Loading...
1992-06-02 Council minutesPage No. 3301 June 2, 1992 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, June 2, 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, and Koch. Councilmember Smith had notified Council that she would be absent. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Koch moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Cummins moved approval of the minutes of the May 19, 1992 regular meeting with correction. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Cummins moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the Code Enforcement monthly report for May. b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the April 28th Planning Commission meeting. c. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the May 26th Planning Commission meeting. d. Acknowledgment of a reminder of the Joint Council/Park and Recreation Commission workshop to be held on June 9th. e. Approval of a request from the Margaret Perron estate to redistribute deferred assessments against 2370 Highway 55 (Furlong improvements). Page No. 3302 June 2, 1992 f. Award of a contract to demolish the structure at 2183 Highway 55 to A. Kamish and Sons for its low bid of $3,740.00. g. Acknowledgment of a memo regarding division of Ivy Creek storm water improvements into two projects. h. Adoption of ordinance No. 285, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 219,11 restricting the sale of vehicles on public property. i. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated June 2, 1992 and attached hereto. j. Approval of the list of claims dated June 2, 1992 and totalling $184,748.95. k. Acknowledgement of contributions totalling $100 from the Dakota County State Bank and the Spinal Care Center to assist in the annual school picnic. 1. Authorization for Wenck Associates to perform analysis of the BARR Engineering Ivy Falls Creek solution for a cost not to exceed $3,000. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 LIQUOR LICENSE HEARINGS Council acknowledged reports from the City Clerk with regard to applications for liquor license renewal from Somerset Country Club, Mendakota Country Club, MGM Liquor Warehouse and the Courtyard by Marriott Hotel. Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on applications from Mendakota Country Club and Somerset Country Club for renewal of their Club Liquor Licenses. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Cummins moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 3303 June 2, 1992 Councilmember Cummins moved to approve renewal of Club Liquor Licenses for Mendakota Country Club and Somerset Country Club. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from the Marriott Courtyard Hotel for renewal of its Limited Service Hotel On-Sale Liquor and Sunday On-Sale Liquor Licenses. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Blesener moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Councilmember Blesener moved to approve renewal of Limited Service Hotel On-Sale Liquor and Sunday On-Sale Liquor Licenses for the Marriott Courtyard Hotel. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from MGM Liquor Warehouse for renewal of its Off-Sale liquor license. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Koch moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins moved to approve renewal of an off-Sale Liquor License for the MGM Liquor Warehouse. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 AIR NOISE/ANLEF Council acknowledged an air noise community update memo from the City Administrator along with a copy of MAC report on the Eagan-Mendota Page No. 3304 June 2, 1992 Heights Corridor Test. Mayor Mertensotto gave the audience a history of the Air Noise Litigation Escrow Fund (ANLEF). He stated that air noise is the number one problem facing Council, and that Council hopes to extend the ANLEF contribution period and re- initiate the program with vigor to determine whether there is community support for ANLEF. Mayor Mertensotto then turned the meeting over to the city's air noise consultant, Bob Collette. Mr. Collette gave the audience a background of what the city has been doing on the air noise problem. He informed the audience that the problem is repetitive overflights every 80 to 90 seconds during peak departure periods. Mr. Collette reviewed transparencies showing the results of the corridor test and flight activity over Mendota Heights. He also explained the noise descriptors used by various agencies. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, he stated that on the west side of the airport, aircraft are fanned in a broad pie. He stated that when the south boundary of the Eagan/Mendota Heights corridor was established in 1971/72, things were much different then they are today. Operations have changed in the past 20 years and adversely affect Mendota Heights today in a way that did not adversely affect the city 20 years ago.