2017-11-07 Council Packet*Later start time due to School Election
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
November 7, 2017
*8:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Swearing In of New Police Officers
6. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of September 5, 2017 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of October 5, 2017 City Council Special Meeting Minutes
c. Approval of October 16, 2017 City Council Closed Session Minutes
d. Approval of October 17, 2017 City Council Minutes
e. Approval of October 30, 2107 City Council Special Session Minutes
f. Approval of October 30, 2017 City Council Closed and Work Session Minutes
g. Acknowledge September 26, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes
h. Acknowledge October 11, 2017 Planning Commission Special Workshop Minutes
i. Approval for City to act as Fiscal Agent for Mendota Heights Fire Relief Association
j. Approve the Purchase of Portable Radios for Fire Department
k. Approval of Recreation Program Coordinator Hire
l. Accept the Resignation of Police Officer Michael Shepard
m. Approval of City Hall Masonry Study
n. Approval of the September 2017 Treasurer’s Report
o. Approval of Claims List
7. Public Comments
8. Public Hearing - None
9. New and Unfinished Business
a. Resolution 2017-96 Approving a Critical Area Permit for Sean Hoffmann, 711 Woodridge
Drive (Planning Case No. 2017-26)
b. Approval of 2018-2019 Teamsters Labor Agreement for Public Works Employees
10. Community Announcements
11. Council Comments
12. Adjourn
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: November 7, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Kelly McCarthy, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Oath of Office Presentation
Introduction
At the November 7th meeting, there will be a ceremonial swearing in of Officers Renteria, Hogan, and
Patton.
Background
Earlier this year, the Council approved the hiring of three new police officers. Officers Renteria, Hogan,
and Patton have all successfully passed their field training. They be sworn in at the November 7th City
Council meeting.
Officer Peter Renteria is a native of West St. Paul and comes to Mendota Heights with a Bachelor’s
Degree from Winona State. Prior to being hired in Mendota Heights, Peter was a part time officer in
Osseo.
Officer Cara Hogan grew up in St. Paul. After graduating from Central High School, she attained her
Bachelor’s Degree from the University of Minnesota-Mankato. Prior to employment with Mendota
Heights, she served as a Park Patrol Agent with the Minneapolis Park Police.
Anthony Patton was raised in Minnetonka, MN, and earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Economics
from the University of Minnesota in 2010. Since then he has worked in a variety of fields. He completed
his studies in law enforcement at Minneapolis Community & Technical College in 2016.
Action Required
Mayor Garlock will swear in the three officers.
page 3
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, September 5, 2017
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 Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers Duggan, Paper, Miller, and
Petschel were also present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Paper moved adoption of the
agenda.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval.
Councilmember Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for
execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items f) Ordinance 513 No Parking
Near Mailboxes, j) Acknowledge Receipt of City Council Goals and Objectives Update, n) Approve
Change Order #2 for the Mendota Heights Road & Kensington Street Improvement Project, and p)
Approval of Claims List.
a. Approval of August 15, 2017 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of the August 14, 2017 Council Work Session Minutes
c. Approval of the August 16, 2017 Council Work Session Minutes
d. Approval of the August 23, 2017 City Council Special Meeting Minutes
e. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License for St. Thomas Academy for Sept 27-29, 2017
f. Ordinance 513 No Parking Near Mailboxes
g. Ordinance 514 No Parking on Lemay Shores Drive
h. Approve Resolution 2017-75 Calling for Public Hearing on Right of Way Vacation and Conveyance
of Hilltop Avenue
page 4
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 15
i. Accept Resignation of Michael Toth from Parks and Recreation Commission and Authorize
Advertisement for Opening
j. Acknowledge Receipt of City Council Goals and Objectives Update
k. Authorize the Renovation of Marie Park Tennis Courts
l. Approve Revisions to Recreation Program Coordinator Job Description
m. Authorize Out of State Travel for Fire Department
n. Approve Change Order #2 for the Mendota Heights Road & Kensington Street Improvement Project
o. Approval of the July 2017 Treasurer’s Report
p. Approval of Claims List
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
F) ORDINANCE 513 NO PARKING NEAR MAILBOXES
Councilmember Duggan commented that he feels the no parking areas near mailboxes should be
marked. He also believes there should be no parking within a certain distance from driveways.
