Loading...
1995-07-06 Council minutesPage No. 4455 July 6, 1995 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, July 6, 1995 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. Acting Mayor Smith called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Acting Mayor Smith, Councilmembers Huber, Koch, and Krebsbach. Mayor Mertensotto had notified Council that he would be absent. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Koch moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of the minutes of the regular meeting with correction. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 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. Acknowledgmenf of the minutes of the June 14, 1995 Airport Relations Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the June 27, 1995 Planning Commission meeting. c. Approval to issue a building permit for exterior remodeling for Farmer's Insurance, 800 South Plaza Drive. d. Adoption of Resolution No. 95 -27, "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR SWANSON'S 2ND ADDITION," and Resolution No. 95 -28, "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR SANITARY SEWERS, WATERMAINS, STORM SEWERS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE SWANSON' S 2ND ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 95, Page No. 4456 July 6, 1995 PROJECT NO. 2," and approval of a tree removal permit to authorize the developer to remove the trees located within the grading limits. e. Approval of the issuance of a cigarette license to Mendota Liquor. f. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated July 6, 1995 and attached hereto. g. Approval of the list of claims dated July 6, 1995 and totaling $381,455.86. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 VISITATION CONVENT Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Batchelder FOUNDATION PERMIT regarding a request from Visitation Convent for a permit to install footings and foundation for a proposed screen house to be located on the Monastery portion of the Visitation property. Council also acknowledged a letter from the Visitation Sisters and a floor plan and site plan for the proposed structure. Sister Helen Ann Wilkie, representing the Convent, stated that the sisters are seeking approval of a footing and foundation permit for a screen house, -which requires a conditional use permit, and fully intends to work with$the' Planning Commission. She explained that the screen house is a donation as a memorial and the family of the donor will be in St. Paul in August. She stated that the Convent would like to honor them by holding a dedication ceremony when the family is in town but must begin footing and foundation construction before Planning Commission action in order to complete the structure on time. She explained that construction of the actual structure will riot occur until after Planning Commission and City Council approval of the conditional use permit. Sister Wilkie informed Council that there are 23 members in the Visitation community and in order to create a screen porch large enough to house that number of sisters the structure must be larger than the 144 square feet allowed in the city's ordinance. She stated that the structure will be shielded by trees and will not have any visual impact. Councilmember Huber pointed out that the structure would not even be observed by someone driving by and he would have no objections to it. Page No. 4457 July 6, 1995 Councilmember Koch moved to approve the issuance of a footing and foundation permit, at the applicant's risk, pending an application for conditional use permit for accessory structure. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 95 -08, KING Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Batchelder regarding a request from Mr. Lawrence King, 5 Beebe Avenue, for an amendment to the conditional use permit and variances for a detached garaged issued by Council on June 6, 1995. Mr. Wally Pischke, contractor for the garage, was present to represent the Kings. He explained that the original proposal was to construct a new garage on the existing garage foundation but after inspecting the foundation it was discovered that the foundation has no frost footings and is not adequate for the new structure. He informed Council that the Kings are requesting approval to remove the existing garage and foundation and build a new structure. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the garage will be approximately 15 } feet, 7 inches from the right -of -way. She noted that the property is a through lot that backs onto another street, which is the reason why a conditional use permit is needed. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the existing structure is eight feet from the side lot line, which would require a two foot variance, asked if the height variance is still required. Mr. Pischke responded that the height will be three feet less than the height approved on June. 6, and neither a height variance nor a size variance will be needed.: Administrator Lawell informed Council that if it wishes, it can revoke the unnecessary variances which were granted on June 6 and start fresh this evening. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that in essence Council would be approving a new detached garage. She asked what will change, noting that there is a,problem with the footings and therefore the structure will change from what was originally proposed. Mr. Pischke stated that the garage as approved in June was barely big enough for two cars, and as long as Mr. King has to build a new garage because of the footings, he would like to build larger and can also move it on the lot. Page No. 4458 July 6, 1995 Responding to a question from Councilmember Krebsbach on whether Council should be concerned about approving a new detached garage, Administrator Lawell stated that the fact that there is an existing structure that cannot be changed. He explained that under the existing building code the city cannot allow the Kings to expand the garage and they wish to replace it with something more compatible with their desires. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she understands the complications of the first proposal and asked if the applicants are still planning to use the loft area for storage. She also asked if Council would be significantly departing from the ordinance because this would be a new detached garage. Assistant Batchelder responded that if this was a garage being proposed on a vacant piece of land a conditional use permit would be required and the most current proposal before Council would fit within the guidelines of the ordinance relating to detached garages. He explained that it fits within the size allowed by ordinance and the conditional permit would be required by virtue of the fact that it is a detached garage on a through lot. He stated that this is why it was processed through the Planning Commission as a conditional use permit and until it was inspected by the city's code enforcement office the owners did not know that the structure could not be built on the existing foundation. Responding to a question from Acting Mayor Smith, Mr. Pischke stated that the Kingsihave already constructed the circular drive in the front of the home. He also stated that all exposed areas of the structure will be cedar siding to match the house, and the roof pitch of 10:12 will blend in with the 9:12 pitch on the house. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she feels the proposal is a much better solution and provides for safer entrance and exit from the garage. She pointed out,that the same stipulations attached to the original approval will apply, including that the loft can only be used for storage. Councilmember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 95- 30, "A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO 95 -24 TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DETACHED GARAGE AT 5 BEEBE AVENUE." Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes:4 Nays: 0 Page No. 4459 July 6, 1995 CASE NO. 95 -12, Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Ed Paster, Mendota PASTER Mall Associates, for a conditional use permit for a liquor store in the Mendota Plaza shopping center. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. Mr. Paster and Mr. Robert Rickes, from Mendota Mall Associates, and Mr. Patrick Soeun, owner of Mendota Liquor, were present for the discussion. Mr. Paster explained that a conditional use permit is required to operate a liquor store in the B -4 District and that the permit issued to MGM Liquors expired since no one has occupied the store facility for over six months. He informed Council that Mr. Soeun and Mr. Rickes have met with Dakota Alliance for Prevention representatives and Police Chief Delmont and Officer Bridger. Mr. Soeun informed Council that he met with DAP representatives yesterday and that he will cooperate with all laws regarding minors and will report to the Police Department any minors who come into the store for liquor. Mr. Rickes stated that at the meeting all laws regarding sale of liquor to minors were reviewed and that Mr. Soeun has agreed to uphold all of the laws of the state and the city. He explained that cigarette sales were also discussed at the meeting. Councilmember Krebsbach was concerned over sales of cigarettes to minors and whether minors are allowed in liquor stores. Administrator Lawell responded that he does not believe there is any legal restriction to prohibit minors from entering the establishment, but the problem is if they represent themselves as 21 in order to purchase liquor. He stated that most liquor stores have signs posted that say that if individuals are not 21 years of age they cannot enter the facility. He also stated that he does not believe there is a law that would prevent someone 18 years or older to buy cigarettes in the facility. Mr. Soeun stated that it will be his practice that if someone appears to him to be under 21 he will ask for identification and ask them to leave the store if they are not of legal age. Councilmember Krebabach stated that she would encourage Mr. Soeun to discourage the sale of cigarettes to 18 to 21 year olds. Acting Mayor Smith agreed, stating that it would make it much easier to operate his business if he kept sales of cigarettes as well as liquor to age 21 and over. Page No. 4460 July 6, 1995 Mr. Paster stated that Mendota Mall Associates shares Council's concerns and wants the shopping center to be a family oriented and full service center and discourages any activity that would be harmful to the city. He further stated that his representatives will be watching the operation carefully to make sure it is following the high standards of both the city and the shopping center. Responding to a question about hours of operation, Mr. Soeun stated that the hours of operation of the store will be in accordance with the city ordinances, that he will probably open at 8:30 or 9:00 a.m. and close at 9 p.m. on weekdays and 10:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. Councilmember Huber asked what advertising will be done at the store. Mr. Soeun responded that there will be a sign in the sign band, and that at least the bottom six feet of the window area will be kept free of advertising to accommodate the police department's need to see inside the store. Council informed Mr. Soeun that the city does not allow large advertising pieces, like the helium devices often seen advertising liquor stores. Councilmember Koch asked if Council can legally encourage Mr. Soeun to discourage sales of cigarettes to anyone under age 21 and whether he can be legally held to that restriction. City Attorney Hart responded that the age discrimination generally protected class is age forty and over, and he did not think there would be any violation by encouraging Mr. Soeun to sell cigarettes only to those aged 21 and over. He informed Council that it is not a crime for someone under 21 to enter a liquor store, as there are many items in the store that could legally be sold to a person of any age, but stated that there is no legal problem that he can see in restricting sales to individuals 21 and over. Councilmember Huber moved adoption of Resolution No. 95 -29, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MENDOTA LIQUOR." Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 LIQUOR LICENSE, MENDOTA Council acknowledged a,memo from the City Clerk regarding the LIQUOR Mendota Liquor application for off -sale liquor license. Page No. 4461 July 6, 1995 Councilmember Huber moved to authorize the issuance of an off - sale intoxicating liquor license to Mr. Patrick Soeun for the Mendota Liquor facility. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 HEARING - EMERSON Acting Mayor Smith opened the meeting for the purpose of a public STREET VACATION hearing on an application from Mr. Terrance Fenelon, 670 Laura Court, for the vacation of a portion of the Emerson Avenue right -of- way adjacent to his lot. Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director Danielson and a proposed resolution. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Mr. Fenelon desires to construct an addition to the rear of his home, and the vacation of a portion of the right -of -way will preclude the need for a variance for the addition. Mr. Fenelon stated that his lot is long and thin and that he would like to construct an addition but in order to do so he would be too close to the lot line. He explained that when he discussed the matter with the City Planner it appeared that it would be best to request the vacation so that a variance is not necessary. Acting Mayor Smith asked if staff sees any reason to believe that at any future time Emerson Avenue will be used as a through way. She stated that she does not recall Council vacating portions of rights -of -way and askedif the entire right -of -way should be vacated. Public Works Director Danielson responded that he does not envision that portion of Emerson ever being constructed, as it is very rugged terrain with wetlands. He stated that the right -of -way is generally being used as back yard area by abutting property owners. He explained that since there are wetlands in the right -of -way the city would have to retain. easements. He recommended that Council consider vacating the remaining right -of -way as abutting property owners apply for vacation. He explained that if the vacation is approved for Mr. Fenelon, the city will retain drainage and utility easement rights over the land and will no longer be fee owner of the property. Councilmember Huber asked if the vacated area would become a part of the Fenelon lot. Public Works Director Danielson responded that it would. He explained that Mr. Fenelon currently has a through lot, because of the right -of -way, and would need a setback variance to construct the addition if the vacation is not approved. He Page No. 4462 July 6, 1995 informed Council that it is his preference that Council consider vacations on a case by case basis, particularly to the south of the Fenelon property where there is a holding pond that was constructed for drainage purposes. Mr. Fenelon agreed that vacations of the right -of -way should be looked at on a case by case basis as there are some potential drainage problems and many lots would be too close to streams and would require DNR permits. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the request seems simple, but approving it would affect the public street. Acting Mayor Smith stated that by approving the vacation Council would be effectively saying that a street will never be built between Laura Street and Sylvandale Road. Acting Mayor Smith asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Huber moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Responding to a Council questions, Mr. Danielson stated that currently the city owns the property and it is a platted street Approval would vacate the street rights but by requiring easement dedication, the city still has the right to use the area for drainage and utility improvements. Acting Mayor- Smith. asked if there would be any restrictions on plantings and alterations within the easement area. She also asked if there are any drainage issues involved in the area Mr. Fenelon would like vacated. Mr. Danielson responded that nearly all platted lots in the city have drainage and utility easements over the rear yard and people do construct fences and plantings within the easement area but do so with the knowledge that.the city has the right to do work within the easement, including moving structures. He stated that there is a low area in the right -of -way and a drainage pond in the Fenelon back yard: drainage goes west from the Fenelon lot and goes down the back yards across Sylvandale to the creek. Page No. 4463 July 6, 1995 Councilmember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 95- 30,ARESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF A PORTION OF EMERSON AVENUE STREET RIGHT -OF- WAY," approving the vacation of the north half of Emerson Avenue abutting Lot 10, Block 3, Ivy Falls 2nd Addition, reserving a permanent drainage and utility easement over the vacated area. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 It was noted that it is the intent of the city that the 30 foot wide vacated right -of -way revert to the Fenelons, that the property be attached to the Fenelon lot and their property will be the beneficiary of the vacation. City Attorney advised staff to be certain to record certified copies of the vacation resolution and reservation of the easements so that the city easement reservation is communicated to future prospective purchasers. CASE NO. 95 -09, PALMER Council acknowledged an application from Mrs. LuDelia Palmer for approval of a wetlands permit to allow construction of a fence on her lot at 675 Ivy Falls Court. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports along with letters from Mr. & Mrs. Palmer and from the Ivy Falls Home Owners' Association and signatures of consent from adjoining property owners. Mrs. Palmer informed Council that she has puppies that need to be restricted and proposes to install a three rail split rail cedar fence with wire backing. She stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with the condition that the construction be completed by September 1 and that a survey be completed and filed with the city. She informed Council that she has arranged for the survey to be done on July 12 and that she will file a copy with the city. Responding to a question regarding the wire, she stated that it will be galvanized mesh. She informed Council that she plans to landscape along the fence and that she believes the split rail will blend into the background and the galvanized mesh will not be visible. She stated that none of the existing landscaping will be removed and plantings will be added. She explained that her home is at the crest of the hill with Ivy Falls Creek below and that there are some erosion problems. Acting Mayor Smith stated that it is her understanding that the fence will follow the crest of the property and will not go down the hill. Mrs. Palmer responded that this is correct. Page No. 4464 July 6, 1995 Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the main Planning Commission concern was that the Palmers have the consent of their neighbors. Mrs. Palmer responded that she has received the written consent of everyone but the owners of 667 Ivy Falls Court who has recently purchased the home but has not yet moved in. She informed Council that she has spoken to the new owner by phone and they have no objections. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the Planning Commission waived the public hearing requirement, which is why they required consenting signatures. Councilmember Koch moved approval of a wetlands permit to allow construction of a fence, as proposed, to within fifty feet of Ivy Falls Creek, conditioned upon preparation and submission of a survey, completion of the fence by September 1, 1995. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 95 -10, PAR 3 Council acknowledged an application from Mr. Michael Cashill for a sign size and setback variance for a 48 square foot sign for the golf course to be placed within 3 feet of the property line along Dodd Road. Council also acknowledged associated staff reports. Mr. Cashill and Mr. Alan Spaulding were present for the discussion. Mr. Spaulding stated that the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval with the condition that the poles from the former sign at the northeast corner of the property be removed. He informed Council that the sign has been removed and he has agreed to remove the poles and will landscape below the new sign. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the Planning Commission made generally favorable comments and agreed that it is an improvement to have only one sign for the facility. She further stated that it was pointed out by the commission that the sign size restrictions are generally for single family homes in R -1 and in this case there is a commercial use in the district which presents a slightly different situation. She _pointed out that the Planning Commission felt that the size and design and colors of the sign were appropriate for the area. She expressed concern over the setback, stating that right now the road is 33 feet wide and the right -of -way is 60 feet, so there is quite a distance between the edge of the road and the sign, but the city cannot control what the state may do in the future. She asked Page No. 4465 July 6, 1995 what Council can do-,to accommodate the sign in its requested location without having to grant a variance. She felt that a variance would not be appropriate given the potential for widening Dodd. Mr. Cashill responded that the type of sign construction would allow him to move the sign very easily - the original sign was only one foot narrower and was in its location over thirty years. He stated that he would be happy to move the sign if Dodd is ever widened. Councilmember Krebsbach moved approval of a 36 foot sign size variance and 7 foot sign setback variance to allow the proposed sign, in accordance with the site plan in Case File No. 95 -10, with the condition that 25 square foot of landscaping be installed around the sign and that the two poles from the former sign at the northeast corner of the property be removed, with the stipulation that the sign be located no nearer than 17 feet from the edge of the paved surface of Dodd Road and no nearer than three feet from the right -of -way. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 95 -11, Council acknowledged an application from Mr. & Mrs. Thomas McNAMARA McNamara, 2371 Swan Drive, for a conditional use permit for a 16 foot by 24 foot accessory structure and front yard setback variance. Council also acknowledged reports from the City Planner and Administrative Assistant and a letter from the McNamaras. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she understands the shed will be in the location of an existing shed and behind some large pine trees and would be very difficult to see from Lake Drive. She noted that the Planning Commission had expressed concerns over the design of the shed. Mr. McNamara presented revised drawings for the structure, informing Council that the garage style door on the front of the structure will be facing east, towards the house. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that there was much discussion over, the garage door, and the revised plan still shows a garage door. She further stated that she believes it was the understanding of the Planning Commission in recommending approval that the door would be changed so that the structure would not look so much like a garage. Mrs. McNamara responded that they want the overhead door for several reasons, stating that other doors have to be opened out and Page No. 4466 July 6, 1995 they need an overhead door to get their lawn tractor and plow in and out. She stated that they feel the overhead door would be better for security. She further stated that if the overhead door is eliminated, the structure would lose some of its utility. Assistant Batchelder stated that the Commission did discuss the door but did not specifically require barn-type doors as a condition. He stated that the condition was that the architectural design of the shed must match the existing home, so that it would look more like a shed than a garage, and that the Commission discussed matching the roof pitch and the larger overhang on the house. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Council has been fastidious about only allowing the number of garages allowed by ordinance and when someone has an attached garage, for example, and needs another larger garage or structure Council has been specific that the existing garage no longer be used for garage purposes. She stated that in this case the structure will not be a garage but will have the utility of a garage. Mrs. McNamara responded that there will not be a driveway to the structure and that she does not think any future owner would want to ( ) put a driveway in. Further, she stated that the structure faces the house and not the street. With respect to how the structure would be used in the future, she stated that she did not feel anyone would use it as a garage as trees and a utility pole would have to be removed and a curb cut would have to be made in Lake Drive for a driveway. Mr. McNamara stated that he does not think the city would allow another curb cut and informed Council that he has no plan to put in a driveway of any kind to the storage shed. He stated that while there would be an overhead garage door there is no intent to make the shed into any kind of a building to store vehicles except the lawn tractor. He explained that there are many evergreens along Lake Drive which he would not remove, and the structure could not be seen from Lake Drive. Councilmember Krebsbach asked if there is any way to make the shed look less like a garage, noting that the shed will probably remain after the McNamaras sell their property. Mrs. McNamara responded that some of the things the Planning Commission recommended have been implemented - the overhang and roof pitch have been modified to match the appearance of the house. She stated that if someone every wanted to make the shed into a garage they could very easily put in a garage door in the future Page No. 4467 July 6, 1995 but she did not think anyone would ever want to use it as a garage. She stated that it would be very unattractive to put pavement to the structure and also there is a butternut tree in front of the door which would have to be removed in order to get a car into the structure. Responding to a Council question, Mr. McNamara stated that two windows were added in response to the Planning Commission request and to make the structure more closely match the house. Attorney Hart stated that the concerns are a matter of notice to the successors of the McNamaras. He did not think Council should rely on the good sense of future owners and suggested that since the application is for a conditional use permit, a condition could be that the structure cannot be used for autos and trucks and other certificated vehicles. He pointed out that the conditional permit would be recorded against the property and would place those limitations on subsequent owners. He stated that since it would be on record that the structure could not be used for those kinds of things, they would be prohibited and if anyone were to use the shed for such storage, enforcement would be the issue. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she is also concerned about the proposed size of the shed. She asked about the lot size. Mr. McNamara responded that the lot is 1 1/8 to 1 1/4 acres in land. Acting Mayor Smith stated that it was her impression that even with a conditional use permit a structure of the proposed size would not be allowed on a lot of this size, but apparently this is not the case. Mrs. McNamara responded that they wanted a larger building but scaled it back after a preliminary meeting with city staff, and any reduction in size of the proposed shed would not meet their needs. She explained that their goal is to not have a yard full of things, and since their house is brick they could not add a third stall to their garage for storage of items now kept outside. Assistant Batchelder distributed copies of the sections of the Zoning Ordinance relating to accessory structures. He stated that there is no limit other than 1,000 square feet in maximum size for conditional use permits for structures other than private detached garages. He further stated that accessory structures as permitted uses in the R -1 district can be 144 square feet. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she never though it was Council's intent when the ordinance language was revised to allow a potential Page No. 4468 July 6, 1995 accessory structure of up to 1,000 square feet. She stated that Council will have to revisit the accessory structure provisions, but for now the provisions apply. Mrs. McNamara asked whether they could build a three car garage if they decided to turn their existing garage into a family room. She stated that they have been struggling for eight years to find the best solution to their storage problems. Administrator Lawell responded that a detached garage is a permitted use so long as there is no attached garage. Assistant Batchelder added that the city would probably require that the driveway and doors be removed from the existing garage. Mr. McNamara suggested that if Council looks at revising the ordinance that percentage of lot size is used - for instance allowing a structure of 1 % of lot size for lots less than an acre. He explained that he has two pretty bad looking sheds on their lot now and their intent is to improve the appearance of their lot for their neighbors and the community be removing those sheds and building the new one. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she would agree that what the McNamaras are doing is appropriate for their lot because it would not affect any of their neighbors and would be well screened from the street as well, but Council must make sure it is being consistent. Responding to a question from Councilmernber Koch, Mr. McNamara stated that he proposes to put in a two to three foot apron in front of the large door. and perhaps some stepping stones in front of the small one and the structure will be built on a concrete floating slab. Councilinember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 95- 32, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND SETBACK VARIANCE FOR 2371 SWAN DRIVE," in accordance with the plans submitted Julyfi, 1995, with the following additional conditions: that the shed will be used only for storage of objects which would normally be stored in sheds; that the shed may not be used to store passenger vehicles or trucks; that a certified copy of the resolution be filed with Dakota County against the property, incorporating into the resolution the legal description of the parcel. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 4469 July 6, 1995 Councilmember Krebsbach pointed out that it is also the intent of the motion that there may not be any access to the shed from Lake Drive. CASE NO. 95 -05, Council acknowledged an application from Tharaldson Enterprises THARALDSON for a conditional use permit to operate a restaurant in the Heritage Inn. Council also acknowledged a reports from Assistant Batchelder and the City Planner, along with letters from Heritage Inn regarding parking, a letter from Northwest Airlines and information from the restaurant operator, Bon Appetit regarding the menu and hours of operation. Mr. Bill Ripeth, legal representative for Tharaldson, reviewed parking needs. He explained that the restaurant is part of a private hotel that is under contract with Northwest Airlines, which uses the hotel to lodge trainees, and stated that probably 50% of the occupants are bussed to the site. He stated that the proof of parking plan for the hotel provides for 127 parking spaces and there are currently 73 parking spaces on site. Reviewing a parking survey completed by the hotel, he stated that at the peak period, 43 parking spaces are used. He felt that this statistic is representative of the hotel's parking needs since it is a private hotel. He stated that since many people will be bussed to the restaurant from the Northwest training facilities, Tharaldson feels that only 21 spaces will be needed for parking for the public restaurant. He explained that although the restaurant will be open to the public, it will not be advertised. He explained that part of the desire to not expand the parking is to keep the existing landscaped area as a campus area. He felt that parking is the main issue in considering the conditional use permit. He stated that the Planning Commission's condition number 4 would require Tharaldson to enter into an agreement with the Marriott for overflow parking, but as a practical matter overflow parking will occur because people from the Marriott facility will be using the Heritage Cafe. He stated that it is difficult for Tharaldson as a legal matter to condition parking on an agreement with Marriott and that it is not likely the Marriott would give Tharaldson a conditional right. He stated that he could not recommend the condition to Tharaldson because it would be a condition that is off site. He felt that Tharaldson has demonstrated the low demand for parking at the Heritage Inn site (through the parking survey), and pointed out that Council can at any time order the Heritage Inn to provide the additional under the proof of parking plan. He informed Council that at the time the hotel use changes to a public hotel, the restaurant will have to be removed to provide a swimming pool under Tharaldson's original conditional use permit. Page No. 4470 July 6, 1995 Acting Mayor Smith asked how Northwest Airlines feels about the restaurant since the facility is under contract to Northwest. Mr. Ripeth responded that Northwest has requested the change, and often works with the Marriott as well. He explained that the restaurant would benefit all of the Northwest employees that stay at the Marriott or at the Heritage Inn, particularly given the closing of the Courtyard's restaurant. He stated that opening the restaurant to the public will insure that it will be a profitable enterprise over the ten year life of the Northwest contract. Acting Mayor Smith pointed out that the original Tharaldson plan did not include a kitchen and when the amended plan came before Council to include the kitchen, Council was told that Northwest would operate the kitchen, contracting for food service. Mr. Ripeth responded that the restaurant is owned by the Heritage Inn, which has contracted with Bon Appetit, a restaurant management company, which will provide the full service management. Administrator Lawell informed Council that Mr. Bill Fitzgerald, from Northwest Airlines, faxed two letters to the city this afternoon. One of the letters talks about opening the restaurant to the public for lunch service. The other letter discusses approval from Northwest's vice - president of operations C Foushee's approval of the serving of beer and wine in the hotel restaurant facility during the time the restaurant is open to the public. Mr. Ripeth responded that currently about 20 people are bussed in the evening off site because they would like beer or wine with dinner. He stated that the Heritage Inn will not have a bar setting and would only serve beer and wine with food service. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Tharaldson has researched who the anticipated guests will be and asked if it anticipates that they will be guests of the Marriott and Heritage Inn hotels. Mr. Ripeth responded that the Heritage Inn people would like to market to the corporate people in the business park, through distribution of handbills, to round out some of the slow periods. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she wants to make sure that it is the intent not to extend the use of the public restaurant should the building become public. She stated that if that possibility is even remotely possible, Tharaldson would want to consider acquiring Page No. 4471 July 6, 1995 additional land additional parking for the facility while land is available. With respect to the recommended Marriott/Heritage Inn agreement, she stated that she agrees with Mr. Ripeth's position on overflow from the Marriott. She stated that the Marriott has its own requirement for parking and the city cannot require them to give up some of their spaces.. She informed Mr. Ripeth that she wants to be sure that the Heritage Inn project has sufficient parking. Mr. Ripeth responded that there are 54 more parking spaces available in the proof of parking plan before Tharaldson would have to go off site for parking. Mr. Ken Scheel, from Tharaldson, stated that Tharaldson has 170 hotels and only adds restaurants if needed by a client. He stated that swimming pools are much better draws, and that he cannot foresee Tharaldson ever keeping the restaurant versus a swimming pool in the Heritage Inn if it ever becomes public. Councilmember Krebsbach informed Mr. Ripeth that if the condition on agreement with Marriott for parking is deleted from the permit conditions. Tharaldson would have to build out the proof of parking should parking needs exceed what is available. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Council could perhaps have a period of time where the city can see how much parking is being used and could then require the construction of additional if it is deemed appropriate. Mr. Ripeth stated that Mr. Scheel has agreed to implement the proof of parking plan if, after a six month period the extra parking is needed. Administrator Lawell stated that at any time the city could require Tharaldson, and Tharaldson would be obligated, to build out the additional parking. He stated that the city could define the mechanism for that, including annual review. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the discussion two years ago was that there would never be a restaurant and then Tharaldson asked for a kitchen and now it is asking for a restaurant. She stated that she cannot envision a company not going into this business with the intent of not making it successful, and if the company has done its studies one would think parking should be built. Mr. Ripeth responded that all of the modifications over the past two years have been driven by the unique contract with Northwest, Page No. 4472 July 6, 1995 which has chosen to contract with Tharaldson and others to provide exclusive service and has asked for changes over time. He stated that if Tharaldson thought it had a parking issue it would rather have the spaces in to satisfy its customers. He informed Council that Tharaldson is prepared to put in all 127 parking spaces, but for aesthetic purposes would like to keep the green space in the interim. Responding to a Council comment about Northwest subsidizing the restaurant, Mr. Ripeth stated that part of the contract would be that Northwest must provide a minimum amount of revenue to keep the restaurant in operation. He informed Council that every request Tharaldson has made to the city has first come from Northwest, which also initiated the beer and wine sale proposal. Councilmember Huber stated that he feels this is a situation where if Council knew in the beginning what it now knows, the original conditional use might not have been approved. Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she feels that if Tharaldson can meet the parking and feels that it has the need for the restaurant she has less of a problem with a proposal than if Tharaldson had requested the restaurant in the beginning. Acting Mayor Smith stated that since it is within the city's prerogative to require additional parking if it becomes apparent that additional parking is need, that is the comfort the city needs. She did not think Council wants more asphalt than is necessary. Councilmember Koch asked if Councilmember Huber feels that 123 parking spaces would not be sufficient. Councilmember Huber responded that if Council had viewed the proposal in total when Tharaldson first came to Council he is not sure that it would have been approved. He wondered whether Council would have said it wanted the full number of parking spaces constructed, but stated that the fact of the matter is that this is a situation where Council has allowed the developer to come in with unfinished parking. He asked whether Council would have to ask staff to do a site visit nightly to see if there is overflow parking. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the checks would certainly have to be made periodically.. Councilmember Huber stated that he is not saying that food service in a hotel is an inappropriate use, but what is unique that what is a Page No. 4473 July 6, 1995 single client hotel will now have the entire business park as its clients. Mr. Ripeth responded that more than 50% of the clients use ground transportation that is provided by Northwest, so that drives down the parking need to 50 %. He stated that if the hotel ever becomes public the restaurant will have to be changed to a pool, and 127 parking spaces would satisfy the parking requirement for the facility. Councilmember Huber stated that his concern is that Tharaldson keeps coming back every six months asking for more. He asked what Tharaldson is really trying to build. Mr. Scheel responded that the project is driven by Northwest and when the matter was presented to the Planning Commission it recommended approval on a month to month basis with city staff. He stated that Tharaldson has agreed to do a daily study and if at any time city staff feels more parking is needed, it will be built. Councilmember Krebsbach pointed out that Dale Glowa has stated that there is a need for a restaurant in the business park. She thought that the restaurant will provide a service to the park and many of the people will walk to it. Responding to a question from Acting Mayor Smith regarding the restaurant menu, Mr. David Toay, from Bon Appetit, stated that one of the reasons the kitchen was built was because Northwest wants food service all day long (breakfast, lunch, dinner) where food is prepared on the premises. He stated that the menu changes quite a bit to give different offerings, but there will be sandwiches, salads and pastas etc. for lunch, and fish and other items for dinner. He stated that the food will be made to order on -site. Acting Mayor Smith stated that her concerns were: 1.) where Northwest stood on the restaurant and liquor; 2.) the ability of the site to accommodate the additional use and a continued use should the hotel become public. She stated that apparently Northwest initiated the request for the restaurant and that Council has also been informed that the restaurant will not continue if the hotel goes public and added parking under the proof of parking plan will not be needed. She noted that Councilmember Huber's concern was over the incremental approach taken by Tharaldson, and stated that perhaps Northwest wanted to see the scope of the facility expanded. She stated that she has also heard that it was a good idea to have a restaurant in the area and while this may not be the ideal location, it 1 . Page No. 4474 July 6, 1995 would provide a welcome addition to the business park as well as to the Marriott. Attorney Hart stated that he would like the record to reflect that 1) proof of parking can be implemented based on the determination of city staff that there is insufficient parking on site to serve the facility; and 2) that the applicant will in a timely fashion, and with reasonably diligence, construct additional parking if from time to time it is determined necessary by the city. Mr. Ripeth agreed that Tharaldson would agree to constructing additional parking if determined necessary by the city. He stated that the request is for. a public facility which will include wine and strong beer and that Tharaldson will go through the liquor license application process. Councilmember Krebsbach pointed out that the applicant must understand that there is no assurance that a liquor license will be granted. Councilmember Koch moved adoption of Resolution No. 95 -33, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RESTAURANT FOR HERITAGE INN," revised to add a condition that city staff monitor parking at the facilities and to add the conditions recommended by Attorney Hart, and to delete the requirement for written agreement on overflow parking between the Marriott and the Heritage Inn. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 Huber SUNFISH LAKE GRAVITY Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director OUTLET Danielson regarding a request from the City of Sunfish Lake to consider providing a lake outlot for Sunfish Lake. Mr. Danielson reviewed the request for Council, stating that a proposed joint powers agreement is;currently being developed and that he brought the matter to Council this evening to ask for Council input. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Council would have to first be concerned with Mendota Heights capacity for its own run off and ensure that the Mendota Heights system can handle the excess capacity (from Sunfish Lake) which has not yet been determined. She further stated that the outlet would also involve the potential for Sunfish Lake to develop at a greater level as well, and that could also affect the level of the lake. She asked if research has been done Page No. 4475 July 6, 1995 to determine the additional capacity needed to accommodate any additional development within the watershed district. Public Works Director Danielson responded that Sunfish Lake is being developed residentially, which has the least run -off potential, and there is ample storage space within the watershed system to handle the added water. He stated that the check/balance is that should it become a problem, the flow from the lake could be metered down. Acting Mayor Smith asked if the level of the Copperfield pond and other ponding areas will increase as well. Mr. Danielson responded that it will not, and that the level of all of the city's ponding in the southeast area is all controlled downstream now. Councilmember Krebsbach asked if the city needs to be concerned that lowering Sunfish Lake to the appropriate level will not fill the city's ponds. Mr. Danielson responded that the Mendota Heights ponds have sufficient capacity and the water will keep running. He stated that two things could be done to stop the flow for periods of time should problems occur downstream such as a blockage - there will be a joint powers agreement, which will address Council's concerns, and there will be a hold harmless agreement to protect the city. Administrator Lawell stated that the level of Sunfish Lake is rising and perhaps the joint powers agreement should restrict building close to the lake. Acting Mayor Smith suggested that the restriction could be based on a specific distance from the high water mark. Councilmember Huber stated that Council wants to make sure that there is nothing new coming into Sunfish Lake that would then drain to Mendota Heights and create a headwater. Councilmember Krebsbach asked if the metering could be done on an emergency basis rather than on an on -going basis, which would eliminate Council's concerns. Public Works Director Danielson responded that he will look into the suggestion. Acting Mayor Smith suggested that staff seek out similar situations around the Twin Cities area to see what problems have arisen. She pointed out that the major concern is that the city does not become liable if the Mendota Heights system cannot handle the flow. Page No. 4476 July 6, 1995 Mr. Danielson responded that he will provide Council with details on the design of the Copperfield pond when the joint powers agreement is brought to Council. He informed Council that the engineers for Sunfish Lake have looked at what impact the outlet would have on the Copperfield pond. He stated that the biggest problem that has occurred in the Copperfield area is damming done by beavers and if the city is vigilant with removing the dams there should be no problems. He stated that Mendota Heights really cannot refuse the outlet since both cities are members of the watershed maintenance organization and the WMO could force the city to enter into an agreement. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Council would rather work cooperatively with Sunfish Lake and arrive at a solution to protect all parties concerned: LEXINGTON POND Public Works Director Danielson briefly reviewed his memo on the status of the Lexington/Marie pond maintenance. COUNCIL COMMENTS Acting Mayor Smith stated that the "rough road" signs which had been placed along Mendota Heights Road near Mendota Meadows has been removed even though the ruts left from bringing the utilities across Mendota Heights Road to the development remain. Public Works Director Danielson responded that he was not aware that the signs had been removed and will direct public works personnel to replace them. He explained that bituminous is installed in several lifts and only the first course has been installed. He stated that there is always some settlement which occurs and it is best to wait as long as possible before installing the second course. Public Works Director Danielson informed Council on the progress of the water tower reconditioning project, stating that the contractor believes that the project will be completed by the July 15 deadline. PARK ISSUES Administrator Lawell informed Council that staff has been trying to meet with the various Mendakota Park ballfield users but may not be able to meet with all user groups in time to bring the matter back before Council on July 18. He stated that he hopes to schedule the issue for Council discussion in early August and all parties will be notified of the date that the ballfield issues will be considered. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she does not believe that it is critical that the matter be on the July 18 agenda and stated that it is much Page No. 4477 July 6, 1995 more important that a complete review be done before the matter returns to Council. Assistant Batchelder announced that the "Celebrate Mendota Heights Parks!" will be held on July 22. Responding to a question from Councilmember Koch, Assistant Batchelder gave an update on the Ivy Falls Park landscaping project. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Koch moved that the meeting be adjourned to the City Council budget workshop to be held on July 11, 1995. Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:22 o'clock P.M. 16thleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor 1 , I r 1