---He informed the audience that if the community votes with its wallets, letters, phone calls, etc., and supports the options the Council is considering, the chances of impacting the air noise problem are greatly enhanced. Mayor Mertensotto stated that if Council gets the backing of the community, it will put city money into the effort, but if support is not received, Council will have to give up the fight. He then asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. John Hagman, 816 Ridge Place, stated that over the last several years he has made many calls to MASAC. He asked whether calls accomplish anything, and which agencies the city is dealing with.. Mayor Mertensotto responded that residents are encouraged to call MAC. He explained that the city is dealing with MAC - the FAA will not begin a test unless it is endorsed by the MAC. He Page No. 3305 June 2, 1992 stated that Council wants to demonstrate to the MAC and FAA that Mendota Heights residents support the Council by contributing to ANLEF. In response to a question from Mr. Hagman about what the city will contribute, Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city would bring in an outside legal specialist and commence action in federal district court. He stated that no contribution to ANLEF is to big or too small - the number of contributions are important. Mr. Jack Barber stated that people should go door to door to solicit involvement in ANLEF and that he feels the city has no choice but to litigate. He asked whether a three mile turning radius is maintained. He stated that he watches Northwest do landings and departures on both runways and that their planes come over his house often. Councilmember Blesener stated that one of the problems is that the south boundary of the corridor is fixed so that when both runways are used for departure, flights are splayed over Mendota Heights. Councilmember Cummins stated that one compounding factor is that there are a substantial number of stage two aircraft being used by Northwest. He stated that Northwest apparently flies a disproportionate number of stage 2 planes out of the Twin Cities than they do in other airports. He asked Mr. Collette at what rate Northwest is reducing the number of DC9s in the fleet and if they are making any effort to shift some of the DC9 flights out of other airports they operate from. Mr. Collette responded that the original deadline for change over to stage 3 aircraft fleets was to have been 2000 but that deadline has been extended to the year 2003. He stated that it will be 10 to 11 years before an all- quiet fleet is reached; approximately 2/3 of the current fleet at NSP is the noisy DC 9's and 727's. The airlines will have to phase those out beginning a requirement for 55% of the fleet to be stage 3 aircraft in 1995. Page No. 3306 June 2, 1992 Mr. Kurt Lindry, Inver Grove Heights noise expert, stated that 65% of the Northwest fleet is stage 2 aircraft as of April. Mr. F.B. Daniel, 2056 Timmy, asked whether there is a specific process for getting the desired number of names supporting ANLEF. He agreed that it is essential that the city have both names and contributions but felt that it is unrealistic to leave it to chance. He suggested that nothing is more effective than a door-to-door effort asking for signatures and checks. He felt that unless such a process is undertaken it is highly unlikely that the city will get enough signatures or money. Mr. Dave Hiner, 1312 Furlong, asked what the city is doing to acquire the Furlong neighborhood. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the city has no affirmative plan for a buyout. He further stated that if the airport is to stay in its present location and continue to operate, the airport will have to acquire properties. He informed Mr. Hiner that MAC recently made an application for Part 150 funds over and above what has been allocated for noise abatement, to buy out 480 to 500 homes in Richfield that are closer to the end of the runway and have a higher LDN level than Furlong. He stated that the city does not have an active acquisition program and pointed out that there are probably as many Furlong residents who would oppose a buyout as would favor it. Councilmember Blesener asked whether council had not requested staff to look into possible participation in the buyout program. Administrator Lawell responded that unlike Part 150, there has been a new passenger facility charge (PFC) placed on all airline tickets. MAC knew the tax was to be implemented and made a plan to spend all of the money generated on on-airport improvements. He stated that Council directed staff to pursue whatever it could to get some of the money spent off-airport. Mendota Heights, Burnsville, Richfield and Eagan all have often discussed using the PFC money for buyout. He informed Council that MAC has decided to use some of the money to buy homes Page No. 3307 June 2, 1992 east of Cedar Avenue in Richfield - the area will be needed in the future if there is to be future expansion of the airport. There being no further comments, Mayor Mertensotto expressed Council's appreciation to all those in attendance for the discussion. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92 -32, "A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DONATION COLLECTION PERIOD FOR THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIR NOISE LITIGATION ESCROW FUND." Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins stated that he thinks the suggestions made that there be an organized petitioning and fund raising effort is appropriate and suggested that any audience members, and those watching the meeting on cable television, wishing to participate in the effort contact the City Treasurer. He suggested that perhaps those residents could form a committee to work in July to help meet the ANLEF target. Councilmember Blesener expressed concern that the July 31st deadline is somewhat arbitrary. She stated that she knows Council wants a timeline but was concerned that without a door to door effort the goals will not be realized. She stated that she does not want Council to take the position that if the ANLEF goal is not reached by July 31st the effort will die. She stated that the support of the community in terms of signatures and money will help make a much stronger case, but Council must commit to finding other means to finance potential litigation. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council is under so much pressure to do something about the noise problem that a deadline must be set. He further stated that $25,000 will not make or break a litigation effort but the support in terms of number of signatures and monetary contributions is necessary to show that people are willing to support the demand for air noise reduction. Councilmember Blesener stated that she would like to see the city do something. She asked what Council is going to do on August 1st if the $25,000 ANLEF goal is not reached by July Page No. 3308 June 2, 1992 31st. She stated that within the next 60 days maybe there are some things that must happen to get things moving in August. Administrator Lawell responded that the city will have to get an attorney working on the issue so that things are pretty far along by August 1st. Councilmember Cummins stated that he is about to the point where if the city does not get a significant showing from the citizenry that they will support the fight he is not sure that Council should spend considerable city money. He further stated that he thinks Council should not spin its wheels if there is not a substantial showing of support and contributions - perhaps air noise is not as significant an issue as it was a couple of years ago. He pointed out that litigation will be very expensive and protracted and support from the residents is necessary. CASE NO. 92 -06, Ms. Kathleen Anderson was present to request ANDERSON approval of her application for subdivision, wetlands permits, and front yard setback variances for property located at the southwest quadrant of Third Avenue and Clement Street. Ms. Anderson stated that she would like to build a small home on the site. She stated that she understands the Planning Commission concern that development would damage the wetlands because of lawn chemicals and informed Council that she does not intend to use chemicals. She stated that there is runoff on the property now because there is no curb and gutter and the water goes into the wetlands. Mr. Robert Wicker, representing Ms. Anderson, distributed letters from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District relating to the wetlands. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request for wetlands permit for four reasons, including the addition of impervious surface near the wetlands. He explained the precautions Ms. Anderson plans to take during construction, including silt fencing, and stated that sedimentation should be no problem. He further stated that Ms. Anderson will comply with the three conditions stated in the letter from the Conservation District and will remove the concrete that has been Page No. 3309 June 2, 1992 placed on the site after construction is completed. He informed Council that the entire east side of the site will be kept as it is, that Ms. Anderson will keep the wetlands right up to the house and will not have a manicured lawn on the east side. He stated that approval of the permit will increase the value of the property and those adjoining it. Mayor Mertensotto stated that what Ms. Anderson proposes is laudable but Council cannot grant variances based on what people promise to do. Mr. Wicker responded that Ms. Anderson's promises can be incorporated into the wetlands permit and she would be willing to put up a bond which could be invoked if the promises are not kept. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he has looked at the property and spoke to some of the neighbors, who told him that approving the permit would not be wise. Mr. Wicker responded that Ms. Anderson could have bought any lot she wanted but searched for wetlands, and this is the lot she wants. He stated that all the neighbors asked her was if she was going to damage the wetlands. Ms. Lillian Wodke, an adjoining property owner, stated that Ms. Anderson wants to build her house at an angle and face the Wodke property. She stated that there were about 20 people at the Planning Commission meeting who are concerned but did not speak. She felt that the proposed development would hurt the value of her property and is inconsistent with the other homes in the area, which all face Third Avenue. She pointed out that there must be a hardship for granting variances and that if Ms. Anderson plans to build a big home she should have a big lot. She stated that she is unhappy about the proposal and does not want the wetlands harmed. Ms. Anderson stated that she is not planning to build a big house. She further stated that if Ms. Wodke is concerned about damage to her property value, she should have considered this before selling the property to Somerset 19. She stated that she did not hear any Page No. 3310 June 2, 1992 comments at the Planning Commission meeting except Ms. Wodke's and concerns about damaging the wetlands. Mr. Howard Guthmann, President of the Somerset 19 Condominium Association, stated that the property was purchased by the Association from Ms. Wodke in 1976. He stated that the purchase had nothing to do with the two Somerset 19 buildings at Dodd and Wentworth, but was purchased to add to the property which is now 13.5 acres. The land is not needed by the Association. He stated that representatives of the Association met with City staff and the planner in 1987 and asked about the possibility of selling the north end of the Third Avenue property. He informed Council that the City staff said at that time that as far as they were concerned a soil test was necessary to determine if the property was buildable, and a soil test was done. He stated that no one ever said anything about any difficulty until now. He stated that the Association has spent $10,000 on the understanding that there is no problem. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that no applications were made in 1987. He stated that he doubts that staff would have committed the city to anything. He further stated that if Somerset 19 had made a planning application at that-time it might have;a legitimate argument but cannot otherwise take any reliance on anything before an application is made. Mr. Guthmann stated that as far as he is concerned, short of having a written permit everything that the Association has done was based on a reliance on what City Planner Dahlgren had said. Councilmember Blesener asked if staff gave the Association representatives the procedure to follow and informed them that Council would make a decision. Mr. Guthmann responded that they had. Councilmember Blesener stated that Council must make a decision on whether the lot is buildable in the respect that there is enough land not in close proximity to the wetlands to build a house on. She pointed out that there Page No. 3311 June 2, 1992 was no representation made that the piece of land available would be determined by Council to be a buildable property. She asked whether the property was subdivided from another property at the time it was purchased by Somerset 19 and if there was any information at the time that the lot was buildable. Mr. Guthmann stated that the land was originally carved off of the Wodke property and was not platted or subdivided. It was purchased by Somerset 19 to be added to the open space. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the subdivision application and also all variances. The reason for denial was that no hardship was demonstrated for the variance. He stated that the problem he has with the application is that Council cannot grant variances on that basis but must determine whether to grant something within 40 feet of the wetlands in light of the fact that front yard setback is needed even to meet a 40 foot setback and place the building far to the east of the site. He asked why the building pad is where it proposed, and stated that any time there are any deviations from the standard there are problems. Mr. Guthmann stated that they should have been told this in 1987. Public Works Director Danielson stated that he does not recall the Planner or staff making assurances that this plat would be approved. He further stated that in all the time he sat in planning meetings with Planner Dahlgren he does not recall him ever assuring anyone that they would receive positive action on an application. Mr. Guthmann responded that the Association was not given any assurances but that they would not have done what they have if there were any questions that subdivision would not work. Councilmember Cummins stated that he does not believe anyone was mislead, but that the staff probably looked at the land in rough form and did not give assurances that something could be built but probably also did not give any Page No. 3312 June 2, 1992 reasons why it could not. He stated that Ms. Anderson has done a good job of presenting the proposal and that he would like to ben over backwards to assist Somerset 19. He stated that Council has granted wetlands permits for homes less than 40 feet from a wetlands but that he does not think Council has ever approved creation of an island in the middle of a wetlands. He pointed out that the home is proposed to be only 15 feet from the wetlands and stated that he is very uncomfortable that Council would be setting a very undesirable precedent in approving the application. Councilmember Koch stated that in the wetlands ordinances -there is nothing that says a person cannot get a wetlands permit as long as certain criteria are met. She pointed out that Ms. Anderson is even proposing a bond. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the application is for subdivision and almost the entire parcel is wetlands. He stated that even with the subdivision, two variances are required in order to build the proposed house. Councilmember Blesener stated that a request should have been presented to Council in 1986 if there was any proposal for a house, for Council to consider whether the property could even be used for a-single family lot. She stated that in her mind Council would never have considered it as being a buildable lot. She further stated that although the property is very nice it does not change the fact that had Council looked at it four or five years ago it would not have been considered buildable. She pointed out that Council deals with subdivision of lots every few months and in every case subdivision is done before the property is sold and staff is always involved in meeting with the applicants in all cases. Mr. Wicker responded that a 30 foot setback is not to keep the house from the wetlands but to match it up with the buildings on the west. Mayor Mertensotto noted the Planning Commission recommendation, minutes and staff reports which have been received on the matter. He stated that the issue is whether Council wants to circumvent the criteria for subdivision where two additional variances are Page No. 3313 June 2, 1992 needed in order to make the subdivision a buildable lot. Councilmember Blesener pointed out that the planning recommendation speaks to the wetlands permit and variances but that the subject before Council is the subdivision. Councilmember Cummins stated that he thinks the applicant can arguably make a case that she is entitled to the wetlands permit but that he has a problem with the subdivision and setback. He pointed out that in order to get a setback variance an applicant must demonstrate that there is a hardship, and there is none except for the one that would be created by subdividing a lot that is not suitable for building. Councilmember Cummins moved to deny the application on the grounds just stated and to refund the full amount of planning fees paid to the City. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 Koch CASE NO. 92-13 Mr. Mark Morin was present to request approval MORIN of a wetlands permit to allow construction of a single family home on Lot 3, Block 2, Guadelupe Heights Addition. council acknowledged staff reports and a letter from the Soil and Water conservation District stating that the District does not consider that the site has a wetlands. After brief discussion, Councilmember Cummins moved to approve the wetlands permit to allow construction of the proposed home within 55 feet of what is currently described on city maps as wetlands and to direct staff to prepare a proposed amendment to the Wetlands Ordinance to remove the site from the wetlands registry, and further that the wetlands permit fee be refunded, conditioned upon installation and maintenance of proper erosion control methods before, during and after construction. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 92-12, Mr. John Spanjers, 786 Marie Avenue, was SPANJERS present to request approval of a wetlands permit to allow installation of a chain link Mr. Otto stated the Brengmans propose to construct a pool in their yard, and the pool fence must be at least 5 feet high by city ordinance. He stated that the lot is a corner lot and cannot have a fence more than 36 inches high in the front yard and a variance is also required for a fence in the front yard that is not at least 300 open. He stated that the Planning Commission felt that the applicant demonstrated hardship and that the question became hardship versus impact on the character of the neighborhood. In response, Mr. Brengman agreed to consider using a 6' high chain link fence rather than a board fence, but has reconsidered, and consulted with his neighbors, and renews his request for a board fence and the three variances. He stated that the Brengmans feel that the proposed fence is the most appropriate for their property, and the neighbors do not object. He stated that there are other variances in the neighborhood, and it comes down to a matter of what the Planning Commission thought was more aesthetically pleasing to the neighborhood. He did not think that the character of the neighborhood would be negatively impacted by the board fence and pointed out that there are at least two other pools nearby which have similar fences. He stated that the applicants propose to plant bushes that will eventually grow to the top of the fence. Page No. 3314 June 2, 1992 fence in his back yard, 22 feet from Spring Creek. He explained that no trees will be removed or damaged and that the visual impact of the fence should be minimal if anything at all. He informed Council that all of his neighbors have given written consent. Councilmember Cummins moved approval of a wetlands permit to allow construction of a fence as proposed to within 22 feet of Spring Creek. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 92 -14, Mr. Lawrence Brengman and his legal counsel, BRENGMAN Steve Otto, were present to request approval of variances to allow construction of a six foot board -on -board privacy fence to enclose Mr. Brengman's back yard at 909 Adeline Court. Mr. Otto stated the Brengmans propose to construct a pool in their yard, and the pool fence must be at least 5 feet high by city ordinance. He stated that the lot is a corner lot and cannot have a fence more than 36 inches high in the front yard and a variance is also required for a fence in the front yard that is not at least 300 open. He stated that the Planning Commission felt that the applicant demonstrated hardship and that the question became hardship versus impact on the character of the neighborhood. In response, Mr. Brengman agreed to consider using a 6' high chain link fence rather than a board fence, but has reconsidered, and consulted with his neighbors, and renews his request for a board fence and the three variances. He stated that the Brengmans feel that the proposed fence is the most appropriate for their property, and the neighbors do not object. He stated that there are other variances in the neighborhood, and it comes down to a matter of what the Planning Commission thought was more aesthetically pleasing to the neighborhood. He did not think that the character of the neighborhood would be negatively impacted by the board fence and pointed out that there are at least two other pools nearby which have similar fences. He stated that the applicants propose to plant bushes that will eventually grow to the top of the fence. Page No. 3315 June 2, 1992 Mayor Mertensotto was concerned about a 6 foot fence being 14 feet from the right-of-way. Mr. Brengman responded that the planner had indicated he did not think the fence would pose a visibility problem. Councilmember Blesener asked who prepared the alternate layout which was included in the information on the application. Mr. Otto stated that it was prepared by the City Planner but is not suitable because of the steep grade at the proposed fence location. Mr. Brengman stated that the way the pool is set up, the property slopes down and the pool will fit up above the ground. The plan developed by the City Planner left no area between the pool and the fence. Mr. Brengman informed Council that there is a three foot high fence on top of a berm at Diane at Victoria, and the