City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that while he understands the concern, because of the amount
of work and upkeep involved, educating the residents on the rule would be sufficient.
Councilmember Petschel agreed that this would be more of an educational issue and is something that
should be included in the City’s newsletters. She noted that this is the Federal Post Office Standard,
which is where staff pulled the language from.
Councilmember Duggan stated that ‘between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.’ should be added to
the ordinance language. Councilmember Petschel pointed out that this language is already in the
ordinance and does not need to be spelled out in the adoption; however, it would be part of the
educational piece.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 513 AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 2,
SECTION 1 OF THE CITY CODE REGARDING NO PARKING NEAR MAILBOXES.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
J) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES UPDATE
Councilmember Duggan asked that the materials included in the agenda packet be put on the City’s
website. Administrator McNeill agreed to do so.
Councilmember Duggan also asked if the Council would agree that Action Item 11: Ready Bourne
Property for Sale costs are captured in the sale of the property.
page 5
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 15
Councilmember Petschel moved to ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES UPDATE with the understanding that they be posted on the City’s website.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
N) APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #2 FOR THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD & KENSINGTON
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Councilmember Duggan noted that the assessment calculations under ASSESSMENT
CALCULATIONS - STREET REHABILITATION – MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD are in units of feet
and wondered why the remainder of the calculations are not. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied
that the assessments on Mendota Heights Road were identified as having multiple zoning. Per the City’s
rehabilitation policy, if there is equal zoning throughout a project it is assessed per unit. If there are
variations in zoning, the assessments will be based on front footage.
In reference to the ‘additional tasks to install the sanitary sewer and additional street quantities’
Councilmember Paper asked about the third bullet point that reads, “Street typical section due to poor
soils ($62,100).” He questioned why the Engineer would not know about this before. Mr. Ruzek replied
that some of the soils are due to the excavating going down 20 feet and pulling up wet soils that are now
getting mixed with some of the upper soils. They have not been able to stabilize it due to the amount of
rain this summer. They are proposing to excavate some of these soft soils and replace it with rock and
fabric to bridge the roadway bed.
Councilmember Petschel moved to AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER #2 FOR THE MENDOTA
HEIGHTS ROAD AND KENSINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
P) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS LIST
Councilmember Duggan questioned the $32,798.27 payment to Kadrmas, Lee & Jackson (KLJ) for the
Dodd Road Trail Study. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the consultant did perform 90%
of the work in their contract. Staff is still having conversations with KLJ on the final billing.
Councilmember Duggan moved to APPROVE THE CLAIMS LIST with the payment to Kadrmas, Lee
& Jackson for the Dodd Road Trail Study in the amount of $32,798.27 to be tabled for future discussion.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
page 6
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 15
PRESENTATIONS
No items scheduled.
PUBLIC HEARING
A) RESOLUTION 2017-62 EASEMENT VACATION AT 950 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD –
ST. THOMAS ICE ARENA
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that the St. Thomas Academy property south of Mendota
Heights Road was platted as two separate parcels. St. Thomas Academy is proposing a small addition to
the west of the existing building. The proposed addition encroaches upon a platted utility easement for a
private water main. Currently, their water is served along their driveway. Saint Paul Regional Water
Service (SPRWS) does not require the water line to be in an easement since it only serves one building.
Councilmember Duggan asked what purpose does this serve other than helping St. Thomas. Mr. Ruzek
replied that this is a private water line in a public easement and is serving no public benefit.
Councilmember Petschel moved to open the public hearing.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
No one from the public wished to be heard on this item.
Councilmember Duggan moved to close the public hearing.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-62 APPROVING A UTILITY
EASEMENT VACATION FOR ST. THOMAS ACADEMY.
