckmann's house is in the wrong location for optimum communication. Mr. Bellows responded that if this is not a proper location, there is none. He stated that the tower is only 33 feet tall, and if cannot be placed on this lot it cannot be put anywhere. He stated that Councilmember Krebsbach has talked about 25 foot high towers. He stated that at least three to five towers would need to be located around the lot to accomplish the same communication as the proposed tower. He stated that this is a perfectly appropriate and proper activity that the Minnesota Supreme Court has indicated is a normal and incidental use of residential property. He further stated that an assessment from a professional engineer has been submitted that deals with the fact that this is far from an optimum situation and is a clear compromise. Mr. Bellows stated that the structure of the tower has been changed and the tower has been moved. He explained that this a huge investment in time and emotion for Mr. Beckmann, and that Mr. Beckmann wants to make sure that it is done properly and conforms to the building code and proper design. He stated that there is clear technical evidence that this is a compromise. He stated that at the last meeting, one concern raised was the impact on residential properties in terms of property values. He stated that during the discussion, the City of Edina was used as an example of comparable values, and informed Council that Edina allows 62 foot tall towers. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council is talking about residential values, and the city has the highest value in Dakota County, and while Edina may allow antennas, a tower larger than 25 feet is illegal in Mendota Heights. Mr. Bellows responded that there are no covenants or restrictions that prohibit the tower. He stated that the proposal conforms to the comprehensive plan and the applicant is not talking about anything that is outside of the city's ordinance. He stated that the ordinance provides for the variance process and Mr. Beckmann is asking for a variance for a tower higher than 25 feet in a residential area. He further stated that the applicant has submitted information that twenty -feet would not provide reasonable accommodation. Page No. 12 November 19, 1996 Councilmember Huber stated that the information indicates that if the tower is not 100 feet tall there will be interference. Mr. Bellows responded that the engineer indicates that the proposed tower is far from the optimum, and an analysis on a 25 foot tower would be that there would be no communication at all in several directions and would render the antenna useless. Responding to a question from Councilmember Huber about the new phase three satellites, he stated that there will be more time when the new satellite will be higher than the others but not at all times. Mr. Beckmann stated that there may be a phase three satellite on the drawings boards, but it takes about ten years to build one. Councilmember Smith asked if the satellite which will be launched in the spring will increase Mr. Beckmann's ability to communicate at 25 feet. Mr. Bellows responded that that would be like saying yes, you could hear the radio but it would be locked on one station forever. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, Mr. Bellows stated that the antenna must be located on the Beckmann property because this is highly directional and the antenna must be pointed to the satellite to be effective. Mr. Beckmann stated that it is clear in PRB -1 that antennas must be allowed. He felt that one of the things that has exacerbated the problems is the lack of a clear message from Council. He stated that Council made it clear that the city spent much money on the Pentel lawsuit and the city has not established what the limits of its authority are. He stated that his neighbors are clearly unaware of what authority the city has. Mayor Mertensotto responded that many times people have come to ask for antennas and Council has suggested that they go to a more appropriate location. He stated that there are few antennas in the city. Mr. Bellows responded that the applicant is providing a solid engineering basis and a solid legal basis that he has made reasonable accommodation. He stated that this is a totally non - paying operation and there is no aspect of it that has reimbursement - it would be a violation of federal law. He explained that Mr. Beckmann has never talked about expanded or commercial use of the equipment and has only talked about expansion by modified antenna in the future. He stated that a letter of objection in the Council agenda was from the Page No. 13 November 19, 1996 Mayor's daughter, and because of conflict of interest the Mayor should excuse himself from the discussion, especially if there is any question on impact on property values. Councilmember Koch stated that the comment in the letter Council received from Mr. Rentfrow indicate that Mr. Beckmann is willing to compromise to get the minimum effectiveness to be a good neighbor makes her wonder that he could not in the future communicate as effectively as he would like with the minimum reception he will be getting and would perhaps come back before Council in the future. She felt that perhaps he should consider not doing anything. She further stated that the one thing that really concerns her is the covenants, where the neighbors agree not to construct auxiliary permanent structures. She stated that if Mr. Beckmann signed an agreement, she is bothered that he agreed to the condition. Mr. Bellows responded that if Council would like, he will submit an affidavit that there is no such document signed by Mr. Beckmann. He stated that the only covenants are the ones Mr. Beckmann received from Dakota County at the time he bought his lot, and they only addressed back yard storage sheds. Councilmember Smith stated that she needs the city's consultant's report before she can make a decision, and if that keeps coming in a revised form as Council continues in the process, it will be very difficult to make a decision. She further stated that she hopes Mr. Beckmann will give Council the courtesy of submitting complete and full information before Council makes a decision. Mr. Bellows agreed, stating that no decision can be given this evening. Councilmember Smith stated that Council will be presented with very complex information only three days before the next Council meeting. She was not sure that Council will be able to absorb all of the information in such a short time. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he will entertain comments from the audience but will not vote on the variance application. Councilmember Smith stated that it is her understanding that in situations such as this, cities can only use the minimal capacity of their ability to govern and state law defines that as protecting the health, safety and welfare of the community, which is possibly open to interpretation. She further stated that one important aspect is Page No. 14 November 19, 1996 safety, and in terms of the health and welfare of the community, those are aspects Council has not investigated. She stated that the limit of Council's ability is to act on health, safety and welfare and otherwise must give reasonable accommodation under state law. Attorney Hart stated that the city has an obligation to reasonably accommodate Mr. Beckmann's interests in amateur radio communication. The city has a right to inquire into and determine areas of legitimate concern to the city in issues of health, welfare and safety, and once the city has identified areas that apply to a particular situation at that point that the city's concerns disappear, Mr. Beckmann is allowed reasonable accommodation. He further stated that if the information is not supplied by Mr. Beckmann within the allowed time and Council must act, he felt it is reasonable for the city to deny the application because adequate information has not bee supplied for Council to make a determination on the impact on health, safety and welfare. Councilmember Huber pointed out that Council must make a decision at its next meeting. Mr. James Schueppert stated that Mr. Bellows has stated that he did not believe the antenna would violate the covenants of the neighborhood, and Mr. Schueppert disagreed. He stated that the covenants on his property also apply to the Beckmann property, and they prohibit television antennas and antenna structures as Mr. Beckmann is proposing. He further stated that he cannot explain why Mr. Beckmann was ignorant of the covenants. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she asked at the first discussion how Mr. Beckmann had not known the covenants which were commonly understood in the neighborhood. Mr. Dennis Finn stated that a copy of the covenants was distributed to the neighbors and the actual covenants as they are filed on his property are slightly different in Section 1, relating to architectural control. He stated that the covenants distributed to the neighborhood did not have a second paragraph in the section. He stated that the neighborhood was aware that there was a difference and did not think it was a big deal. He distributed a copy of the registered covenants to Council, stating that they are the same on all of the properties within the subdivision. He explained that under the covenants no building or other structure or any additions or alterations can be made until the plans and specifications are submitted to and approved in writing by the architectural committee and a member of the committee must sign the plans before a Page No. 15 November 19, 1996 building permit can be acquired. He explained that the second paragraph states that the committee is comprised of the developer and whoever he designates and a committee is in place until all lots are built or until 1990, whichever comes first. He stated that Mr. Beckmann interprets that paragraph as meaning that the committee is abolished as of 1990, but the neighborhood interpretation is that the developer is no longer involved after December 31, 1990 but the concept is not abolished. He distributed a letter from the developer, Michael Kurtz, and, responding to a question from Councilmember Smith, stated that the Beckmann lot is included in the covenants. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she has a question about another set of covenants that says that no antennas are allowed in the Ponds. Mr. Finn responded that the antenna restriction was not included in the covenants that were filed with the plat and he did not know who got a copy of those covenants. Mr. Schueppert stated that he thinks those are commonly understood restrictions. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that there was one set of covenants that was commonly understood in the neighborhood but Mr. Beckmann went to the County. Mr. Finn responded that he cannot say that it was commonly understood by the neighborhood or to what extent those covenants were distributed. He felt that Section 3 of the covenants, relating to noxious activity, could apply. Mr. Schueppert stated that he believes he could provide the Council with a legal decision that the covenants apply and also he believed that the proposed antenna would affect property values. Ms. Jan Banks stated that the neighborhood has retained the services of appraiser Blake Davis, who is very familiar with property values in Mendota Heights. She stated that the neighborhood asked Mr. Blake to prepare a professional view on what impact the antenna would have on the property values in the neighborhood. She informed Council that Mr. Davis' findings were that there would be a negative impact on the values of many surrounding properties resulting from the construction of the ham radio antenna depending on the location, etc., of the properties. She briefly reviewed and then distributed copies of the report to Council. She pointed out that Page No. 16 November 19, 1996 there are no power poles in the neighborhood, and that the report cites the potential for interference with electronics. Councilmember Krebsbach asked what the cost of burying utilities is and who bears the cost. Administrator Batchelder responded that Engineer Mogan indicated earlier this evening that it would cost about $4,000 per lot. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that when the buried utilities are installed in a new subdivision, the cost is about $2,000 per lot, and that is refunded as people hook up. Buried phone lines for a new division are about $800 per lot, which is also refundable as the homes hook up. Responding to an audience question about interference with household electronics, Mr. Bellows sated that there are standards of the FCC that apply and there should be no interference from the antenna if the household electronics are properly designed conforming electronics devices. He further stated that even when there are problems that occur, amateurs feel it is important to fix the problems when brought to their attention. He explained that adding a "donut" to a phone cord would take care of phone interference. Councilmember Smith asked if federal law pre -empts neighbors from any recourse if there is any interference. Mr. Bellows responded that it does not and that Mr. Beckmann must operate in the confines of maintained and tuned equipment or he could lose his license. He further stated that everyone is responsible for their own acts and to the extent that a neighbor has an inadequate piece of equipment that does not conform to FCC regulations, they are responsible. He stated that if Mr. Beckmann is operating within the federal law the neighbors have no recourse. Attorney Hart stated that he thinks this goes beyond federal law, and PRB -1 applies to the relationship between federal and local law, and if Mr. Beckmann is operating radio equipment that materially interferes with the use of home electronics, that is a nuisance and it would, in his opinion, be a significant right of the members of the home owners association. Councilmember Krebsbach asked who would be responsible if someone needs to make a 911 call and the use of their phone is inhibited. Page No. 17 November 19, 1996 Mr. Bellows responded that he does not believe there has ever been an instance like the one described, although there have been cases where there has been interference with phones. He stated that he has never heard of any case where an emergency call has not gone through. Councilmember Koch asked if there has ever been a problem with interference in all the years Mr. Beckman has been operating a ham radio. Mr. Finn responded that there have been problems, but no one knows what caused the interference, power lines or whatever. Mayor Mertensotto stated that whatever decision Council makes will be up to the Council and that he will step down from the table if the matter is back on the next agenda. He suggested that staff place the matter immediately after the consent calendar and he will bow out of the meeting. Staff was directed to mail the Blake Davis communication to Mr. Bellows. Mr. Bellows stated that he is waiting for information to come back from Mr. Jillson and that Mr. Beckman has submitted some of the information relative to structural analysis and he has received Mr. Jillson's comments on that. He stated that he also has a comment on what should be submitted in addition - he asked that he be given the information from Mr. Jillson as soon as possible and if it presents a problem to get the information from Mr. Jillson in time for Council's review the matter could be continued beyond December 3. He stated that if Council decides to terminate the process when the 120 days has elapsed, Mr. Beckmann could apply right away. Mayor Mertensotto stated that if Council does not have the applicant's consent to extend the deadline, approval is implied. He further stated that Council's decision will either have to be made next meeting or the applicant will have to consent to an extension. Mr. Bellows responded that Mr. Beckmann will likely request a short extension of time so that al of the studies can be done and all parties can review and respond to them. Mr. Schueppert insisted that Council make a decision this evening so that he does not need to spend any more time on the matter. Page No. 18 November 19, 1996 Mayor Mertensotto responded that sometimes applications must be extended in order to allow adequate study. Mayor Mertensotto informed Council that he will be absent from the December 17 meeting. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Batchelder regarding a request from the Dispute Resolution Center for a financial contribution. Councilmember Smith moved to designate $500 as a financial contribution to be made to the Dispute Resolution Center. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 LMC POLICIES Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Batchelder along with the proposed League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policies for 1997. MENDOTA MALL SIGNS Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director Danielson regarding proposed amendments to the Mendota Mall sign policy to allow installation of a sign for Dr. Wild at the rear entrance to the mall.. Mr. Ed Paster and Mr. John Streeter, from Paster Enterprises, were present for the discussion. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council does not want a sign band on the rear of the shopping center. He stated that he has spoken to Mr. Paster who informed him that he wants to develop the same sign band all around, but that he informed Mr. Paster that the rear is not the face of the building. He further stated that he can see why the dentist would want a sign since his access and parking is to the back of the building, but it is not the face of the building. He stated that if the sign were to be allowed, Snyder's would likely also want one on the rear. He stated that what is proposed is contrary to the sign policy for the city. Councilmember Smith stated that she would say since it is the side of the building that faces a residential area there should not be lighted signs. She agreed that there could be a uniform identifier that the entrance is an access to a specific office, but that there could be no lights. Mr. Paster stated that the shopping center has four sides and that the center does not have a separate delivery area. He further stated that the building faces three commercial streets and there are no homes Page No. 19 November 19, 1996 affected by the shopping center or by its lights. He stated that landscaping and blacktop has been installed on the South Plaza side of the site to accommodate the traffic coming in from that area and the entrance at the rear also accommodates the new senior facility. He felt that the residents of the senior facility would be very happy to find an easy way to get to the shopping center, and everything in the center, including the paint and decor gives the appearance of shopping on all three sides. He stated that there is a sign band on the back and he just wants to accommodate the dentist by installing a 24 inch lit sign that just says "dentist." He stated that the sign will bring people into the site from South Plaza and the bank to the dentist's entrance. He informed Council that he would also like to have a sign on the rear for Snyders in the future and that a back entrance was installed for Snyders so that bus and truck drivers could enter there from the area where they park. He explained that he would like the center to be as good looking form South Plaza as it is from T.H. 110. He showed Council elevations of the rear of the building and distributed drawings of the sign. Councilmember Huber informed Mr. Paster that a dentist on South Plaza was recently denied a sign, and is now being asked to approve a lighted eleven foot four inch sign for a dentist across South Plaza. Mr. Paster responded that it is not an unusual size sign for a shopping center and he did not know what Council's reasons were for denying the other sign but that he does not feel that is an issue. He asked how Council expects a shopping center to do business without signs, and stated that signs need to be illuminated. Councilmember Smith stated that if the signage is approved everyone else will want signs on the back of the center. Mr. Paster responded that there are only two businesses that use entrances on the rear of the building and that is all the signage he is looking for. Councilmember Smith responded that others will ask. She pointed out that Mr. Paster is asking for a band all around the back of the building. Mr. Paster responded that the businesses in the center want to be identified and he wants everyone to know the center is in business. He stated that the sign is a quality sign. Page No. 20 November 19, 1996 Councilmember Smith stated that she thinks Council could certainly provide for some signage, but she did not think it needs to be an eleven foot sign with 24 inch letters. Mayor Mertensotto stated that if the lighted sign were approved, people who live on Creek Avenue could see it. Mr. Street responded that he has driven in the area at night and there is possibly one house that could see the shopping center. Mr. Paster stated that the letters in the front of the building are 35 inches tall versus the proposed 24 inch letters on the rear. He stated that he does not need a directional sign, but rather needs an identification sign at the entrance for the dentist. He stated that this is a shopping center, not a residential area, and he needs to have 24 inch letters on a sign ten feet about the ground. Councilmember Koch stated that she looks at this as an extension of the shopping center, not the back, and if Mr. Paster is trying to draw from the senior facility, etc., she does not want a dark, dead area at the rear of the building. Mr. Paster stated that the sign in the front of the center for the dentist is a very small sign. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the South Plaza side is still the rear of the building and there are no peaks or canopies. Mr. Paster responded that the decor is the same and even the sidewalk is raised to match the front and the doors are the same as those on the front of the building. Mayor Mertensotto stated that no one will be traveling down South Plaza that will be able to quickly see what is in the center, and he did not feel that lights from the center need to project out six blocks. A gentleman in the audience stated that the commercial businesses on the other side of South Plaza have signs. He stated that what is good for those businesses is good for the shopping center, and asked why Mr. Paster cannot have a sign which will not affect the neighbors. Councilmember Huber stated that he will not approve an eleven foot lighted sign. Page No. 21 November 19, 1996 Mr. Paster responded that everyone seems to be getting hung up on the size of the sign and the size of the letters. He asked that Council consider the size of the building, and explained that there needs to be architectural balance and proportion. He stated that his designers have designed the sign so that it would look appropriate on the sign band, and that he does not want little signs that would look . ridiculous and out of balance and make the shopping center look bad. Mayor Mertensotto asked what would happen if Old America comes in and wants a sign at the rear entrance. Mr. Paster responded that Old America did not want to be at the rear. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that Council sees the South Plaza side as the back of the shopping center and the change is that this is now a three sided shopping center and there will be businesses fronting on that side. Her concern is just over the neighborhood seeing the lights from the sign. 1 Mr. Streeter responded that he has driven the neighborhood after dark and the lights at the back of the center that light the parking lot are fifty times brighter than the proposed sign will ever be, so the sign will have no impact on the neighbors. He pointed out that the shopping center is a PUD and if there were a request for other signage in the future, Council would have to approve them. Mr. Paster stated that he cannot understand the reluctance of Council to approve a sign for the shopping center for the dentist. Councilmember Smith responded that the dentist already has a sign and is asking for a second sign, and now Council is being presented with a new policy for signage on the back of the building. Responding to a comment about the light being on all night, Mr. Paster asked what time Council would want the light off. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would want the light turned off at 10:00 p.m. Mr. Paster stated that he can arrange for the sign light to be turned off at that time. Administrator Batchelder stated that at the last Council discussion j on the proposed sign policy amendment, Council asked staff to have Mr. Paster come back with the minimum proposal he could live with and the hours of lighting, but what staff received was the same as Page No. 22 November 19, 1996 that which was available at the last discussion. He felt that continuing the discussion to the next meeting would be consistent with the prior discussion. Councilmember Huber moved to continue the matter to December 3 for further discussion. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 RECREATION PROGRAM Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Batchelder regarding consideration of a full -time recreation programmer position. Dr. John Norton, representing the MHAA, stated that the organization keeps growing and needs better communication with what is going on within the city and with the school district. He stated that his experience has been that even though the recreation program is very accommodating, it is hard to get in touch with him because he is only part -time. He stated that as the city has grown there is a real need for someone to at least be a full -time liaison between the school district, MHAA and the city, to take care of the park and recreation needs. Mayor Mertensotto responded that it is not proposed that the recreation programmer do scheduling for MHAA, and that what he is doing is scheduling use of the fields. He stated that for the added time, the city would be getting into programs that the residents relied on community education for. He stated that the city hired a programmer so that city staff would not have to deal with scheduling the fields, and once a full -time person is added the position is permanent. Councilmember Huber stated that during his election campaign he spoke to at least 800 people over a few weeks and did not hear anyone say they oppose the conversion to full -time. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that perhaps what is need is two part- time people during the summer months to accommodate scheduling. He did not think the other programs are needed because they are being provided by the school district. He stated that the programs do not provide anything for seniors, and all the expansion of the position would do is increase the city's levy. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that the taxes statements recently mailed out by the county, which includes the full -time position, indicate that the city's taxes will go down next year. He explained Page No. 23 November 19, 1996 that when Council approved the preliminary levy and budget, the conversion to full -time status was included, and if it is taken out, it would be taken out at the truth in taxation hearing. He further stated that the program revenues, which were included in the general revenues for next year, would need to be reduced. He stated that in 1996, about $17,000 in revenues was generated from recreation programs and $35,000 was anticipated in the proposed 1997 budget. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he has not seen any demand from the residents for more recreation programs. Mr. Stan Linell, Parks and Recreation Commission Chairperson, stated that the commission strongly supports the full -time position. He pointed out that Council will control whether recreation becomes a department or remains a single person staff, and that the recreations programs that the city has are required to be self - sufficient, and each program is paying its own way except the park celebration and concerts in the park. He explained that the understood goal is to keep the city's cost just to the recreation programmer, and that the commission is not looking to create a grand department or a great expenditure for the city. He stated that the commission has seen the increase in demand by the increase in use of the programs as more programs are offered. Councilmember Smith stated that she had asked for the proposal to be prepared and that Council just received a lot of information on what the possibilities