1995-06-20 Council minutesPage No. 4437
June 20, 1995
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, June 20, 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.
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
Councilmember Smith moved adoption of the revised agenda for the
meeting.
Councilmember Koch seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Councilmember Smith moved approval of the minutes of the
regular meeting with corrections.
Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Smith moved approval of the consent calendar for
the meeting, revised to move item e., Miller condemnation award,
and item g, dispatching services cost arrangement to the regular
agenda, along with authorization for execution of any necessary
documents contained therein.
a. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the June 13, 1995 Park
and Recreation Commission minutes.
b. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department monthly report for
May.
c. Acknowledgment of the unapproved minutes of the April 5,
1995 NDC -4 meeting and the May 3, 1995 Executive
Committee meeting.
d. Acknowledgment of the Treasurer's monthly report for May.
e. Approval to issue a building permit to United Properties
Contract Management for remodeling tenant space at 1355
Mendota Heights Road, Suite 139, in accordance with a memo
from the Code Enforcement Officer dated June 14.
Page No. 4438
June 20, 1995
f. Authorization to issue tree removal permits to Donald Stein,
1033 Mayfield Heights Lane and Mr. & Mrs. Richard Askler,
1037 Mayfield Heights Lane, in accordance with the Code
Enforcement Officer's memo dated June 15.
g. Acknowledgment of the 1995 Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities Legislative Summary.
h. Acknowledgment of an update on the proposed July 4th
fireworks at Mendakota Country Club, and direction to staff to
track all city costs for development of a fee schedule for future
fireworks permits.
Adoption of Resolution No. 95 -25, "RESOLUTION
ACCEPTING PETITION AND ORDERING
PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR
SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAINS, STORM SEWER
AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE IVY FALLS
SOUTH (IMPROVEMENT NO. 95, PROJECT NO. 3)," with
direction to revise the proposed developer's agreement to add
landscaping provisions for Ivy Lane.
j. Approval of Supplement 3 to the existing Cooperative
J Agreement for the Dakota County Community Development
Block Grant Program, and authorization for its execution by
the Mayor and City Clerk.
k. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated June 20, 1995
and attached hereto.
1. Approval of the list of claims dated June 20, 1995 and totaling
$439,532.02.
Councilmember Koch seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
MILLER CONDEMNATION Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director
Danielson regarding the Commissioners' award in the Eric Miller
easement condemnation.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that he did not feel the city should spend
any more money to appeal the award, commenting that the property
owner needed the Ivy Falls Creek improvement more than any other
property owner. He stated that although the Commissioners' award
of $8,059 exceeds the city's appraised value for the drainage
Page No. 4439
June 20, 1995
easements, the city has also incurred costs for the appraisal and
Commissioner fees.
Councilmember Huber moved that Council accept the
Commissioners' award and affirm the Council's position to express
no intent or desire to appeal the award.
Councilmember Krebsbach seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
DISPATCHING SERVICE Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Lawell
regarding West St. Paul dispatching billing, along with a letter from
Administrator Lawell to West St. Paul City Manager Bill Craig
summarizing a proposed agreement on costs and service. Mayor
Mertensotto reviewed the memo and informed Council on
discussions he and Administrator Lawell have had with West St.
Paul representatives with respect to entering into a fixed cost
dispatching arrangement.
Councilmember Krebsbach moved to enter a fixed cost arrangement
for dispatching services authorize settlement with the City of West
St. Paul for 1994 and 1995 as outlined in the letter to Mr. Bill Craig
dated June 6, 1995.
Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays:0
ENGINEERING AIDE Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director
Danielson requesting approval to hire Derrick Anderson as a
temporary engineering aide.
Mayor Mertensotto asked why an engineering aide is needed in
addition to Tony Fotsch. Public Works Director Danielson
responded that this is a particularly busy summer and two aides are
necessary over summer, especially with the curb and gutter set to
begin in Friendly Hills. He also informed Council that Tony Fotsch
will only be working until mid - August and someone must be
available through the fall months. He explained that the length of
time Mr. Anderson will be needed will depend on what projects are
going on in the fall, and if the Curley street project is ordered he
hopes that surveying will occur in October and November.
