2014-11-05 Council Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
November 5, 2014 7:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
1.
Call to Order
2.
Roll Call
3.
Pledge of Allegiance
4.
Adopt Agenda
5.
Consent Agenda
a.
Approval of October 21, 2014 City Council Minutes
b.
Acknowledgment of October 14, 2014 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes
c.
Acknowledgment of October 28, 2014 Planning Commission Minutes
d.
Approval of Resolution 2014-72, Formally Accepting Donation of Coffee From Caribou Coffee
e.
Approval of Resolution 2014-74, Final Payment for 35E/Marie Avenue Storm Sewer Project
f.
g.
Approval of Resolution 2014-75, Reaffirming Support of West St. Paul Ice Arena Grant Application
h.
Approval of Purchase of Fire Station Rooftop Heating Unit
i.
Approval of Claims List
j.
Approval of Contractors List
6.
Public Comments
7.
New and Unfinished Business
a.
Ordinance 467, Adopting Various Zoning Code Amendments
b.
c.
Review of 2015-2019 Capital Improvements Plan
8.
Community Announcements
9.
Council Comments
10.
Adjourn
page 2
5a.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota
Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights,
Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present:
Councilmembers Duggan, Povolny, Petschel, and Norton.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Krebsbach presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Povolny moved adoption of the
agenda.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Krebsbach presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and
approval. Councilmember Dugganmoved approval of the consent calendar as presented and
authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items a)Approval of
October 7, 2014 City Council Minutes; d) Approval of City Labor Attorney Request for Proposals;and
g)Approval of Resolution 2014-71, Supporting 2015-2019 Dakota County Capital Improvement Plan.
a.Approval of October 7, 2014 City Council Minutes
b.Acknowledgment of October 8, 2014 Airport Relations Commission Minutes
c.Receipt of September 2014 Fire Department Synopsis Report
d.Approval of City Labor Attorney Request for Proposals
e.Receipt of September Building Activity Report
f.Receipt of September Par 3 Report
g.Approval of Resolution 2014-71, Supporting 2015-2019 Dakota County Capital Improvement Plan
h.Approval of 2015 Insurance Renewal and Election to Not Waive Statutory Tort Limits
i.Approval of Resolution 2014-70, Calling for a Public Hearing to Consider Vacation of Part of
Partition Road Right-of-Way
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 1
page 3
j.Approval of Purchase Orders for Storm Sewer Repairs
k.Approval of Purchase Order for Sanitary Lift Station Repairs
l.Approval of September 2014 Treasurer’s Report
m.Approval of Claims List
n.Approval of Contractors List
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
A)APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 7, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
A revised and corrected set of minutes for the October 7, 2014 City Council Meeting was provided to
the Councilmembers.
Councilmember Petschel moved to approve the October 7, 2014 City Council Minutes as revised and
corrected.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Abstain: 1 (Povolny)
Nays: 0
D) APPROVAL OF CITY LABOR ATTORNEY REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
City Administrator Justin Miller provided background information on the request for proposal for the
position of City Labor Attorney. The City Labor Attorney is expected to assist in all types of personnel
matters. It is expected that the new contract would be effective January 1, 2015.
Councilmember Duggan moved to approve the City Labor Attorney Request for Proposals.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
G)APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2014-71, SUPPORTING 2015-2019
DAKOTA COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
City Engineer John Mazzitello explained that each year Dakota County requests cities to review their
proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)for the next five years.Mendota Heights does not have any
significant infrastructure projects listed beyond the recurring markings and signage maintenance items,
but there is one item for the County’s contribution to stormwater funding for the reconstruction of
Highway 13, which is scheduled to take place next year. That project includes an extensive stormwater
drainage modification that was worked through the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management
Organization to help alleviate some slope erosion. Mendota Heights has a contributing water flow to the
watershed so will be expected to paya small portion of the stormwater fees.
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 2
page 4
Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014-71, SUPPORTING PROJECTS LISTED
IN THE DRAFT 2015-2019 DAKOTA COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
PRESENTATIONS
A) JESS LUCE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMMUNITIES FOR A LIFETIME
City Administrator Justin Miller introduced Mr. Jess Luce from the Dakota County Public Health, who
has been working on a Dakota County initiative called Communities for a Lifetime involving senior
citizens in the city.
Mr. Luce explained that Dakota County’s Communities for a Lifetime initiative has been going on for
almost three years. There is a local group called Mendota Heights for a Lifetime. The main focus point
of the initiative is to make good places to grow up and grow old in; a community planning framework
that suggests that if you plan and build for older adults in mind, you do so at the benefit of other citizens
– younger people and other age cohorts.
Mr. Luce noted that in 2010, nearly 40,000 people in Dakota County were age 65 and older; that number
is expected to double by 2020 and triple by 2030. According to a report from the University of
Minnesota School of Public Health, an estimated 28 percent of Minnesota boomers will not have
sufficient resources to cover their retirement expenses.
Mendota Heights for a Lifetime has been working with other groups in West St. Paul, Hastings, Apple
Valley, and others to do asset mapping and strategic planning.
Councilmembers asked questions regarding the long-term future of DARTS and if the percentage of
aging adults in Mendota Heights mirrors Dakota County.
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) PLANNING CASE 2014-28, CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR EXCEPTIONTO
SWIMMING POOL FENCING REQUIREMENTS, RESOLUTION 2014-61
Planner Nolan Wall noted that this was a continuation of the discussion that took place at the last
Council meeting regarding a request to amend Title 9-2-4(C) of the City Code to allow an exception for
swimming pool fencing requirements.
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 3
page 5
Councilmember Duggan asked for a clarifying edit to Section 1, Item 4. He also asked if any research is
being done about a backup of some sort in case of an electrical failure and if there are any statistics
available to compare the number of drownings in a pool with an automatic pool cover versus a pool with
a fence.
Mayor Krebsbach stated her opposition to this ordinance amendment as it puts in a human dimension,
although she is aware that if a fence is not latched there is a human dimension there as well.
Mayor Krebsbach moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014-61 DENYING ORDINANCE NO. 469 TO
AMEND THE CITY CODE TO ALLOW AN EXCEPTION FOR SWIMMING POOL FENCING
REQUIREMENTS based on the following Findings of Fact as stated in the resolution.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3 (Krebsbach, Povolny, Petschel)
Nays: 2 (Duggan, Norton)
B) PLANNING CASE 2014-20, AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 645 SIBLEY
MEMORIAL HIGHWAY,RESOLUTION 2014-69
Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant was requesting an After-the-Fact Conditional Use
Permit to clear cut vegetation in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area at 645 Sibley Memorial
Highway. The applicant received a Critical Area Permit in October 2013 to construct a new dwelling on
the subject parcel. On July 1 of this year, staff was made aware of cutting activity within the bluff area,
which was not included as part of the approved Critical Area Permit. Staff investigated the issue and
notified the property owners of the appropriate course of action, which included submitting a
Conditional Use Permit application, inventorying the trees that were removed, and providing a
restoration plan.
Planner Wall noted that the proposed After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit only addresses the clear
cutting activity that took place within the impacted area this past summer and any additional cutting or
trimming would require another application. Clear cutting within the critical area is allowed by
Conditional Use Permit in compliance with various conditions. As noted, a number of those conditions
were not met in this case.
The goal of processing the after-the-fact permit is to place conditions on the property, to monitor the
vegetation regrowth, and to ensure that no action is taken that may cause further damage to the impacted
area. A Bluff Tree Preservation Plan was included as part of this application.
The impacted area has been cut in the past and the existing vegetation pattern in that area is different
than the adjoining properties along the bluff, which consists of mature Oak, Basswood, Maple,
Hackberry, and Ash Trees. As a result of the most recent activity no additional mature vegetation was
removed that would substantially increase the area of the previously impacted area – the trimming that
was done was within the same area as previously. The vegetationregrowth was evaluatedin September
to determine its viability.
The applicant did provide a Vegetation Restoration Plan that would be implemented if the regrowth was
determined to be inadequate. According to the landscape architect, the plantings are meant to
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 4
page 6
supplement and support the natural vegetation regrowth and are not meant to replace mature trees that
were removed by a previous property owner.
Councilmember Norton asked when the previous clearcutting took place and when the current owner
purchased the property.
Mayor Krebsbach asked Planner Wall to walk the Council through all of the points in terms of activity
on the site and what the Council needs to decide.
Planner Wall explained that staff revisitedthe site in August and again in September 2014to evaluate
and document the vegetation regrowth. Staff also required the owners to submit a report from their
contracted landscape architect. This architect provided images showing some of the regrowth in the area
(taken July 28) The existing tree stumps and root systems were left intact and substantial regrowth has
occurred since June. The report also recommended that no additional planting are undertaken as this
time to prevent unwanted disturbance to the soil surface or to the existing root systems, which could
potentially lead to increased erosion in the impacted area.
According to the geotechnical report provided by the applicant, no evidence of erosion was observed in
the impacted area and the clearcutting activity did not appear to have a negative impact on the stability
of the slope. Planner Wall noted that these observations were made from the top of the bluff and soil
samples were not taken, per the geotechnical engineer, due to unsafe conditions and to eliminate any
additional disturbance within the impacted area. Staff and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
reviewed the reports and are not recommending any further action.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this case at their August meeting and
recommended approval of an After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit for clearcutting within the
Mississippi River Corridor with conditions.
Planner Wall further explained that potential approval of this permit is not intended to condone what
was done. If the property owner had engaged the City prior to conducting the clearcutting, appropriate
procedures and limitations could have been discussed and implemented.
Planner Wall noted that any further investigation of the slope would be left up to a professional to
determine how best to continue to monitor it.Staff reserves the right to either contract with someone or
require the property owner do that to provide the information.
Councilmembers asked questions regarding who would conduct any additional investigation on the
slope, if Council has the right to impose a fine and if the City Attorney would recommend such a fine,
the name of the vendor who did the tree cutting, if the vendor checked for the existence of a permit, the
possibility of sending the vendor a letter expressing the City’s concerns with their services in light of
their knowledge of clearcutting in the bluff area, and whether or not some of the conditions would place
undue hardship on the property owner.
Mayor Krebsbach invited the applicant to come forward and address the Council.
Paul and Shannon Burke, along with their landscape architect, noted that they really did not have a lot to
add beyond what staff has already described. Mr. Burke did comment that the tree service he hired was
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 5
page 7
contracted to prune the trees for view. This tree service took it upon themselves, based upon a phone call
they claimed to have made to the City, to go ahead and cut the boxelder treesto their stumps.
Mayor Krebsbach opened the floor for comments from the public.
Mr. Marco Scibora, a neighbor, stated that he was disturbed when he noticed the activity because he
understands the ramifications of such. He asked that this permit be denied. After reading the report from
the geotechnical engineer, there is nothing there to base their opinion on. They recommended that
nothing be done; however, at the end of their letter they state that “No warranty expressed or implied is
made”. He believes that his property is now at risk. He recommended a bond be put in place to protect
all of the area property owners and that waiting until next spring to ‘see if the regrowth is adequate’ is
too late.
City Attorney Tom Lehmann stated that he does not believe the City would have the ability to require
such a bond. At some point the City would have to defend any such request, and it would be impossible
for any bond company to issue such a bond because the City would not know what the conditions would
be to determine whether or not the actions caused what the City would require them to bond for.
Mayor Krebsbach asked about the credibility of a visual inspection from the top of the bluff or slope.
City Attorney Lehmannstated the City has relied upon the expertise of the geo-technicians in the past.
Planner Wall commented that the Planning Commission requested the applicantpay for the geotechnical
evaluation.Staff was hesitant to require a soil sample or have someone go down the slope due to the
liability involved.
City Administrator Miller stated for clarification that if the resolution were to be approved, it would not
mean that the City condones what was done. The property owner has had to incur expenses to do the
reports received, and staff is going to be asking him to put up a letter of credit, which will be in the
thousands of dollars, to guarantee a value of any future landscaping. The city will probably be looking
at issuing acitationfor a misdemeanor that would have a financial penalty as well.
Ms. Shirley Erstad, Executive Director of Friends for the Parks & Trails of St. Paul and Ramsey County,
1660 Laurel Avenue, St. Paul, has been and continues to be an active participant in the DNR revision
process for the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. She stressed the importance of upholding the
ordinances in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area as well as the ordinances in Mendota Heights.