Councilmember Paper seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
B) NPDES PHASE II STORM WATER PERMIT FOR MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM
SEWER SYSTEM (MS4)
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that the City is required to have an annual permit for
discharge of storm water from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The storm water permit
requires the City to follow certain activities to be compliant. There are six minimum components for
each SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program) termed ‘minimum control measures’, which
include Public Education and Outreach, Public Participation/Involvement, Illicit Discharge Detection
and Elimination, Construction Site Runoff and Control, Post-Construction Runoff Control, and Pollution
Prevention/Good Housekeeping.
page 7
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 15
As part of the SWPPP and Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP), the City has adopted
various ‘best management practices’ to address these six components. Mr. Ruzek provided a brief
explanation of these practices.
Councilmember Petschel moved to open the public hearing.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
No one from the public wished to be heard on this item.
Councilmember Duggan moved to close the public hearing
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
No action was required on this matter. Mr. Ruzek noted that staff would continue to work with the
requirements of the pollution control permit and make improvements as they can.
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) RESOLUTION 2017-67, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLTECH
ENGINEERING CORP. FOR HIGH SECURITY FENCE IN I-INDUSTRIAL ZONE – 2515
PILOT KNOB ROAD (PLANNING CASE 2017-17)
Community Development Director Tim Benetti presented this request for an eight foot high security
fence in the I-Industrial Zone on the Alltech Engineering property located at 2515 Pilot Knob Road. The
applicant was seeking a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as required by City Code since the proposed
fence is over six (6) feet in height.
The property is located at the southwest corner of Mendota Heights Road and Pilot Knob Road and is
4.34 acres in size and includes a 33,000 square foot office/warehouse building. Mr. Benetti shared a site
plan showing the location of the proposed fence and access points. He also shared images of the fence
design and the views from surrounding roadways.
Staff had suggested the applicant plant a number of trees to screen some of the open areas; however,
they suggested no plantings be added to the Northland Drive entryway due to sight-line concerns for
trucks entering and exiting the site.
Councilmember Paper, referencing an image that showed the neighbor’s parking lot with the berm and
retaining wall, asked where the property line was located. Mr. Benetti replied that the retaining wall in
question belonged to the property owner to the south. Councilmember Paper then asked if there would
be any issues with the fence should the retaining wall fail. Mr. Benetti replied in the negative.
page 8
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 15
Councilmember Duggan asked if the applicant was required to hide or screen the fence. Mr. Benetti
replied that when he visited the site he realized there were a number of commercial/industrial properties
in the Industrial Park that do not have the outdoor storage areas or loading screened off. This proposed
fence is very beautiful, however the City always wants to see some type of screening to help soften it.
Councilmember Duggan stated the applicant should get the ‘good citizen’ award for their quality fence
and their willingness to screen it with trees.
Councilmember Petschel acknowledged that the applicant received a variance several years ago and the
property is much more attractive. She was delighted at their willingness to put in such a beautiful fence.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-67 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO ALLTECH ENGINEERING CORP. TO INSTALL AN EIGHT-FOOT HIGH
SECURITY FENCE IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (LOCATED AT 2515 PILOT KNOB ROAD).
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
B) RESOLUTION 2017-68, APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO PETER & JENNIFER EISENHUTH TO ALLOW CERTAIN
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IN THE CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT –
1275 KNOLLWOOD LANE (PLANNING CASE 2017-18)
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Landscape Architecture, Inc. submitted
this application on behalf of Peter and Jennifer Eisenhuth, to allow certain construction activities in the
Critical Area Overlay District. The permit is to remove the existing single-family structure and to
construct a new one. The Conditional Use Permit is required for any grading work on slopes that have
an 18% to 40% grade, which is easily met on this site.
Approximately three-quarters of the property is located in the Critical Area. The property is 1.73 acres in
size, includes a 4,037 square foot single-family residence with a single access point off Knollwood
Lane.
Mr. Benetti shared images of the current home and landscaping, and renderings of the proposed
construction and elevations with native or natural looking materials. The purpose of a critical area
permit is to prevent or mitigate irreversible damage to the bluff line. All structures are required to have a
setback at least 40 feet from the bluff line. The proposal is showing a 70-foot setback. The house is also
going to be set back 61 feet from Knollwood Lane. The proposed construction will be within the current
home footprint area. All new grading work and land disturbance would take place fully within the lot.
The critical area limits the height of structures to 35 feet; however, the R-1 residential zoning district
limits height to 25 feet. The new construction would have a 24-foot height so they do meet that standard.
page 9
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 15
The applicant is intending to remove some of the invasive-type vegetation along the bluff area. The
landscape architect indicated this would be a very carefully managed process. The plans are showing a
number of white pines along the northern boundary line, which would provide for a buffer for the
neighbors. Two majestic oaks in the back yard would be saved.
Councilmember Paper, in reference to the oak trees, asked what the process would be to protect those
during construction. Mr. Benetti replied that work is anticipated to not affect the trees and the
contractors will make every effort to work around them.
Councilmember Duggan noted that this is one of the top plans that have ever been presented since his
tenure on the Council. It is very impressive and lovely.
Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-68 APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA
PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PETER & JENNIFER EISENHUTH WHICH
WOULD ALLOW CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IN THE CRITICAL AREA
OVERLAY DISTRICT (LOCATED AT 1275 KNOLLWOOD LANE).
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
C) RESOLUTION 2017-69, APPROVING A REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLAT,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND WETLANDS PERMIT TO MICHAEL
DEVELOPMENT OF MN, LLC, FOR THE NEW MENDOTA HEIGHTS APARTMENTS
DEVELOPMENT – 2160 & 2180 HIGHWAY 13 (PLANNING CASE 2017-19)
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this is a request for rezoning, approval of
the Preliminary Plat, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Wetlands Permit for the redevelopment of
the former Mendota Motel and the former Larsen Garden Center sites. The applicant, Mr. Mike
Swenson, owner of Michael Development of Minnesota, LLC, is proposing to redevelop the site and
build two apartment buildings. The rezoning is from B-3 General Business to a HR-PUD High Density
Residential. The Preliminary Plat is simply to re-plat the two parcels into one parcel, a Phase I and a
Phase II site as Mendota Heights Apartments. The CUP is for the establishment of the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) and the creation of the new multi-family housing in this district. The Wetlands
Permit is due to the proximity of the work next to Lemay Lake.
The Phase I and Phase II sites involve two 70-unit market rate apartment buildings displayed in
symmetrical fashion with each other; with a central access point off of Highway 13. Each building
would have underground parking. Mr. Benetti shared renderings of the building elevations and material
styles. The PUD site development plan shows four levels, the fourth level being an underground level
for parking, which would accommodate 79 spaces per building. There would also be 56 surface parking
areas; for a total of 135 dedicated parking stalls.
Each 70-unit building will consist of 37 one-bedroom, 16 one-bedroom plus den, and 17 two-bedroom
units. The sizes of the units would range from 771 square feet up to 1,329 square feet; all units either
meet or exceed the required unit sizes for the R-3 district.
page 10
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 15
The grading plans show that a significant amount of the natural area will be retained behind the Phase I
building The owner did want to locate the building too close to the area around Lemay Lake. New
drainage ponds will a part of the overall development plan, which will be tied into the stormwater
system. A detailed landscape plan was included as part of the PUD Site Development Plan. Augusta
Shores residents indicated a problem with site lines coming off Acacia Drive and onto Highway 13. The
developer agreed to modify the plan.
Councilmember Petschel asked Mr. Benetti to show on the site plan where the right turn lane on
Highway 13 would be located. Mr. Benetti complied. Councilmember Duggan asked what the length of
the right turn lane would be. Mr. Benetti did not have that information and Public Works Director Ryan
Ruzek indicated that it had not been identified yet.
