Loading...
1992-12-01 Council minutesPage No. 3461 December 1, 1992 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, December 1, 1992 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 Blesener, Cummins, Koch and Smith. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Blesener moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Cummins moved approval of the minutes of the October 6, 1992 regular meeting and the October 6, 1992 Council workshop with correction. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Koch moved approval of the minutes of the November 3, 1992 regular meeting with correction. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the minutes of the November 17, 1992 regular meeting with corrections. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Koch moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the October 27th Planning Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the November 24th Planning Commission meeting. Page No. 3462 December 1, 1992 c. Adoption of Resolution No. 92 -8114 "RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DELINQUENT SANITARY SEWER RENTAL CHARGES TO THE DAKOTA COUNTY AUDITOR FOR COLLECTION WITH REAL ESTATE TAXES." d. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated and attached hereto. k. Approval of the list of claims dated December 1, 1992 and totalling $244,108.21. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING - TRUTH IN Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the TAXATION /BUDGET purpose of a public hearing on the proposed 1993 budget and tax levy. Treasurer Shaughnessy informed the audience that the Truth in Taxation hearing is required by state statute, and that each year in August the city prepares a proposed budget and certifies to the County the maximum tax the city expects to levy for the coming year. He informed Council that the Fire Department has requested authorization to purchase breathing apparatus from the 1992 budget, and recommended that the $27,600 included within the Fire Department budget proposed for 1993 be adjusted to remove $27,600. He then showed and reviewed graphics on proposed revenues and expenditures for the general fund and enterprise funds, and on the proposed general tax levy and special levies. He explained that the overall levy increase proposed is approximately 7.6 %, which, when adjusted by growth in the city's valuation should result in an increase of approximately 4% in a homeowner's tax bill. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. A gentleman in the audience stated that his valuation increased about 13% but his property tax is proposed to increase 34 %. Treasurer Shaughnessy explained the tax capacity formula, stating that for 1992 taxes (payable in 1993) the rates on homes over $115,000 is Page No. 3463 December 1, 1992 2.5% but the rate will be reduced next year to 0 20. Mr. Bob Tousignant, 1300 Furlong Avenue, stated that while he recognizes that the installation of utilities to his home will increase the valuation of the property, the taxes went up 90.4% on the vacant lot next to his house and 24.5% on his home. The lot valuation went from $3,900 to $8,900 and it is an unbuildable lot. Treasurer Shaughnessy suggested that Mr. Tousignant contact the County Assessor to explain that the lot is unbuildable and to ask that it be consolidated with the homestead property for property tax purposes. Mrs. Rhonda Burling, 913 Crown Court, stated when her home was built in 1992 the mortgage value was $100,000 but that the Assessor's market value is $163,000, making her taxes go from $975 to $2,800. She explained that next year will be the first full year of property tax on the home. Treasurer Shaughnessy suggested that Mrs. Burling contact the Assessor about the valuation. Mayor Mertensotto told Mrs. Burling that she should also attend the Board of Review meeting in the spring if she feels her property valuation is to high. Mr. Walter Kurtz, 580 Maple Park Drive, stated that in the past two years his valuation has increased $24,000 and the city tax increased 32% last year and 34% this year. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that the tax increase is almost entirely due to a property valuation increase and suggested that Mr. Kurtz contact the Assessor with respect to reducing his property valuation. Mayor Mertensotto asked what happened to the 1/2% increase in sales tax which was initiated to build a fund for Homestead Credit (HACA) and local government aid (LGA). He stated that the legislature is apparently preparing to take away the city's homestead credit. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that when the sales tax was increased a year ago, the reason cities and counties agreed to the proposal was that 1 1/2% of the sales tax was to be Page No. 3464 December 1, 1992 dedicated to LGA. He pointed out that the state is now talking about taking the aid away from the other agencies. Mayor Mertensotto stated that elimination or withdrawal of the assistance to the cities would be a fraud on the public after the cities and counties to agreed to the tax increase in order to build a fund where 1 1/2% would go into a trust fund for LGA and HACA and other assistance. He felt that property owners should talk to their legislators to point out that they must be responsible for their actions. He asked how the city stands on its budget and if there will be any reserve. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that there will be some reserve from 1992, primarily due to the heavy building activity. He informed the audience that there must be a positive position and a reserve must be kept because the city receives no income the first six months of the year - the first property tax revenue is not remitted to the city until July of each year. Councilmember Cummins asked how much the imposition of the sales tax has had on the city. He pointed out that while the city must now pay sales tax, the school district does not. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that about $25,000 has been included within the budget for sales tax on city purchases. Responding to an audience question, Administrator Lawell stated that $1,000 per month is currently budgeted for legal fees for prosecutions and that staff is currently in the process of testing the market with a number of legal firms. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Smith moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 It was the consensus to approve the proposed levy and budget, adjusted to remove $27,600 from the Fire Department budget, and to direct staff to prepare revisions to the levy and budget resolution. Page No. 3465 December 1, 1992 FIRE EQUIPMENT Council acknowledged a memo from Fire Chief Maczko requesting authorization to purchase 25 Self Contained Breathing Apparatus from the 1992 budget rather than from the 1993 budget as had been originally proposed. Chief Maczko, present for the discussion, reviewed the memo and explained the need for the equipment. He then responded to Council questions. Treasurer Shaughnessy explained that it was originally anticipated that the equipment net cost would be $37,000, which would be too much to absorb in 1992. The combination of a special offer of $32,424.00 made by Minnesota Conway plus savings of approximately $12,800 in the 1992 Fire Department budget, and the sale and trade-in of existing SCBA units, make it possible to purchase in 1992. Mayor Mertensotto asked if the proposed 1993 contingency will be reduced if the $27,000 is removed from the proposed 1993 Fire Department Budget. Treasurer Shaughnessy responded that the contingency can be reduced if desired. After discussion, Councilmember Blesener moved to authorize the purchase of 25 SCBA units, as proposed, to be funded through the 1992 Fire Department budget with the understanding that the proposed 1993 Fire Department budget will be reduced by $27,000, that 10 of the existing units will be advertised for sale for a minimum bid of $300 per unit, and that 14 existing units will be traded in, all as presented in the Fire Chief's memo. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING: IVY FALLS Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the CREEK IMPROVEMENTS purpose of a feasibility/assessment public hearing on proposed Ivy Falls Creek improvements. Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director Danielson and written objections from the following property owners: Mr. & Mrs. William Gacki, 1198 Fallsview Court; Mr. & Mrs. Ellis Abrahamson, 714 Maple Park Court; Mr. & Mrs. David Libra, 737 Knollwood Court; Mr. & Mrs. Eric Miller, 681 Ivy Falls Court; Mrs. Joan O'Brien, 1199 Falls View Court (by Attorney John Daubney); Mr. & Mrs. Chris Doyle, 642 Maple Park Drive; Page No. 3466 December 1, 1992 Mr. Alan Taylor, 1297 Sylvandale; and Mr. Nick Smookler, 682 Ivy Falls Court. Public Works Director Danielson gave a slide presentation on the problems which exist in the creek and its tributaries. Mr. Jim Langseth, from Barr Engineering, stated that the fundamental problem is that the creek bed is eroding and progressively dropping. He further stated that as the bed drops, the valley walls also erode, and threatens the property on each side of the creek. The situation will continue to worsen until the creek bed reaches a stable slope. He stated that the solution to the problem is to stabilize the creek, and a partial solution will not work. Mr. Langseth then reviewed the alternatives which have been evaluated and the recommended solution which is to install a series of small drop structures down the creek. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Attorney John Daubney, representing Mrs. Joan O'Brien, stated that he will not challenge the need for the improvements, that he has walked the creek and feels that the city faces liability if improvements are not made. He informed Council that he is present to discuss the assessment formula, and whether the proposed assessments are fair and equitable. He reviewed his letter to Council and stated that the work must be done - he has no doubt that houses might fall into the creek if there is another super storm. Mr. Daubney stated that the question is whether the assessments are fair and equitable, and that he does not feel the assessments are fair because the three outlots owned by the Ivy Falls Homeowners' Association are not being assessed although they are directly benefitted. He also pointed out that the feasibility report did not give an answer as to how commercial and industrial properties are going to be assessed although residences will pay $3.50 per quarter to the storm sewer utility to offset $500,000 in project costs that are not being assessed. Mayor Mertensotto responded that Council had originally hoped that all costs would be paid Page No. 3467 December 1, 1992 through the watershed management organization and that Council is wrestling with initiation of a storm water utility for this project and others as well. Commercial and industrial properties would also be billed quarterly charges for the utility. With respect to the three parcels owned by the Association, he stated that it would be extremely difficult to determine market value of the parcels and to establish benefit. The Association takes in a large number of people, over 100, and there is a concern that taxes on the parcels would be left unpaid if they are assessed. Mr. Daubney responded that the