Loading...
1993-06-15 Council minutesPage No. 3648 June 15, 1993 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, June 15, 1993 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: Acting Mayor Smith, Councilmembers Huber and Koch. Mayor Mertensotto and Councilmember Krebsbach had notified the Council that they would be absent. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Huber moved adoption of the agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Koch moved approval of the minutes of the June 1, 1993 regular meeting with corrections. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Huber moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the Treasurer's monthly report for May. b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the May 5th NDC-4 meeting. C. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the May 25th Planning Commission meeting. d. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the June 8th Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. e. Authorization for the issuance of a sign permit to EcoLab to allow installation of a 21 square foot sign above the existing entrance sign at 840 Sibley Memorial Highway. Page No. 3649 June 15, 1993 f. Approval of a modified Critical Area site plan for Mr. & Mrs. Michael DeVito to allow construction of a home at Lot 8, Block 2, Val's Addition, along with authorization for refund of the $100 critical area application fee. g. Adoption of Resolution No. 93-37, "RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STATE AID HIGHWAYS," requesting that the Commissioner of Transportation designate Decorah Lane as an MSA street. h. Approval of a joint powers agreement with West St. Paul for Ivy Falls Creek improvement cost sharing along with authorization for its execution by the Mayor and City Clerk. i. Approval of the list of claims dated June 15, 1993 and totalling $125,089.75. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Virgil McQuay was present to discus an incident at his residence in December, 1989 involving NSP. He felt that an investigation should be made by state or federal authorities and asked for city cooperation. Administrator Lawell informed Council that a great deal of analysis has been made on the incident, and much information and correspondence is on file. He explained that the city had suggested that Mr. McQuay contact the County Attorney and that all of the information has been given to Mr. McQuay. Mr. McQuay responded that the County Attorney's office informed him that charges must be made within three years. He stated that he made charges immediately but the county did not recognize them because the city has not cooperated. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the city's involvement in the matter may be limited to just providing information. Administrator Lawell stated that as the complainant, Mr. McQuay should make the Page No. 3650 June 15, 1993 initial contact and that if the authorities he contacts need additional information staff will be happy to provide whatever is available. City Attorney Hart stated that Council is not an investigative or judicial body, and that the appropriate course for Council to take is to promise that the city will cooperate with an investigation by any agency Mr. McQuay chooses to contact. He further stated that it would be inappropriate for Council to make any conclusions on the incident this evening because council is not acting as a judicial body. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Cathy Ellers, 1751 Diane Road, was present on behalf of residents in the Victoria Highlands area to request Council consideration of traffic safety issues in the neighborhood. She explained that the two points of entrance to the neighborhood, Diane Road and Douglas Road,,are uncontrolled intersections and there is much speeding traffic. The neighborhood is concerned about safety of pedestrians and is also concerned about the cul-de-sacs at the end of Douglas and Diane. She explained that people cannot see further down the roads at the intersection to realize they are not through streets and people come onto them at high speeds thinking they are through streets. She stated that the neighborhood hopes for two "dead-end" signs at the southwest and southeast corners of the intersection and posted speed limit signs at the intersections with Victoria, or "slow - children present" signs. Engineer Klayton Eckles stated that normally when people request signs, the police and engineering staff do traffic studies, looking at the need for stop signs and other types of signage. Acting Mayor Smith stated that one of the risks of the "child at play" signs is that the signs may give a false sense of security. Administrator Lawell suggested that the residents submit a written request to the City Clerk, which would then be forwarded to police and engineering for a response to Council on July 5th. Page No. 3651 June 15, 1993 MISSISSIPPI RIVER Ms. Joanne Kyral, from the National Park MANAGEMENT PLAN Service, was present to update the Council on the National Mississippi River and Recreation Area (MNRRA) Management Plan planning process. She informed Council that the total acreage within the 72 mile boundary of the MNRRA is 54,000 acres and that the Park Service owns only 43 acres at this time. She explained that the Service does not intend to be a major land manager but rather a facilitator for the project. She stated that copies of the draft plan will be submitted to the city after it is completed and public hearings will be held on the draft. She briefly reviewed the land use management program and explained that the Park Service would have review authority over management plans but will not be another level of government - local communities would be responsible for their own land use management plans. She anticipated that NPS will have an extensive interpretive program, and that a grant program will likely be available to help with items within local land use management plans. NPS personnel would work closely with the communities. She stated that Council comments to the draft NPS plan are welcome. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Council is interested in the land use portion of the plan and asked if Ms. Kyral knows how the land use portion will impact cities. Ms. Kyral responded that from meetings with the Metropolitan Council, they would work with the communities to update or revise existing land use plans and from that point cities would implement the plan. Acting Mayor Smith asked what would happen to existing land use plans if they are impacted. She stated that she understands that the impact would be within a 300 foot stretch from the high water mark of the river. Ms. Kyral responded that she understands that the DNR would work with the cities on writing ordinances, but would like to confirm that this is correct. The Metropolitan Council and DNR will implement the policy - for example, they might recommend a continuous trail through the corridor but it would be up to the communities to determine where the trail would go. Page No. 3652 June 15, 1993 Acting Mayor Smith stated that in other words, a trail is the goal and if it cannot be accommodated in the corridor the city must find a location for it. Ms. Kyral responded that this is correct, that the city would determine the next best location. She pointed out that the current draft of the plan respects the rights of the private property owners. Acting Mayor Smith stated that Council members are strong supporters of open space and parks and the city is a leader in conservation and ecological issues, but on the other hand Council has concerns about how legislation will impact the city in other aspects. She asked what the schedule is for review and implementation. Ms. Kyral responded that the review period will be from July 5 to September 10, followed by a 3 to 4 week period for Commission review of the comments. After the review the plan will be revised and a the plan will be sent to the Governor for comments, followed by final approval by the Secretary of Interior. COMMUNITY SURVEY Council acknowledged a memo and draft Dodd/Highway 110 community survey from Administrator Lawell. Mr. Bill Morris, and Ms. Diane Traxler, from Decision Resources Limited, were present for the discussion. Mr. Morris explained that the questionnaire was developed from a mission statement provided by Council. He then reviewed the entire survey. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the full Council is not present and Council may therefore need to review the survey further, perhaps with additional input from Mr. Morris. Acting Mayor Smith stated at the last meeting she had suggested an enhancement to the introductory paragraph on the second page. Mr. Morris stated that the introduction can generally be three paragraphs long. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she is a little concerned about getting into the question of whether the land should be preserved should be in the front of the survey. She felt that this is the driving point of the survey, yet Page No. 3653 June 15, 1993 the survey does not touch on some of the factors that impact the decision - some of the trade-offs. She felt that it might be premature for the respondents to consider the question so early in the survey. She further stated that the survey only speaks to current traffic, although one concern is how future traffic will affect the intersection. She explained that Mn/DOT has projected statistics into the future, and the projections could change people's minds on whether or not the land should be preserved. Mr. Morris responded that the facts could be added, and the survey could ask about the adequacy of the intersection for future traffic, moving some of the later questions and then asking respondents later to reconsider the responses to this section. Administrator Lawell stated that he had not considered that the survey might ask the question twice, and that the city would want to make certain in the survey to provide a yardstick on the traffic volumes. Councilmember Koch felt that the question over preserving the land should perhaps be asked at the end of the survey, rather than asking it twice, in order to get a more valid response. Mr. Morris responded that if the question is asked at the end, after respondents are exposed to the facts, he could not be sure the responses would represent the community any more - respondents would be acting on facts. Acting Mayor Smith stated that to a certain point asking twice might get a response to the actual data and a further response to the hypothetical. She agreed that this would seem a little like the respondents are being lead. Mr. Morris responded that the technique he is suggesting is called impact polling - seeing if attitudes shift after respondents are provided with additional information. He felt that it is a cleaner approach. He suggested that one thing that could be done is to ask people after the second question if they were aware of the facts which had been just presented. Page No. 3654 June 15, 1993 Councilmember Huber pointed out that there are traffic statistics available and asked if it was based on those projections that Mn/DOT came to the conclusion not to proceed with full