Loading...
1990-01-16 Council minutesPage No. 2693 January 16, 1990 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, January 16, 1990 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 Anderson, Blesener, and Hartmann. Councilmember Cummins had notified the Council that he would be absent. AGENDA ADOPTION Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Hartmann moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Councilmember Hartmann moved approval of the minutes of the January 2nd regular meeting. Councilmember Anderson seconded the motion. Councilmember Hartmann 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 January 9th Park and Recreation Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgment of the quarterly Engineer's Project Report. c. Acknowledgment of the Code Enforcement monthly report for December. d. Acknowledgment of the Treasurer's monthly report for December. e. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department monthly report for December. f. Acknowledgment of a letter from St. Paul Water informing Council that there will be no increase in water rates for 1990. g. Page No. 2694 January 16, 1990 Authorization for the purchase of an Apple Macintosh IIcx computer and peripheral equipment for the Police Department through the State Contract with Apple Computers, for a cost of $5,378.20. h. Authorization for the Police Department to begin the process for selection of a new police officer. i. Authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to execute labor agreements for 1990 with the Minnesota Teamsters Local 320 and Law Enforcement Labor Services. Adoption of Resolution No. 90 -02, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING ELECTION OF MICHAEL THOMAS LAWELL TO. BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION." k. Authorization for the issuance of a purchase order in the amount of $6,500 to Business Records Corporation for the purchase of an Optech III -P optical scan ballot reader. 1. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated January 16, 1990 and attached hereto. m. Approval of the list of claims dated January 16, 1990 and totalling $1,524,951.31. n. Approval of the permanent full -time appointment of Duane Toenyan in the Street Department. o. Authorization for the Mayor to execute the amended Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for the 1990 recycling program. Councilmember Anderson seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a letter from Mr. and Mrs. David Hiner, 1312 Furlong Avenue requesting the opportunity to discuss the Furlong area property acquisitions. Council also acknowledged an associated report from Public Works Director Danielson. Page No. 2695 January 16, 1990 Mrs. Carmel Hiner, 1312 Furlong, read a letter dated January 16, 1990, and submitted by 25 neighborhood property owners, containing a ten-point list of neighborhood buyout requirements. She asked what the City is going to do about the area's sewer problems, commenting that there is raw sewage in the area. Mayor Mertensotto responded that there is a City ordinance addressing such problems, and that the City will attempt to catch the people who are pumping. He informed the audience that Council has been working with the residents: about six months ago, the majority of the residents indicated that they did not want to be bought out. He further stated that when the buyout program idea was dropped, it was because the neighborhood asked Council to do so. He stated that there is no statutory requirement for the City to do anything, but that Council realizes that it is prohibitive for those with sewer and water problems to replace those facilities. The City has done feasibility studies to bring utilities into the neighborhood. The cost for the utilities was approximately $25,000 per lot, and the City had offered to use tax increment monies to grant each homeowner about $10,000 to reduce their proposed assessment. He stated that Council was told by the residents that they did not want to spend $15,000 for the utilities. Several people then indicated that they did not have the financing necessary to relieve their utility problems: at that time the City offered to purchase three to four homes a year, as money was available. Public Works Director Danielson stated that two homes have been purchased and that the County is investigating the utility problems for two other homeowners currently. Mayor Mertensotto pointed that by their letters, the neighborhood is asking Council to do something which there is no money available for. The City has asked MAC about a buyout possibility, and MAC has responded that they have no funds. In response to a comment from Mrs. Hiner that the neighborhood is in the MAC buyout program when funds become available, Mayor Mertensotto stated that the City will forward a letter to MAC stating that the Page No. 2696 January 16, 1990 neighborhood has asked the City to petition MAC to buy them out. Mrs. Hiner informed Council that the residents have been told by the health department that there is toxic waste in the neighborhood. Mayor Mertensotto indicated that the Council would be willing to pursue the toxic waste issue, but stated that the last time the neighborhood asked the City to work out a buyout program, about 9 to 10 people indicated that their utilities were not up to code. The majority of the Furlong Area residents indicated to Council that they wanted to BE part of a buyout. Mrs. Hiner responded that the neighborhood would be acceptable to a buyout on the terms contained in their letter. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that it would take a $25 to $30 million new development to support a tax increment large enough for a total buyout. He stated that no developers have expressed interest in the area. He indicated that Council is willing to help the residents, but that there must be a consensus from the neighborhood and there must be cooperation. Mr. Doug Guyer, 1309 Kendon informed Council that his home has been for sale since August 4th, and distributed a statement from his real estate agent on why the home has not sold. Councilmember Blesener stated that the issues the neighborhood raises now are those that Council has been trying to deal with. At the meeting last summer, the neighborhood told Council to leave them alone, that they didn't want to be bought out. She asked City Attorney Hart if the Council were to set up a committee to meet with the neighborhood and come up with parameters for an agreement, would Council be getting itself into condemnation posture. Mr. Hart responded that the process of negotiation would not place the City in a condemnation posture, but that without consensus of the neighborhood, if the City acquires more homes it may have a negative impact on remaining property values. Page No. 2697 January 16, 1990 Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the City does not have a project in process. Councilmember Blesener felt that Council should ask the neighborhood to form a small committee to meet with staff and try to find general parameters that everyone can live with, and that Council should then try to aggressively pursue some source of funding. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that buyout is strictly voluntary now - the City may not be able to find funding to buy out more than three to four homes a year. Councilmember Anderson stated that in his judgment the way the City is currently proceeding, buying 2 to 3 homes a year through tax increment funding, is the worst way to proceed. The point will be reached when there are more open lots, causing reduced property values for the remaining homes. He felt that a program either has to be comprehensive or the City should stop purchasing homes in the area. Mayor Mertensotto observed that when the hearings with the neighborhood were conducted it was the general consensus that the houses were not marketable. Mr. Hiner responded that airport noise is not affecting the salability of the neighborhood - sewer and water problems are. Councilmember Blesener felt that the neighborhood should decide if they want to be bought out or not and then the City should look for a developer or another agency to do the buyout. She further felt the City should spend the time to try to work out an understanding with the neighborhood, since the approach Council has been taking is not acceptable to the neighborhood. Councilmember Anderson felt that the recent adverse publicity is destroying the salability of the properties. He felt there are many homeowners who would stay in the area if they knew what was going to happen in the future, and that piecemeal buyout is a bad idea. Ms. Mary Schwartz, 1286 Kendon, agreed that the piecemeal approach is destroying property values. Page No. 2698 January 16, 1990 Councilmember Anderson pointed out that Council represents the entire City, including people who do not have similar problems. Owning a home requires maintenance, but unfortunately in this neighborhood, the maintenance cost is very expensive. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the residents have totally reversed on the issue - they are now saying that because the City has taken two homes and is considering acquiring two more, the neighborhood is being destroyed. Mr. Robert Tousignant, 1300 Furlong, suggested that the important issue is that when the neighborhood came before Council on July 12, 1989, the understanding was that the buyout process had been totally stopped, but then it immediately continued. At the request of the City, the County surveyed the neighborhood and the City bought two lots and negotiated for two others - that takes the neighborhood out of control. The residents are at the mercy of the Council, since the City is the only buyer. He asked for the long term plan for the lots the City bought - are the lots going to sit vacant for 25 years? Councilmember Anderson pointed out that Council must have a consensus from the neighborhood. If there are people dumping raw sewage the neighborhood should report it. He suggested that the neighborhood should come up with some ideas as to how to treat the problem, and pointed out that there is no plan for a total buyout - only those properties with serious problems are considered. He felt