She shared the background of how and when the critical area was created. She stated that there should
be no further trimming, cutting, or alteration of the bluff or slope of any kind and she recommended an
annual thorough inspection of this slope and the bluff for the next five years at a minimum, to monitor
the vegetation regrowth and check for signs of erosion. She also expressed her support of the retention
of a security bond.
Mr. Tom Dimond, 2119 Skyway Drive, St. Paul shared the plan for restoration of Lilydale Park after the
slides that caused damage and deaths. The fact that the City of Mendota Heights has a property that
literally abuts these areas raises clear concerns. Hestated that the geotechnical analysis of the slope was
not adequate because of safety concerns and limited access to the bluff area. He feels it is unknown what
the stability of the area is. Considering the fact that there have been issues along the corridor, there is a
great liability and he encouraged the Council to ensure they have an adequate bond. He also encouraged
the Council to have a longer review time.
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 6
page 8
City Engineer John Mazzitello addressed the concerns raised about the geotechnical report. He stated
that the geotechnical engineer’s report was produced to supplement and backup what the landscape
architect had produced. There is a statement where the geotechnical engineers states that they
understand that stumps and root structures were undisturbed. The root structure that existed prior to
cutting the vegetation is still in place, so there was no disturbance of the soil of the slope although the
vegetation was removed. In discussing courses of action with staff, it was discussed about not taking on
any activities that may make the stabilization of the slope worse – such as disturbance of the slope that
would be associated with re-vegetation activities. Staff recommends monitoring the regrowth very
closely. If there are areas exposed that do not have regrowth, re-vegetation may be necessary in those
areas at a future date.
With respect to the timeframe of financial security, the citystaff chose 24 months as an ability to
observe two growing seasons. Staff would have no objection to making that 60 months. Mayor
Krebsbach stated that she would be in support of increasing the timeframe.
Councilmember Petschel said she would support 5 years. She also expressed her concern that the bond
may not be adequate.City Attorney Lehmannstated that he believes that City Code allows the bond to
be 1.5 times the amount of the cost. Administrator Miller stated that staff would receive the estimate
from the applicant, review it, and make any adjustments that they deem necessary.
Councilmember Duggan suggested that this topic be held over, get another geotechnical report and have
staff verify it, and then Council could take action.
Mayor Krebsbach asked if the geotechnical report included in the packet is adequate. Planner Wall
replied that it was recommended by the Planning Commission that the applicant contract with a
geotechnical engineer that is licensed to do this kind of report, and that is what they submitted. It is the
Council’s decision to determine if this is adequate for them to make a decision.
In response to the last sentence in the report that reads “No warranty expressed or implied”, City
Engineer Mazzitello explained that it is more of an insulator for the firm because the opening of that
paragraph that reads “Haugo GeoTechnical Services LLC” –this particular engineer with his license
number is still liable. He did not believe it was necessary to obtain another geotechnical report.
Mayor Krebsbach voiced her desire to see a condition added to the resolution that an additional report be
obtained if the City deems further information from this or another geotechnical firm is warranted. City
staff recommended language amending Condition #3 in the resolution to make it clear that the city may
at any time within the next 36 months, and at the property owner’s expense, retain a geotechnical
engineer to conduct an investigation of the slope
Councilmember Petschel stated that the item missing is the ‘best practices’ of what is necessary to
replant the slope, how much, and how much that is going to cost; which would in turn determine the
performance bond.
Councilmember Norton moved that no more public comments be taken on this topic.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 1 (Duggan)
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 7
page 9
Mayor Krebsbach stated her desire to see a condition be added to pursue a citation for the violation.
Planner Wall responded that staff would not need a Council action to undertake that process. However, a
motion from the Council, separate fromthis resolution, might be of interest to the court in considering
this case.
Councilmember Norton moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014-69 APPROVING AN AFTER-THE-
FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 645 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY with conditions as
amended by the Council.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilmember Norton moved that direction be given to staff to further investigate whether a citation is
appropriate given the circumstances.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
For the record, Mayor Krebsbach pointed out that this recommendation by staff would come back to the
Council for approval.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
OTHER
Councilmember Povolny pointed out that there were a couple of students in attendance working on
different projectsand a Boy Scout fulfilling badge requirements.
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
Assistant to the City Administrator Tamara Schutta made the following announcements:
Annual Halloween Bonfire is Friday, October 31 from 7:00 – 9:00pm behind Mendota Plaza.
General Election is Tuesday, November 4. Residents can absentee voteat City Hall during
regular business hours. Absentee voting will also be available on Saturday, November 1.
Residents were encouraged to adopt afire hydrantto keep itfree from snow andaccessible
during the winter months.
Starting November 1 there will be no parking on city streets from 2:00am – 6:00am.
th
The 66Annual Firefighters Dance is Friday, November 14. Tickets are available at City Hall.
Victoria Road Reconstruction and Rolling Green Neighborhood – final lift of asphalt was
installed on Tuesday, October 21; the project is pretty much complete.
Construction on Highway 13 trail connection from Summit to Lilydale Road has begun; to be
completed by mid-November.
th
Due to the General Election on Tuesday, November 4, the next Council meeting was
th
rescheduled for Wednesday, November 5at 7:00 p.m.
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 8
page 10
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Duggan encouraged all of the residents to purchase tickets for the Fire Department
Annual Dance. They are one of the best fire departments in Minnesota, if not the Country.
Councilmember Petschel noted that during her recent door-to-door campaigning,she ran into a number
of residents who have had their homes tested for radonand found the levelshigh.It is an inexpensive
test to have done and not terribly expensive to remediate. She encouraged all residents to have their
homes tested.
She also gave kudos to Sloan Wallgren, who worked so hard to develop the soccer-style golf at the Par
3. There was a wonderful write-up in the paper. This is bringing even more youth golfers to the course.
She suggested the City leverage their websiteto contact residents, or have them be able to go to the
website for electronic notifications of when their water or power were to be turned off. Maybe too there
could be a place where residents could see if there are any ongoing issues in their neighborhoods they
should be aware of.
There will be a partial solar eclipse on Thursday, October 23.
Mayor Krebsbach was asked by a resident about protocol if there is a break-in or an incident in their
neighborhood, how are residents informed. City AdministratorJustin Miller replied if it is believed that
it would help in the apprehension of a suspect,staff or crime prevention personnel reach out to residents
in the neighborhoods. There are three city reports available online; Just the Facts, Timeline, and Friday
Update.
ADJOURN
Councilmember Duggan moved to adjourn.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m.
____________________________________
Sandra Krebsbach
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
October 21, 2014 Mendota Heights City CouncilPage 9
page 11
5b.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTSDAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PARKSAND RECREATION MEETING
October 14, 2014
The October meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on
Tuesday,October 14, 2014 at Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve.
Chair Hinderscheid called to order the parks and recreation commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. The
following commissioners were present: Chair Hinderscheid, CommissionersIraKip, Stephanie
Levine, Joel Paper, Jack Evans and David Miller. Staff present: Recreation Program Coordinator
Sloan Wallgren.
Approval of Agenda
Chair Hinderscheid added Dog Park and Activity Log to the agenda.
COMMISSIONER LEVINE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA;
COMMISSIONEREVANS SECONDED THE MOTION.
AYES 6: NAYS 0
Approval of Minutes of September 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER LEVINE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES;
COMMISSIONERPAPER SECONDED THE MOTION.
AYES 6: NAYS 0
Marie Park Hockey Rink Update
Mr. Wallgren updated the commission on the status of the Marie Park Hockey Area. The hockey
rink was paved this week and the boards would be installed very soon.
Commissioner Paper noted that there was a puddle near the center of the rink and asked if that
would be fixed. Mr. Wallgren said the puddles would be addressed.
Mr. Wallgren noted that as of now the city was not planning on painting the surface, but if
necessary the area would be painted in the spring.
Park Bench Donation
Mr. Wallgren informed the commission that there is a process in place to donate a bench in a park.
The amount of $1,000 is required to donate a bench. The location of the bench must be approved
by the commission and council. Mr. Wallgren noted that he city supplies the concreate slab for the
bench and the labor to install it.
Commissioner Miller asked if there was list of places identified where benches were needed. Mr.
Wallgren said not at this time, but that would be a good list to start.
MHParksandRecreationCommission10-14-2014Page
page 12
Recreation Program Survey Results
Mr. Wallgren presented survey results from summer programs. Staff sent surveys to participants in the
tennis program, playground program, junior golf league and junior golf camps. We received a 25-30%
response from parents.
Mr. Wallgren stated that staff was able to learn some important information from the surveys. There
are staffing issues that need to be addressed at the golf course and tennis program. Also we will be
expanding and adding programs based off the feedback from parents.
Recreation Programming Report
Mr. Wallgren informed the commission that there are two field trips later this week for youth
during MEA break. Also staff has added four field trips during winter break and one more in
January during a non-school day.
Mr. Wallgren announced that the city will soon be hiring Warming House Attendants, and if
anyone knew or reliable youth that are looking for a winter job to please have them contact city
hall.
The city will be hosting the annual Halloween Bonfire on Friday, October 31, 2014 from 7:00pm to
10:00pm. Residents can begin to drop off brush on Saturday, October 25, 2014.
Archery Range
At the last parks and recreation commission meeting the idea of offering an archery program was
mentioned. Mr. Wallgren did some research and found that that our current city ordinance does not
allow for the shooting of bows in the city, with the exception of a city authorized deer hunt or a
special permit issued for target practice.
Mr. Wallgren informed the commission that Friendly Marsh Park was used as an archery range in
the past. Staff removed the targets years ago because people were vandalizing them.
Staff contacted the city of Eagan and Dakota County to inquire about their archery ranges. The city
of Eagan has a small range at one of their parks with four targets and it is free for people to use.
Eagan city staff said that the busy time of year is from Labor Day to Thanksgiving. Dakota County
offers a range at Spring Lake Park. The range is $5 to use or $30 for an annual pass, the county
generates about $8,000 from the sales of passes.
Mr. Wallgren informed the commission that the Minnesota DNR offers a grant that would match
funds from $2,500-$10,000 for archery ranges to be built. The grants are due at the end of the
summer 2015.
The commission discussed the idea and thought it an interesting idea, but would like to get
feedback from residents. The commission suggested including something about the archery range
in the February issue of the Heights Highlights asking for public feedback at a future meeting.
Par 3 Report
Mr. Wallgren informed the commission the cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul worked
together to offer a golf event on Saturday, September 27, 2014. There were 40 players that played a
round of golf at each course then had lunch and prizes at the Par 3.
MHParksandRecreationCommission10-14-2014Page
page 13
The popularity of Footgolf has been growing. In the month of September the course collected over
$300 in revenue from Footgolf. An article was feature in the Pioneer Press on October 11, 2014
and the phone has been ring off the hook with interest in the new sport.
Mr. Wallgren announced that fall maintenance was done to the greens and that the irrigations
system would be serviced for the season before the end of the month.
Total sales for the month of September were $15,450 are expenses were $14,380. Total sales for the
year through September are $130,834 and expenses are $107,817 resulting in a net revenue of
$23,017. The golf course in on track to have a yearend net revenue of around $5,000 to $8,000.
Dog Park
Chair Hinderscheid wanted to if there has been any progress on building a dog park.
Mr. Wallgren replied that as of now the city council has not given staff any direction regarding the
dog park.
The commission briefly discussed the issue. There was a sense that some of the commission would
like to see a site selected for a dog park. The commission talked about the feedback that was given
from residents at the May meeting. Many of the residents at the meeting wanted to see a dog park
large than one or two acres.
Mr. Wallgren suggested that if members of the commission wanted the city council to readdress the
issue they should do so outside of the parks and recreation commission meeting.
Parks Projects
Chair Hinderscheid distributed a log of current and future park projects. The commission discussed
the projects. Many of the trail projects on the list would be complete by the end of the season.
Staff noted that the Special Parks Fund currently has around $130,000.
Announcements
Mr. Wallgren announced that the Halloween Bonfire would be held from 7:00pm to 10:00pm on
October 31, 2014. Residents can begin to drop of brush on Saturday October 25, 2014.
Mr. Wallgren also wanted to acknowledge the Mendota Heights Athletic Association for all of their
hard work.
Commission Comments
Commissioner Miller thought it was a good meeting and thanked staff for their work.
Commissioner Levine encouraged everyone to get outdoor and enjoy our beautiful green spaces.
Commissioner Paper thanked staff and enjoyed seeing the survey results.
Commissioner Kipp thought it was a good meeting.