realignment of T.H. 149. Administrator Lawell stated that Mn/DOT sees an increase in future traffic but not to the extent that it would require the full realignment as it was originally envisioned when the right-of-way was purchased. Councilmember Huber asked if Mn/DOT made any recommendations to the city for reworking the intersection based on traffic projections. Administrator Lawell responded that the projections were part of the analysis when the city study was done two years ago but that he believes the owner of the shopping center asked for a study on what could be done to solve the problems at the intersection. Councilmember Huber stated that he is still not comfortable with asking the respondents to take on the roll of being a traffic planner. If the survey stated that based on traffic projections the current waiting time at the traffic light at the intersection is "x" and that it would be "x" based on traffic projections, the respondents could make a determination. He pointed out that on the other hand, if that data is available, Council should be able to make a determination. He felt that a survey could be crafted on the current statistics at the intersection - responses based on the future projections would tell Council nothing because the respondents would be asked to make a judgment they have no frame of reference for. He stated that he could see asking them what time of development they would like to see at the intersection but not asking them to be traffic planners. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the driving force behind the question is whether to pursue preserving the right-of-way - giving it up today would severely limit future options. Councilmember Huber agreed but stated that knowledgeable traffic planners could do that analysis. Page No. 3655 June 15, 1993 Acting Mayor Smith responded that the city has asked traffic planners and received several different answers - none of what has been proposed has been favored by everyone. She felt that perhaps the respondents may have an idea that Council has not yet considered. Administrator Lawell stated that the city is looking for the best long term solution, not just for traffic movement but also for pedestrian movement and development in the area. He further stated that the engineering solution may not be the best community solution which is why the opinions of the community are necessary. Councilmember Huber responded that conversely, the respondents might come up with answers which solve all the problems but it would not be affordable. Mr. Morris stated that a new element has been brought in - the survey asks people to comment in a general way, and has not given multiple options. He stated that if multiple options are necessary, too many questions would have to be asked for a telephone survey. He then reviewed the third page. Acting Mayor Smith stated at the last Council meeting it appeared that some of the questions (14 to 21) were too specific. Administrator Lawell stated that the concern is that if the questions are not specific Council would have to guess what is most desired by the residents. He pointed out that some portions of the right-of-way are quite removed from the intersection and that the problem in working with the survey is that there is no way to orient the respondents on where they would like to see certain types of development. Mr. Morris responded that if the preference is for broader descriptions he would suggest using five broader categories, including single family, multi-family, commercial/office, retail/service center, and community center. He asked whether the question should be followed with the types of development. Page No. 3656 June 15, 1993 Acting Mayor Smith expressed concern (on page 4) about the trade-offs, suggesting that they may be too obvious, specifically question 22.. Mr. Morris responded that this was the most difficult section of the survey to write. He stated that question 24 is a startling trade- off but 22 does not appear to be a trade-off of the same magnitude. He asked if there are any other trade-offs Council would like in the survey. Acting Mayor Smith described some of the trade-offs Council has been discussing, including access to the shopping center and the associated cost. It was the consensus that a question such as "do you use the shopping center, how often, etc.," and if the response is no, then ask if the lack of use is because of access, shops, etc. would be useful to the survey. Councilmember Koch asked how the surveyors will answer questions people may ask about trade-offs. Mr. Morris responded that if people find it difficult to make the trade- offs, the surveyors will find that out in the preliminary test and notify Council and will come back before Council for more guidelines. Administrator Lawell asked if the last three questions are too specific to Mendakota Park or if they should ask if people are crossing the intersection to get to any park facilities. He suggested that perhaps the survey should ask whether T.H. 110 is a barrier to getting to the amenities on the opposite side of the highway. Acting Mayor Smith agreed, stating that she thinks the trail system itself is a destination and the linkage of the trail system across the highway is important. Councilmember Huber felt that the question would be a worthwhile follow-up to question six and perhaps should replace question three. Administrator Lawell responded that questions 3 and 4 basically speak to automobiles and suggested that the same type of questions could be used for pedestrian use of the intersection. Page No. 3657 June 15, 1993 Councilmember Huber suggested that a question could ask whether people would access the open space south of T.H. 110 more frequently if they felt more comfortable with making the crossing. Acting Mayor Smith stated that perhaps the question should be whether the existing intersection conditions are a deterrent to using the open space. She agreed that there should be more of a general series of questions dealing with the intersection, not specific to Mendakota Park. Acting Mayor Smith asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Brian Birch stated that he is interested because he is the underlying fee owner of some of the right-of-way, and that his first question is what would the cost be if the survey were dropped tonight. He further stated that he,has lived in the area for years and would benefit the most if a new road were to be built past his commercial land, but from a citizen's point of view, building a road would benefit no one. He observed that it has been stated that just adding turn lanes at the intersection would cost $2 million, and projected that building a new road from South Plaza Drive across the intersection would be extremely expensive and the road would serve no one. He felt that the land on the south side should be preserved but that Council would not give up any options by giving up the land on the north. He felt that turn lanes at the intersection are very viable and suggested that a tunnel under the intersection for trail purposes would be the cheapest approach to pedestrian access. He asked Council to drop the survey and stated that building a new road would hurt all of the businesses at the northeast corner of the intersection and would serve no benefit. Acting Mayor Smith responded that the informal estimate for the intersection is $2 million but that no bids have been taken and no formal estimate has been made. She pointed out that Council is not tied in to a specific design and that Council's desire is to ensure safe passage across the intersection for pedestrians and vehicles. Page No. 3658 June 15, 1993 Mr. Birch complained about city dumping of fill on his property. Councilmember Smith thanked Mr. Morris and Ms. Traxler for attending the meeting and stated that Council may hold a workshop on June 29th, and would review changes to the survey at that time. Mr. Morris responded that neither he nor Ms. Morris would be available on the 29th but that they will get a revised draft to Council before its next meeting. Councilmember Huber suggested that Council review the draft at the workshop if it is possible to complete the revisions by that date. Administrator Lawell suggested that perhaps doing a pre-test between June 29th and the second meeting in July would be appropriate. Councilmember Huber suggested that Council review the draft at the workshop and if Council could basically agree to the draft with only minor changes, Mr. Morris would not need to come back before Council but could develop the final draft and start the pre- test. It was the consensus to discuss the revised survey draft at the Council workshop and conduct a pre-test in early July - if no problems arise during the pre-test, DRL could proceed with the survey. CASE NO. 93-13, Council acknowledged an application from McMAHON Dr. & Mrs. John McMahon for subdivision, lot width variance and wetlands permit for their property located at 620 Wentworth Avenue. Council also acknowledged reports from staff and Planning Consultant Uban, a report from Mr. Jonathan Faraci, of Development Engineering, P.A., a regarding his inspection of the existing septic system, a letter of intent from Dr. McMahan, and a letter from the Dakota County Surveyor regarding right-of-way dedication. Mr. John McMahon, Jr., stated that his parents propose to divide the 8.5 acre parcel into two lots, which would require rerouting the driveway, tearing down a barn and apartment and building a new dwelling. Variance to the requirements for 100 foot lot width, frontage Page No. 3659 June 15, 1993 on a public street for Lot 2, which is behind the lot that the existing house is located on, and a wetlands permit to build 75 feet from the wetlands are needed. He stated that the wetlands variance is required because there is a very mature stand of pine trees which his parents would like to save and the proposed location of the house is the highest point on the property, which will help with the drainfield and septic system. He stated that the applicants have agreed to grant a 30 foot conservation easement to protect the wetlands. The existing bituminous drive will be removed and the area of the driveway will be restored to its natural state. He informed Council that the Planning Commission was concerned about the condition of the existing septic system, and that a study and soil test which have been done have found the system to be adequate. The engineer who performed the study also identified an alternate site in the event that the existing system should fail in the future, and the location is shown on the revised preliminary plat. He stated that the plan has also been revised to show existing utilities and the location of new future utilities - easements will be granted for all utilities on the plat in a ring around the property. The easements will then be available should the city want to do anything in the future. He stated that his parents have offered a restrictive covenant on Lot 1 so that it cannot be further subdivided and will grant a permanent easement for ingress and egress over Lot 1. Acting Mayor Smith stated that the applicants have approached the development of the property very sensitively. She asked if there is a city standard for the length of a driveway from a public street. She also asked how the easement location was determined. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated that there are a few standards on private driveways, such as the type of driveway, width and load requirements. He further stated that typically in Mendota Heights, cul-de-sacs should not be longer than 500 feet because that is the approximate length of a fire hose but that he was unsure as to whether this standard applies to driveways. He informed Council that the applicants propose a 12 foot wide paved surface with 4 foot gravel Page No. 3660 June 15, 1993 shoulders, which meets fire department requirements. With respect to the utility easement, he stated that the location follows the property line around the border and that the location has been reviewed by the Public Works Director who found them to be satisfactory. Acting Mayor Smith stated that one thing in the planning report that was only partly discussed by the Planning Commission was the suggestion for a public road from Wentworth with a cul-de-sac, which would avoid the need for a variance to frontage on a public street. She stated that what has been done in other cases is not to require that a public street be constructed but to accommodate any future needs and adjust the width for a cul-de-sac. Assistant Batchelder responded that in previous cases the city has required public right-of-way to be platted but allowed private driveways to be constructed. In this case, it is very unlikely that public right-of-way could be acquired all the way to Lot 2, and the Planning Commission did not include this as a condition in its recommendation. Mr. McMahon stated that the matter was discussed with the commission and it was agreed that dedicating right-of-way would be platting a public road that would go nowhere. He informed Council that all of the adjoining property owners are very opposed to a public roadway. Acting Mayor Smith stated that she realizes that the existing house has been on the property for a long time but that cul-de-sacs typically cannot be longer than 500 feet. She asked how fire protection will be provided to the homes. Assistant Batchelder responded that the Fire Department would likely respond to a fire call with a pumper, which is how they respond to Sunfish Lake. He informed Council that conservation easements cannot be dedicated on a final plat but must be dedicated as drainage and utility easements and must be recorded separately as conservation easements within the drainage easement. He stated that this can be taken care of at the time of final platting. Page No. 3661 June 15, 1993 Mr. Bill Brown, who prepared the preliminary plat, stated that the line shown as conservation easement on the preliminary plat will be identified as a utility easement on the final plat and a conservation easement will be filed for that area with the final plat. The restrictive covenant will be a separate document which must be recorded with the final plat. Attorney Hart stated that the Planning Commission record has established that the criteria for a wetlands permit have been met and the criteria for the variances is the practical difficulty and unique typography of the lot. Assistant Batchelder stated that the Commission also recognized that the existing lot is non-conforming and presents practical difficulties. Acting Mayor Smith pointed out that there was also a finding of the Commission that the overall net affect of placing the driveway in another area creates a positive net affect on the wetlands. Councilmember Koch moved to approve the preliminary plat dated July 7, 1993, along with approval of a ninety foot variance to the required lot width of 150 feet in the R-1A zone for Lot 1, a variance to the required public road frontage for Lot 2, and a wetlands permit to allow construction of a single family home on Lot 1 to within 75 feet of the designated wetlands and to allow removal of the current driveway including restoration of the driveway area, approvals subject to receipt by the city of acceptable documents establishing a conservation easement and establishing the restrictive covenant for Lot 1 so that it cannot be further divided. Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 RECYCLING FUNDING Council acknowledged a memo from Administrative Assistant Batchelder recommending that the city apply for special assistance grants from Dakota County on July ly 1st, for two recycling projects - curbside and multi-family collection of mixed paper, and Page No. 3662 June 15, 1993 purchase of canvass grocery bags /reduction education. Assistant Batchelder reviewed the recommendation for Council. Councilmember Koch moved adoption of Resolution No. 93 -38, "A RESOLUTION REQUESTING SPECIAL ASSISTANCE GRANT MONEY FOR RECYCLING ACTIVITIES." Councilmember Huber seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 COUNCIL WORKSHOP Councilmember Koch informed Council that she cannot attend a workshop on June 29th. Acting Mayor Smith suggested convening in workshop at 6:30 on July 6th, which would provide an hour for discussing the community survey before the regular meeting to be held that evening. It was the consensus to conduct the workshop at 6:30 on July 6th. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Koch asked staff to check the Ivy Falls Park pond for beavers. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Huber moved that the meeting be adjourned to closed session. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:17 o'clock P.M. 11-thleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: JiYl" Smith Acting Mayor