that it was apparent that those with serious sewer problems are not willing to pay to maintain their sewage systems, and pointed out that the City is not in the real estate business. Mr. Tousignant stated that the solutions are complicated, and suggested that the Council and neighborhood should try to determine which areas they agree on and which they do not. Mayor Mertensotto responded that Council has tried that approach and could not get a consensus from the neighbors, who were fighting amongst themselves. He pointed out that people were pleading with Council to buy them out because of their utility problems. Page No. 2699 January 16, 1990 Councilmember Hartmann pointed out that the residents knew at the July, 1989 meeting that the City was not proceeding in a buyout program and that only those with serious health risk problems, as determined by the County Health Department, would be bought. The residents understood that this would be the City's approach, and Council has not changed the game plan. Councilmember Blesener stated that the residents are willing to be bought out if they have an understanding of what the buyout would be, and felt that Council should pursue terms for a general agreement. She felt that something should be put in writing on what the City would do if it could find funding. Councilmember Anderson responded that the City is not in a financial position to buy out the entire neighborhood. He felt that a written statement would have a chilling effect on the neighborhood in the long run. Two homeowners have had insurmountable utility problems, and two more appear to have the same problems. The only thing that makes sense is a comprehensive purchase plan, and there is no funding available. He felt that dedicating a lot of staff time at this time would not be realistic, and would create unrealistic expectations from the neighborhood, since there is no developer interested in the property and no City funding. Councilmember Hartmann stated that the City can contact the MAC to see if that agency has funds available for a buyout, and the other option is to explore Superfund as a potential, although he is not aware of toxic waste in the area. Councilmember Anderson strongly urged Council to immediately discontinue purchasing homes, and pointed out that the two which have already been purchased were absolutely out of the question in terms of rehabilitation. Margaret Swenson, 1294 Kendon Lane, stated that the majority of the people want to sell out, but the main issue boils down to fair market value. She stated that she would like to sell her house now and cannot wait because of the sewer and water problems. She felt Page No. 2700 January 16, 1990 that the neighborhood should be sympathetic to those who have serious utility problems. Katherine Max, 1284 Lakeview, stated that she is one of two or three homeowners who do not want to sell. She stated that the only thing she is afraid of is that the others want to sell out and that the City is going to take her home. Mr. Hiner pointed out that one of the homes purchased by the City across Highway 55 has an open basement. Mayor Mertensotto informed Mr. Hiner that the City will inspect the site and also will follow through with MAC and the Superfund. He suggested that another approach to the issue might be special legislation, and suggested that the neighborhood contact their legislators for special legislation to authorize the City to issue bonds to buy out the neighborhood. He explained that Council would like to help the residents but that their cooperation is necessary. He pointed out that the City does not want to force anyone out of their homes, but rather that Council wanted to help those with contaminated sewer and water systems. An unidentified audience member stated that some of the residents cannot afford to fix their utility systems. He felt that the City should have its health officer check the neighborhood. He stated that the children in the neighborhood cannot be supervised all of the time, that they do not know enough to stay away from raw sewage. He felt that the City should either condemn the homes with sewer problems or buy all of the homes. Councilmember Blesener suggested continuing the approach of buying out the homes with serious sewer problems and at the same time try to come to agreement with the other residents on terms for a buyout at such time as funds become available. Mary Schwartz felt that the City should condemn the houses with serious problems and clean out the neighborhood so that the rest of the residents can stay in their homes if they want to. Page No. 2701 January 16, 1990 Councilmember Blesener moved that a committee of Council, staff and the neighborhood be formed to negotiate to draft a general outline for terms to buyout the neighborhood, conditioned upon future funding which has yet to be determined. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Tousignant stated that Council is destroying the value of the neighborhood. Mayor Mertensotto responded that if the neighborhood feels the buyout of the homes with serious problems is detrimental to the neighborhood, perhaps Council should stop the buyouts. Mr. Guyer stated that this is not what the neighborhood is asking. Mrs. Doffing, 1314 Furlong, stated that her home has been up for sale since July and no one has been even willing to look at it. She felt that not buying out those homes with serious problems now would be wrong. She informed Council that at the last neighborhood meeting, the group felt that they wish Council to consider a buyout, preferably all at one time, but even one at a time if necessary. They just want some parameters: some people in the neighborhood do need help and everyone hopes the City will give them help. She stated that the residents want Council to continue buying the problem homes, but those who don't have problems just want to protect their interest as well. Jim Schwartz, 1286 Kendon, stated that when the City first considered buyout the Council was talking about condemnation procedures with 20% relocation and ability to contest the value with independent appraisals. All of a sudden when the City started the buy out those issues were dropped. He informed Council that he built his home 5 years ago and does not believe his property has any value now. He pointed out that when the Dahlgren study was done two years ago, the City did promotional brochures on the neighborhood, and Mr. Hiner sold his old home in the neighborhood in ten days for a good price. Now, after all of the buyout talk, two neighbors have had their homes for sale for six months with no success. He felt that the sewer problem is having an Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 Blesener Page No. 2702 January 16, 1990 adverse affect but more of the affect is because of the buyout, and the City actively pursuing developers. He felt that cancelling the program will not make market values come back. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the City is not pursuing a developer and that the brochure was prepared in the past to see if there was a market. Councilmember Anderson pointed out that the basic premise of one recent news article was that the City's piecemeal buyout was destroying the neighborhood; the second news article said the people were pumping sewage onto the street. He also pointed out that there have been people building and buying homes in the neighborhood in the last two years. Councilmember Blesener suggested tabling the matter and indicated that she would like to meet with the neighborhood. Councilmember Anderson moved that Council resolve that it be made very clear to the neighborhood that there is no City program or buyout plan for the Furlong; that the buyout of homes on a piecemeal basis be ended tonight; and that staff be directed to develop and investigate financing sources, including the MAC, Superfund, special legislation, other than Mendota Heights taxpayers, to see if there is any money available for future buyout of the neighborhood. Councilmember Blesener asked the point of cutting of the program. Councilmember Anderson explained that it appears to him that the continued piecemeal purchase is destroying the neighborhood, but that the prior purchase of two homes has not destroyed the neighborhood. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto asked how long it would take to determine what means of financing are available to proceed with the request for buyout. HEARING - FRIENDLY HILLS TOT LOT Page No. 2703 January 16, 1990 Administrator Lawell responded that staff could make a preliminary investigations yet this week and that he would anticipate that it would take a month to get information on the Superfund process and formal response back from the MAC and from legislators who would be willing to support legislation. The matter will be brought back to Council on February 20th. Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of an informal hearing to consider the City's divestment of the Friendly Hills Tot Lot. Council acknowledged reports from Administrative Assistant Batchelder and a letter from City Attorney Sherman Winthrop dated April 19, 1983, as well as additional associated reports and minute excerpts. Park and Recreation Commission Chairperson John Huber and Park Project Manager Guy Kullander were present for the discussion. Administrative Assistant Batchelder reviewed the background on the tot lot and informed the audience of the Park and Recreation Commission's recommendation that the City commence the process for clearing title so that the lots can be sold. Mr. Huber informed the audience that the City has had a long-standing policy of not constructing tot lots. He stated that there is no funding in the referendum program to develop the Friendly Hills tot lot and that it is not recommended by the Park Commission that the Special Park Fund support improving the tot lot. Mrs. Sylvia Nelson, 2349 Apache, submitted a drawing, prepared by the neighborhood, which presented ideas on how they would like improvements made to the lots rather than residential development. She informed Council that her decision to purchase her home was based on the open space adjacent to the property. She stated that she accepted the removal of the old play equipment as a positive measure, but that the sale of the lots for the building of 4 new homes amongst 25 year old homes would not be an improvement. She felt that the Friendly Hills park serves a different segment of the community and the play equipment is not geared to preschoolers. She urged the Council to improve the tot lot Page No. 2704 January 16, 1990 to accommodate toddlers and preschoolers, leaving space for a basketball hoop and creative play area. She informed Council that the neighborhood wants the tot lots refurbished. It was noted that the Friendly Hills Park is 300 feet from the tot lot. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the Park Commission is recommending that instead of improving the tot lot, the property should be sold and the proceeds should be used for tot equipment in the Friendly Hills Park. Mr. Huber showed the audience an exhibit on the design layout for the Friendly Hills Park, and pointed out that the proposed play equipment is the modern and the safest available. Mrs. Nelson responded that the neighborhood was led to believe that the tot lot was their park, and it is hard for the neighbors to accept something different. The audience was informed that there is only one other tot lot in the City, located in the Curley Addition, and that the reason Council agreed to the tot lot was that the area is so far from the closest park, at Rogers Lake. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the Commission is looking at overall economics - maintenance is costly. He stated that had the City been incorporated at the time the Friendly Hills 1st Addition was planned, the tot lot would not have been approved. Mrs. Joan Crisp, 2341 Apache, asked why $10,000 from the referendum can't be put into purchasing equipment for the tot lot. She stated that when the referendum was proposed, the neighborhood thought that the tot lot would be the recipient of some of those funds. Laurie Lastine, 2336 Apache, stated that her parents mowed the tot lot area for many years because the City did not. She stated that it is important to the neighbors that the tot lot be retained. Lois Parsons, 2332 Apache, felt that the Friendly Hills park serves a different population than the tot lot does. Friendly Page No. 2705 January 16, 1990 Hills Park is used for organized sports, and serves people from throughout Mendota Heights and West St. Paul. She did not feel that it is a neighborhood park, and felt that it is not a safe place for tots because of the ponds. The residents of 2350 Apache and 755 Keokuk both indicated that they purchased their homes because of the proximity to two parks - Friendly Hills and the tot lot. The owner of 755 Keokuk encouraged the Council to retain the property as open space even if new play equipment is not to be installed. Mr. Huber informed the audience that the Commission intends to hold neighborhood meetings and to get neighborhood input - the drawings shown this evening were prepared to show how a contractor might place equipment. Councilmember Blesener stated that it is her understanding that the City will select a consultant to design and install play equipment for $17,500 per park. The City will then prepare a design layout plan for the parks in conjunction with other consultants and prepare presentation drawings for the neighborhood to react to. A lady in the audience stated that the neighborhood is not asking for a major change in the plans, but is asking that $5,000 worth of the equipment proposed for Friendly Hills be used instead for equipment for the tot lot. Mr. Huber responded that a flyer was distributed to everyone in the community before the referendum. It included information on everything proposed for the Friendly Hills Park, but nothing was mentioned about equipment for the tot lot. He stated that the City has no money to put into the tot lot, and the idea of selling the lots has come up since the referendum as a way to put more money into the Friendly Hills Park. If it is decided that the lots will not be sold, the money planned in the referendum for Friendly Hills Park will still be used in that park. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that no action be taken at this time but that Chairman Huber be directed to inform the Park Commission of this evening's discussion and see if there is an alternate recommendation. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 PLAY STRUCTURES Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 2706 January 16, 1990 There was discussion over the level of maintenance of the lots. Councilmember Blesener moved that the matter be referred back to the Park and Recreation Commission for reconsideration of their recommendation to Council. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. Staff was directed to contact Mrs. Crisp as the neighborhood's representative, keeping her informed on the matter. Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from Administrative Assistant Batchelder regarding the award of a contract for the installation of play equipment in the six existing neighborhood parks and in the Victoria Highlands neighborhood park. After discussion, Councilmember Anderson moved adoption of Resolution No. 90-03, "A RESOLUTION AWARDING PLAY EQUIPMENT CONTRACT FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS," awarding the contract for installation of seven play structures to Earl F. Anderson Associates at a price of $17,500 per installation. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. CASE NO. 89-25, FRYE Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from Mr. & Mrs. Richard Frye for a critical area variance to allow construction of a two- story indoor pool at 1845 Hunter Lane. Council acknowledged a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Frye requesting that the hearing be continued to February 6th to allow them to develop new plans and review their options. It was the consensus that if new plans are submitted, they should be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to Council consideration. Councilmember Blesener moved to continue the hearing to 7:45 o'clock P.M. on February 6th and to direct staff to notify the applicants that if they are planning to show Council new plans, they should appear before the Planning Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 89 -25, DODGE NATURE CENTER Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 NIGHT WATCH LIGHTS Page No. 2707 January 16, 1990 Commission first. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. At the request of the applicant, Council - member Blesener moved that the hearing on Dodge Nature Center's application for conditional use permit for planned unit development be continued to February 6th. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a report from Public Works Director Danielson with regard to an NSP night watch light which had been installed and subsequently removed from the Don Baier property at 741 Mohican Court after a complaint had been received. Council also acknowledged a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Baier and a petition from several Mohican Court residents supporting the installation of the light. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he is concerned that homeowners can just make a request for a light to NSP and NSP will install it. He felt that all requests for security lights should be processed through the City and that NSP should refer the requests to the City. Mr. Bob Schmall, from NSP, stated that NSP will be willing to work with the City. He informed Council that NSP believes it has the right to provide this service, but feels that everyone should be treated in a fair manner. He stated that the whole problem hinges on the language in the City's ordinance. Mr. Bernard Friel informed Council that he is the person who complained about the light. He stated that residents in the immediate area talked about street lighting in the neighborhood about 8 years ago and the consensus was that there should be none. It was concluded, he stated, that the neighborhood would undertake the neighborhood crime watch program and consideration of street lighting was dismissed. He felt that the subject light is significantly brighter than any street light in the City. His home is 300 feet away from the light, yet on the evening the light was installed, he could see Page No. 2708 January 16, 1990 his shadow in his bedroom with the room lights off. He stated that he feels the City ordinance (No. 401) was designed for lights like this, glaring lights which constitute a nuisance, to prevent the light source from being visible from adjoining property. He also observed that the light was erected on the wrong side of the pole. Councilmember Anderson stated that he interprets the ordinance section as meaning that if someone heard a noise at night and turned on their floodlights and the source could be seen by a neighbor, that neighbor has the right to call the Police, who could charge the property owner with a nuisance. He felt that the ordinance language needs much change, and needs to be defined, and that Council should determine whether the ordinance language is needed. Mr. Friel responded that Councilmember Anderson may be correct as the strict interpretation, but this light is on all night. Councilmember Blesener also felt that the ordinance needs work. She stated that she is not in favor of street lights, but feels people in individual neighborhoods should have some option of approaching the City - and if the majority desire to have their neighborhood lit they should have the opportunity to do so. She informed Mr. Friel that Council has been trying to develop a street lighting policy for years. She felt that the subject light is a street light rather than a night watch light, and that she believes the intent of a night watch light is not to illuminate the neighborhood but rather to illuminate the private property. She asked Mr. Schmall whether there is a night watch light that can be downlit and whether there are any alternatives available. Mr. Schmall responded that the subject light has a 100 watt lamp with high pressure sodium. He stated that the light source is probably equivalent to the surface brightness of the moon or a bright star. He informed Council that Mr. Friel probably is seeing