Loading...
1992-03-05 Council minutesPage No. 3'223?5 March 5, 1992 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, March 5, 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 Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Cummins moved approval of the minutes of the February 4, 1992 regular meeting with corrections. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Koch moved approval of the minutes of the February 18, 1992 regular meeting with correction. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 Blesener 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 Code Enforcement monthly report for February. b. Approval of an "Agreement Between the County of Dakota and the City of Mendota Heights for Cost Sharing of Aerial Photography and Stereo Digitizing," at a cost to the City of $16,900, along with authorization for execution of the agreement by the Mayor, and award of a purchase order to the Gorman Company in the amount of $2,000, for ground control Page No. 3238 March 5, 1992 surveying. Costs for the aerial topography and ground surveying are to be distributed equally to the Engineering, Planning and Utility Fund budgets. c. Acknowledgment of a notice of water rate increase from the St. Paul Water Department. d. Authorization to direct NDC-4 to begin telecasting Planning Commission meetings. e. Adoption of Resolution No. 92-16, "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR PINE CREEK ESTATES." f. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated March 5, 1992 and attached hereto. g. Approval of the list of claims dated March 5, 1992 and totalling $197,028.55. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 BID AWARD - MENDOTA Council acknowledged a tabulation of bids HEIGHTS ROAD received for improvements to Mendota Heights Road from Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road. Councilmember Smith asked whether the improvements will extend to Dodd Road and if the project will change the configuration of the Dodd/Mendota Heights Road intersection. She expressed concern over safety at the intersection. Public Works Director Danielson responded that the intersection was improved by Mn/DOT several years ago and that the current improvement project will stop at Visitation Drive. He informed Council that traffic counters have been placed at the intersection and that staff will report to Council as soon as data is available. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-17, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAINS, STORM SEWERS, STREETS AND PEDWAY IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT NO. 4),11 awarding Page No - 3239 March 5, 1592 the contract to Tower Asphalt for their low bid of $562,448.60. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 92-05, Council acknowledged a report from regarding CENTRE POINTE SIGN an application for sign variance from the Centre Pointe Medical Clinic and a memo from the Administrative Assistant Batchelder informing Council that the Clinic representatives have requested that the matter be tabled to April 7th. Councilmember Blesener moved that discussion on the application for sign variance for Centre Pointe Medical Clinic be tabled to April 7th. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 92-01, Council acknowledged an application from the HUDSON COMPANY Hudson Company for a conditional use permit to allow the firm to operate a freight terminal in an Industrial District at the former Country Club Warehouse on Highway 13. Council also acknowledged staff reports and a letter from the Hudson Company in response to Planning Commission concerns. Mr. James Hudson, President of the Hudson Company, and the project architect, Mr. Kilstoff of Kilstoff and Associates, were present for the discussion. Mr. Kilstoff reviewed drawings of the facility, informing Council that the plan includes construction of a new 4,300 square storage garage. It is also planned to do some minor interior remodeling, add a freezer and increase the existing cooler size. The applicant also plans to install a 10,000 square foot below ground fuel tank and a diesel fuel pump which would only be used to fill company vehicles. All signage will be on the building. Mr. Kilstoff responded to Planning Commission concerns over screening, stating that the firm will plant juniper shrubs at the top of the existing berm to screen the loading docks from the highway. Page No., 32'40CF March 5, 1992 With respect to the underground tank, Public Works Director Danielson informed Council that state law controls underground tanks, and the regulations are enforced by the EPA. Mr. Hudson stated that an environmental survey has been done on the property and there are no contaminants on the site. Councilmember Cummins asked if the building is occupied. Mr. Hudson responded that Country Club has vacated the building, and it is not currently occupied. Mr. Hudson stated that he has concerns about the shrubbery on the berm, stating that he would hate to see it get so high that it blocks visibility along the highway, but that he will do whatever Council requests for landscaping. Mr. Kilstoff stated that the plantings he has suggested, consisting of two species recommended by city staff, would grow to five feet in diameter and three feet high. The berm is three feet high, and the loading docks will not be seen from the highway when the plantings have grown to three feet. Since a landscaping plan has not been prepared or submitted at this time, there was discussion over how Council could proceed with approval. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that the approving resolution could be adopted conditioned upon submission of the landscaping plans within thirty days. The conditional use permit would not be issued until the plan is submitted and approved by City staff. Councilmember Koch asked what the storage building setback is in relation to the existing railroad tracks. Administrative Assistant Batchelder responded that the building is set back five feet from the property line, as is allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. If the 100 foot railroad right-of- way is purchased by Mn/DOT, he felt that the right-of-way would likely revert to the contiguous property owners. He did not anticipate that the right-of-way would ever be developed. Page No. 822?0_9 March 5, 1992 Councilmember Blesener pointed out that the two berms are about 200 feet in length, and suggested that, if the proposed plantings are to be 5 feet on center, the landscape plan should specify 40 bushes. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that a building permit will be required, and suggested that Council could authorize the permit subject to staff review and approval of the building plan and the landscaping plan. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-.18, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR FREIGHT TERMINAL IN THE "I" DISTRICT FOR THE HUDSON COMPANY," and authorization for issuance of the building permit, subject to staff review and approval of the building plan, on the condition that no building permit will be issued by the city until the landscaping plan has been submitted and approved by city staff. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 92-03, Council acknowledged an application from MARVIN ANDERSON HOMES Marvin Anderson Homes for a preliminary plat (BRIDGEVIEW SHORES) to create five outlots in the Bridgeview Shores Third Addition. Council also acknowledged a petition from Bridgeview Shores residents and a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Scott Bachman, 2464 Bridgeview Shores, regarding the Bridgeview Shores development. Mr. Marlin Grant, President of Marvin Anderson Construction Company and Mr. Gale Happe, legal representative for the firm were present for the discussion. Mr. Happe explained that the application was submitted because of a problem which arose over a title defect in the approved plat. A property dispute with the adjoining property owner, Bernard Friel, arose because of an old fence which meanders from 0 to 10 degrees south of the quarter-quarter section. Marvin Anderson Company is asking to plat a narrow strip of land along the fence line into separate outlots. once the dispute is settled, the outlots will either be added to the five lots from which they are proposed to be taken or will revert to Mr. Friel. Page No. '32,42) March 5, 1992 Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the City Planner indicated in his report that since the request is for a total replat, the complete planning process has been required. The application has been before the Planning Commission. Mr. Jeff Melind, surveyor for the Marvin Anderson Company, stated that some minor changes have been made to the lot lines to maintain lot sizes, but those changes do not affect the size of the homes or the building pads. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, he stated that the replatting should have no affect on the wetlands or cause any additional problems. Mayor Mertensotto asked if the proposed replatting would affect the location of in- place utilities. Public Director Danielson indicated that it would not. Mr. Bernard Friel stated that the discovery over the fence line was made as the result of some significant grading by some trees near the property line. The disputed area is between the quarter section line and the fence line which was established for at least sixty to seventy years. He informed Council that the proposed outlots C, D, E, and F, all abut his property. Mr. Friel stated that he has no objection to the outlot platting, and that the consequence is that in order to settle the dispute it will either be by settlement or litigation which would significantly slow down development of the property unless the outlots are approved. The requested platting would at least hold the property in abeyance until the dispute is settled. He pointed out that the Planning Commission recommended that if the plat is approved, Council should allow no removal of trees in the disputed area. Mr. Scott Bachman, 2464 Bridgeview Court, stated that the submitted petition contains the signatures of nine of the ten original Bridgeview Shores First Addition homeowners. He stated that the residents ask for a sixty day delay in acting on the request to allow them to make a presentation to Council. He informed Council that the residents would like the opportunity to show that there is a problem with variances and construction. Page No. 3243 March 5, 1992 Mr. Norman Linnell, 2488 Bridgeview Court, stated that some of the concerns of the petitioners is over introductions Mr. Grant made at the Planning commission meeting. He stated that it is his understanding that Mr. Grant is no longer involved in the management of Marvin Anderson. Also, the residents have had no opportunity to meet with those who are in charge at the company. He pointed out that the firm is before Council for an accommodation - in order to do so, they must replat. He stated that Council must