are but she did not have a good sense of what is proposed for the person to do an a regular basis. She further stated that full utilization of the existing recreation resources in the city really appeals to her. She felt that there is possibly some room for expansion of utilizing the city's resources such as forming groups for hiking, volleyball, etc. and stated that she would like a concrete proposal so that Council knows in what direction the city is heading. She thought that the proposal is too open now and needs a much firmer direction where Council would be approving something solid. Councilmember Huber stated that he thinks that staff was trying to scope out ideas that the community may have some interest in, and until the programmer progresses with those programs Council will not know how they will be accepted. He also stated that the programmer needs to offer programs that are self - sustaining. Councilmember Smith stated that if all of the additional groups and programs are created and run in a great manner, and then for some Page No. 24 November 19, 1996 reason the expectation changes and all of a sudden it is put on the city to run other programs, the city could end up with twice the load. Councilmember Huber responded that no one is considering taking on the MHAA programs. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city is spending about $380,000 a year for parks, including debt levy. Councilmember Koch stated that she was one who supported the issue for discussion but what she sees is that if the city's programs are self - supporting it is a wash and they are not bringing in revenues. She stated that the city would still have the salary going out. She further stated that the memo stated that currently all segments of the public are under- served and the recreation programmer could build programs to serve every segment of the community. She stated that Council does not know how much activity there would be, but perhaps the city should let the people know of the offerings that are currently available. She did not know if a full -time year round person is needed or whether there needs to be full time during just the summer. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that it was originally presented to Council that this would be a department, and she stated that she would hesitate for the city to duplicate what the school district, community education and technical college are doing now. She further stated that she felt this is a case of hiring someone over qualified for the job and that there are people who could work half- time with a more flexible schedule and perhaps the city could add another half time when needed. She felt that it is unfair to ask the current programmer to continue to work half time in his position and stated that she would like to see the city have someone with flexibility to work more hours during the field scheduling or perhaps another half time person to supplement during that time. Mayor Mertensotto felt that recreation programming needs to be reigned in and he did not want the city to get into craft types of activities. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that perhaps there should be a liaison for MHAA and scheduling with the assistance of additional temporary help during two to three months of field scheduling for seasonal demand. Page No. 25 November 19, 1996 Mr. Linell stated that the recreation programmer also works for the community education program, so it is not his intent to duplicate anything they are currently providing. Councilmember Huber stated that the programmer's scheduling does not occur in the summer, because by that time schedules are set. He pointed out that scheduling is going on during January through March. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that the biggest money maker and biggest part of the recreation programmer's job is running the adult softball leagues, which pay half of the programmer's salary. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would like to have workshop in January to look at needs and does not think this is the way to make a decision. Councilmember Krebsbach moved to remove the add -level increase from the budget. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 1 Huber PARK ISSUES Council acknowledged a memo from Administrative Intern Hollister regarding a request from the Park and Recreation Commission that Council direct staff to prepare an inventory and optimum use analysis of all remaining vacant land in the city. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 It was the consensus of Council to direct staff to perform an inventory and analysis. Council acknowledged a request from the Parks and Recreation Commission for a joint meeting to discuss several park related issues. Councilmember Krebsbach moved to conduct a joint workshop with the Parks and Recreation Commission at 7:30 p.m. on January 14, 1997. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Council directed Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Linell to prepare a list of topics and submit it to the City Administrator for distribution to Council before the holidays. Page No. 26 November 19, 1996 CLAIMS LIST Councilmember Smith moved approval of the list of claims dated November 19, 1996 and totaling $ 596,847.61. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Koch moved that the meeting be adjourned to closed session for discussion on labor negotiations. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 1:05 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL Asphalt Contractor License Radloff and Weber Blacktopping, Inc. Excavating Contractor License Penn Contracting, Inc. Roto- Rooter Services Company General Contractor Li =zg Minuti -Ogle Co., Inc. Welle Construction,Inc.