Councilmember Smith moved to authorize hiring Derick Anderson
immediately as a temporary engineering aide at an hourly rate of
$9.50, effective until November 15, 1995.
Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Page No. 4440
June 20, 1995
BUROW FARM Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Lawell
regarding proposed acquisition of the Burow farm property. Mr.
Ron Smith was present for the discussion.
Mr. Smith informed Council that he was present to ask Council to
budget for the acquisition of the farm. He described the property as
a historical, working farm and reviewed its history and a proposed
agreement. Mr. Smith stated that he would like the closing on the
property to be in September, 1995 and monthly payments of $1,000
to Mr. Burow to begin on October 1 and continue during Mr.
Burow's life estate on the property. He explained that the city
would acquire the property and turn it over to a non -profit
corporation, the Friends of the Burow Farm, which would manage
the property. He stated that he has raised $30,000 for the Friends
and the funds are being held by the St. Paul Foundation. He
expressed concern that if nothing is done this year, the property will
be lost.
Mayor Mertensotto responded that he does not want people to get
the implication that the city would not be acting in good faith,
informing Council and the audience that Mr. Smith obtained the
$30,000 contribution from one individual. He stated that the city did
not ask for contributions and would not be acting in bad faith if it
does not acquire the property. He further stated that the Planning
and Park Commissions have said that the would not object to
acquisition but that it would not be open space and they would not
want special park fund monies to be used to pay for it. He explained
that financing would have to be through a special levy.
Mr. Smith responded that the commission acts under the direction of
Council and Council must determine where funding should come
from.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that there is a priority of expenditures for
city funds and if funding is not available, Council would have to
adopt a levy. He explained that if it were Council's judgment that
the farm has a higher priority than other park expenditures the
special park fund could be used to make the farm property part of
the city's park system. He informed Mr. Smith that Council is not
going to spend city funds for maintenance, as considerable money is
currently spent on park maintenance and there is currently demand
for more parks and ball fields. He asked how Council can equate
those demands - Mr. Smith is asking Council to determine that the
Burow farm has greater priority than the children in the Mendota
Heights Athletic Association programs.
Page No. 4441
June 20, 1995
Mr. Smith stated that there is little open space left in Mendota
Heights, which bodes the importance of preserving the 9 acre Burow
site as open space.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that if the city wishes to preserve open
space there are other areas that would also qualify. He informed Mr.
Smith that every time there is a newspaper article on the farm
acquisition, residents call him and ask why Council would consider
it. He further stated that residents have called him saying that the
Dodge Nature Center farm serves the residents and people have
asked him how there will be a benefit from the Burow farm as open
space other than just to have open space.
Mr. Smith responded that he is trying to save nine open acres which
has historical background and also happens to be across the street
from one of the nicest townhome developments in the Twin Cities
area. He stated that if Mr. Burow were to move on before the end of
the $55,000 contract is completed, the Friends should do fund
raising to pay off the balance of the contract.
Mayor Mertensotto responded that people have suggested to him
that a special taxing district should be formed, of Eagle Ridge and
surrounding properties, to acquire the property. He informed Mr.
Smith that residents he has spoken to do not feel the farm has a
community -wide benefit. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Mr.
Burows could sell the property directly to the private non -profit
group, which could acquire the property through fund raising. Then
the city would not need to be involved or levy a tax to acquire it.
Mrs. Joan Olin, 1136 Orchard Place, stated that it is hard to be
against something presented the way Mr. Smith has presented the
matter but that she is against using tax money for acquiring the farm.
She stated that the proposed contract says that the Friends of the
Burow Farm owns the property, and if they purchase the land that is
all right, but it is not all right if it is purchased with tax dollars. She
further stated that nowhere in the articles of incorporation of the
non - profit does it state that it would be for charitable purposes and it
is up to the Friends to determine whether people can come onto the
property. She read for Council and the audience historical society
guidelines on what makes a property a historical landmark. Mrs.
Olin stated that she does not believe the farm meets any of the
guidelines, and that while it has been called a working farm it
produces no product. She informed Council that Dakota County
does not even recognize less than 10 acres as a farm and stated that
residents would not have access to the property. She stated that if
the property were purchased and developed as a park, she would be
Page No. 4442
June 20, 1995
in support of the proposal but that she does not support its purchase
only for the benefit who live around it. She suggested that the
Friends of Burow Farm purchase the property and own it. She asked
Council not to spend tax money for a view for some people and a
place to board horses for one person.
Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the city has a four acre holding
pond on the property, so effectively only five acres is left for the
farm.
Mr. Smith stated that the city would be holding fee title and would
enter into a long term lease with the Friends.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that he fails to see community support for
the proposal. He further stated that he does not believe purchasing
the property would be in the best interest of the city.
Councilmember Smith responded that there are aspects of the
proposal which appeal to her, one of which is passive open space.
She stated that it is a lovely pastoral area that adds to the charm of
the city but that she would place a number of conditions on any
support, for instance, if the city were to spend money the farm
would have to be open to the public. She noted that some of the
documents that were presented to Council recommended that the
city not be shown as the fee owner - she would want quite a bit of
control by the city for the ultimate use of the land and if the Friends
could not sustain the property, it would have to revert to the city for
the park system for use as a passive park. She stated that it would
have to follow the normal budget process, including commission
recommendations, and if the Park Commission recommended
against funding through the special park fund Council would have to
find some other financing. She also expressed concern over
unfunded liability.
Mr. Smith responded that any public land must have public use, but
the Friends would determine that use, and if it fails as far as a
passive use, it would be reasonable that it revert to the city.
Regarding unfunded liability, he stated that the maximum cost
would be $145,000 payable at $1,000 per month. He explained that
the Friends would assume the liability upon the death of Mr. Burow.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that there is a problem with ownership -
the city's risk managers have advised not to get involved in
acquiring any land where there would be animals.
Page No. 4443
June 20, 1995
Mr. Smith responded that the lease to the Friends would contain
indemnity and insurance provisions and the Friends would get
insurance to cover it.
Councilmember Huber stated that the comments he has received
from residents are that it seems to be a city expenditure to benefit a
few members of the community. He stated that he is sure that
people surrounding a recently discussed development would have
preferred that the city had acquired that land as open space.
Mrs. Olin asked whose horses would be boarded at the farm, and
Mr. Smith responded that the horses are his.
Mrs. Olin responded that Mr. Smith does then have an interest in the
acquisition. She stated that her concern is what happens if the
Friends do not have $1,000 per month after they take over the
property.
Councilmember Smith responded that those details have not been
worked out and she would not accept an unfunded liability.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she would like to see a
referendum so that residents have an opportunity to vote for or
against the acquisition. She further stated that she sees the farm as
an amenity to the city.
Mayor Mertensotto responded that running a referendum would be
very expensive, and that he had suggested a special taxing district to
tax the properties surrounding the farm which would receive the
benefit from its acquisition by the city. He stated that the
acquisition proposal does not have wide public support and he
would not want to levy a tax against the entire city to acquire the
farm. He suggested that perhaps a survey could be included in the
next city newsletter.
Mr. Smith urged Council to take action on the proposal in the
upcoming budget discussions.
Mayor Mertensotto responded that he cannot support the proposition
and does not believe it would be a good expenditure of city funds.
He informed Mr. Smith that Council will have a response back to
him at budget time.
MENDOTA LIQUOR Discussion on the application from Mr. Patrick Soeun for an off -sale
liquor license for Mendota Liquor was tabled to July 6.
Page No. 4444
June 20, 1995
CASE NO. 95 -02, ZONING Council acknowledged a memo from Administrative Assistant
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Batchelder regarding a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance
regarding industrial construction materials. Discussion on the
proposed amendment was tabled to July 6.