consider whether the firm has lived up to promises made both to Council and the buyers of lots in the First Addition. Marvin Anderson made certain commitments to Council in order to get approval of the original plat and wetlands permits in 1988. Since that time the company made many promises to potential residents of the First Addition to encourage purchase of lots. He stated that those residents don't feel Marvin Anderson has lived up to its promises to them or the city. In April, 1988 Council considered 24 wetlands permits for Marvin Anderson, and Fred Haas, its representative, promised that all basements would be 8 feet above the waterline. He stated that this is not true in Phase 2 - from a visual inspection it also does not appear to be eight feet above the high water mark. He asked what will happen in the third addition and what assurance Council has that the firm will keep the promise over basement levels and setbacks. Mr. Haas also stated that as many trees would be preserved as possible, and plant additional trees on the north side, which has not been done. He further stated that Council was informed that the custom homes would sell in the $250,000 to $400,000 price range. He was concerned is that the promises have not been kept and that Council has no assurance they will be followed in the Third Addition. He informed Council that those who purchased homes in the First Addition are concerned that they were promised to them that all of the homes would be custom homes priced at $200,000 or more and that the third phase would not be developed for at least three years. The residents were given commitment that there would be architectural controls for value and type of homes - all of the homes would be walk-outs. Mr. Linnell stated that the residents feel that Council should look at the commitments that were made Page No. 1244 March 5, 1992 to Council and do everything in its power to see that the company lives up to its promises. Mayor Mertensotto asked Mr. Grant to address the setbacks and elevations and the tree removal issues. He informed Mr. Linnell that he did not believe that Council can get involved in the home value issue, which is a representation from the developer to the buyers. He expressed concern about architectural controls but felt that it is a private matter. Mr. Grant responded that Marvin Anderson has been in business in the Twin Cities for 40 years and wants to continue in the business. As far as removal of trees, he informed Council that when an area is developed that has a significant difference in topography from one area to another, and streets must be graded to a certain pitch, the developer must do some grading of the land. He stated that his firm is committed to retaining as many trees as possible, as trees are valuable, and none are removed without good reason. He also pointed out that removing trees is costly. With respect to wetlands, he assured Council that he is sure Mr. Haas abided by the approved setbacks and by the elevation over the highwater mark. He explained that Mr. Haas is very concerned about the issue and spends much time on the site. The surveyor stated that the developer is required to submit a survey with every building permit application, showing all grades. The survey is reviewed by the city inspection department before any permit is issued. He stated that on occasion the locations of houses have been adjusted because of the proximity to the wetlands - they have been changed to maintain the setbacks. Mayor Mertensotto stated that city staff can certainly determine the elevations of the homes. He further stated that Council recognizes that some trees must be removed in the grading of a plat but that a developer is responsible to keep as many trees as possible. Mr. Grant responded that as much as possible is done to save trees, but if a 20 foot cut is required, it is very hard to adjust the grade to save trees. Page No. 32453 March 5, 1992 Mayor Mertensotto expressed concern over the stability of lots which receive fill to keep the elevations above the high water mark. Mr. Grant responded that if fill is used, it would have to be done under the observation of a soils engineer. The surveyor informed Council that there should never be any problems with fill, since it is compacted and observed by a soils engineer. Public Works Director Danielson stated that city staff is given a soils report from the developer's soils engineer before a building permit is issued for a lot. Councilmember Smith pointed out that the grading plan submitted to Council was dated February 3, 1991, which was prior to the grading of the site. She stated that she knows that many of the trees are gone, and the plan is not an accurate portrayal of what exists today. The surveyor responded that the date was a typographical error - the plan was done right before its submission of the preliminary plat, and it shows the trees which remain on the site. Councilmember Smith stated that when she walked the site she noticed there is a very steep cut along the tree line and a number of the trees had their roots exposed. She asked whether this has been rectified, and pointed out that she could not believe the trees would survive. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the grading operations were discontinued when the boundary dispute arose and there are some trees at the edge of the bank. Engineer Klayton Eckles informed Council that as part of the recently revised zoning ordinance, a grading plan must be submitted for every new lot before a building permit can be issued. He stated that he reviews each grading plan to make sure that drainage conditions and elevations are correct. He pointed out that the elevation the engineering department uses is 3 foot above the high water mark, although it may be true that the Council minutes reflect an 8 foot elevation for the first addition. Page No. 3246 March 5, 1992 Councilmember Smith asked if the grade of neighboring property is taken into account when grading plans are approved. She stated that there is at least a 15 foot drop in grade on the site. The engineering department reviews the plans to make sure that drainage will work and that the proposed grading will not adversely affect the neighboring properties. He stated that staff cannot tell a developer that he cannot have a berm or steep slope - those details are determined in the planning process - but engineering looks for at least a 3:1 slope as a normal maximum. He pointed out that the subject grading operation was stopped before completion. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that perhaps in the replatting of the addition Council should require basement elevations higher than three feet above high water. Engineer Eckles responded that if the basement elevations are three feet above the high water they should be fine. There are no structures in the Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition that have any potential flooding problems at all. The ponds have overflow elevations, and there is no way a house could possibly be flooded. The third addition sits up higher than the second, and the elevations should not be an issue. Mr. Grant stated that it appears that there will be an early spring and his firm would like to get going on the balance of the grading as soon as possible. He further stated that the trees with exposed roots are dormant now and he would like to get the roots covered up soon. Mr. Friel responded that there was no need to make a cut 20 feet deep along his property line and expose the tree roots. He stated that the contractor cut about 75 feet along the property line to a depth of 18 feet. Mr. Friel pointed out that when he complained about the cutting, Public Works Director Danielson told him that it did not comply with the grading plan, and the developer indicated that he was going to have a contractor remove the trees. Mr. Danielson then stopped the grading. As a result, Mr. Haas looked at the Page No. _ 24f March 5, 1992 grading and responded that the dirt was being taken for fill and would be replaced. In the process several mature trees were destroyed to accommodate on-site filling. He further stated that the developer promised that the area would be refilled last fall and the area would be fertilized. Although he suggested that the trees be trimmed to help save them, nothing was done. Mr. Friel stated that all the grading plan means is where the finish grade will be. Mr. Greg Vidas, a resident of Bridgeview Shores lst Addition, asked who is held accountable for the misrepresentations of the Marvin Anderson Company on what has been done. Many of those in his addition bought their homes in good faith and believed in the representations which had been made but were not kept. He felt that the second addition homes are essentially tract homes, and that none of them is custom. He pointed out that signs for the area are now advertising homes for $125,000 and up - the first addition homes are valued at $200,000 plus, and are totally surrounded by homes that are valued in the $100,000's. He felt that this is destroying the value of the first addition homes and is a total misrepresentation. Councilmember Cummins stated that he is both angry and disappointed that the quality of the homes in the development has deteriorated. Those promised and built in the first phase were high quality custom construction, and what Council expected but now sees in the Bridgeview Development is much lower quality and pricing. Mr. Grant responded that the market has changed dramatically since the first addition was platted - the higher priced homes are very difficult to sell. He stated that what has happened is that there is now a wider range of prices - there is a home in the second addition with a $300,000 price, and others have lesser costs. He observed that he would prefer to build the higher priced homes but must build what the buyers want. Councilmember Cummins stated that very specific representations had been made by the developer to Council about valuations and that he felt the developer was prepared to ride out Page No. 324TD March 5, 1992 the market. He stated that insofar as the request being made by the developer he feels no obligation to deal with it in an accommodating way. He further stated that it is his intent to table the matter for two months to allow all of the issues to be thoroughly investigated and to determine what steps the city can legally take to be sure that representations made by the developer to the city are met. He expressed his desire to see more of the $200,000 to $300,000 homes that were promised and fewer of the $130,000 homes that have been built. Councilmember Cummins moved to table the matter to May 5th to allow city staff time to prepare reports regarding wetlands setbacks and building elevations and to allow residents the opportunity to submit their concerns to staff. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 IVY FALLS CREEK Council acknowledged a report from Engineer Eckles regarding the Ivy Falls Creek improvement neighborhood meeting. Council also acknowledged a letter from Mr. Jack Brassard, 1205 Sylvandale Road, expressing his support for the proposed project. Engineer Eckles informed Council that only those property owners whose property is classified as the high benefit area were invited to attend the meeting. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, he confirmed that the property owners recognized the need for the project, and that their biggest concern was over funding of the project. He stated that the City Administrator has suggested that the matter be addressed in a workshop setting at which staff would present various options to council. Mr. Ellis Abrahamson, 714 Maple Park Court, stated that not all of the properties are affected by the erosion, including his property. He objected to the use of gabions and felt that storm sewer installation would be a better solution. He further commented that the entire area is involved and everyone should pay the cost for improvements, including the City of West St. Paul. Page No. 3-2%47 March 5, 1992 Mayor Mertensotto responded that the City is a member of a watershed management organization which has as a purpose the equalization of community costs for controlling water drainage. Public Works Director Danielson stated that it would be extremely difficult and costly to divert the water into storm sewer pipes instead of into the creek. Mr. Tom Vining, 706 Maple Park Court, asked why the city is asking him to pay anything for the project if the WMO has diverted water into the creek. He stated that he is appalled that the water has been diverted past his property through a regional plan. Engineer Eckles stated that Mr. Vining is correct that all of the water is going through his property and that the proposal staff is currently looking into is that the city find some way to finance 80% of the project cost. He informed the audience that public hearings will be held on the project in the future. It was the consensus of Council to conduct a workshop at 6:30 P.M. on March 17th to discuss park land goals and financing of public improvements. SNOW PLOWING POLICY Council acknowledged a revised draft of the proposed snow plowing policy. Councilmember Smith stated that she would like the City Attorney to review the document and that there are still some questions to be answered about yard damage claims. Councilmember Cummins stated that he supports submitted draft which included a highlighted paragraph explicitly stating that plantings in the right-of-way are the responsibility of the property owners. Councilmember Smith pointed out that the language conflicts with other statements in the policy. Councilmember Blesener and Koch agreed that the city does not want to be responsible for things in the boulevard. Page No. 3n- 61", March 5, 1992 Councilmember Smith moved to accept the proposed contract, with a total contract cap of $6,000, amended to require DSU to request written authorization from the city before proceeding from one contract phase to another. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 GOAL SETTING It was the consensus of Council that the annual Council goal setting session be conducted on Saturday, March 28th. MISCELLANEOUS Administrative Assistant Batchelder informed Council of a new state mandate, which the city must enforce, requiring that all households and commercial properties must be served by a garbage contractor. A revision to the city ordinance will be presented to Council in the near future. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember moved that the Councilmember Cummins moved to approve the snow plowing policy dated March 5, 1992. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Blesener was excused from the meeting at 8:38 P.M. Administrator Lawell informed Council that if the intent is to implement the policy for the 1992/93 winter season it will be necessary for Council to authorize preparation of specifications for a fourth snow plow. Councilmember Cummins moved to authorize preparation of specifications for a snow plow. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 SUPERBLOCK PLANNING Council acknowledged a report from the City Administrator regarding superblock planning and a related proposal from the City Planner. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that the proposed contract should be amended to provide that after completion of a phase of the contract, the consultant must request written authorization from the city to proceed with the next phase. Councilmember Smith moved to accept the proposed contract, with a total contract cap of $6,000, amended to require DSU to request written authorization from the city before proceeding from one contract phase to another. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 GOAL SETTING It was the consensus of Council that the annual Council goal setting session be conducted on Saturday, March 28th. MISCELLANEOUS Administrative Assistant Batchelder informed Council of a new state mandate, which the city must enforce, requiring that all households and commercial properties must be served by a garbage contractor. A revision to the city ordinance will be presented to Council in the near future. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember moved that the Page No. 375.9, March 5, 1992 meeting be adjourned to 6:30 P.M. on March 17th for Council workshop. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:51 o'clock P.M. ya-thleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor