Loading...
1990-12-04 Council minutesPage No. 2963 December 4 1990 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, December 4, 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, Cummins and Hartmann. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Hartmann moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Cummins moved approval of the minutes of the October 16, 1990 regular meeting. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Hartmann moved approval of the minutes of the November 20, 1990 regular meeting with correction. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the consent calendar, for the meeting amended to move the proposed 1991 Dakota County Legislative Policies to the regular agenda, along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgement of the Code Enforcement monthly report for November. b. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the November 27th Park and Recreation Commission meeting. C. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated December 4, 1990 and attached hereto. Page No. 2964 December 4 1990 d. Approval of the list of claims dated December 4, 1990 and totalling $140,854.91 Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING: HUESSNER Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the ALLEY VACATION purpose of a public hearing on an application from Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Huessner, 654 1st Avenue, for the vacation of an alley located in Block 7 of T.T. Smith's Subdivision No. 3 (running from Vandall Street to Laura Street). Mr. Huessner was present for the discussion. He explained that it is his desire to enclose an existing screened porch on his home, and that when his contractor applied for permit, the City building department denied the permit because the Huessner garage encroaches on the alley right-of-way, putting the property in an existing non-conforming status which could not be expanded. He explained that he applied for the vacation so that the garage will be entirely on his property. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the staff report indicated that there is no need to retain the alley right-of-way for public purposes and has recommended its vacation subject to a 20 foot drainage and utility easement over the alley area. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Councilmember Blesener pointed out that the drawings indicate that a garage to the west of the Huessners also encroaches on the alley. Public Works Director Danielson responded that that garage appears to violate the setback requirements and will remain non-conforming until such time as it is taken down, in which event it would not be allowed to be constructed in the same location. Also responding to a question from Councilmember Blesener, Mr. Danielson stated that any future improvements by NSP (such as putting lines underground), would go within the 20 foot easement. There being no further questions or comments, Page No. 2965 December 4 1990 Councilmember Cummins moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 90-83, "RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF AN ALLEY," as amended to stipulate the 201 width of the retained easement. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 GLENHILL ROAD Mayor Mertensotto explained to the audience RECONSTRUCTION that the issue of reconstruction of the intersection of Victoria Curve/Glenhill Road came before the Council on November 20th at the request of Mn/DOT. He stated that City staff has received new information from Mn/DOT since that meeting and that all of the residents of the Culligan area have been notified of two options before Council. Engineer Klayton Eckles stated that the proposed reconstruction was initiated by Mn/DOT in September, and is a part of the Mendota Interchange project. As part of the project, the frontage road will curve south and use the old T.H. 110 road bed, T.H. 110 will be lowered several feet, and a,dramatic grade change on Glenhill will be created. Mn/DOT has submitted two proposals to the City, one for an I's-curve" which would take Glenhill Road down to the new frontage road to allow more space to make the grade change and meet the frontage road at a higher elevation. Mn/DOT feels that this option is undesirable because of the grade and because it is an I's- curve" and presented an alternative for a cul- de-sac on Glenhill, which would eliminate the connection to the frontage road. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that the City may decide not to choose either option, since Glenhill is a City street. He pointed out that the Shaughnessy drive is still coming out of the frontage road at the same location and suggested it be moved to the west and that the curve be made longer to improve safety. Councilmember Blesener asked how the proposed grade of the curve relates to today's grade. Mr. Eckles responded that the curve is not engineered yet but it is very sharp and steep Page No. 2966 December 4 1990 - it would possibly be less steep after being engineered, and the grade difference is about 8%. He informed Council and the audience that there are advantages and disadvantages to both of the proposed options. Council acknowledged a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Tom Gavin, 1199 Culligan Lane, and signed by 30 property owners on Glenhill, Culligan, Hunter, Orchard and Veronica, in opposition to the proposed cul-de-sac, and a petition signed by 21 property owners in favor of the cul-de- sac. Council also acknowledged a letter from the School District 197 Transportation Center asking for consideration of the retention of the Victoria Curve access to Glenhill. Mr. Eckles stated that the most important advantage to the I's-curve" design is that it provides a second access point to the neighborhood. The disadvantage is that it would be a marginal design which does not meet Mn/DOT standards and Mn/DOT would like to avoid it because I's-curves" are the most dangerous type of curve, and it would come to the intersection at a very steep grade. The advantage to cul-de-sac is that they are generally preferred to thru streets by neighborhoods because they keep through traffic out of neighborhoods. Also, this design would avoid the I's curve." With respect to a question over increased traffic on Culligan if a cul-de-sac were constructed on Glenhill, he stated that it would put about 13 more households of traffic onto Culligan after the neighborhood is totally developed and that there should be a net decrease in traffic because non-neighborhood traffic will not be coming in if there is no connection to the frontage road. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the question before Council is whether the City wants an access point to the frontage road. The alternative may be that children may have to walk down to Culligan and Hunter to catch a school bus and also the question of what can be done in the design to either flatten the curve or flatten the curve and reduce its grade. Mr. Eckles informed Council that Mr. Shaughnessy called him and expressed his Page No. 2967 December 4 1990 concern because the s-curve would damage his property. Ms. Linda Linsmaier, 1935 Glenhill, stated that she and her neighbors have been notified and have discussed the matter, and she presented Council with a petition signed by 21 of the neighbors in favor of the cul-de-sac. Councilmember Cummins stated that the frontage road will change from a very short dead-end to, in effect, a through street into Mendota. He asked whether staff can anticipate that would increase random traffic turning off the frontage road and into the neighborhood if the I's-curve" option were selected. He felt there would be a significant increase in traffic on the frontage road. Mr. Eckles responded that there will definitely be an increase of traffic on the frontage road, but that traffic on Culligan will increase no matter which option is chosen. Councilmember Anderson asked if there is any other neighborhood which could be compared, neighborhoods where there is only one access serving 34 homes (cul-de-sac option). Mr. Eckles responded that Crown Point is very comparable and that he has not heard any complaints over the single access. Mr. Tom Gavin stated that he had received a letter from Mr. Eckles about the options, but that the letter did not address safety, cost, or long-term planning for the road system in the neighborhood. In response, he and his wife have written a letter expressing their concerns and the letter was signed by many neighbors. He stated that he would like to know of all plans for roads in the neighborhood. He further stated that it is his understanding that City staff, including police and fire, has recommended to the Council that dual access to the neighborhood is preferred for public safety purposes. He also pointed out that if the school district eliminates the Culligan/Glenhill intersection, 30 children would have to catch their school bus at the intersection of Hunter and Culligan, where all of the traffic would also have to go. Page No. 2968 December 4 1990 Ms. Linsmaier stated that all of the neighbors have the same goal, concern over safety of the children in the neighborhood and how to minimize traffic. She further stated that none of the neighbors in her area are in favor of the connection because of the flow-through traffic and the fact that people coming into the neighborhood would not know that there are so many children. She stated that the petition she had submitted was signed by all of the homeowners on Glenhill except three. She stated that she is concerned about kids riding bikes on Glenhill now because of blind spots and that the situation would be worse if the I's-curve" were constructed. She felt that if there is a cul-de-sac, children will be drawn to it and will stay away from Culligan. Mayor Mertensotto responded that the argument about children is not overly persuasive because there are many residential areas in the City where there is much more traffic. Mr. Larry Culligan stated that he feels the I's-curve" is untenable as described, and also felt that there would be an increase of speculative traffic in the area. Sandy Krebsbach, 1230 Culligan Lane, spoke in favor of the cul-de-sac, stating that only 12 households would add traffic to Culligan Lane, six of which already use Culligan. She further stated that a school bus picks up junior and senior high school students at Glenhill and Culligan now, and that the school district could be petitioned to pick up elementary school children at that intersection also. Mr. Jack Barber, 1919 Hunter Lane, stated that he strongly objects to the cul-de-sac because it would put more traffic on Hunter and expressed concern over the traffic at Culligan and Hunter. He felt that those streets provided only meager residential ingress and egress before the Culligan development, including turning problems at the Hunter/Culligan intersection, and felt that the City should study the traffic patterns. He asked that more study and engineering be given to the I's-curve" option, and felt that it could be designed better. Mr. Barber urged the Council to retain the two accesses to the neighborhood. Page No. 2969 December 4 1990 Mr. Tom Gavin stated that in his opinion, increase in 11gawker" traffic through the neighborhood which some suggested would occur if the I's-curve" option is approved is a perceived concern. He did not believe traffic coming from the frontage road would make turns into the neighborhood to "gawk." He further stated that everyone in the area agrees that the existing curve at Glenhill and Victoria is dangerous now and they have lived with it for years. He felt the I's-curve" would be an improvement over what currently exists and further that it would slow traffic down. Mr. Burton Vicks, a property