TREE PLANTING Council acknowledged a memo from Parks Project Manager
Kullander and tabulation of quotes received for the 1995 boulevard
tree planting program. Mr. Kullander explained that the low quote
of $13,060 is based on 100 trees but the city has the right to add or
subtract trees.
Councilmember Huber moved to award the 1995 boulevard tree
planting program contract to Blaeser Landscape for its low quote of
$13,060.
Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
TREE PRESERVATION Council acknowledged a memo and proposed tree preservation
ordinance from Administrative Assistant Batchelder, along with a
letters of objection from Robert Prior, 2455 Hampshire Court and
Richard Falconer, 1355 Sylvandale, and a letter from Chris Riley in
support of the proposed ordinance.
Assistant Batchelder gave a summary and history of the proposed
ordinance. He explained that the primary purpose of the proposed
ordinance is to protect large undeveloped properties in the city. He
stated that over the years there have been many requests to divide
large parcels of land, and the current subdivision ordinance requires
a tree inventory at the time of preliminary plat submission but it
does not set any standards. He informed the audience that the
Planning Commission has worked over the winter and spring with
the city's planning consultant to come up with a draft ordinance,
using ordinances which are in force in several other communities.
He then reviewed the draft ordinance.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that he looks at the ordinance like the dog
leash law, where half of the people are against it and have are for it.
He asked how many cities in the area have similar ordinances.
Mr. Batchelder responded that the commission reviewed ordinances
from six cities, including Eden Prairie and Burnsville.
Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that when the city first
considered preparing an ordinance, the intent was to look at
undeveloped properties and not existing residential properties, but
the draft ordinance has been expanded.
Page No. 4445
June 20, 1995
Mr. Sten Gerfast, 1802 Valley Curve, stated that on June 6 he had
submitted a petition containing over 100 signatures of residents
against the moratorium and a preservation ordinance. He explained
that he has spoken to many people and found no opposition to his
petition from anyone. He then submitted additional petition
signatures, and stated that on behalf of those on the petition and
himself Council exclude existing single family homes and
commercial property from the ordinance. He stated that that is the
first comment he has heard from people - that they should be
allowed to decide what to do with their own yards.
Mr. Joe Stefan, 1820 Valley Cure, stated that he understands the
intent of the ordinance and if it had come up when he was a member
of the Planning Commission he may or may not have agreed with
the proposed ordinance. He stated that when he first saw the article
about the issue in the city newsletter he did not think it was a bad
idea, but after thinking about it felt that it was government intrusion.
He further stated that it appears to him that the areas that should be
looked at are the currently undeveloped parcels of land and land that
is currently proposed for development. He stated that it bothers him
that the city might be thinking about a forestry department, which
would be added city cost involved.
Mayor Mertensotto asked Mr. Stefan if he would exclude
undeveloped commercial land and industrial land. He stated that
there are many parcels which will receive development pressure in
the coming years.
Mr. Stefan responded that if undeveloped residential land is
included, undeveloped commercial land should be included as well.
He felt that landscaping is affected much more in commercial and
industrial development.
Ms. Diane Kammerer, 660 W. Marie, stated that she is opposed to
the moratorium and thinks it is an example of government going
crazy. She stated that if she chooses to cut down one of the 27 trees
that she planted on her 1/2 acre lot it will not affect the public health
and safety of the community. She further stated that the moratorium
affects every land owner and that the proposed ordinance is
extremely restrictive in the kinds of trees that can be replanted. Ms.
Kammerer stated that over the past 20 years she has seen many open
rolling hills become developments which have more trees than were
originally on the property. She felt that the ordinance and
moratorium are intrusions on the rights of a property owner and
create a level of bureaucracy the city does not need.