Councilmember Paper asked where the 8-foot trail would be located. Mr. Benetti replied that the trail
would connect from Acacia to Victory Avenue, running down the front of the property. A 5-foot
boulevard would be located between the trail and the curb.
Councilmember Duggan noted that he was disappointed when he read the material and discovered that
they were proposing two units of housing. He asked when the City approved that PUD’s could go from a
10-acre site to a 5-acre site and did that also reduce the requirements established in the 10-acre site. Mr.
Benetti replied that the entire PUD allows for reductions of certain standards; so setbacks, parking
reductions, and higher density all come into play at the discretion of the Council. Councilmember
Duggan stated that he has not seen this in the actual language of the PUD ordinance. His concern was
the separation of the buildings from 60 feet between the two buildings down to 47 feet.
Councilmember Duggan stated that he is also concerned with the ‘impervious surface’ and wondered if
the amount is increasing or decreasing. The proposal was for 64.1% of non-pavement surface and now
they are proposing 50.3% , an increase of 13.8% of pavement surface.
Density was also a concern for Councilmember Duggan. He stated that Mendota Heights is unique. With
these proposed changes, that uniqueness is being diminished significantly He stated he did not believe
the City was doing a service to the community in relation to open and spacious when there is enough
room out there already.
Councilmember Petschel asked if it was necessary to do a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Mr.
Benetti replied that in the broad category of what they presented, a PUD works better.
Councilmember Duggan added that to get the units of housing that they are asking for, they need a PUD
and they need the Council’s super-leniency in relation to that PUD, of which he is not comfortable with.
Councilmember Miller concurred and said that fully knowing how anxious he was to redevelop these
properties, that excitement should be tempered by putting together something that fits.
Councilmember Duggan reiterated that he would like to see a design that does not require any of the
lowering of setbacks on the front, back, or sides and definitely between the two buildings. It is clearly
stated in the ordinance, that buildings must have a 60-foot separation.
page 11
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 of 15
Mr. Benetti, referencing the 60-foot separation, stated that the applicant asked for the 47-foot separation
because the Furlong Addition to the south stated that they did not want this development so close to the
street. Staff encouraged the developer to push the buildings as far into the site as possible. The Fire
Department has said that 47 feet was more than adequate space between these two buildings. Staff also
said that they would not be opposed to moving the buildings as far north as possible along Acacia
Boulevard because they felt that area would still be highly maintained through the effective screening
along Lemay Lake.
Councilmember Duggan asked if they were not looking at a truncation of the setbacks. Mr. Benetti
replied that they are not significant and under the PUD those are allowable standards. Councilmember
Duggan stated that he believed them to be far from where they could be. The focus on high density is
fine for inner cities like St. Paul or Minneapolis, but not for Mendota Heights as it is today.
Councilmember Paper noted that this development has been fairly consistent from the first proposal to
where it is now. Stretching these buildings further apart does push it closer to the neighbors. If the Fire
Department says 47 feet is practical, he believes the neighbors would appreciate having the extra space.
Councilmember Petschel agreed with Councilmember Paper. The fact that the developer is willing to
change their plans to accommodate the neighboring property, she is comfortable with that. She
continued by stating that good landscaping in the impervious area would soften the building a great deal.
Councilmember Duggan asked about the change in impervious surface and the impact that would have
in relation to drainage and runoff. Mr. Benetti replied that the initial plan shows all of the drainage
would be taken care of on site as per code.
Councilmember Duggan asked Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek if there were any calculations in
relation to impervious surface proposed and the impact on drainage in the area. Mr. Ruzek replied there
is about one acre of new impervious surface being created with this development. They will be treating
the drainage on-site. At this time, they do not have the final plans available. These properties do not
extend all of the way to Lemay Lake. Staff will want to make sure that the water coming out the
discharge point does not create an erosion issue. They will have infiltration basins in the front, on the
south, and on the north as shown on the grading plan as well.