net affect is the same. He also stated that under the ordinance he could install a 6 foot wood privacy fence on two sides of his lot. Councilmember Blesener stated that she thinks that a tall board fences do have a definite impact on the character of a neighborhood. She further stated that when individuals purchase corner lots they must consider that these lot may not have the same utilization as other lots. She informed Mr. Brengman that Council has in the past occasionally approved 42 inch high chain link fences for corner lots but that a six foot board fence 14 feet from the right of way has not been approved. Mr. Brengman stated that he has contacted his neighbors about the Planning Commission's recommendation for a five or six foot chain link fence and they did not like the proposal, but that all of them had agreed with his original plan. Councilmember Koch asked whether Mr. Brengman had considered a design like a picket fence, which would provide privacy yet still give the feeling of openness to address the Planning Commission's concern over opaqueness. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he can support the applicant's proposal but that he would like Mr. Brengman to get written consent from the neighbors across the street and to the Page No. 3316 June 2, 1992 north of his property to a 6 foot wood fence along the front property line facing Diane. Councilmember Blesener stated that Diane Road is a through street in the neighborhood and many people other than those living across the street would have opinions on the fence. She felt that approval of a 5 foot tall wood fence on a through street, 14 feet from the right- of-way, would set a very poor precedent. Councilmember Cummins moved to approve variances to allow a five foot wood fence less than 30 % open along that portion of the yard where a height variance is required and up to six feet tall where no height variance is required on the conditions that plantings be installed all around the outside of the fence to obscure the fence from the street and that staff withhold the required permit until the applicant submits signed statements of approval from the neighbors who signed the original approvals dated May 4th, including the neighbors immediately to the north and across from the Brengman property. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 Blesener Councilmember Blesener stated that by approving the variances Council is setting a precedent that could crop up all over the city. She stated that she can find no hardship - a back yard of 77 feet wide (useable area) would be available if the fence were kept at the setback. Administrator Lawell reminded Mr. Brengman that the proposed pool house will require conditional use permit approval. CASE NO.92-09, ARNDT Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the SUBDIVISION/HEARING: purpose of a public hearing on the proposed STREET VACATION vacation of all street rights-of-way within the Mechanics Addition. Mr. Paul McGinley, representing Mr. & Mrs. Floyd Arndt, was present to request approval of the vacation and the preliminary plat for the proposed Arndt subdivision. Mayor Mertensotto informed Council and the audience that the property owner, Mrs. Eleanor Arndt, is a client of his and that he will not Page No. 3317 June 2, 1992 represent Mrs. Arndt in the discussion or vote on the matter. Mr. McGinley reviewed the original proposal for the subdivision, which envisioned the extension of London Road through the property. He informed Council that there was neighborhood discontent about the continuation of London Road at the original Planning Commission hearing. At the continued hearing, four other plans were considered. Option A met with approval from those attending the hearing and all of the contingencies required by the Planning Commission. The proposed plan maintains 13 lots proposed in the original plan and includes a 13,200 square foot park dedication in the southwest corner of the subdivision. The plan shows a walkway on the north side of lots 6 and 7, as requested by the Planning Commission, and a walkway down the center of vacated Kirchner. He stated that the Planning Commission also recommended a walkway along Butler to the park. With respect to wetlands, Mr. McGinley stated that a portion of the property was designated as wetlands on the city's wetlands inventory map years ago because it was a water course collecting water from the east and northeast. Those areas are now served by storm sewer. He informed Council that the Conservation District has looked at the property and has determined that it is no longer a wetlands and should be removed from the inventory. Council acknowledged a letter from Mr. Steve Kernik, Urban Conservationist from the Soil and Water Conservation District confirming that the land would not be classified by the District as a wetland area. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Harold Blechinger, 605 West Butler, expressed concern over the walkway proposed to be constructed in the vacated right -of -way. He stated that he understood that it would be blacktopped and maintained by the city. He stated that he has been maintaining the land for years but does not wish to pay increased taxes for the vacated area that would accrue to his property. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the question is where the walkway is located and stated Page No. 3318 June 2, 1992 1 that perhaps it will not be necessary to vacate the right -of -way adjacent to the Blechinger property. Mr. John Markert, representing his son, Jeff Markert, stated that he is interested in where the utility easement will be reserved if Kirchner is vacated. Public Works Director Danielson responded that the city will maintain the entire right -of -way as a utility easement. Mr. Markert stated that if 30 feet of right - of -way accrue to his son's property and the Blechinger property they will be receiving additional land but will not be able to use it because of the utility easement. He stated that if this is the case, he would counsel his son not to pay taxes on the vacated area. He asked who will maintain the walkway, and was informed that the city will plow the walk. Councilmember Blesener stated that perhaps the Kirchner right -of -way should not be vacated. Mr. Markert responded that he is not present to oppose the subdivision but that he does reserve the right for his son and Mr. Blechinger to refuse to acquire title to the vacated right -of -way. Councilmember Blesener asked if the trail will continue from the end of London Road along the north edge of the new property above the curb along Kirchner to Butler and above the curb along Butler all the way to the park. She stated that she would like to see the trail assessed against the plat as part of the park dedication. She pointed out that there is very little street construction proposed to serve the 13 lots. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he did not think there would be any objection to Councilmember Blesener's suggestion and further stated that there should be a berm along Outlot A so that land owners can rely on that screening. Mrs. Blechinger stated that the trail is fine but asked if the city can provide that she j will not be assessed. Councilmember Blesener responded that the Blechingers will not be Page No. 3319 June 2, 1992 assessed for any improvements to serve the Arndt plat. Mr. Jeff Markert stated that he is concerned about the vacation adjacent to his property and asked who will maintain the trail. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the city will plow the trail and that if land is vacated, law determines whose property the vacation area will accrue to. If the original right- of-way was taken from the Markert property it will be deeded to Mr. Markert, but he could not build any permanent structures on the area because a permanent easement will be retained by the city but that it could be used for a garden. He informed Mr. Markert that property tax on the vacated area should not be very costly. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Blesener moved that the street vacation hearing be closed. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 Mertensotto Councilmember Blesener moved to approve the preliminary plat for the Arndt subdivision (option A) dated May 18, 1992, with the condition that construction of walkways along Kirchner and Butler Avenues be assessed against the plat, along with a finding of fact that the wetlands designation is to be removed from the site and direction to staff to amend the Wetlands Ordinance accordingly and to authorize the Mayor to sign a quit claim deed to transfer title to the city-held tax forfeit parcel to the applicant. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 Mertensotto Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-31, "RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF STREETS," with the condition that the city retain a permanent utility easement over the vacated Kirchner Avenue right-of-way. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 Mertensotto STREET REHABILITATION Council acknowledged receipt of a memo and Page No. 3320 June 2, 1992 proposed street rehabilitation policy from Engineer Klayton Eckles. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he would like staff to contact the City of West St. Paul about its policy as compares to the proposed street rehabilitation policy to be sure that the city will not be accepting too large of a share of the cost of upgrading from rural to urban construction. Councilmember Cummins moved to table the street rehabilitation policy discussion to June 16th and to direct the City Attorney to review the proposed policy, and further to direct staff to inquire of the City of West St. Paul whether it has encountered any Ayes: 4 pitfalls with its policy. Nays: 0 Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Council acknowledged a memo from Administra- AMENDMENT tive Assistant Batchelder and proposed resolution for city initiation of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, from HR-PUD to MR-PUD, for the Putnam site. Council also acknowledged an associated proposal for planning services from Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban. Mayor Mertensotto felt that the $4,600 planning services proposal can be reduced to encompass Phase 1 and that city staff can complete Phase 2. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-34, "A RESOLUTION INITIATING A COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT FOR THE PUTNAM SITE." Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 Blesener Councilmember Cummins moved to approve the contract with Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban to perform necessary services in conjunction with the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for a maximum cost of $2,650 for work described as Phase 1 in the contract. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 Blesener CURLEY TRAIL Mr. Dave Ayers was present to express concern over the removal of the Curley Trail. He stated that a dangerous condition faces all Page No. 3321 June 2, 1992 residents of the Curley Addition and others who enter the subdivision from the north side. He stated that he understands that a 30 day notice was given to the City by Tim Curley to remove the bikeway, but that there are 97 home owners in the Curley Addition who want to walk to Rogers Lake or north who must now do so on Lexington Avenue. He expressed a number of concerns over removal of the trail, and stated that he recognizes that there are some pending Mn/DOT projects that will make it more economical for the City to delay trail construction along Lexington but that he feels it is urgent to build a trail now. Councilmember Blesener informed Council that she has received a number of complaints about the lack of a bike path in the area and stated that she regrets that Council did not negotiate harder with Mr. Curley to keep the trail. She also stated that she was very much opposed to spending $14,000 to construct a trail at the time the matter was first discussed, but agrees with Mr. Ayers that the Curley Trail was very highly used. She also pointed out that Wagon Wheel Trail is dangerous for walking. Mr. Ayers stated that the neighborhood's biggest concern is with Lexington but that Wagon Wheel is the other outlet from the neighborhood. Councilmember Cummins asked how the one block stretch of Lexington to the Curley Addition differs from the one mile stretch of Dodd Road from Decorah to T.H. 110 which does not have a trail and which has much walking traffic. Mayor Mertensotto asked when the Mn/DOT construction is planned and whether staff can negotiate to have something done sooner. Public Works Director Danielson responded that it will occur in 1993. He stated that staff can negotiate with the County. Councilmember Blesener stated that she would like the city to build something now and work out cost sharing later. Mr. Danielson responded that a separated crushed rock or gravel trail could probably be constructed for approximately $6,000. Page No. 3322 June 2, 1992 Mayor Mertensotto suggested that perhaps the County would allow the city to construct a blacktopped path down the drainage area. Councilmember Cummins stated that he would be concerned about spending $6,000 just because there is a trail system currently being built. He pointed out that there are neighborhoods in the city which would like trails completed but the city delays construction because of the potential for cost sharing. He pointed out that the Curley trail is something the city has planned on doing and that he is not sure it is more dangerous of a situation than any other area in the city. He felt that Council should wait until a permanent trail can be built. Mr. Ayers stated that all of the other city trails are almost exclusively used for recreation purposes but that the Curley trail is needed in order for people in the neighborhood to leave the area safely by foot or bicycle. He stated that the condition is hazardous and there is no alternative route. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council is trying to work on a schedule where construction can be done in conjunction with other projects. He pointed out that the city did not have an easement from Mr. Curley for the trail and that one of the conditions for the temporary trail was that it would be removed on 30 day notice from Mr. Curley. He stated that he would like to know how many people were using the trail and pointed out that Council does not want to see anyone injured because the trail was removed. Councilmember Koch stated that she is concerned about safety but pointed out that the city did not create the problem. She felt that the problem is a County problem because of how Lexington Avenue is built. A Curley Addition resident in the audience stated that people in the neighborhood got into the habit of using the trail and are now at risk. He stated that if Council cannot build the trail for $6,000 it should at least do something about repairing the shoulders on Lexington. He stated that the shoulders are badly eroded and repair and signage would Page No. 3323 June 2, 1992 probably cost less than a temporary trail link. Public Works Director Danielson stated that he can contact the County about repairing and widening the shoulders. Councilmember Blesener asked whether a class 5 or ag -lime path could be constructed as an interior separated trail on the east side of Lexington. Staff was directed to contact the County to see if some arrangement can be worked out to put in a path from Tom Thumb Boulevard to the SOS store, at little cost to the city and to return to Council on the evening of the joint Council /Park Commission workshop with a suggestion for a low cost temporary trail. DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC Council acknowledged a proposal from Dahlgren, ISSUES Shardlow and Uban for preparation of a study to address the transportation issue at the intersection of Dodd Road and T.H. 110, including a presentation to Council on June 16th. Councilmember Blesener moved to approve the proposed contract with Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban at a cost not to exceed $2,200 plus Ayes: 4 expenses. Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Cummins moved that the meeting be adjourned to 7:15 P.M. on June 9th for the purpose of discussing the Curley Trail timeline, and the joint Council /Park and Recreation Commission Workshop. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:42 o'clock P.M. ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor June 2, 1992 General Cont. License Hudson Company Welsh Construction Plaster/Stucco License Nielsen Drywall Inc. Gas Piping License Swanson Plumbing & Heating Inc. Friend Mechanical Heating & Air Cond. License Swanson Plumbing & Heating Inc. Alpine Heating & Cooling Friend Mechanical