property could go tax forfeit. He stated that the properties which are being eroded are receiving the most benefit, and that here would be benefit to the Association. He felt that an assessment could be spread over the entire Association, stating that the Association has the power to assess the members and that they can certainly afford to pay their fair share. He stated that there is clear benefit to the Association property and that every lot in the Association contributes run-off to the creek. He felt that there should be a more equitable basis than is provided in the assessment roll. Councilmember Cummins asked if it is within the province of the Council to determine what an equitable assessment is. Mr. Daubney responded that it is, and that for an assessment to be valid, a benefit equal to or greater than the assessment must be shown. Councilmember Cummins stated that Council has wrestled with a variety of solutions and is dealing with a significant enhancement to the properties of those living on the creek. He did not think Council could see any benefit to the properties owned by the Association, while the values of the 31 properties which are proposed to be assessed will either be preserved or significantly enhanced. Mr. Daubney responded that he disagreed with the logic because although the Association parcels may not have benefit because they are not saleable, every member of the Association will have an increased value to their property because of enhancement of the creek. The creekbed improvement may not necessarily Page No. 3468 December 1, 1992 enhance the property, but will remove a detraction, and all of the people in the Association, by virtue of their membership, will receive benefit. He suggested that it is not equitable to not assess the Association property and asked that it be reconsidered. He stated that those in the Association are proud of the creek and because the creek is there, they benefit. Mrs. Marge Elvgrin, 647 Sibley Highway, was concerned about financing, stating that she understands that 15% of the cost would be paid by 31 homeowners, $50,000 would be paid by West St. Paul, and the remainder would be paid by the rest of the community. She stated that as a matter of principle, the improvement will be lovely when done, but no one will see it except those who abut the creek and while that it is all private property, 85% of the cost will be paid by the community. Mr. Bill Wolston, 648 Sunset Lane, agreed with Mrs. Elvgren, stating that there are no trespassing signs to keep people away from the creek. He stated that he was already assessed at the time of the creekbed improvement from Somerset Country Club to Laura Court. At that time, it was his understanding that there were three divisions that would be handles. Mr. Wolston stated that he believes the City paid for half of the first project, and those whose properties abut the creek were assessed hard and the others whose properties contributed to the drainage district were also assessed. He further stated that he understood at that time that he would not pay again, that this was very specific, and that the property owners agreed to the assessments because they were concerned about the creekbed at the Somerset School. Mr. Wolston stated that he was surprised when he read in a newspaper article that the remainder of the creek is proposed to be repaired and was amazed that nothing had been done to the creek since the first project. He felt that the assessment proposal is not in keeping with what happened before, particularly since some residents have already paid for creek repair. He felt that those people should not be assessed (by the storm water utility) to benefit someone else. He felt that what is proposed is a breach of faith. Page No. 3469 December 1, 1992 Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that when the first creek improvement was done, those who abut the creek paid a higher rate than those who were remote, and that the primary change in philosophy is that under current statutes the city probably could not expand the assessment roll beyond what is proposed. Mr. Larry Wachtler, a landscape architect representing Mr. Abrahamson, stated that he is concerned that the emphasis of the design basically deals with engineering concerns and not aesthetics such as re-vegetation of the slopes, and issues relating how the gabions are designed into the creekbed are not definitive. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the City contracted with Wenck Associates with respect to design and will use a landscape architect with respect to increasing the capacity of the holding pond in the Ivy Falls Park. Mr. Abrahamson stated that his only objection is how the first addition reach is being handled, and if it will be used as an approach for heavy equipment. He was concerned about design and the fact that the sanitary sewer line is where the construction road would go. Mr. Libra stated that he lives on a tributary that is exhibiting little or no damage and is protected by previously installed gabions. He felt that he is being dragged into an expensive project for no reason and stated that there are at least 17 to 20 lots that drain into the reach near his property yet only two or three properties are being assessed. He further stated that the catch basins which have already been installed are doing a good job and he sees no erosion. Engineer Klayton Eckles stated that staff looked closely at the tributaries and that there is erosion under one of the gabions which Mr. Libra is talking about. He pointed out that the bed is unstable and is the slope is dropping, and he is concerned that unless it is repaired, the lower gabion will be lost. He stated that the proposal for this area is to put in smaller drop structures which are less disruptive, and which would stabilize that channel to the creek. Page No. 3470 December 1, 1992 Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the question is whether to do the work in the tributary now or to wait, and that it would be much more costly to delay the work. Mr. Eric Miller stated that he continues to object to the assessment proposed for his property. Mr. Jed Taylor stated that he has met with the engineers after being challenged to come up with a compromise to concrete pipe on his property, and although he is not comfortable with the compromise which has been arrived at, such is the nature of compromises. He felt that the amount of assessment is out of proportion to the value of his property - his house is valued at much less than $300,000. He felt that his assessment is excessive. Mr. Jerome Crary, 1313 Laura Court, responding to Mr. Wolston's comments, asked whether his question is why the project wasn't completed earlier. He stated that it is true that the residents were told the creek repair would be done in three stages, and that the creek problem has been a ten year ordeal for many people. He did not think anyone wants their taxes raised but if the option is to do nothing, he would lose more in diminished property value over 20 years than the assessment will cost. He stated that the creek at times becomes a raging flow, and considering the alternatives, if it comes down to doing nothing versus assessing a project he does not think he would hear anyone sat that nothing should be done. He pointed out the people must consider how much their property values will diminish if nothing is done. With respect to the question of assessing the Association, he stated that he would be willing to be assessed if necessary, and that if nothing is done to repair the creek, he will sue the city. Mr. Crary stated that the damage that is being done to the property along the creek is much greater than the assessments, and that he thinks people are objecting to how the assessment is proposed to be done. He felt that a $55,000 from West St. Paul is a travesty. Page No. 3471 December 1, 1992 Mr. John Brassard, 1205 Sylvandale, stated that the creek serves as a storm drain, and that the flow increased 12% last year. He further stated that new development in the Ivy Falls area will only make matters worse, and that if nothing is done, he will join Mr. Crary in a suit. Councilmember Smith stated that the project is not just to repair people's back yards - it is a storm sewer improvement project, and the creek handles all of the run-off from the district. Mr. Brassard stated that Mrs. Elvgren stated that the creek is private, but children are running down the creek all of the time. He further stated that the creek has never been posted before, but it is now because it is very dangerous - the water in the last storm was four feet high, and there were children playing along the bank who could have fallen into the creek and drowned. Mrs. Harvey Miller, 715 Sylvandale Court, stated that signs went up after a woman fell over the falls, and no one knew if they would be sued or not. The signs went up as a simple protection for the property owners. Mayor Mertensotto reviewed the proposed funding plan, informing the audience that it has taken Council ten months to come up with a package it finds acceptable. Speaking to those who have expressed concern over a quarterly storm water utility charge, Councilmember Cummins stated that four of the five members of Council live south of T.H. 110, outside of the drainage district, and do not contribute drainage to the creek, and will be billed for the storm water utility. He pointed out that Council views the creation of a storm sewer utility as a good way of paying for a portion of the subject project and other storm water problems, and that this is a responsible way of dealing with community storm water problems. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that the utility would provide about $100,000 a year, and over a 19 year period would finance $500,000 of the Ivy Falls creek project and the cost of two other projects which must be done. Page No. 3472 December 1, 1992 Mr. Marion Newman, 1289 Sylvandale Road, stated that he recognizes that no one enjoys paying more taxes but that it appears to him that there is a great deal of support to continue with the project and that he supports it. He felt that a conscientious effort has been made to spread the costs as fairly as possible. Mrs. Celia Seitzer, a neighbor to Mrs. Elvgrin, stated that the 1987 super storm took much of the bank on her property and she and her neighbors paid considerable money to restore their banks yet no one came to their rescue. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Blesener moved to close the hearing. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Blesener stated that there are two specific issues before Council, whether the project should be done, and how to pay for it. She felt that after four years of discussion, it is time to make a decision. She stated that she is totally convinced that the project must be done and that she believes that Council has reached the most equitable method of paying for the improvement. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the assessment roll proposed to Council this evening is the maximum that would be levied against properties and that if the project were to come in at a lower cost Council would certainly give consideration to reducing assessments proportionate to the reduced cost. Councilmember Blesener moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-82,11 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT, ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATION FOR IVY FALLS CREEK IMPROVEMENTS (IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT NO. 6)." Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 With respect to the question over assessing the homeowners association, Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city needs to acquire easements over the association property and it Page No. 3473 December 1, 1992 is hoped that the association will give the easements to the city. He further stated that the association only pays minimal taxes on the land. Mrs. O'Brien stated that she is also concerned about damage to her property from heavy equipment. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the project specifications will stipulate where the creek access will be. Mr. Daubney stated that the association owns land that will benefit, and if costs are allocated to the association they would be equally divided against the members. He recommended that there should be an area assessment against the association and a frontage assessment for those who front on the creek. He further stated that people who would be assessed for special benefit are also members of the association. Councilmember Blesener stated that there seems to be much concern about the homeowner association and whether it is a going concern, but that in principle she agrees that it bears some responsibility. She proposed that Council take action tonight to approve the assessment of 150 of the project, and to fund the remainder of the cost as proposed, and then hold another public hearing to add the association to the assessment roll, notifying the association of the hearing. This would allow the city to get on with the project and still allow Council to take another look at how to spread the assessments. Mayor Mertensotto agreed, stating that this approach would allow the project to proceed - that the assessment roll could be adopted and at the same time a public hearing could be called to assess part of the cost to the association, and the assessment roll could be adjusted. Administrator Lawell stated that the proposal before Council this evening is for the specific assessments contained in the proposed assessment roll. He informed Council that a copy of the roll has been provided to the 31 property owners proposed to be assessed. He pointed out that if the roll were to be Page No. 3474 December 1, 1992 changed in any way to include new properties the process would have to be started again, and it would be late January or February before a new hearing could be held. He felt that it would be in the city's best interest to put the project on hold for 30 days until those who have filed objections file motions in district court. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council can amend the assessment roll. Administrator Lawell agreed that Council could adopt a roll and then reduce the amount of assessment for the 31 properties. Councilmember Cummins stated that he feels it is necessary to put a funding mechanism in place, recognizing that it can be revised down. Councilmember Smith stated that she has reservations about whether it is appropriate to assess people adjacent to the association owned property, and asked how storm water improvements are normally funded. Public Works Director Danielson responded that such improvements are normally assessed on an area basis, and that the contributing area pays 100% of the cost. With respect to assessing the association, Engineer Eckles stated that staff originally proposed this approach and discussed it with the president of the association. The property was not proposed to be assessed because if was felt that if this were done, the association would dissolve and the property would go tax forfeit. Councilmember Cummins asked if the city could obtain an association membership list and directly assess each member 1/100th share of an assessment against the association owned property. He asked if a determination of benefit can be made which would allow such an assessment. Attorney Grooms responded that Council is still presented with the question of whether the members realize a special benefit equivalent to or greater than what is assessed. He pointed out that the members could raise that objection. Page No. 3475 December 1, 1992 Councilmember Smith felt that more objection would be received from those who would be paying twice. Councilmember Cummins stated that the association consists of the 31 property owners who are included on the assessment roll and 70 property owners who are not on the roll. Administrator Lawell suggested two alternatives: rescind the resolution just adopted, or adopt the assessment roll as prepared knowing that those amounts may go down, and start a separate assessment procedure for the home owners association property. If that is approved, at a later date the assessments against the 31 properties could be reduced by the amount levied against the association. Mayor Mertensotto asked what had originally been considered to be assessed against the association property. Engineer Eckles responded that the amount was small because the value of the property is very low. After further discussion, Councilmember Cummins moved to adopt Resolution No. 92-83, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR IVY FALLS CREEK IMPROVEMENTS (IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT NO. 6).11 Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Blesener moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution to order a public hearing and to explore a methodology for securing payment of any assessments which could be levied against association parcels benefitted by the Ivy Falls Creek improvement. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins suggested that staff check the legality of assessing a portion of the improvement costs against each of the individual members of the association as benefitting property owners. CASE NO. 92-34, Council acknowledged a memo from Administra- GRILZ VARIANCE tive Assistance Batchelder regarding an application for variance from Mr. Donald Grilz, 715 Decorah Lane, to allow construction of a home utility and storage facilities Page No. 3476 December 1, 1992 addition which would accommodate the special needs of Mr. & Mrs. Grilz, both of whom have restrictive physical disabilities. Councilmember Cummins moved to approve a four foot rear yard setback variance for 715 Decorah Lane to allow construction of the addition as proposed. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays; 0 MENDAKOTA GOOSE Council acknowledged a letter from the CONTROL Mendakota Country Club requesting approval of a hunting permit to address problems associated with gees on the Country Club property. Council also acknowledged a memo from Police Chief Delmont, and a letter from the Department of Natural Resources regarding various goose control options. Mr. John O'Connell, representing Mendakota, reviewed the problems and stated that the DNR has been very cooperative and is also anxious to find a solution. He asked that Council authorize a goose shoot from December 15th through the 24th. Mr. O'Connell informed Council that the DNRIs Area Wildlife Manager, Jon Parker, has indicated that if Council authorizes a permit the DNR will give Mendakota direction on how to proceed within DNR policies. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city had received a request from Somerset Country Club some time ago to allow trapping and relocation of geese, and there was so much public objection that they did not even start the trapping program. Additionally, the City of Eagan allowed a hunt one year and immediately terminated the permit. Mr. O'Connell responded that the difference between Mendakota and Somerset is the amount of water on the properties. He informed Council that there were 20 sets of breeding geese at Mendakota last year which produced 53 goslings. Councilmember Blesener stated that she cannot support shooting geese on the golf course and that she thinks Mendakota should instead consider trapping and relocation for a few Page No. 3477 December 1, 1992 years to see how effective it is. Councilmember Smith agreed. Mr. O'Connell stated that the shoot would be an immediate solution to the problem and would cut substantially into the flock. Councilmember Cummins asked what efforts have been made to this point to rid the course of geese. Mr. O'Connell responded that in the last five years the goose population has kept doubling and that next year in addition to the mating pairs, the 53 goslings will return. Mayor Mertensotto asked if trapping cannot be completed in one year rather than over a three to four period at a cost of $1,000 per year. Mr. O'Connell responded that it cannot be done in one year because the adult pairs will return to Mendakota but the goslings will return to where they are released. He further stated that it will likely take four or five years of trapping and relocating to get the flock down to a manageable size. Mayor Mertensotto asked if staff had spoken to Resurrection Cemetery representatives to see if the geese are causing problems on cemetery property. Administrator Lawell responded that this has not been done and that the DNR sees it as a metro problem. He stated while the DNR is in favor of opening up the area to hunting, the Police Chief is very concerned about permitting hunting. Councilmember Cummins stated that he is very sympathetic to Mendakotals problems but agrees with Chief Delmont that hunting within the city limits is not the proper approach to goose control. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he realizes that funding for trapping and relocation is a real problem for Mendakota and suggested that Resurrection has a similar problem and the city likely does in its parks. He felt that perhaps the city could look at a funding mechanism where the city could assist the country clubs and cemetery with funding. Mr. O'Connell stated that he could get a permit from the University of Minnesota for Page No. 3478 December 1, 1992 the trapping and relocation and asked if the city will split the cost if the University is amenable to issuing a permit. Councilmember Cummins stated that Mendakota must get a permit from the city as well and that cost participation can be discussed at that time. Councilmember Blesener stated that she would be prepared tonight to act to approve a trapping permit but is not prepared to discuss a cost share. She stated that she is not sure the city needs to participate in the project. Administrator Lawell responded that he does not believe there is anything in city ordinances that require Mendakota to come back for a trapping permit but that he will contact the DNR to see if city approval is required. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that staff contact Somerset Country Club and Resurrection Cemetery also to see if they would be willing to participate. Administrator Lawell responded that he understands that trapping/relocation is a University program, and that the $1,000 annual charge is money paid to the University to put out traps. He further stated that it is likely that if traps are to be placed at four sites the cost would increase. He stated that staff would contact the other entities to see if they are interested in the program. Councilmember Blesener moved to approve a trapping permit should a city permit be required by Mendakota in order to trap and remove geese from the Mendakota property. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 92-35, Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Kueppers were present to KUEPPERS request approval of a 2 foot sideyard setback variance to allow an accessory structure 3 feet from the property line at 28 Somerset Road. Mr. Kueppers explained that he had purchased and installed a pre-fab 12 by 8 foot accessory structure, without a cement slab, on his lot to replace an existing shed which was badly Page No. 3479 December 1, 1992 deteriorated. He informed Council that he did not know until after installing the structure that it was within a required setback. Mrs. Kueppers stated that the old shed was very close to the house and she was concerned over her safety, for fear someone could lurk there late at night. She informed Council that her home had been burglarized a year ago. Councilmember Blesener asked what the Kueppers have done about the drainage problem on the lot. Mr. Kueppers responded that the accessory structure bridges the drainage, and that if it must be moved as proposed by the City Planner, it would not bridge the drainage. He pointed out that all property owners within 100 feet of his lot have submitted written consent to the variance. Councilmember Smith stated that the structure appears to be in the least obtrusive spot on the lot. She asked if there are plantings all around and to the side of the lot. Mr. Kueppers responded that there is a 10 foot high fence to the south covered with vines and to the northeast is a pine tree with an 18 inch trunk, about 40 feet tall. After discussion, Councilmember Cummins moved to approve the requested 3 foot sideyard setback variance on the basis of the hardship caused by the natural drainage problem. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 SEWER RATE INCREASE Council acknowledged and briefly discussed a memo from Treasurer Shaughnessy recommending a 10% increase in the quarterly sanitary sewer charges to offset a portion of the 15% increase in the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's charges to the city. Treasurer Shaughnessy informed Council that in all likelihood there will be a 20% increase in MWCC charges for 1994 and that it will likely be necessary to increase the sewer charges again in 1994. Councilmember Blesener moved adoption of Resolution No. 92 -84, "RESOLUTION SETTING SEWER RENTAL CHARGES FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, MULTIPLE DWELLINGS, AMENITY STRUCTURES, SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, PUBLIC Page No. 3480 December 1, 1992 BUILDINGS, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USERS." Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 BOND SALE Treasurer Shaughnessy distributed abstracts of bids received for the sale of Park Bonds and General Obligation Improvement Bonds. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92 -85, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID ON SALE OF $1,470,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1992, PROVIDING FOR THEIR ISSUANCE, PLEDGING FOR THE SECURITY THEREOF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, AND LEVYING A TAX FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF," awarding the bid to Norwest Investment Services for its low quote of 5.8816% net interest. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92 -86, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID ON SALE OF $710,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION PARK BONDS OF 1992, PROVIDING FOR THEIR ISSUANCE AND LEVYING A TAX FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF," awarding the bid to Norwest Investment Services for its low quote of 5.05% net interest. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ARNDT ADDITION Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92 -87, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT, ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SANITARY SEWERS, WATER, STORM SEWERS AND STREET CONSTRUCTION TO SERVE GEORGE AND ELEANOR ARNDT ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 92, PROJECT NO. 1)." Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 AIR NOISE UPDATE Administrator Lawell gave the Council a brief oral update on the MSP air noise ordinance, stating that MAC held a hearing last evening on whether there should be a mandatory noise budget ordinance. He stated that the public record for the hearing will remain open through December 4th, and if Council desires, staff could prepare a resolution calling for the ordinance. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ASSOCIATED BUREAUS ADJOURN Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ATTEST: ,oza..e. ­15. at . Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor Page No. 3481 December 1, 1992 Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92 -88, "A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION TO IMMEDIATELY ENACT A MANDATORY NOISE BUDGET ORDINANCE AT MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT." Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Acting City Attorney Lloyd Grooms updated Council on the status of the Associated Bureaus agreement. There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Koch moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:41 o'clock P.M. athleen M. Swanson City Clerk LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL December 15, 1992 Excavating License Hubbell Excavating Concrete License Robert Compton, Inc. Gas Piping License Cool Air Mechanical Northwestern Service, Inc. HVAC Contractors License Cool Air Mechanical Drywall License B.C. Drywall, Inc. Sign License Elements, Inc.