Commissioner Evans thought it was a good meeting and said that he had missed the last two
meeting because he and his wife had this first child.
MHParksandRecreationCommission10-14-2014Page
page 14
Chair Hinderscheid thought it was a good meeting and was glad to hear our tennis program is one
of the biggest in the metro. Chair Hinderscheid would also like to see some movement forward in
the dog park issue.
COMMISSIONER PAPER MADE A MOTION TO ADJOUN THE MEETING; COMMISSIONER
EVANS SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ayes 6: Nays 0
The meeting adjournedat8:20 p.m. Respectfully Submitted by Sloan Wallgren
MHParksandRecreationCommission10-14-2014Page
page 15
5c.
1CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
2DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
3
4PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES
5October 28, 2014
6
7The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October
828, 2014, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
9
10The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., CommissionersHoward
11Roston,Michael Noonan, Mary Magnuson, and Ansis Viksnins.Those absent:Doug Hennes.
12Others present were City Planner Nolan Wall and Public Works Director/City Engineer John
13Mazzitello.
14
Approval of September 23, 2014Minutes
15
16
17COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSONTO
18APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 2014, AS PRESENTED.
19
20AYES: 5
21NAYS: 0
22ABSENT: 1
23
Approval of Agenda
24
25
26Chair Litton Field requested that the agenda be amended as the applicant for Planning Case 2014-
2731 have requested that it be laid over.
28
29There being no one in attendance who wished to speak regarding this matter, COMMISSIONER
30ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN TO LAY OVER
31PLANNING CASE 2014-31 TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
32SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 25, 2014
33
34AYES: 5
35NAYS: 0
36ABSENT: 1
37
Hearings
38
39
40PLANNING CASE #2014-30
41GreenWood Design Build, LLC, 750 Hilltop Road
42Front Yard Setback Variance
43
44Planner Nolan Wallexplained that the applicant was seeking a Variance from the front yard
45setback requirements to construct a new single family residential dwelling. This parcel is 0.48
46acres or approximately 20,862 square feet and is the existing lot of record that was subdivided
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFTPage 1
page 16
47from 1925 Dodd Road in 2010 as part of Planning Case 2010-25. The lot is zoned R-1 and guided
48for low density residential development on the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant purchased the
49subject parcel and intends to construct a new 2,267 square foot dwelling.
50
51The ‘string-line’ rule was previously in affect for determining the front yard setback line; however,
52as discussed in the approval of the lot split in 2010 that provision impacted the location of the
53future dwelling on the subject parcel due to the lot sizes and setbacks of those abutting properties.
54This ‘string-line’ rule provision was amended in 2010 and includes a formula that determines the
55minimum front yard setback for lots that are located in between two developed abutting properties.
56
57If the existing code revision is applied in this case, the required front yard setback for the new
58dwelling on the subject parcel would be 57.3 feet. Planner Wall shared images of the setbacks and
59the proposed dwelling. The proposed setback survey was also included as part of this request. The
60applicant is proposing to utilize the 30-foot front yard setback, which is based on the applicants
61preferred location for the new dwelling, which is the minimum standard for a typical lot in the
62R-1 Residential district.
63
64Planner Wall shared the thresholds that would apply in this variance request.
65
66Staff recommended approval of the front yard setback variance request for construction of a new
67single-family dwelling on the subject parcel.
68
69Commissioners asked questions regarding the old ‘string-line’ rule.
70
th
71Mr. Scott Loehrer, President GreenWood Design Build, LLClocated at 4820 W. 77, Edina came
72forward to address the Commission and to answer questions.
73
74Commissioners asked questions regarding thereasons for moving the dwelling forward as much
75as requested andthe topography of the lot.
76
77Chair Fieldopened the public hearing.
78
79Mr. Steve Lemay, 764 Hilltop Road, stated that in 2010 he and his wife did not care for the plan
80to divide the lot. Herecognizes that it is a buildable lot but sees no reason why they should change
81it now. He shared images from his front window and claimed that the location of the proposed
82building would detract from their yard as, essentially, the new dwelling would be in their front
83yard. He also explained the water drainage issues they have currently and believes the location of
84the new dwelling would cause further issues. When asked, he admitted that no matter where the
85new residence was located, it would negatively impact their front yard.
86
87Mr. Paul Plum, 1933 Dodd Road – and the owner of 1925 Dodd Road – is the one who applied for
88the lot split in 2010. Everyone has been very accurate in their description of the situation so far.
89As the homeowner of the two properties most directly involved, he stated that he was in favor of
90pushing the home more towards the street with the variance so that it would be further away from
91his own backyard.
92
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFTPage 2
page 17
93Ms. Joan Cochrane, 1937 Dodd Road, noted that no matter where the new residence is located she
94will be able to see it. They have a wraparound deck and when she sits out there, they will be able
95to look at her and she will be able to look at them. She would be in favor of whatever makes the
96most sense and works for the neighbors. She requested the contractor keep her deck and the other
97home’s view in mind when design the new dwelling.
98
99Ms. Susan Lucio, 1888 Valley Curve, mentioned that one of the reasons she moved into the
100neighborhood was because of the large front yards; making it a very cozy and warm area. Her
101children played in her large front yard because their back yard is small. She expressed her desire
102to keep the trees in the neighborhood and not have the dwelling so close to the street.
103
104Mr. Richard Kouri, 1888 Valley Curve, claimed that if the Commissioners visited the area during
105the day they would see why this new residence should not be so close to the street. It would ruin
106the appearance of the neighborhood and the rules should stay as they are.
107
108Mr. John White, 1897 Wachtler Avenue,voiced his opposition to so many homes being built in
109the areathatare out of character with the neighborhood. He is now looking at a 2.5-story garage
110out his bay window.
111
112Mr. John Vanbogart, 1920 Wachtler Avenue, stated that his concern is less about the setback,
113although he believes the home should be a little further back from the road, and more about the
114esthetics. Moving this home too close to the street is going to be a problem and will change the
115look and feel of the neighborhood. If they have to move the home forward, do not move it forward
116too far.
117
118Mr. Scott Loehrerreturned to address the concerns expressed by the residents by stating that
119GreenWood is not trying to make mad neighbors. He noted that moving the proposed dwelling
120back further would make it sit higher due to the topography of the lot. He also stated that if the
121variance request is not approved, then his company would build the home in the back corner where
122it would meet all of the code requirements, would have a very small backyard, and would be
123approximately 27feet from the neighboring lot line. However, they would be willing to move the
124home back 45 feet from the lot line instead of the proposed 30 feet \[the current required setback is
12557.3 feet\].
126
127Chair Fieldasked for a motion to close the public hearing.
128
129COMMISSIONER VIKSNINSMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON,
130TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
131
132AYES: 5
133NAYS: 0
134ABSENT: 1
135
136Commissioners asked questions regarding the status of the 60-day ruleand the possibility of an
137extension.
138
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFTPage 3
page 18
139COMMISSIONER VIKSNINSMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
140TABLE PLANNING CASE 2014-30, FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCETO THE
141NOVEMBER 25, 2014 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGWITH A STRONG
142ENCOURAGEMENT TO THEAPPLICANT TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS FOR
143DISCUSSION.
144
145AYES: 5
146NAYS: 0
147ABSENT: 1
148
149PLANNING CASE #2014-22
150City of Mendota Heights
151Proposed Code Amendments
152
153Planner Nolan Wall explained that this is a continuation of a discussion from the September 23,
1542014 Planning Commission Meeting. The City is considering various amendments to the Zoning
155and Subdivision Ordinances within the City Code. Over the past year, staff has identified a number
156of potential amendments packaged into a single application for consideration. The goal would be
157to clean up, clarify, and simplify certain sections in order to improve the interpretation and
158implementation of those ordinances.
159
160The reason for this case being tabled was in regards to the traffic studyrequirement portion of the
161proposed amendments. Commissioners were provided a tracked changes copy of the proposed
162amendment in their meeting packet.
163
164Commissioners expressed their appreciation for the changes that were made. However, discussions
165continued on whether or not the changes were substantial enough.
166
167Commissioners asked questions regarding if the definition of development or redevelopment is in
168the code.
169
170As this public hearing was left open at the last meeting, Chair Fieldasked if anyone was present
171who wished to speak in regards to this case.
172
173COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS TO
174CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
175
176AYES: 5
177NAYS: 0
178ABSENT: 1
179
180
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFTPage 4
page 19
181COMMISSIONER NOONANMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO
182RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2014-22,DRAFTORDINANCE 467
183
184AYES: 5
185NAYS: 0
186ABSENT: 1
187
188Chair Field noted that this would be considered at the next City Council Meeting scheduled for
189Wednesday, November 5, 2014.
190
Verbal Review
191
192
193Planner Wall gave the following verbal review:
194
195PLANNING CASE #2014-26
196Wayne Cummings, 2054 Acacia Drive
197After-the-fact Wetlands Permit Wetland Permit for Vegetation Removal
198Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
199
200PLANNING CASE #2014-27
201Sarah and Aaron Macke, 744 Woodridge Drive
202Critical Area Permit
203Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
204
205PLANNING CASE #2014-28
206Sarah and Aaron Macke, 744 Woodridge Drive
207Code Amendment Request for Exception to Swimming Pool Fencing Requirements
208Split decision at the October 7, 2014 City Council Meeting; subsequently tabled
209Denied by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission at their October
21021, 2014 City Council Meeting
211
212PLANNING CASE #2014-29
213Visitation School, 2544 Visitation Drive
214Conditional Use Permit for an Electronic Display Sign
215Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
216
217PLANNING CASE #2014-20
218Paul and Shannon Burke, 645 Sibley Memorial Highway
219After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit for Clear Cutting in the Critical Area
220Ultimately approved by the City Council
221
222Planner Wall mentioned that the City Council and staff appreciated the work that the Commission
223did with this difficult issue. With the conditions that were proposed that the Planning Commission
224recommended, the City Council increased the life of the performance bond on the landscaping to
22536 months. They also added an additional change to the recommendation that would allow for
226additional geotechnical studies as needed in the future to be paid for by the applicant, if that is
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFTPage 5
page 20
227determined to be necessary. There was also an additional condition included that the City has the
228right to inspect the property over the span of that time period to monitor the regrowth and require
229a restoration plan be implemented if necessary.
230
231Commissioners asked if the City Council had discussed any civil penalties. Planner Wall replied
232that Councilmembers discussed the citation and staff is to bring back additional information to
233continue that discussion with them internally and with the prosecuting attorney.
234
Staff Announcements
235
236
237Grading has started at the United Properties site on Northland Drive for their 97,000 square
238foot industrial building. They anticipate submitting for a building permit in the near future;
239staff anticipates construction to begin in the spring.
240Grading may start as early as next week on the Lemay Shores project. They intend to
241construct a model home on the site this year, weather permitting.
242Based on the discussion for the After-the-Fact Wetlands Permit in the Augusta Shores
243development, staff reached a compromise in authoring a wetlands permit agreement with
244the entire townhome association to allow buckthorn removal in compliance with a number
245of conditions and best management practices.
246The next Planning Commission meeting is Tuesday, November 25, 2014.
247
Adjournment
248
249
250COMMISSIONER ROSTONMOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
251ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:54 P.M.
252
253AYES: 5
254NAYS: 0
255ABSENT: 1
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFTPage 6
page 21
5d.
DATE:
November 5, 2014
TO:
Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM:
John P. Maczko, Fire Chief
SUBJECT:
Resolution No. 2014-72 Resolution Formally Acknowledging the
Donation of Coffee from Caribou Coffee
BACKGROUND
The city auditor has advised that Minnesota State Statue 465.03 “Gifts to municipalities”
requires that all donations be acknowledged by resolution. This memo meets the Minnesota
State Statutory requirements.
Caribou Coffee came into city hall on Friday, October 3, 2014, to drop off 77 lbs of coffee as a
donation from patrons of Caribou Coffee for the Mendota Heights Fire Department.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
If Council desires to implement the recommendation, they should pass a motion adopting
Resolution No. 2014-72, “Resolution Formally Acknowledging the Receipt of Gifts to the
Mendota Heights Fire Department.”
page 22
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
Resolution No. 2014-72
RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF GIFTS TO THE
MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARMENT
WHEREAS
, the City of Mendota desires to follow Minnesota Statute 465.03 “Gifts to
municipalities”; and
WHEREAS
, the Minnesota State Statute requires a resolution to accept gifts to
municipalities;and
WHEREAS
, the City has previously acknowledged gifts with a resolution; and
WHEREAS
, The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights have duly considered this
matter and wishes to acknowledge the civic mindedness of citizens and businesses and officially
recognize their donations; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights is accepting a donation of 77 lbs of coffee from patrons of Caribou Coffee.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5 day of November, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By____________________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 23
5e.