Page No. 4446
June 20, 1995
Mr. Stan Gustafson, 7 Mears Avenue, stated that people wonder why
the ordinary citizen is really concerned about the intrusion of
government into their lives and the tree ordinance is the closest
example of intrusion at the local level. He stated that he would
prefer that the city do something proactive like removing dead elm
trees that breed beetles which infect his trees. He did not believe the
city should hire a forester to determine whether he has an 18 inch
tree or a landmark tree and cannot remove it even if it becomes a
hazard to his home. He stated that when he drives over the Mendota
Bridge and sees the site that was clear cut he does not know what
trees were there. He was bothered more by the appearance of an old
house in that area and felt it was more important to remove the
house. He stated that he understands that about half of the tax
revenue in the city comes from industrial properties and that he has a
problem if Council wants to save a maple tree at the expense of a
$10 million commercial building. He asked that Council leave
private home owners along and not be quick to throw out
commercial developments.
Mr. Stan Linnell, 1407 Cherry Hill Road, stated that it has been
stated that the original intent was for large properties and not
individual homes and he agreed that individual property owners
should not be affected by the tree ordinance. He further stated that
he knows that Council is not going to stop large commercial
development to save one tree and individual home owners will not
be required to replace individual trees. He stated that the ordinance
is not as bad as people think and that the ordinance is in a working
stage yet. He felt that the moratorium needed to be enacted because
if he owned and wanted to develop a five acre parcel and the new
ordinance was in draft stage he would possibly want to remove some
trees before the ordinance could be adopted.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that she does not know what
interest Council has in individual trees at this point, further stating
that the Planning Commission has put a lot of work into the
ordinance but it is still a working draft.
Mr. Linnell responded that there are many cities that have tree
preservation ordinances and there are benefits to such an ordinance -
for example, he cited a new development near his home where many
trees could have been lost if it were not for the moratorium.
Councilmember Krebsbach pointed out that there is no way to
protect the character of an area if it develops unless there is an
ordinance that gives authority and does not impact existing home
owners. She explained that that has always been the Council's
Page No. 4447
June 20, 1995
intent and that Council is now reacting to a very well thought out
document.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city is getting more and more
specific regarding landscape plans for developer, which is why a
preservation ordinance has evolved - rather than negotiating with a
developer. He stated that he can also see the other side of the issue -
certain types of trees are scrub trees, like boxelders and
cottonwoods.
Councilmember Krebsbach felt that Council is not even interested in
that level of being specific, and stated that her interest has been
control over undeveloped property.
Mr. Gustafson stated that the only reason he is present this evening
is to let Council know that there are people who do not like the
proposed ordinance and would like Council to take a better look at it
and change it.
Mr. Gary Seivert, 724 Mohican Court, stated that he applauds the
Council for looking at preserving the treed nature of the city. He
stated that he lives on a cul de sac and looks at the wooded
undeveloped school property. He explained that he and his
neighbors value trees enough that they asked the city to plant trees
and he and his neighbors maintain them. He stated that there will be
a middle school built on the school property and asked how that will
fit in with the tree ordinance and maintaining the nature of the area.
Councilmember Krebsbach responded that she is interested in
keeping a treed perimeter and stated that she thinks that is all that
can be asked of a developer. She explained that her interest is that
Council has some regulation to preserve the perimeter and clustering
of existing vegetation. She stated that an ordinance would give
Council something to stand on, but she was unsure that the proposed
draft gives the perimeter protection.
Mr. Seivert stated that he has spoken with his neighbors about the
ordinance and the impact of development of the school district
property. He stated that there are stately oaks and birch trees along
the trail and the property is wooded.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that Council is not interested in
covering every tree by the ordinance and is looking for people to
work with Council and say what makes sense to the residents. She
asked that residents give Council suggestions.
Page No. 4448
June 20, 1995
Mr. Dave Jacobson, 728 Mohican Court, stated that he agrees with
the importance of perimeter trees and stated that his neighborhood
will look at the ordinance and submit comments.
Mrs. Betty Schuster, 1900 Wachtler, stated that she feels single
family homes should be excluded no matter what the size of the tree
is. She further stated that she can see excluding some trees, such as
boxelder, and that developed commercial property owners should be
allowed to decide about their own property. She thought that when
people in the commercial field are going to build, they are not going
to destroy trees and when people buy a lot they look at the trees and
place their homes accordingly. She felt that developers should be
scrutinized more but that single family home owners should not
have to come to city hall to protect their rights.