owner on Glenhill, stated that he is not in favor of the cul-de-sac. He stated that he does not understand why Mn/DOT is planning to lower the grade on Victoria and felt that the City should discuss that issue with Mn/DOT. He further stated that whether the frontage road is above or below T.H. 110 can be addressed with the state, and that the I's-curve" can be made feasible. He pointed out that while a cul-de-sac might make his property more valuable, the only access to his home would be a long way from his property. Mr. Ray Mahowald, a Culligan Lane resident, expressed opposition to the cul-de-sac option. Mr. Richard Swanson, 1908 Glenhill Road, stated it is the responsibility of the area residents to drive through the area safely. He expressed support for the dual access option. Councilmember Cummins suggested that staff be directed to contact Mn/DOT and secure more information and additional design work to help Council determine what is best. Councilmember Blesener stated that there are many homes indirectly affected, three existing homes on Glenhill and three lots on Glenhill that would be directly affected by what happens, along with seven homes on Culligan which would be impacted by additional traffic if the cul-de-sac is approved. She pointed out that engineering and traffic studies show that on average there are 6 trips per day per household, and that under the cul-de-sac option, there could be from 250 to 500 additional felt that, additional retaining sense. Page No. 2970 December 4 1990 trips per day on Culligan. She adding school bus access to the trips per day, it is clear that the two accesses makes the most Councilmember Anderson stated that there are two alternatives that cannot be compromised - Council must decide on either the cul -de -sac or two accesses. He further stated that Council must select the option that is in the best interest of the community at large. Safety is a factor, the number of people who would have only single ingress /egress, emergency access and school bus access are all important. He felt that considering these factors, in the long range best interest of the City two ways in and out for so many households is important. He felt that there would be little increase in sight -seer traffic and that Council must make its decision based on what makes sense safety -wise. Councilmember Hartmann agreed with the dual access, pointing out that if there were ever to be a need to temporarily close the access at Hunter and Culligan, for reconstruction or some other reason, and there would be no access for emergency vehicles. Councilmember Cummins stated that if he lived in the neighborhood, his preference would be for the cul -de -sac, but that if Mn /DOT can design a safer access onto Victoria he would support it. Councilmember Anderson stated that he would like Council to direct staff to ask Mn /DOT to do additional engineering work. Mayor Mertensotto suggested that Mn /DOT should be requested to move the connection of Glenhill and Victoria Curve further east. Councilmember Blesener suggested that the frontage road be moved further south. Councilmember Blesener moved to direct staff to inform Mn /DOT that a second access on Victoria Curve must be maintained and that Mn /DOT design a safe intersection. Councilmember Anderson seconded the motion. l Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 2971 December 4 1990 BUDGET HEARING Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on the proposed 1991 Budget and 1990 levy collectible in 1991. Treasurer Larry Shaughnessy informed the audience that to comply with "Truth in Taxation" the City was required to adopt a tentative budget in August, and to conduct a public hearing in December. He further stated that in August, the Council established a budget at the City's legal maximum levy limit, and that the tentative budget has been refined. Mr. Shaughnessy reviewed transparencies showing comparisons of the 1990 tax levy, 1991 preliminary levy as proposed in August and recommended levy; a comparison of 1990 general fund budgeted revenues and anticipated 1991 revenues; and a comparison of 1990 budgeted general fund expenditures and 1991 proposed expenditures. He informed the audience that 1991 is the first year in which there will be a levy for the park bond issue approved at the 1989 referendum. The overall recommended increase in the total levy is 9.8%, and the total general fund levy is proposed to be $1,883,590 versus the 1990 levy of $1,793,000. He stated that there should be a valuation increase of about 4 to 5% because of new growth, and that individual property taxes will increase between 4 to 6% if property values have not changed. He explained that there have been changes made in the tax capacity formula for next year, and that the City tax levy represents about 18% of an individual's total property tax bill. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the City operates with fiscal responsibility and has always operated with good financial reserves at the end of the year, while at the same time trying to keep City taxes down. He further explained that the City operates on a "bare-bones" staffing level. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Brian Birch asked several questions about changes in proposed revenues, and asked why the Council budget has increased 30% since 1988. He stated that as one looks at the budget for one year, it looks great, but if it Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 2972 December 4 1990 were looked at over two years, the percentages are quite different. He stated that if residents must "tighten their belts ", the City should do the same. Councilmember Cummins stat, been fortunate that it has in building, but this will not continue in the future more difficult to run City future. ad that had so almost and it operat the City has much growth certainly will become ions in the Councilmember Blesener asked whether the budget as proposed changes the City's position of having the lowest tax rate in the metropolitan area, as reported by the Citizens League. Mr. Shaughnessy responded that if the levy is adopted as proposed, the City will remain in the bottom five on the Citizen League survey. A member of the audience stated that Council should keep the budget at a zero increase over 1990. Mr. Birch responded that the majority of the budget increase is payroll and that he feels the employees are entitled to cost of living increases. At the request of Councilmember Anderson, Mr. Shaughnessy reviewed the Council salaries, informing the audience that Councilmembers are compensated $2,400 per year and the Mayor's compensation is $3,600 per year. He informed the audience that overall, the general fund budget is proposed to increase 4.6% and that the park issue represents $180,000 of the tax levy. There being no further questions or comments, Councilmember Cummins moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Councilmember Blesener moved adoption of Resolution No. 90 -84, "RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL 1990 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1991." Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Councilmember Anderson moved adoption of the Page No. 2973 December 4 1990 After brief discussion, Councilmember Cummins moved to grant temporary variances to allow a 75 square foot sign area and to allow the proposed banner to be installed on the roof of the Centre Pointe Medical Clinic for three months. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 90-41, Mr. Dennis Callahan, 1851 Warrior Drive, was CALLAHAN present to request Council approval of a wetlands permit to allow him to retain an 8 by twelve storage shed which had been installed twenty-five feet from a wetlands. He explained that at the time he installed the shed he was unaware of the ordinance setback requirement. He informed Council that he agrees to the Planning Commission's recommended requirement that he put plantings around the structure to make it less visible. Councilmember Anderson asked whether there is any hardship involved. He stated that even if a variance is not required, aesthetically he would not want to see a precedent set for this type of shed within a wetlands setback. Councilmember Cummins concurred, and stated that if more of Mr. Callahan's neighbors had found the structure to be offensive, he would vote against the request. 1991 Budget as presented this evening. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 90-43, Ms. Sue Zwirner, from the Centre Pointe CENTRE POINTE Medical Clinic, was present to request approval of a variance to allow the Clinic to install a temporary cloth banner on their building's roof. She explained that since the clinic is new, people are not yet familiar with its location and the existing freestanding sign for the building is not of adequate enough size to be seen from the road. The temporary banner would have 18 inch lettering, which can be seen from T.H. 110 to familiarize the public with the clinic's location. It would be attached to existing posts for the fencing which encloses the roof- top heating and cooling units. After brief discussion, Councilmember Cummins moved to grant temporary variances to allow a 75 square foot sign area and to allow the proposed banner to be installed on the roof of the Centre Pointe Medical Clinic for three months. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 90-41, Mr. Dennis Callahan, 1851 Warrior Drive, was CALLAHAN present to request Council approval of a wetlands permit to allow him to retain an 8 by twelve storage shed which had been installed twenty-five feet from a wetlands. He explained that at the time he installed the shed he was unaware of the ordinance setback requirement. He informed Council that he agrees to the Planning Commission's recommended requirement that he put plantings around the structure to make it less visible. Councilmember Anderson asked whether there is any hardship involved. He stated that even if a variance is not required, aesthetically he would not want to see a precedent set for this type of shed within a wetlands setback. Councilmember Cummins concurred, and stated that if more of Mr. Callahan's neighbors had found the structure to be offensive, he would vote against the request. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 2974 December 4 1990 Mr. Callahan responded that the only part of the shed that can be seen by Mr. Lapean, who had objected to the permit during the Planning Commission discussion, is the roof. He further stated that his house is at the 100 foot setback, and he can't move the shed to his sidelot area because of other lot restrictions. Councilmember Cummins moved to approve a wetlands permit to allow the storage shed to remain in place, approximately 25 feet from the wetlands area, at 1851 Warrior Drive, subject to the applicant agreeing to plant a shrubbery screen, said screen to be reviewed and approved by City staff. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. With respect to a suggestion made by Mr. Roy Lapean at the Planning Commission meeting, Councilmember Blesener suggested that the City staff should send notice to and receive consent signatures from neighbors of people requesting planning approvals, rather than requiring the applicants to solicit neighbors' consent. Councilmember Anderson disagreed, stating that he feels that the personal contact between neighbors is good, and that if staff were to send and receive consent forms, it would put staff into the position of doing the bidding for individuals and would take staff time needed for other things. MENDAKOTA PARK Park and Recreation commission chairperson John Huber and Park Project Manager Guy Kullander reviewed preliminary sketches for the development of the Mendakota Park. Council acknowledged a memo from Mr. Kullander and Administrative Assistant Batchelder with respect to Mendakota Park planning along with a preliminary cost estimate submitted by Barton-Aschman Associates and a report from Mr. Kullander regarding 1990 park improvement expenditures. Mr. Huber informed Council that although residents of Mendakota Estates would like tennis courts, there is not much potential for the Park Commission to recommend their construction. Mayor Mertensotto expressed concern that there should be lighting at Mendakota Drive, Dodd Road and the Fire Station, because the proximity of the Fire Station access to Page No. 2975 December 4 1990 Mendakota Drive makes it difficult to differentiate between them at night. Administrator Lawell informed Council that he has discussed the matter with the fire chief, who expressed concern about potential traffic waiting on Dodd to get onto Mendakota Drive interfering with emergency access to the station. Councilmember Blesener expressed concern over the location of the comfort station, stating that she would like to see more room around the comfort station. She also was concerned over the location of the play structure. She felt that Mendakota Park could be a first- class central park for the City and that she would like to see a master plan to make a significant play structure and picnic pavilion or bandshell - something to provide a community gathering space. She suggested moving the proposed play structure from between the ballfields to a location closer to the parking lot, where it would be more central to the rest of the park. Mr. Kullander responded that it would be possible to split the parking lot, utilizing the area under the power lines for parking and moving the play structure. Councilmember Blesener stated that if anything must be sacrificed, she would sacrifice the free-skating area. She further stated that she would like to see two ways in and out of the parking lot and creation of a drop-off area. She felt that if the Mendakota developer is willing to dedicate land, the City should build a tennis court and incorporate the land area into the park. She suggested that there may be a better location on the park site for the tennis courts and perhaps the land proposed to be deeded by the developer could be used for another park purpose. Mr. Huber felt that a play structure for 34 of a City commitment, developer would build land to the City, the agreeable. tennis court plus the homes would be too much but that if the the courts and deed the Commission would be Page No. 2976 December 4 1990 Councilmember Blesener asked Mr. Huber to see if Barton-Aschman can come up with a long- range, creative plan, showing future enhancements for a community gathering place. She felt that nothing should be built in the near future that would preclude future options. Councilmember Cummins asked if 98 parking spaces is adequate. Mr. Kullander responded that on-street parking on Mendakota Drive, 200 feet from Dodd, should accommodate 30 to 40 vehicles. Mr. Huber briefly reviewed park improvement costs. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he does not feel special park funds should be counted in funds for the park improvement project. He suggested that the Park Commission be asked to come up with a funding plan, and that Mendakota Park should be a good, substantial investment - a showcase for the City. The Council asked Councilmember Blesener to do a follow-up at the December 11 Park Commission meeting. Mr. Huber stated that he would refer Councilmember Blesener's comments to Barton- Aschman. DAKOTA COUNTY Councilmember Cummins stated that he asked LEGISLATIVE POLICIES that this issue be removed from the consent calendar so that Council could discuss the proposed position on light rail transit. He stated that from a Mendota Heights point of view LRT will have no benefit and felt that Council should not support either LRT or the sales tax being proposed to fund it. He stated that LRT would be the largest public works project in the history of the state and that it will not be good for the state or drivers. He felt that it is ill-conceived and proposed at a very bad time from a benefit standpoint. Mayor Mertensotto concurred, and felt that the concern is great enough that Council should support the legislative policies excluding policy number six, LRT. Administrator Lawell stated that Dakota County is very involved in LRT. He stated that the Council can certainly notify the County that it does not see the benefit of LRT and that it is not in favor of a metro-wide tax for a Page No. 2977 December 4 1990 service Mendota Heights residents may not receive any benefit from. Councilmember Cummins stated that LRT is a project that has been a falsehood, both in terms of projected ridership and cost. The $2.2 billion estimated cost is only for construction of the eight lines and makes no provision for continuing funding. He felt that Council should tell the County that it does not feel this is a good policy, that LRT is too expensive and will not accomplish the goals being stated in the policy. Administrator Lawell responded that it will be well to notify the County that the City opposes the proposed policy, but cautioned that it may well still remain part of the legislative policies, depending on how other communities in the county react. It was the consensus of Council that the Administrator be directed to notify the County that the Council is in agreement with the legislative policy positions except that Council takes exception to the policy on LRT. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Hartmann moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:50 o'clock P.M. M—thleen M. Swanson City Clerk Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL December 4, 1990 General Contractors Licenses L. H. Bolduc Co., Inc. Wooddale Builders, Inc. Masonry Licenses Mrozik Const., Inc. Heating & A/C License Aspen Heating & A/C