DATE: November 5, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT:Final Payment and Acceptance of the 35E and Marie Storm Sewer
Job No. 201311
BACKGROUND:
The contract work for the 35E and Marie Storm Sewer project has been completed,
inspected, approved and is ready for final payment (this will start the one-year guarantee
period).
Total contract costs for this project is $157,330.00, not including engineering and
overhead costs. The original contract amount was $154,343.60. The project was
$2,986.40 over the estimated amount.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Final payment of this contract totals $157,330.00. Under the terms of our agreement with
MnDOT, 35% of this cost, or $55,065.50, will be reimbursed to the City by MnDOT. In
addition, Xcel Energy has agreed to reimburse the City in the amount of $15,628.00. The
remaining amount, $86,636.50 will be paid out of the City’s Municipal State Aid (MSA)
account. There are sufficient funds in our MSA account to cover this expense.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the city council pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 2014-74,
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT
“
FOR JOB NUMBER 201311”.
page 24
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-74
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT
FOR JOB NUMBER 201311
WHEREAS,
pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Mendota
Heights on July 30, 2014, with Didion Contracting of Prior Lake, Minnesota, has
satisfactorily completed the improvements for the 35E and Marie Storm Sewer, job
number 201311, in accordance with such contract.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED
by the City Council of the
City of Mendota Heights that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted
and approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby
directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of
$157,330.00, taking the contractor’s receipt in full.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of November,
2014.
ATTEST CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
BY____________________________ BY___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
page 25
5f.
DATE:
November 5, 2014
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Justin Miller, City Administrator
SUBJECT:
Letter of Support for Dakota County Broadband Grant Application
BACKGROUND
The Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, Office of Broadband
Development, has recently announced the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant
Program, an initiative to help mitigate the cost of certain broadband expansion efforts. Dakota
County is currently applying for funding through this program, to be matched 50% by County
funds, to continue to develop infrastructure and increase broadband connectivity across the
County.
Dakota County plans to use these funds to continue todevelop broadband infrastructure in the
southern part of the County, in rural areas currently underserved or unserved by broadband.
Although these efforts will be concentrated in a particular geographic area, greater broadband
connectivity benefits the entire county. It will afford greater redundant connections across the data
network connecting local governments across the entire county, enhancing the reliability and
capacity of connections and building a stronger platform for future collaborative efforts.
Dakota County is requesting that the City of Mendota Heights submit the attached letter of support
in association with their grant application.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
If council desires, a motion to approve the attached letter of support would be in order. Approval
of this action requires a majority vote of the city council.
page 26
November 7, 2014
Danna MacKenzie
Executive Director, Office of Broadband Development
Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development
st
1National Bank Building
332 Minnesota Street, Suite E200
St. Paul, MN 55101
Dear Ms. MacKenzie,
The City of Mendota Heights is aware of Dakota County’s efforts to pursue a grant from the
Border-to-Border Broadband Grant Development Program to continue to expand broadband
infrastructure within Dakota County. We support the continued development of acountywide
broadband network to increase connectivity and to enhance the economic competitiveness of our
region.
Mendota Heights, as well as the rest of Dakota County, is continually seeking ways to make our
broadband network more robust and redundant. This grant will help reach that goal and will
have a positive impact for our residents and business community.
The City of Mendota Heights looks forward to Dakota County continuing to develop a
countywide broadband infrastructure.
Sincerely,
Sandra Krebsbach
Mayor
page 27
5g.
DATE:
November 5, 2014
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Justin Miller, City Administrator
SUBJECT:
West St. Paul Ice Arena Grant Application Resolution of Support
BACKGROUND
At the September 16, 2014 city council meeting, the city approved a letter of support pledging up
to $555,333 to assist in the renovation of the West St. Paul Ice Arena. This project is planned to
be a joint effort between the cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul along with ISD 197 and
a potential grant from the State of Minnesota.
West St. Paul took the lead by applying for the Mighty Duck Ice Arena Grant Program and
submitted our letter of support with their application. The Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission
has communicated to West St. Paul that a formal resolution is needed to complete the grant
application. Attached to this report is a resolution expressing the same support and provisions that
th
the city council adopted on September 16.
BUDGET IMPACT
The city council approved up to $555,333 towards this project, payable in two installments (2015
and 2019).
RECOMMENDATION
If council desires, a motion to approve the attached resolution would be in order. Approval of this
action requires a majority vote of the city council.
page 28
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-75
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CITY OF WEST ST. PAUL’S APPLICATION TO
THE MIGHTY DUCKS ICE ARENA GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS
, the City of Mendota Heights recognizes the importance of the John V.
Hoene Ice Arena, located in West St. Paul, to the northern Dakota County area; and
WHEREAS
, the ice arena is in need of repairs and upgrades, without which may require
the closing of the arena; and
WHEREAS,
the Mendota Heights City Council on September 16, 2014 approved a letter
pledging up to $555,333 towards the renovation of the ice arena in conjunction with the City of
West St. Paul and ISD 197; and
WHEREAS,
the above mentioned approval included several conditions of the city’s
support, including the receipt of $200,000 in grant funding from the Mighty Ducks Ice Arena
Grant Program,
NOW THEREFOREBE IT RESOLVED
that the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights, Minnesota affirms their support West St. Paul’s application to the Mighty Ducks Ice
Arena Grant Program as originally approved by adopting the attached letter of support on
September 16, 2014.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5 day of November, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENODTA HEIGHTS
________________________________
ATTEST Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
_________________________
orri Smith, City Clerk
L
page 29
page 30
page 31
5h.
DATE:
November 5, 2014
TO:
Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM:
Dave Dreelan, Assistant Fire Chief
SUBJECT:
Purchase of Roof Top HVAC Unit for the Fire Hall
BACKGROUND
Yale Mechanical did their yearly seasonal check-up of the roof top HVAC unit at the fire hall. The unit is
30 years old and was installed in 1984. Yale Mechanical red tagged the current unit and took it out of
service because of a cracked gas manifold which, when running, would put fumes into the fire hall. The
unit needs to be replaced immediately.
Terry Sullivan, Facility Manager, obtained three quotes for replacing the HVAC unit. The quotes are as
follows:
Cool Air Mechanical, Ham Lake, MN $9,123.00
Yale Mechanical, Minneapolis, MN $9,746.00
Veto Mechanical, Eagan, MN $9,785.00
Staff anticipated the need to replace this unit and included i in the proposed 2015 budget as a
capital expenditure.
BUDGET IMPACT
There is $16,000 available in the proposed 2015 budget for the replacement of the fire hall
rooftop unit. By approving this now, the City would be pre-spending the 2015 proposed budget
amount and there would be a savings of $6,877.00. Fire Department expenses are general fund
expenditures.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council issue a purchase order to Cool Air Mechanical of Ham Lake,
Minnesota for the amount of $9,123.00 topurchase and install anHVAC unit at the fire hall.
This action requires a simple majority vote.
page 32
5i.
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
5j.
Airic's Heating, LLC
Ryan Company, Inc
Airic's Heating, LLC
Flare Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc
Plumb Right Corp
Thursday, October 30, 2014Page 1 of 1
page 46
7a.
DATE:
November 5, 2014
TO:
Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM:
Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT:
Ordinance 467 Adopting Proposed Code Amendments
BACKGROUND
Staff has identified a number of potential code amendments, contained in one ordinance, for discussion and
action by the City Council. The goal is to clean-up, clarify, and simplify certain sections to improve the
interpretation and implementation of the subdivision and zoning ordinances.
The attached memos describe the proposed amendments and rationale, which includerevisions to the
following:
1.Fence Encroachments
2.Traffic Studies
3.Variances
4.Beekeeping
5.Park Dedication Procedure
The Planning Commission discussed the proposed amendments at the September and October meetings;
there were no public comments at either public hearing.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommended approval of Ordinance 467 as describedin Planning Case 2014-
22.If the City Council desires to implement therecommendation, pass a motion adoptingORDINANCE
.
NO. 467 AMENDING SECTIONS 12-1D, 12-1E, 12-1L, AND 11-5 OF THE CITY CODE
Thismatterrequires a simple majority vote.
page 47
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 467
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 12-1D, 12-1E, 12-1L, AND 11-5 OF THE CITY CODE
OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, DAKOTA COUNTY, CONCERNING
VARIOUS AMENDMENTS
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain:
Section 1.
Section 12-1D-6(D)is hereby amended to read as follows:
Permitted Encroachments Onto Public Ways: Notwithstanding the other requirements of subsection A or
B of this section to the contrary, fences greater than thirty six inches (36") in height but no greater than
six feet (6') in height and no less than thirty percent (30%) open may be allowed to encroach into rear
yards of corner and through lots or side yards of corner lots throughby administrative approval by the
Engineering Department conditional use permitwhen said yard abuts a public street; provided, however,
that in no event shall such fence be allowed to be constructed on a public easement for street, utility, or
drainage purposes.
Section 2.
Section 12-1D-17 is hereby added to read as follows:
12-1D-17: TRAFFIC STUDIES:
A.An applicant for any proposed development or redevelopment project that results in the
change or intensification of the existing or planned land use may be required to conduct or
submit a recently-completed traffic study, at the cost of the applicant and prepared by a
licensed engineer, analyzing existing and proposed traffic patterns of the surrounding area for
review and comment as part of any permitapplication.
B.The study shall be prepared in compliance with the most current version of the Dakota
County Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines.
C.When potentially impacted roadways included in the traffic study are under County, State, or
adjacent City jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to request additional review and
comment from those jurisdictions for consideration in evaluating the permit application.
Section 3.
Section 12-1L-5(A) is hereby amended as follows:
A.Authority To Grant Variances; Conditions: The council may grant variances from the strict
application of the provisions of this chapter and impose conditions and safeguards in the
variances so granted in cases where there are practical difficulties or undue hardships in the way
of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter. "Undue hardship” “Practical
difficulties”, as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner
proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter; the plight of
the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and
Ord #467 – 11/05/14 City Council Review page 1 of 2
page 48
the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic
considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. in question cannot be put to a
reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by this chapter and the hardship is due to
circumstances unique to the property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted,
will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations shall not
constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under this chapter.
Section 4.
Section 12-1E-3(C) is hereby amended as follows:
Keeping of bees on parcels of fifty (50) acres or more in area, provided any accessory structures conform
to the city's requirement for accessory buildings, no more than ten (10) hives may be maintained, and all
buildings, hives, apiaries, or other areas for colonies of bees are located no closer than one hundred feet
(100') from any property line.
Section 5.
Section 12-1E-3(D) is hereby amended as follows:
Keeping of bees on parcels of fifty (50) acres or more in area, provided any accessory structures conform
to the city's requirement for accessory buildings, no more than ten (10) hives may be maintained, and all
buildings, hives, apiaries, or other areas for colonies of bees are located no closer than one hundred feet
(100') from any property line.
Section 6.
Section 11-5-1 is hereby amended as follows:
Pursuant to Minnesota statutes section 462.358, subdivision 2b, as amended, the city council shall require
all developers requesting platting or replatting of land in the city to contribute ten percent (10%) of final
plat gross area to be dedicated to the public for their use as either parks, playgrounds, public open space,
trail systems, or water ponding, or to contribute cash in lieu of land in an amount established by
resolution of the city council, based upon the conditions outlined below. The form of contribution (cash
or land, or any combination thereof) shall be decided by the city council based upon need and
conformance with approved city plans. Payment of cash in lieu of land will be collected prior to any
subdivision or final plat being recorded by Dakota County.
Section 7.
This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication.
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this fifth day of November, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Ord #467 – 11/05/14 City Council Reviewpage 2 of 2
page 49
DATE:
September 23, 2014
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT:
Planning Case 2014-22
Proposed Code Amendments
APPLICANT:
City of Mendota Heights
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
N/A
ZONING/GUIDED:
N/A
ACTION DEADLINE:
N/A
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The City is considering amendments to various sections of the City Code.
BACKGROUND
Staff has identified a number of potential code amendments, packaged in a single application, for discussion
and recommendation by the Planning Commission. The goal is to clean-up, clarify, and simplify certain
sections to improve the interpretation and implementation of the subdivision and zoning ordinances.
ANALYSIS
1.Fence Encroachment \[12-1D-6(D)\]
Current Standard
Permitted Encroachments Onto Public Ways: Notwithstanding the other requirements of subsection A or B
of this section to the contrary, fences greater than thirty six inches (36") in height but no greater than six
feet (6') in height and no less than thirty percent (30%) open may be allowed to encroach into rear yards of
corner and through lots or side yards of corner lots by conditional use permit when said yard abuts a public
street;provided, however, that in no event shall such fence be allowed to be constructed on a public
easement for street, utility, or drainage purposes. (Ord. 429, 8-3-2010)
Proposed Amendment
Permitted Encroachments Onto Public Ways: Notwithstanding the otherrequirements of subsection A or B
of this section to the contrary, fences greater than thirty six inches (36") in height but no greater than six
feet (6') in height and no less than thirty percent (30%) open may be allowed to encroach into rear yards of
corner and through lots or side yards of corner lots throughbyadministrative approvalby the Engineering
Departmentconditional use permitwhen said yard abuts a public street; provided, however, that in no event
shall such fence be allowed to be constructed on a public easement for street, utility, or drainage purposes.
page 50
Rationale
The intent is to provide additional standards for fences within side and rear yards that encroach into the
required setbacks to ensure safe sightlines are maintained at intersections. A conditional use permit
application requires a public hearing and significant Staff time to process. In addition, the minimum
5-week application approval process and $350 fee can be burdensome to applicants.It is Staff’s opinion
that applicable fence permit applications can be reviewed and administratively-approved by the planning
and engineering departments and still accomplishthe intent of the ordinance, while making the approval
process more efficient and equitable.
2.Traffic Study Requirement
Current Standard
N/A
Proposed Amendment \[12-1D-17\]
Traffic Studies
A.Any proposed development or redevelopment in the Citymay be required to conduct or submit
a recently-completedtraffic study, at the cost of the applicantand prepared by a licensed
engineer,for review and commentaspart of any permit application.
B.The study shall be prepared in compliance with the most current version of the Dakota County
Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines.
C.When potentially impacted roadways included in the traffic study are under County, State, or
adjacent City jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to request additional review and comment
from those jurisdictions for consideration in evaluating the permit application.
Rationale
Potential development or redevelopment projects may not require a conditional use permit or other planning
application requiring a public hearing. In addition, the Code currently does not require a traffic study to be
included as part of any planning application. The Code does allow the City to consider “existing and
anticipated traffic conditions” and that the proposed use will not “cause serious traffic congestion nor
hazards” in granting a conditional use permit.The proposed amendment would give the City the authority
to require a traffic study, if necessary, as part of any permit review process, even if a public hearing is not
required.
3.Variances \[12-1L-5\]
Current Standard
A.Authority ToGrant Variances; Conditions: The council may grant variances from the strict
application of the provisions of this chapter and impose conditions and safeguards in the variances
so granted in cases where there are practical difficulties or undue hardships in the way of carrying
out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter. "Undue hardship", as used in connection with
the granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used
under conditions allowed by this chapter and the hardship is due to circumstances unique to the
property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations shall not constitute an undue hardship if
reasonable use for the property exists under this chapter.
page 51
Proposed Amendment
A.Authority ToGrant Variances; Conditions: The council may grant variances from the strict
application of the provisions of this chapter and impose conditions and safeguards in the variances
so granted in cases where there are practical difficulties or undue hardships in the way of carrying
out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter. "Undue hardship"”Practical difficulties”, as
used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the propertyowner proposes to use
the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter; the plight of thelandowner is
due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if
granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone
do not constitute practical difficulties.in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by this chapter and the hardship is due to circumstances unique to the property,
not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of
the neighborhood. Economic considerations shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable
use for the property exists under this chapter.
Rationale
A 2010 decision from the Minnesota Supreme Court,Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, 783 N.W.2d.
721 (Minn. June 24, 2010) resulted in the state legislatureamending the law in 2011 renaming the municipal
variance standard from “undue hardship” to “practical difficulties,” but otherwise retained the three-factor
test. The current City Code should be amended to be consistent with variance language in Minn. Stat.
§462.357, subd. 6.
4.Beekeeping \[12-1E-4(C)\]
Current Standard
Keeping of bees on parcels of fifty (50) acres or more in area, provided any accessory structures conform
to the city's requirement for accessory buildings, no more than ten (10) hives may be maintained, and all
buildings, hives, apiaries, or other areas for colonies of bees are located no closer than one hundred feet
(100') from any property line. (Ord. 429, 8-3-2010; amd. Ord. 448, 4-2-2013)
Proposed Amendment
Same language –relocated to 12-1E-3(C)
Rationale
The City Council approved Ordinance No. 448 allowing beekeeping on residential properties, with
conditions, in March 2013. The applicant for Planning Case 2013-03 was Somerset Country Club, which
is zoned R-1. The Code only allows beekeeping in the R-1A District as an accessory use, but not in the
R-1 Districtas intended. Upon reviewing the staff report and subsequent ordinance, it appears an error was
made concerning the appropriate Code reference for the amendment. Title 12-1E-3(C) should have been
amended, not 12-1E-4(C). The proposed amendment would correct the error and allow for beekeeping in
the R-1 District. In addition, accessory uses in the R-1 District are also allowed in the R-1A, R-1B, R-1C,
R-2, and R-3 Districts.
5.Park Dedication Procedure\[11-5-1\]
Current Standard
Pursuant to Minnesota statutes section 462.358, subdivision 2b, as amended, the city council shall require
all developers requesting platting or replatting of land in the city to contribute ten percent (10%) of final
plat gross area to be dedicated to the public for their use as either parks, playgrounds, public open space,
trail systems, or water ponding, or to contribute cash in lieu of land in an amount established by resolution
page 52
of the city council, based upon the conditions outlined below. Theform of contribution (cash or land, or
any combination thereof) shall be decided by the city council based upon need and conformance with
approved city plans. (1981 Code 301 § 6; amd. 2003 Code)
Proposed Amendment
Pursuant to Minnesota statutes section 462.358, subdivision 2b, as amended, the city council shall require
all developers requesting platting or replatting of land in the city to contribute ten percent (10%) of final
plat gross area to be dedicated to the public for their use as either parks, playgrounds, public open space,
trail systems, or water ponding, or to contribute cash in lieu of land in an amount established by resolution
of the city council, based upon the conditions outlined below. The form of contribution (cash or land, or
any combination thereof) shall be decided by the city council based upon need and conformance with
approved city plans. Payment of cash in lieu of land will be collected prior to any subdivision or final plat
being recorded by Dakota County. (1981 Code 301 § 6; amd. 2003 Code)
Rationale
The City’s current policy on collecting park dedication fees is unclear. The park dedication fees are
currently included in the building permit section of the Fee Schedulewhich causes confusion when they
should be collected. There are instances where a subdivision may be approved, but not built immediately.
In the case of a final plat, the City isrequired to sign the official Mylarcopy that gets filed at City Hall and
the County. In the case of a minor subdivision (lot split), the applicant is required to record the survey map
and the signed resolution with the County. The proposed amendment would clarify the procedure and
ensure the City collects the applicable fee prior to any documents being filed with Dakota County.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission discuss the proposed Code amendments. If acceptable to the
Commission, action can be taken at this month’s meeting. Staff would proposeto bring back any suggested
revisions for review at a future meeting prior to making a recommendation to the City Council.
ACTION REQUESTED
Following the public hearing and further discussion, the Planning Commission may consider the following
actions:
1.Recommend approval of DRAFT Ordinance 467, as presented or as amended by the Commission.
OR
2.Recommend denial of DRAFT Ordinance 467.
OR
3.Table the request, pending additional information and revisions from Staff.
MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW
1.DRAFT Ordinance 467
page 53
DATE:
October 28, 2014
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Nolan Wall, AICP
Planner
SUBJECT:
Planning Case 2014-22
Proposed Code Amendments
APPLICANT:
City of Mendota Heights
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
N/A
ZONING/GUIDED:
N/A
ACTION DEADLINE:
N/A
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The City is considering amendments to various sections of the City Code.
BACKGROUND
Staff has identified a number of potential code amendments, packaged in a single application, for discussion
and recommendation by the Planning Commission. The goal is to clean-up, clarify, and simplify certain
sections to improve the interpretation and implementation of the subdivision and zoning ordinances.
Based on the discussion at the September meeting, the traffic study requirement has been revised forreview
by the Planning Commission. No other changes are being proposed to DRAFT Ordinance 467.
ANALYSIS
Traffic Study Requirement
Current Standard
N/A
Proposed Amendment \[12-1D-17\]
Traffic Studies
A.An applicant for any proposed development or redevelopmentproject that results in the change
or intensification of the existing or planned land usemay be required to conduct or submit a
recently-completed traffic study, at the cost of the applicant and prepared by a licensed
engineer, analyzing existing and proposed traffic patterns of the surrounding area for review
and comment as part of any permit application.
page 54
B.The study shall be prepared in compliance with the most current version of the Dakota County
Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines.
C.When potentially impacted roadways included in the traffic study are under County, State, or
adjacent City jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to request additional review and comment
from those jurisdictions for consideration in evaluating the permit application.
Rationale
Potential development or redevelopment projects may not require a conditional use permit or other planning
application requiring a public hearing. In addition, the Code currently does not require a traffic study to be
included as part of any planning application. The Code does allow the City to consider “existing and
anticipated traffic conditions” and that the proposed use will not “cause serious traffic congestion nor
hazards” in granting a conditional use permit.The proposed amendment would give the City the authority
to require a traffic study, if necessary, as part of any permit review process, even if a public hearing is not
required.
As recommended, the proposed amendment language was revised to include a description of projects that
may require a traffic study.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission discuss the proposed Code amendments. If acceptable to the
Commission, action can be taken at this month’s meeting. Staff would proposeto bring back any suggested
revisions for review at a future meeting prior to making a recommendation to the City Council.
ACTION REQUESTED
Following the public hearing and further discussion, the Planning Commission may consider the following
actions:
1.Recommend approval of DRAFT Ordinance 467, as presented or as amended by the Commission.
OR
2.Recommend denial of DRAFT Ordinance 467.
OR
3.Table the request, pending additional information and revisions from Staff.
MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW
1.DRAFT Ordinance 467
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
7b.
DATE: November 5, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: An Ordinance Establishing No Parking Areas on Warrior Drive in
Conjunction with the River to River Greenway Trail
BACKGROUND:
Throughout 2014, the City of Mendota Heights has heard about the realignment of the
River to River Greenway trail (RTRG), formerly known as the North Urban Regional
Trail (NURT). The realignment project, being completed by Dakota County, is nearly
complete. The portion of the project along Warrior Drive is considered substantially
complete; with just landscaping and punch list items remaining.
As part of the County project, Dakota County is requiring that the 250 feet of the east
side of Warrior Drive, immediately south of the Henry Sibley High School drive
entrance, be designated as a ‘no parking’ area. This is to facilitate pedestrian safety and
to increase sight distance for vehicles leaving the high school onto Warrior Drive. In
addition, Mendota Heights City Code requires that ‘no parking’ areas be established for
25 feet on either side of crosswalks. There are two pedestrian access points along
Warrior Drive where pedestrians can access the RTRG trail. These areas are on the east
side of Warrior Drive just north of High Ridge Circle and Sibley Court respectively.
The attached Ordinance 462 will put these ‘no parking’ areas into City Code and allow
for the enforcement of the parking restriction.
In addition to the RTRG trail ‘no parking’ areas, staff noticed two anomalies in the
parking code that are proposed for correction.
1.Currently, City Code Paragraph 6-3-3-C prohibits parking on the west side of
Warrior Drive for its entire length, while City Code Paragraph 6-6-3-D prohibits
parking from 7:00am to 2:00pm Monday through Friday for the north 600 feet of
the west side of Warrior Drive. These two items are in conflict. Staff is
proposing the addition of “Except as listed in Paragraph D” be added to the
Paragraph C line item to de-conflict these two codes.
2.Currently the east side of Warrior Drive, north of the Henry Sibley High School
drive entrance is signed as a ‘no parking’ area, and has been for quite some time.
This area is not listed in City Code as a ‘no parking’ area. Staff is proposing
adding the east side of Warrior Drive, “North of the Henry Sibley High School
driveway,” to Paragraph C so code can match the signage.
page 59
BUDGET IMPACT:
A new ‘No Parking’ sign with post will cost approximately $150.00. By adopting the
attached Ordinance, seven new ‘No Parking’ signs would be necessary for a total cost of
$1,050.00. There are sufficient funds in the Street Division budget to accommodate this
expense.
RECOMMENDATION:
AN ORDINANCE TOESTABLISH
Staff recommendsadoptingORDINANCE 462,“
PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON WARRIOR DRIVE IN THE CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS,MINNESOTA”.
This action would require a simple majority
vote.
page 60
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 462
AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON
WARRIOR DRIVE INTHE CITY OFMENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA
Be it ordained and enacted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, State of Minnesota, that
these amendments following, by this act, are newly enacted section(s) which, upon their enactment,
become lawful upon publication of the Ordinance.
Section 6-3-3: PARKING PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONSis hereby amended to read
as follows:
C. Parking Prohibited On Certain Streets: No Person shall park or leave standing any motor
vehicle on the following streets or portions thereof in the City:
StreetSideLocation
Centre Point BoulevardBeginning at the south side of the southernmost
driveway and extending on the west side of the street
southerly around the curve, at its intersection with
Centre Pointe Drive for a distance of 200 feet and
extending on the east side of the street to the west side
of the first driveway on Centre Pointe Drive, and
prohibiting parking from within 30 feet of either side of
the driveways for the Centre Pointe V building, the
west driveway of the Centre Pointe IV building, the
west driveway of the Centre Pointe II building and the
south driveway of the Centre Pointe I building
West30 feet north of Centre Pointe Circle
Crown Point Frontage RoadEitherFrom Highway 110 to Crown Point Drive
Delaware Avenue (County WestFrom Interstate 494 to Emerson Avenue
Road 63)
Dodd Road (TH 149)EastBeginning at the north property line of the Old Fire
Hall Site, 2144 Dodd Road, to the north property line
of 2150 Dodd Road
Lake Drive West30 feet north and south of northernmost entrance radii
to St. Thomas Academy marked with “No Parking”
signs and yellow paint
Lemay Lake RoadWestFrom Mendota Heights Road to Highway 13
Marie AvenueNorthBetween Dodd Road and Delaware Avenue
South50 feet wide, centered on the pedestrian crosswalk
located across from Ridgewood Drive
Mary Adele AvenueNorthBetween Timmy Street and Patricia Street
Mendakota DriveNorthBetween Dodd Road (TH 149) and Mendakota Court
Ord. 459 page 1 of 3
page 61
Mendota Heights RoadNorth50 feet on either side of the driveway for 1455 Mendota
Heights Road
NorthBeginning at the east line of 1031 Mendota Heights
Road’s driveway and extending to the east 150 feet
EitherBetween and to within 100 feet east or west of the 2
driveway entrances to the Friendly Hills Middle School
EitherBetween TH 55 and Medallion Drive
EitherFrom Pilot Knob Road to Northland Drive
Mendota RoadSouthFrom Warrior Drive to Delaware Avenue
Northland DriveEastExtending south from that part of Mendota Heights
Road lying east of TH 55 for 850 feet south
WestFrom Mendota Heights Road lying east of TH 55 for
480 feet south
Pueblo LaneWestBetween Decorah Lane and Mohican Lane
South Plaza DriveNorth Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 100 feet east
SouthBeginning at Dodd Road and extending 200 feet west
State Highway 13
Victoria CurveNorthBetween Lexington Avenue (CR 43) and Hunter Lane
Wagon Wheel TrailNorthFrom Cygnet Lane to Wagon Wheel Court
NorthFrom 35E Bridge to Lexington Avenue
SouthFrom Dodd Road (TH 149) toLexington Avenue
Warrior DriveWestExcept as listed in Paragraph D.
EastNorth of the Henry Sibley High School driveway
EastFrom the south side of the Henry Sibley High School
driveway south 250feet
East50 feet wide, centered on the pedestrian ramplocated
across from and just north of High Ridge Circle
East50 feet wide, centered on the pedestrian ramplocated
across from and just north of Sibley Court
D. Parking Prohibited During Certain Hours: No person shall park or leave standing any motor
vehicle on the following streets in the city, during the following hours on the following days:
7:00 A.M. TO 2:00 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY
StreetSideLocation
High Ridge Circle and Sibley Within 30 feet of their intersections
Court
Warrior DriveWestNorth 600 feet
8:00 A.M. TO 3:00 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY
StreetSideLocation
High Ridge CircleSouthFrom Warrior Drive to the west edge of 588
High Ridge Circle
Ord. 459 page 2 of 3
page 62
Passed by the Council this fifth day of November, 2014.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Ord. 459 page 3 of 3
page 63
ExistingNo
ParkingAnyTime
ExistingNoParking
7:00am-2:00pm
Monday-Friday
ProposedNoParking
AnyTimeDueTo
RTRGAccess
page 64
7c.
DATE: November 5, 2014
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM:Justin Miller, City Administrator
John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Plan
BACKGROUND:
Each year the City forecasts capital expenditures in a five-year Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP). CIP projects aredivided into seven categories and projects are tentatively
programmed into future funding years. Infrastructure projects are categorized into
streets, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and parks/trails; additional identified projects
include City Hall/facilities and equipmentpurchases. The attached Draft 2015-2019 CIP
shows proposed projects listed by these categories.
The second part of the CIP identifies funding sources, by budget year, for the same
projects. These funding sources include the general fund levy, bond sales, Municipal
State Aid (MSA) funds, assessments, sanitary sewer utility fund, storm sewer utility fund,
water fund, special park fund, City Hall fund, and other monetary sources such as grant
funds or other City funding sources. Included in the attached CIP is a listing of proposed
CIP projects sorted by budget year with proposed funding sources for each project.
In past years, the portion of the CIP outlining street improvement projects has been an
item of discussion for Council. Specifically, the amount of new debt incurred due to
municipal bonds issued for the City portion of the proposed project costs. The current
CIP utilizes a target value of 1% of the general levy for the amount of new debt incurred
year-to-year. Table 1 below summarizes the street improvement projects in the current
CIP based on this target.
Table 1- Proposed CIP Street Program
ProjectType20152016201720182019
Victoria (ph 2)Recon$1,212,675
Kensington
NeighborhoodRehab$750,000
Warrior DriveRehab$350,000
Marie (ph 2)Rehab$911,000
Center Point/
CommerceRehab$1,232,000
MHR (ph 2)Rehab$620,000
Mendota RdRecon$1,360,000
Wesley
page 65
NeighborhoodRehab$517,000
Sylvandale
NeighborhoodRehab$1,066,000
S Plaza DrRehab$244,000
Total$1,962,675$1,531,000$1,582,000$1,877,00$1,310,000
Est. City
Bond Amt.$996,525$881,000$852,600$779,200$724,200
Est. % of
General Levy1.11%0.98%0.95%0.87%0.80%
Staff has analyzed reducing the amount of estimated City bond debt by setting a reduced
target for percent of new debt due to municipal bond sales at 0.60%. Table 2 below
shows a revised street CIP based on this new target. These are the same projects listed in
Table 1 with three more years added to the plan to accommodate the reduced scope of
work year to year.
Table 2 – Reduced Annual Street Improvement Plan
ProjectType20152016201720182019202020212022
Victoria (ph 2)Recon$1,212,675
Kensington
NeighborhoodRehab$750,000
Warrior DriveRehab$350,000
Marie (ph 2)Rehab$911,000
Center Point/
CommerceRehab$1,232,000
MHR (ph 2)Rehab$620,000
Mendota RdRecon$1,360,000
Wesley
NeighborhoodRehab$517,000
Sylvandale
NeighborhoodRehab$1,066,000
S Plaza DrRehab$244,000
Total$1,212,675$970,000$1,360,000$911,000$750,000$1,232,000$761,000$1,066,000
Est. City
Bond Amt.$621,525$503,000$512,000$560,000$375,000$670,600$398,200$593,000
Est. % of
General Levy0.69%0.56%0.57%0.62%0.42%0.75%$0.44%0.66%
The 0.6% target is harder to hit on a consistent basis due to the scope of some of the
projects in the plan. Staff tried to offset years where the percent increase exceeds 0.6%
by establishing years with a percent increase less than 0.6%. Over the course of the 8
years outlined in Table 2, the average annual percent increase to the general levy is
0.59%.
The streets portion of the CIP is not a finite plan. As existing streets age and wear, new
projects are added to the plan for forecasted for future improvements. The goal is to get
all City streets into a 50-year life cycle program that would provide for work on a portion
of the 71 mile street network in each budget year.
The streets plan is the only difference between the two attached CIP spreadsheets. All
other items remain the same between the two attached proposed CIPs.
page 66
BUDGET IMPACT:
The CIP is a planning and forecasting document and is intended for review on an annual
basis. Other than the 2015 budget year, the CIP does not obligate or commit the City to
any future expenditure. All items listed in the 2015 budget year are part of the proposed
2015 annual budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council review the CIP and provide direction to staff for
inclusion in the 2015 budget approval process scheduled for December.This action
requires a simple majority vote.