Mr. Gerfast stated that Mendakota Country Club is very much
against the ordinance as well as Royal Redeemer Church, and even
the chair of the Planning Commission opposed it.
Mr. Stefani asked if there would be additional city expense, hiring a
forester and staff, if the ordinance is adopted.
Mayor Mertensotto responded that Council is not thinking about
hiring a forester. He explained that the ordinance is in a working
stage and Council will listen to resident comments and work with
residents to meet their desires and balance Council's concerns over
undeveloped properties.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that the Planning Commission has
put a lot of effort into the ordinance and has developed a model, but
it is now in a different stage of the process. She explained that she is
concerned about large undeveloped tracts but not about developed
single family lots.
Councilmember Huber agreed, stating that Council's concern is over
large undeveloped land.
Councilmember Smith stated that she is concerned about another
level of government and asked whether tree preservation could be
addressed in the subdivision ordinance.
Assistant Batchelder responded that if it were just a matter of
establishing standards in the subdivision ordinance, that would
work, but there are no standards with which to measure tree loss or
replacement. He explained that adding language to the subdivision
ordinance only affects those developers who act in good faith and
Page No. 4449
June 20, 1995
does not protect against those who will remove trees and then come
in with a development proposal. He stated that the intent of the
ordinance is to capture undeveloped lands for formal application and
that something is needed to control the clear cutting and destruction
of trees before a development comes before the city.
Mayor Mertensotto invited residents to submit comments to
Assistant Batchelder.
MENDAKOTA PARK Council acknowledged a memo from Assistant Batchelder regarding
backstop alternatives for foul balls at Mendakota Park.
Mayor Mertensotto explained that the issue came before Council
because the Mendota Heights Athletic Association has requested use
of Mendakota Park ball fields for some activities rather than limiting
them to adult softball. He explained that the reason the ball fields
have a pinwheel design was to accommodate adult softball, and
when the referendum discussions were going on the Sibley fields
were to be used for youth baseball. He stated that there are about
1,100 children involved in the Association programs and Council is
trying to make available as many fields and spaces as possible to
accommodate their needs. He stated that if Council is going to
permit the Association to use the Mendakota fields, use must be
restricted to youths no more than 12 years old. He stated that there
is a concern that if baseball is allowed, the backstops are not high
enough, and pointed out that the back stops at Sibley are 14 feet
high.
Park Project Manager Kullander stated that the Sibley back stops are
14 feet high with a six foot overhang and the fields are away from
the center section so that the concession stand is in the center of the
outfields where foul balls are not so much of a factor.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that people at Mendakota Park have to
pay attention behind the back stops or they could get hit. He stated
that there are no backstops that could be designed to prevent all foul
balls from coming out but Council wants to stop as many as
possible. He asked what can be done at Mendakota that would not
destroy the visual integrity of the park.
Assistant Batchelder responded that staff has outlined a number of
alternatives in his memo, and he felt that the two best possibilities
are to extend the back stops vertically to a higher elevation or to
install hooded backstops to stop the lower level line drives from
coming onto the observation decks (options one and four). He stated
that the forty foot extension (option one) would involve putting
Page No. 4450
June 20, 1995
- telephone poles in and removing existing backstops and adding
netting. He stated that this would be very effective but would cause
significant destruction of existing facilities. He explained that
option one is either /or - ten feet would extend the existing backstops
ten feet, and the forty foot extension would require building a new
pole structure.
Mayor Mertensotto asked about installing a hood - bringing the
fence up to 20 feet and then putting on the 45 degree slope.
Mr. Kullander responded that when the hood is put on it would
distort the other boards and vertical extension would not have the
visual affect but would have the same affect of stopping foul balls.