the light because of the refractor. The light is intended to give light out to 100 feet at about the brightness of moonlight. He Page No. 2709 January 16, 1990 observed that the brilliance of the source drops after about 100 hours, and the lamp and reflector will get dirty, and as the lamp ages the light will diminish in brightness. Responding to a Council question, Mr. Schmall explained why the mounting height of this type of light is 25 feet. He stated that NSP can put the light on the other side of the pole and can paint the lens so as not to allow light to emit towards the Friel house. Councilmember Anderson asked if Council revises the ordinance to initiate a different procedure, could people instead install their own light on their own pole and save money? He also asked whether NSP has received complaints from any other residents in the Baier neighborhood. Mr. Schmall responded that there would be a cost savings, in terms of installation labor, however he felt that statistics would prove that NSP can rent this type of light to people cheaper than they can buy and maintain their own lights. He informed Council that he has received no complaints other than that of Mr. Friel. Also responding to a question from Councilmember Anderson, he stated that there is a similar light on Pagel Road. Councilmember Anderson asked if NSP would be concerned that people would be more likely to install gerry-rigged lights if Council changes the procedure. Mr. Schmall stated that he would be concerned, and it is very likely that people would install their own lights. He felt that the City would then experience more problems - people will install their lights too low. Most of the time, the subject light is not a problem for people in the area because of its 45 degree viewing area - in this case the problem is caused because of the terrain. Mrs. Alice Baier, 741 Mohican Court, stated that her husband is in law enforcement, working nights, and comes home at 3:00 A.M. She informed Council that when they asked NSP for the light, they had no desire to do anything underhanded. They felt that the additional light was necessary because of Mr. Baier's work shift, and so that he could Page No. 2710 January 16, 1990 safely walk the dog between the house and kennel after work, etc. They had no desire to install a street light, nor was one installed. She stated that they contacted NSP to install the lowest wattage night watch light. She informed Council that she had checked with the City and NSP and indicated that she and her husband were more than willing to come to some compromise with the complainant but that he would not accept any compromise. Her position was that if the City directs NSP to turn the light out, the decision would be arbitrary if all similar lights in the City are not also taken out. She agreed that perhaps the ordinance should be reworked to avoid future problems but that her light would not be affected. One of the compromises discussed with NSP was to put a reflector on the light and paint the side facing the Friel home black, which would place the light only towards her house. It was noted that NSP has installed similar lights for 37 residential and 14 commercial customers and that this is the only complaint the City has received. One of the Balers' neighbors stated that eleven of the neighbors are present and have signed and submitted a letter supporting the Baiers. He stated that the neighbors see the light and it does not bother them, whereas the lighting at the top of the hill (Friel residence) appears to be like Star Wars yet none of the neighbors have complained about it. He felt that if the Friels can have security lights, the Baiers should have the same right. Another neighbor stated that he lives across the street from the Baier residence and the light doesn't bother him even though it shines directly into his home. He stated that Mr. Friel lives 350 to 400 feet away from the light, and suggested that it couldn't bother him very much. Mr. Friel responded that he did not get in touch with the Baiers and perhaps should have. When he placed the complaint with NSP initially, they said they install the lights whenever they are requested and did not know there was any objection - if there was one they would turn the light off. He then Page No. 2711 January 16, 1990 researched City ordinances and informed the Mayor that he felt the issue should be addressed so that lights do not start showing up all over town. He stated that he objects to the light. He informed Council that he does have lighting on his home and uses it occasionally in the evening. He has lights that turn on and off automatically when the garage is approached. He felt that the light is much brighter than any other intersection street light and casts an orange glow at far greater distance than 100 feet. Mr. Jack Shoho, NSP counsel, stated that it is extraordinarily difficult for NSP to deal with an ordinance that has so little standard. Mr. Friel's is not an adjacent residential property, and under a reading of the ordinance, he is complaining as any other member of the public can complain about any other light in the community. While NSP is interested in cooperating with the community, there must be greater definition of the standards. He stated that NSP has had no such difficulty in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or other surrounding communities, and felt that the source of the problem may be Section 17.14 of the zoning ordinance. He stated that NSP would be happy to make some suggestions in redrafting the ordinance language. Councilmember Blesener pointed out that there has been plenty of precedent elsewhere in the City for the night watch light. She felt that a compromise should be worked out to reduce the light impact on the Friel property, and that staff should be directed to review the lighting ordinance. Councilmember Anderson moved to: direct staff to redraft Section 17.14 of the zoning ordinance, using whatever resources are available and with input from NSP; authorize NSP to turn the light back on; direct that NSP paint around the perimeter of the light and maintain the paint; and to direct NSP to turn the light inward onto the Baier property if at all feasible. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. Councilmember Anderson clarified that it is the intent of the motion that the light not be DEER SURVEY Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 2712 January 16, 1990 powered until the painting and turning of the light occur. Council acknowledged a memo from Administrator Lawell along with a letter from the Minnesota DNR requesting funding for a helicopter survey of the deer population within the Fort Snelling State Park adjacent to Mendota Heights. It was estimated that the City's cost would not exceed $200.00 and could be funded through the administration sundry budget allocation. Councilmember Hartmann moved to authorize City financial participation in a DNR helicopter survey of the deer population within the Fort Snelling State Park area adjacent to Mendota Heights. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. ASSESSMENT Council acknowledged a memo from the City CANCELLATION Clerk recommending that the street lighting improvement assessment levied against a portion of Mn/DOT right-of-way for T.H. 55 (Improvement NO. 86-11) be cancelled Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 LEGISLATIVE POLICIES BOARD OF REVIEW Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Councilmember Hartmann moved to authorize the cancellation of the balance of the assessment levied against Parcel No. 27-03400-011-75 for Improvement No. 86-11. Councilmember Anderson seconded the motion. Council acknowledged the proposed Dakota County legislative policies for 1990 along with an associated memo from the City Administrator. Council acknowledged and discussed a memo from the City Clerk regarding the scheduling of the 1990 Board of Review. It was noted that the date proposed by the County Assessor, April 10th, is Passover, and that the only available alternate date is Wednesday, May 2nd. After discussion, Councilmember Blesener moved to schedule the 1990 Board of Review for 7:30 o'clock P.M. on Wednesday, May 2nd. Councilmember Anderson seconded the motion. ADJOURN Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 2713 January 16, 1990 There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Anderson moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:32 o'clock P.M. Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY , 1990 Blacktop Licenses Asphalt Specialties Co., Inc. Pine Bend Paving, Inc. General Contractors Licenses A & L Construction A-Men Construction & Consulting Co. Charles Cudd Corp. Dakota Fire Suppression D.J. Kranz Company, Inc. D.S. Trudeau Co. Garvey Construction Heaver Design & Construction, Inc. Industrial Sprinkler Corp. of MN, Inc. K.W. Dahm Construction Co., Inc. Kraus-Anderson Const. Co. Linert Construction Rossbach Construction, Inc. Sawyer's Construction Shield Fire Protection, Inc. Twin City Fireplace Company Twin City Storm Sash Unipro Construction Corp. Valley Investments Construction Masonry Licenses Carlson Masonry, Inc. Fred A. Deutsch Gresser, Inc. M.F. Fleischhacker, Inc. SeMent Construction, Inc. Excavating Licenses A. Kamish & Sons, Inc. Becklin Brothers Growth Sewer & Water Mack's Excavating Plymouth Plumbing, Inc. Rauchwarter, Inc. Rayco Excavating Rose Sewer & Water Rumpca Sewer & Water, Inc. S.J. Dahn Trucking & Excavating, Inc. Gas Piping Licenses American Burner Service, Inc. Apollo Heating & Vent. Corp. Arneson Heating Service Co. Blaine Heating, A/C & Electric, Inc. Cedar Valley Heating & A/C Gas Piping Licenses Continued Efficient Air Control Egan & Sons Company Merit HVAC, Inc. Ray N. Welter Heating Co. Rouse Mechanical, Inc. Heating & Air Conditioning Licenses Airstream Heating & Cooling American Burner Service, Inc. Apollo Heating & Vent. Corp. Henke Heating Blaine Heating, A/C & Electric, Inc. Boehm Heating Company Cedar Valley Heating & A/C Egan & Sons Co. Gopher Heating & Sheet Metal, Inc. Merit HVAC, Inc. Midwestern Mechanical Corp. Ray N. Welter Heating Co. Rouse Mechanical, Inc. Plaster Licenses Housley Construction, Inc. Quality Drywall, Inc. Tree Removal License S & S Tree Specialists, Inc.