67
page
2,170,000.00775,000.0015,000.0015,000.00
Plan
In
Not
$$$$
35,000.00
1,066,000.00244,000.00 1,310,000.00 200,000.00
235,000.00
2019
(CIP)
$$$$$$$
$
Plan
1,360,000.00517,000.00315,000.00208,000.0038,000.00
1,877,000.00315,000.00
208,000.00
Improvements
Category
2018
by
Draft
$$
$$$$$$$
Capital
35,000.00
350,000.001,232,000.00 1,582,000.00
35,000.00
Final
2017
2019
2015
$$
$$$$$
17,000.00
911,000.00620,000.00 1,531,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00 80,000.0070,000.0073,000.00
80,000.00160,000.00
2016
$$$$$$$$$
$$
1,212,675.00286,063.0040,000.0017,000.0035,000.00292,000.0070,000.00294,975.00
750,000.00 1,962,675.00
326,063.00414,000.00
2015
$$
$$$$$$$$$$$
Rehabilitation
Rahabilitation
MnDOT
Park
Park
494
Avenue
Park
Park
Park
Station
I
Hills
Mendakota
Rehabilitation
to
Improvements
Wentworth
Park
Hills
Repair
Park
Marie
Wentworth
Road
Rehabilitation
Neighborhood
Park
RehabilitationPark
Friendly
Reconstruction
2
Lift
Rehabiltation
Marie
Friendly
Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation
110/Dodd
Falls
Heights
Marie
Rahabilitation
Marie
Main
to
Road/Northland
Street
Main
Ivy
2Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation
Trail
ReplacementReplacementReplacement
Rehabilitation
RehabilitiationForce
Rehabilitation
ReplacementReplacementReplacement
ReconstructReconstructReconstruct
Drainage
RehabilitationMendota
Replacement
Water
at
Neighborhood
Drive/Wesley
Neighborhood
Market
Main
Road
Repair
CenterPoint/Commerce
Main
RoadRoad
Neighborhood
Trail
ReconstructReconstructReconstruct
Water
Brompton/Winston
2
Sewer
HeightsHeightsHeightsHeights
Storm
Trail
Court
BankTrailTrail
HouseHouseHouse
Walsh
Trail2
Sewer
RoadRoadRoad
AvenueAvenue
BoardBoardBoard
Drive
Sewer
CourtCourt
Hills
Parks/Trails
Plaza
13
Wentworth
Place
Kensington
RoadRoad
Basketball
Sylvandale
Stream
Knob
MendotaMendotaMendotaMendotaMendotaWarmingWarmingWarmingMendotaMendota
Stratford
Highway
Sanitary
Warrior
Friendly
VictoriaVictoriaVictoria
Streets HockeyHockeyHockey
Wesley
TennisTennis Water
MarieMarie
South
Ridge
Storm
DoddDodd
Pilot
IVC
68
page
2,050,000.00
525,000.00
$$
20,000.00
120,000.0027,000.0035,000.00
167,000.00
(CIP)
$$$
$$$
Plan
60,000.0075,000.0045,000.0060,000.0036,750.0010,000.00
38,000.00 120,000.00
180,000.00
Improvements
Category
by
Draft
$$$$$$$$$
Capital
11,000.0070,000.0015,000.0050,000.00
15,000.00200,000.0060,000.0035,500.0012,000.00
111,000.00
Final
2019
2015
$$$$$$$$$$$
20,000.00
60,000.0040,000.0010,000.0020,000.0010,000.0015,000.0034,000.0020,000.0030,000.00
160,000.00
$$$$$$$
$$$$$
37,000.0030,000.0016,000.0015,000.0029,000.0035,000.0010,000.009,000.0033,000.00
83,000.00
294,975.00
$$$$$$$$$$$
(streets)
(parks)
dept)
(5)
dept)
unit
hall/police
Plow
Plow
(cityhall/police
per
(cityhall/police)
hall)
works)
(engineering)
and
and
hall)
(police)
(engineering)
(police)
hall)
(city
hall)
Box
Box
(city
(city
Works)
(public
hall)
hall)
(city
hall)
Replacement
Dump
Dump
(cityAssessment
Main
Replacement
Upgrade/Expansion
Upgrade
(police)(police)
(cityUpgrade
(fire)(police)
(1)
(city(streets)
(police)(police)
(fire)
(city(fire)
InstallationUpgrade
(Public
Bay
Water
(fire)
System
Software
with
with
Replacement
Vehicle
Main
Replacement
Pumps
(police)
(police)
Upgrade
(fire)HVAC
Vehicle
Generator
(parks)Tahoe
Control
Works)
Truck
VehicleVehicle
(parks)Truck
(fire)
HVAC
Replacements
(police)
CarCar
(IT)
WaterNetwork
Management
Facility
Brompton/Winston
(streets)Safety
Sidewalk/Concrete
Plow
Hall/Facilities
(police)
Electrical/Lighting
Drive
Squad
Carpet/Furniture
&
&
Room
ForceForce
Switch
Tape
1
Pickup
(police)
Machine
Pickup
BoilerSquad
MowerVehicle
Camera
Chief
Room
Investigator'sInvestigator's
Digital
Blower
(Public
Snow
Hills
System
Public
System
Wheel
StorageVehicle
Handler
Lot
Equipment
Emergency
Generator
TelephoneApparatus
HeatUnmarked
Handguns
Hoe
Task
Task
Network
Training
Friendly
Ton
Reserve
ReplaceReplaceReplace
Ton
Parking
CopierChief's
Sewer
Xmark
Direct
LOGIS
Fence
Asset
Radio
HVACWash
Track
Alarm
Roof
SnowFour
DrugDrug
Full
Salt
City
full
SRO
Air
69
page
25,000.00
60,000.001,772,000.00
(CIP)
$$
$
Plan
350,000.0049,500.00
3,244,250.00
626,250.00
Improvements
Category
by
Draft
$$$$
Capital
80,000.00
437,500.002,165,500.00
Final
2019
2015
$$$
7,000.00
10,000.00
116,000.002,082,000.00
$$$
$
29,000.00
3,240,713.00
160,000.00
$$$
(fire)
(fire)
Repair
(fire)
Van
(fire)
(fire)
Ladder
(fire)
(fire)
Marshall
Pump
Radios
10
Radios
Aerial
Sign
Rescue
Fire
Fire
Community
Portable
Mobile
10
GPM
ReplaceReplace
Ladder
700
2111
3,240,713.00
2,082,000.00
70
page
$
$
1,793,713.00750,000.00292,000.0015,000.0017,000.0040,000.0035,000.0070,000.0029,000.0010,000.0035,000.009,000.0033,000.0016,000.0029,000.0037,000.0030,000.00 3,240,713.00 911,000.0070,000.00620,000.0
073,000.0035,000.0080,000.0017,000.0015,000.0020,000.0034,000.0040,000.0020,000.0010,000.0030,000.0010,000.007,000.0010,000.0020,000.0060,000.00 2,082,000.00 350,000.001,232,000.0035,000.00200,000.00
60,000.0012,000.0050,000.0035,500.0080,000.0070,000.00
Totals
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
292,000.0010,000.0035,000.00 337,000.00
Other
$
$$$$
37,000.0030,000.00 67,000.00 20,000.0060,000.0070,000.00
80,000.00
Hall
City
$$$$$$$
17,000.0035,000.0070,000.00 122,000.00 17,000.00 17,000.00 35,000.00
Par
k
Special
$
$$$$$$
294,975.00
294,975.00
Water
$$
$
286,063.0040,000.00 326,063.00 80,000.00 80,000.00
Sewe
r
Storm
(CIP)
$$
$$$
Plan
15,000.00 15,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00
Year
Sewe
r
Improvements
Funding
Sanitary
by
$
$$$
Draft
Capital
Assessments 375,000.00 678,650.00315,000.00
303,650.0091,000.00224,000.00168,000.00561,400.00
Final
2019
$$
$$$$$$
2015
287,500.00 287,500.00 330,000.00 478,000.00
148,000.00
MSA
$$
$$$
621,525.00375,000.00 996,525.00 490,000.0070,000.00248,000.0073,000.00 881,000.00 182,000.00670,600.00
Sales
Bond
$$
$$$$$$$$
29,000.00 116,000.00 15,000.0034,000.0040,000.0020,000.0010,000.0030,000.0010,000.007,000.00 196,000.00 80,000.00
29,000.009,000.0033,000.0016,000.0020,000.0010,000.00200,000.0060,000.0012,000.0050,000.0035,500.00
Lev
y
General
$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(sewer)
sewer)
Rehabilitation
(stm
(streets)
(parks)
MnDOT
(parks)
Avenue
Rehabilitation
Park
Plow
Park
Station
2
Improvements
Park
Hills
Rehabilitation
5
(engineering)
and
Park
Marieof
Wentworth
(engineering)
2
Lift
1
Rehabiltation
Marie
Friendly
Rehabilitation
hall)hall)
Box
(sewer)
110/Dodd(fire)
Falls
Marie
hall)
2
hall)
to(police)
hall)
Road/Northland
Rehabilitiation
Neighborhood
Dump
Street(city(city
Replacement
Ive
Repair
2
(city
ReplacementReplacement
(city
(police)
Rehabilitiation
(city
(fire)
(police)
(streets)
Trail
(police)
software
(fire)Rehabilitation
ReplacementReplacement
DrainageControl
Installation
Replacement
(fire)
at
System
with
Pumps
(fire)
Switch
Market
Replacement
Vehicle
(fire)
Replacement
Ladder
Repair
CenterPoint/Commerce
(police)
(police)
RoadRoad(fire)
HVAC
(parks)Tahoe
Truck
Vehicle
(parks)
(fire)
HVAC
Reconstruct
Replacements
Pump
ManagementVehicle
Trail
Estates
HVACNetwor
Radios
andPlow
(police)and
HeightsHeightsHeights
Storm
Drive
Van
Carpet/Furniture
Aerial
TrailBank
HouseHouse
Room
Tape
1
Pickup
(police)
Machine
SquadBoiler
Mower
CameraVehicle
AvenueAvenueChief
Room
BoardBoard
Investigator'sMarshall
Drive
DigitalFire
BlowerSnow
Court
WheelInvestigator
Handler
13
Portable
Kensington
Road
TelephoneGenerator
Apparatus
Heat
Stream
Handguns
10
WarmingMendotaMendotaMendotaWarming
Highway
GPM
Training
Warrior
Ton
ReplaceReserveReplace
Replace
Victoria
HockeyHockey
Ladder
Chief's
Copier
Tennis
Sewer
DirectXmark
MarieMarie
Asset
Wash
Radio
Dodd
Roof
2016
2015 SnowFour 2017
Full
Fire
700
IVCAir
21
2,998,250.00
2,165,500.00
71
page
$
$
15,000.0011,000.0015,000.00 2,165,500.00 1,360,000.00517,000.00315,000.00120,000.0060,000.0010,000.0036,750.00350,000.0045,000.0049,500.0060,000.0075,000.00 2,998,250.00 1,066,000.00244,000.00200,000
.0035,000.0020,000.00120,000.0027,000.0035,000.0025,000.00 1,772,000.00
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$
200,000.00 200,000.00
$
$$$
60,000.0075,000.00 135,000.00 20,000.00
15,000.0011,000.00 96,000.0020,000.00
$$$$$$
$$
35,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00
$
$$$
38,000.00
38,000.00
$$$
$
208,000.00 208,000.00
(CIP)
$$$
$
Plan
315,000.00 315,000.00 40,000.009,000.00 49,000.00
Year
Improvements
Funding
by
$
$$$$$
Draft
Capital
250,000.00 402,000.00 473,000.00112,800.00
729,400.00 152,000.00 585,800.00
Final
2019
$
$$$$$$
2015
450,000.00 450,000.00
$$$
$
852,600.00 512,000.00267,000.00 779,000.00 593,000.00131,200.00 724,200.00
each
$
$$$$$$
120,000.00350,000.00 671,250.00 80,000.0015,000.0015,000.0020,000.00
15,000.00 452,500.00 60,000.0010,000.0036,750.0045,000.0049,500.0018,000.0035,000.0025,000.00 158,000.00 2,170,000.00775,000.002,050,000.00525,000.00
$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(parks)
Park
Park
494
Hall/Police)
5
unidentified
Plow
of
)
I
Hills
Mendakota
(cityhall/police)
to
hall)
5
Reconstruction
works)
4,
and
Road
Rehabilitation
Friendly
Park
(police)
3,
(city
Box
5
Rehabilitation
(City
of
Heights
hall)
Works)
Marie
(public
year/source
hall)
Replacement
Dump
2
(police)
MainMain
Rehabilitation
Replacement
Upgrade/Expansion
Rehabilitation
Replacement
hall)(city
(fire)
(city
Reconstruct
Sewer
Mendota
Upgrade
(Public
Bay
WaterWater
Rehabiltation
with
Neighborhood
Replacement
MainMain
(city
(fire)
Vehicle
(fire)
Upgrade
Vehicle
Generator(fire)
Neighborhood
Works)
Truck
(funding
(police)
Sanitary
Handler
WaterWater
Facility
Brompton/WinstonBrompton/Winston
(streets)
Sidewalk/Concrete
10
Electrical/Lighting
Radios
Drive
Squad
Court
Trail
Sign
House
Force
Rescue
Pickup
Road
(Public
HillsHills
SystemCourt
System
Year
Vehicle parks/trails
Storage
CommunityHandler
Air
Plaza
Lot
Place
Emergency
Road
Basketball
Sylvandale
Unmarked
Mobile
HoeTask
Warming
Mendota
facilities
FriendlyFriendly
Ton
ReplaceReplace
Parking
Wesley
streets
Tennis
Future
water
Fence
South
HVACRidge
Track
Dodd
Alarm
2019
2018
Drug
Full
Salt
SRO
Air
11
72
page
2,170,000.00775,000.0015,000.0015,000.002,050,000.00
2,945,000.00
Plan
In
Not
$$$$
$$
1,066,000.00
1,066,000.00
2022
$$
517,000.00244,000.00
761,000.00
2021
$$$
1,232,000.00 1,232,000.00
2020
$$
35,000.00
750,000.00200,000.00
750,000.00235,000.00
2019
Category
(CIP)
$$$$$$
$
Plan
by
911,000.00315,000.00
315,000.00
911,000.00
Reduced)
Improvements
2018
Program
$
$$$$$
Capital
35,000.0038,000.00
1,360,000.00208,000.00
1,360,000.00208,000.0035,000.00
(Street
2017
2019
Draft
2015
$
$$$$$$$
Final
17,000.00
350,000.00620,000.0035,000.00 35,000.00 80,000.0070,000.0073,000.00
970,000.0080,000.00160,000.00
2016
$$$$$$$$$
$$
1,212,675.00286,063.0040,000.0017,000.0035,000.00292,000.0070,000.00294,975.00
1,212,675.00
326,063.00414,000.00
2015
$$
$$$$$$$$$$
Rehabilitation
MnDOT
Park
Park
494
Avenue
Park
Park
Park
Station
I
Hills
Mendakota
Rehabilitation
to
Improvements
Wentworth
Park
Hills
Repair
Park
Marie
Wentworth
Road
Rehabilitation
Park
RehabilitationPark
Friendly
Reconstruction
2
Lift
Rehabiltation
Marie
Friendly
Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation
110/Dodd
Falls
Heights
Marie
Rehabilitation
Marie
Main
to
Road/Northland
Street
Main
Rehabilitation
Ivy
2Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation
Trail
ReplacementReplacementReplacement
Rehabilitation
RehabilitiationForce
Rehabilitation
ReplacementReplacementReplacement
ReconstructReconstructReconstruct
Drainage
RehabilitationMendota
Replacement
Water
at
Neighborhood
Neighborhood
Market
MainMain
Road
Repair
CenterPoint/Commerce
Main
RoadRoad
Neighborhood
Trail
ReconstructReconstructReconstruct
WaterWater
Brompton/Winston
2
Sewer
HeightsHeightsHeightsHeights
Storm
Drive
Trail
Court
BankTrailTrail
HouseHouseHouse
Trail2
Sewer
RoadRoadRoad
AvenueAvenue
BoardBoardBoard
Drive
Sewer
CourtCourt
HillsHills
Parks/Trails
Plaza
13
Wentworth
Place
Kensington
RoadRoad
Basketball
Sylvandale
Stream
Knob
MendotaMendotaMendotaMendotaMendotaWarmingWarmingWarmingMendotaMendota
Highway
Sanitary
Warrior
FriendlyFriendly
VictoriaVictoriaVictoria
Streets HockeyHockeyHockey
Wesley
TennisTennis Water
MarieMarie
South
Ridge
Storm
DoddDodd
Pilot
IVC
73
page
525,000.00
$
20,000.00
120,000.0027,000.0035,000.00
167,000.00
Category
(CIP)
$$$
$$$
Plan
by
60,000.0075,000.0045,000.0060,000.0036,750.0010,000.00350,000.00
120,000.00
180,000.00
Reduced)
Improvements
Program
$$$$$$$$$$
Capital
11,000.0070,000.0015,000.0050,000.00
15,000.00200,000.0060,000.0035,500.0012,000.00
38,000.00111,000.00
(Street
2019
Draft
2015
$$$$$$$$$$$
Final
20,000.00
60,000.0040,000.0016,000.0010,000.0020,000.0010,000.0015,000.0034,000.0020,000.0030,000.00
176,000.00
$$$$$$$
$$$$$$
37,000.0030,000.0015,000.0029,000.0035,000.0010,000.009,000.0033,000.00
67,000.00
294,975.00
$$$$$$$$$$
(streets)
(parks)
dept)
(5)
dept)
unit
hall/police
Plow
Plow
(cityhall/police
per
(cityhall/police)
hall)
works)
(engineering)
and
and
hall)
(police)
(engineering)
(police)
hall)
(city
hall)
Box
Box
(city
(city
Works)
(public
hall)
hall)
(city
hall)
Replacement
Dump
Dump
(cityAssessment
Main
Replacement
Upgrade/Expansion
Upgrade
(police)(police)
(cityUpgrade
(fire)(police)
(1)
(city(streets)
(police)(police)
(fire)
(city(fire)
InstallationUpgrade
(Public
Bay
Water
(fire)
System
Software
with
with
Replacement
Vehicle
Replacement(fire)
Pumps
(police)
(police)
Upgrade
(fire)HVAC
Vehicle
Generator
(parks)Tahoe
Control
Works)
Truck
VehicleVehicle
(parks)Truck
(fire)
HVAC
Replacements
(police)
CarCar
(IT)
Network
Management
Facility
Brompton/Winston
(streets)Safety
Sidewalk/Concrete
Plow
Hall/Facilities
(police)10
Electrical/Lighting
Drive
Squad
Carpet/Furniture
&
&
Room
ForceForce
Switch
TapeRescue
1
Pickup
(police)
Machine
Pickup
BoilerSquad
MowerVehicle
Camera
Chief
Room
Investigator'sInvestigator's
Digital
Blower
(Public
Snow
System
Public
System
Wheel
StorageVehicle
Handler
Lot
Equipment
Emergency
Generator
TelephoneApparatus
HeatUnmarked
Handguns
Hoe
Task
Task
Network
Training
Ton
Reserve
ReplaceReplaceReplaceReplace
Ton
Parking
CopierChief's
Sewer
Xmark
Direct
LOGIS
Fence
Asset
Radio
HVACWash
Track
Alarm
Roof
SnowFour
DrugDrug
Full
Salt
City
full
SRO
Air
74
page
25,000.00
60,000.001,212,000.00
Category
(CIP)
$$$
Plan
by
49,500.00
2,032,250.00
626,250.00
Reduced)
Improvements
Program
$$$
Capital
80,000.00
437,500.002,189,500.00
(Street
2019
Draft
2015
$$$
Final
7,000.0010,000.00
116,000.001,537,000.00
$$$$
29,000.00
2,474,713.00
160,000.00
$$$
(fire)
(fire)
Repair
(fire)
Van
(fire)
Ladder
(fire)
(fire)
Marshall
Pump
Radios
Radios
Aerial
Sign
Fire
Fire
Community
Portable
Mobile
10
GPM
Replace
Ladder
700
2111
2,474,713.001,467,000.00
75
page
$$
1,793,713.00292,000.0015,000.0017,000.0040,000.0035,000.0070,000.0029,000.0010,000.0035,000.009,000.0033,000.0029,000.0037,000.0030,000.00 2,474,713.00 350,000.00620,000.0073,000.0035,000.0080,000.00
17,000.0015,000.0020,000.0034,000.0040,000.0016,000.0020,000.0010,000.0030,000.0010,000.007,000.0010,000.0020,000.0060,000.00 1,467,000.00 1,360,000.0035,000.00200,000.0060,000.0012,000.0050,000.0035
,500.0080,000.0070,000.0015,000.0011,000.0015,000.00
Totals
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
292,000.0010,000.0035,000.00 337,000.00
Other
$$$$$
37,000.0030,000.0020,000.0060,000.0070,000.00
67,000.0080,000.00 15,000.0011,000.00
Hall
City
$$$$$$$
$$
17,000.0035,000.0070,000.00 122,000.00 17,000.00 17,000.00 35,000.00
Par
k
Special
$$$$$$$
294,975.00 294,975.00 38,000.00
Water
$$
$$
286,063.0040,000.00 326,063.00 80,000.00 80,000.00 208,000.00
Sewe
r
Year
Storm
(CIP)
Funding
$$
$$$$
Plan
15,000.00 15,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00
by
Sewe
r
Improvements
Reduced)
Sanitary
Program
$$$$
Capital
Assessments392,000.00
303,650.00 303,650.00 168,000.00224,000.00152,000.00
(Street
2019
Draft
$
$$$$$
2015
287,500.00 148,000.00 450,000.00
287,500.00 148,000.00
Final
MSA
$$
$$$
621,525.00 621,525.00 182,000.00248,000.0073,000.00 503,000.00 512,000.00
Sales
Bond
$
$$$$$$
29,000.0029,000.00 100,000.00 15,000.0034,000.0040,000.0016,000.0020,000.0010,000.0030,000.0010,000.007,000.00 212,000.00 200,000.0060,000.00
9,000.0033,000.0020,000.0010,000.0012,000.0050,000.0035,500.0080,000.0015,000.00
Lev
y
General
$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(sewer)
sewer)
Rehabilitation
(stm
(streets)
(parks)
MnDOT
(parks)
Avenue
Park
Plow
Park
Station
2
(cityhall/police)
Improvements
Park
Hills
Rehabilitation
5
works)
(engineering)
and
Park
Park
Marieof
Wentworth
(engineering)
2
Lift
1
Marie
Friendly
hall)Rehabilitation
hall)
Box
(sewer)
110/Dodd(fire)
FallsMarie
hall)
(police)
hall)
to
(public
hall)
Road/Northland
hall)
Dump
Street(city(city
Replacement
Ivy
Repair
(city
ReplacementReplacement
(city
(police)
(city
(fire)
(police)
(streets)
Trail
(police)
software
Rehabilitation(fire)
ReplacementReplacement
(city
DrainageControlReconstruct
InstallationUpgrade
Switch
Bay
Replacement
(fire)
at
System
with
Pumps
(fire)
Market
Replacement
Vehicle
(fire)
Replacement
Ladder
Repair
(police)
(police)
RoadRoad(fire)
HVACUpgrade
Vehicle
(parks)Tahoe
Truck
Vehicle
(parks)
(fire)
HVAC
Reconstruct
Replacements
Network
Pump
ManagementVehicle
HVAC
Radios
Plow
and
(police)and
Electrical/Lighting
HeightsHeightsHeights
Storm
Drive
Van
Carpet/Furniture
Aerial
TrailBank
HouseHouse
Room
Tape
1
Pickup
(police)
Machine
Road
SquadBoiler
Mower
CameraVehicle
Chief
Room
BoardBoard
Investigator'sMarshall
Drive
DigitalFire
BlowerSnow
CourtSystem
System
WheelInvestigator
Handler
13
Portable
Road
Generator
Telephone
Apparatus
Heat
Stream
Handguns
10
WarmingMendotaMendotaMendotaMendotaWarming
Highway
GPM
Training
Warrior
Ton
ReplaceReserveReplace
Replace
Victoria
HockeyHockey
Ladder
Chief's
Copier
Tennis
Sewer
DirectXmark
Asset
Wash
RadioHVAC
Dodd
Alarm
Roof
2015 SnowFour 20162017
Full
Fire
700
Air
IVC
21
4,877,500.00
5,989,250.00
76
page
$
$
1,943,500.00 911,000.0070,000.00315,000.00120,000.0060,000.0010,000.0036,750.00350,000.0045,000.0049,500.0060,000.0075,000.00 2,102,250.00 750,000.00200,000.0035,000.0020,000.00120,000.0027,000.0035,
000.0025,000.00 1,212,000.00 1,232,000.00 1,232,000.00 517,000.00244,000.00 761,000.00 1,066,000.00 1,066,000.00
$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
200,000.00 200,000.00
$
$$$$$$
96,000.00 20,000.00
60,000.0075,000.00 135,000.0020,000.00
$$$$$$$$$
35,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00
$
$$$$$$
38,000.00
$$$$$$
208,000.00
Year
(CIP)
Funding
$$$$$$
Plan
315,000.00 315,000.00 40,000.009,000.00 49,000.00
by
Improvements
Reduced)
Program$$$
$$$$$$
Capital
152,000.00 375,000.00250,000.00112,800.00473,000.00 473,000.00
91,000.00 91,000.00375,000.00 561,400.00 561,400.00362,800.00
(Street
2019
Draft
$$
$$$$$$$$$$
2015
450,000.00 330,000.00 330,000.00
Final
$$$$$$
$
512,000.00 490,000.0070,000.00 560,000.00 375,000.00 375,000.00 670,600.00 670,600.00 267,000.00131,200.00 398,200.00 593,000.00 593,000.00
each
$$$$
$$$$$$$$$
452,500.00 80,000.0015,000.0015,000.0020,000.00
120,000.0060,000.0010,000.0036,750.00350,000.0045,000.0049,500.00 671,250.00 18,000.0035,000.0025,000.00 158,000.00 2,170,000.00775,000.002,050,000.00525,000.00
$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(parks)
Park
Park
494
Hall/Police)
Rehabilitation
5
unidentified
Plow
of
)
I
Hills
Mendakota
to
hall)
5
Reconstruction
4,
and
Road
Rehabilitation
Friendly
Park
(police)
3,
Rehabiltation
(city
Box
5
Rehabilitation
(City
2
of
Heights
hall)
Works)
Marie
Rehabilitiation
year/source
Neighborhood
Replacement
Dump
2
(police)
MainMain
Rehabilitation
Replacement
Upgrade/Expansion
2
Rehabilitation
Replacement
(city
hall)
Rehabilitiation
(fire)
Sewer
Mendota
(Public
WaterWater
Rehabiltation
with
Neighborhood
Replacement
MainMain
(city
(fire)
VehicleCenterPoint/Commerce
(fire)
Generator(fire)
Neighborhood
Works)
Truck
(funding
(police)
Sanitary
Handler
WaterWater
Trail
Facility
Brompton/WinstonBrompton/Winston
(streets)
Estates
Sidewalk/Concrete
10
Radios
Drive
Squad
Court
Trail
Sign
House
Force
Rescue
Pickup
AvenueAvenue
(Public
HillsHills
Court
Year
Vehicle parks/trails
Storage
CommunityHandler
Air
Plaza
Lot
Place
Emergency
Kensington
Road
Basketball
Sylvandale
Unmarked
Mobile
HoeTask
Warming
facilities
FriendlyFriendly
Ton
Replace
Replace
Parking
Wesley
streets
Tennis
Future
water
MarieMarie
Fence
South
Ridge
Track
Dodd
2018
2019202020212022
Drug
Full
Salt
SRO
Air
11