He stated that each of the cities he has contacted seem to approach
the issue differently - every city has a different opinion on what
works. He stated that cities that use netting usually use a 30 foot
pole, but that has maintenance costs and visual impairment
consequences. He stated that cyclone fencing is permanent and the
vertical extension would save on maintenance costs. Responding to
a question from Mayor Mertensotto, he stated that the overhang on
the observation deck is 16 feet high.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that if 10 feet were added to the existing
backstop there is no way a line drive would hit the observation deck.
Mr. Kullander responded that the backstop could just be extended to
20 feet to protect the observation deck and wings would not have to
be added. He stated that the $10,000 bid was for creating 80 foot
wide backstops on all four fields.
Councilmember Huber asked what age groups MHAA wants to be
allowed to play on the fields.
Mr. Charlie Godbout, representing MHAA, responded that the
association is not specific and plays ages 10 -11, 12 -13, and 8 -9 as
groups.
Councilmember Huber stated that as everyone knows, there will be
future discussion on whether MHAA can play baseball on softball
fields. He stated that depending on the age group there are
differences in what is needed for pitching mounds and changing
from grass to skinned infields, and the fields would then become
truly baseball fields and not softball fields. He stated that if he is in
favor of going to fencing it would be to get more use out of the
fields but that does not mean he would be willing to make changes
in the mounds and infields.
Page No. 4451
June 20, 1995
Mr. Godbout responded that the changes to the mounds or infields
are not contemplated at all.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council would not want too many
balls knocked out onto Dodd Road, which is why he wants to limit
the age group to 12 year olds as a maximum age.
Mr. Godbout responded that he would agree to that condition and it
would be fine if only 10 and 11 year olds use the fields, which
would help the association's scheduling problems.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that if the association is allowed to use the
fields, there would be more utilization out of the fields than
currently exists, pointing out that at times only one or two of the
fields is being used. He explained that if Council makes a decision
to increase the height of the backstops that would be a signal that it
would be willing to discuss fitting the association into the schedule.
Mr. Godbout informed Council that the MHAA games start at 6:30
with a time limit such that games are over by 8:30 p.m. He stated
that perhaps the games could be started at 5:30 during the summer
months and they would be done by 7:00 or 7:15. He stated that this
would allow adults to play a second session at the fields.
Councilmember Huber stated that his only comment would be that
the larger question, over baseball use, is coming next month. He
stated that he does not know that if agrees to extending the
backstops he would be sending a signal about baseball use. He
stated that there is plenty of time to do the work on the backstops
and if there is intent to send a signal to MHAA, he would rather
delay making a decision on the backstops until after a decision is
reached on use. He stated that if he does vote in favor of the
backstop extension it would not necessarily mean that he is leaning
one way or the other on the issue of baseball versus softball.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that if the backstops are increased, a
change is being made - Council has heard that the pinwheel design is
for adult softball but the fields are not being utilized as they should
and MHAA has asked for baseball use. He stated that if Council
decides to increase the height of the backstops it will be sending the
signal to MHAA that it is willing to negotiate with them to allow,
baseball for up to 12 year olds. He stated that staff was to provide
information on how many residents and how many non - residents are
on the softball teams.
Page No. 4452
June 20, 1995
Councilmember Huber stated that if Council says backstop
extension will allow baseball at Mendakota, he is not willing to
make a commitment until he knows whether some softball teams
will be bumped off the schedule. He further stated that if he votes
for the extension that would not mean that softball will have to go -
he pointed out that the backstop extensions would be for safety,
whether softball or baseball is played.
Assistant Batchelder stated that fast pitch softball is being played at
Mendakota as part of the MHAA softball program, and those games
generate foul balls.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that if action is taken on the
extensions, Council would not be changing anything in terms of
advocating one sport over another, but rather would be acting
because of safety concerns.
Councilmember Huber stated that Council is still in a data collecting
stage and the issue facing Council now is that of backstops. He
stated that there are many reasons to increase the size of backstops
but he does not want to send any signals about field use.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that the signal it sends is that Council will
contemplate youth baseball at Mendakota.
Assistant Batchelder stated that he is attempting to coordinate
schedules to set up a meeting with MHAA representatives, Sibley
area fast pitch representatives and adult softball representatives.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that what has come out of this evening's
discussion is that it would be best to increase the backstops to a
height of 26 feet for the 80 foot fence area, which would be higher
than the soffit on the observation deck. He stated that Mr. Kullander
must know if this is Council's desire so that he can get specific bids.
Councilmember Huber responded that he is not against baseball at
Mendakota and that the ideal would be that everyone can be fit in,
but he did not want to make promises to both groups and then tell
them that they do not fit in.
Councilmember Krebsbach stated that is it her understanding that
the backstop extension consideration is a safety issue and that the
agreement is that Council will make every attempt to provide for
softball league scheduling.
Page No. 4453
June 20, 1995
Mr. Jim Kilburg stated that the experience from softball tournaments
is that balls that come up in the concession stand or over it that are
the problem. He stated that the pinwheel is so tight that there is not
a lot of room and people who are watching a game on another field
could get hit by a foul ball.
Staff was directed to request bids for ten foot extensions on the
backstops and wings for all four fields.
TAX FORFEIT PARCELS Council acknowledged a memo from the City Clerk regarding
potential use of tax forfeit parcels.
After discussion, Councilmember Huber moved to approve the non -
conservation classification for tax forfeit parcels, Lots 1 -4, Block 1,
Centre Pointe South.
Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CURLEY ADDITION Council acknowledged the feasibility report for proposed Curley
FEASIBILITY STUDY Valley View Addition street reconstruction. Engineer Mark Mogan
reviewed the report for Council.
Councilmember Smith stated that she would like some input from
1 the William Court property owners to see how they feel about
having only mill and overlay work done on a portion of William
Court.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that all of the streets throughout the
project should receive the same improvements, and that the entire
subdivision should be treated equally.
Public Works Director Danielson stated that the report will be
revised to that there is one proposal to treat all of the streets the
same. This would allow Council to make a decision based on the
comments received at the hearing.
Councilmember Smith asked about use of storm water utility funds
for watermain construction costs. Engineer Mogan responded that
the item was included in the report as a contingency item to cover
any unforeseen problems.
Councilmember Smith stated that the report recommends the use of
TIF to support the assessments attributable to the north side of Mary
Adele abutting the Curley redevelopment area. She stated that there
was a similar situation where there was questionable benefit to
properties along Dodd Road in the Friendly Hills project.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
BUDGET
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
ATTEST:
Charles E. Mertensotto
Mayor
Page No. 4454
June 20, 1995
Mr. Mogan responded that portions of the lots drain to the street and
a case can be made for use of TIF.
Mayor Mertensotto stated that he believes that the city would be
better off keeping the wall of evergreen trees between the
neighborhood and the commercial area and paying the assessments
by TIF.
Public Works Director Danielson informed Council that if the lots
were to ever develop a hook-up charge would be required in an
amount equivalent to the assessments.
Councilmember Krebsbach moved adoption of Resolution No. 95-
26, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND
CALLING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED STREET
RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION
IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE CURLEY'S VALLEY VIEW
ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 93, PROJECT NO. 4)," the
hearing to be held on July 18.
Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.
Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Lawell
regarding possible budget workshop dates.
Councilmember Huber moved to conduct a budget workshop on
July 11 at 7:00 p.m.
Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.
There being no further business to come before the Council,
Councilmember Smith moved that the meeting be adjourned to
closed session for discussion on personnel related litigation.
Councilmember Koch seconded the motion.
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:32 o'clock P.M.
Kathleen M. Swanson
City Clerk
LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL 4.
June 20, 1995
Asphalt Contractor License
Blacktop Driveway
Arden Griepp & Sons Blacktopping, Inc.
Masonry Contractor License
Graf Concrete & Masonry, Inc.
Gas Piping Contractor License
Blaylock Plumbing Co.
Hokanson Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
General Contractors License
All- American Recreation, Inc.
John Klem Construction
Twin City Acoustics, Inc.
Valley Pools Inc.
Tree Service & Removal
Green Leaf Tree Service Inc.