Mayor Garlock stated that he was in favor of the plan as it has been presented. Staff and Council have
spent a lot of time with Mr. Swenson and the plan has not changed. The additional setback along Victory
Avenue was to appease the abutting property owners. The City did an outstanding job of recognizing the
blight of the previous businesses. The City is deficient and in need of apartments spaces.
Councilmember Duggan proposed that the central parking area have a good landscaping plan. Mr.
Benetti indicated that the packet in front of the Councilmembers did show a revised landscaping plan
with additional landscaping in the central islands than what was just shown on the conceptual plan. The
landscaping plan would be approved as part of the overall development plan.
page 12
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 of 15
Councilmember Paper asked what would be done to protect soil and water runoff, besides a silt fence.
Mr. Benetti replied that the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) states it is their
responsibility to make sure everything stays on their site, they control it, and the site be regularly
inspected during construction. Staff would keep a very close eye on the site. This will also be a part of
the development agreement they will have with the City.
Councilmember Duggan referenced the City Code setbacks standards which read “No principal
building shall be less than 60 feet from each other”. Mr. Benetti replied that the HR-PUD gives Council
the flexibility to relax some of those requirements.
Councilmember Petschel stated that when it is realized why the buildings were moved closer, it makes
sense. The developer did not shift the buildings because he could not honor the 60 feet; he shifted them
to accommodate the abutting neighbors.
Councilmember Petschel stated that she believes Mr. Swenson has done everything reasonably to
accommodate the City, the Augusta Shores residents, and the Furlong residents. The iteration being seen
now is the same iteration that has been seen since this project was first proposed.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-69 APPROVING A REZONING,
PRELIMINARY PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND WETLANDS PERMIT
APPLICATIONS TO MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT OF MINNESOTA, LLC FOR THE NEW
MENDOTA HEIGHTS APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT (LOCATED AT 2160 AND 2180
HIGHWAY 13).
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3 (PETSCHEL, PAPER, GARLOCK)
Nays: 2 (DUGGAN, MILLER)
Councilmember Petschel complimented Mr. Swenson on the feedback she has received from residents
and from members of the Planning Commission. He has been one of the most wonderful developers that
they have worked with. She also expressed her appreciation for his responsiveness to the residents of
Augusta Shores and the Furlong Addition.
Mayor Garlock echoed Councilmember Petschel’s comments and noted that Mr. Swenson had been very
straightforward. He has taken into account the recommendations from the residents and staff. The Mayor
stated that both buildings were nicely designed and would be an asset to the City.
D) RESOLUTION 2017-70, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE AND
WETLANDS PERMIT TO THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TO ALLOW THE
INSTALLATION OF A NEW ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEM (GROUND MOUNT
SOLAR) NEXT TO CITY HALL – 1101 VICTORIA CURVE (PLANNING CASE 2017-20)
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this was a request from the City of
Mendota Heights, working with Ideal Energies, LLC, to install an alternative energy system as a ground
mount solar array. As the report indicated, City Hall consists of two large parcels of approximately 17.5
acres. The developmental parcel is approximately six acres in size and is located in the R-1 Single
Family Residential District.
page 13
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 11 of 15
Mr. Benetti noted that in February 2017, the Council authorized staff to work with Ideal Energies in
seeking out two separate solar energy grants. The MiM grant was received and the City would receive a
25% savings in electrical bills for the first 12 years. After that time, 100% of the benefit would go to the
City. The MiM would pay for the cost of the installation and maintenance for the initial 12-year period.
After 12 years, the City becomes owner. The system is expected to last from 25 to 30 years; however,
these systems can last up to 40 years. There is no cost borne by the City, other than the removal of the
trees. A ground mount system in an R-1 district requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Mr. Benetti noted that the maximum height of this system would be 14 feet. This height conforms to the
maximum accessory structure limitation of 15 feet. The solar arrays will be tilted at an angle for
maximum efficiency and will be locked into place and stationary.
Solar panel systems are required to be set back a minimum of 15 feet from all property boundaries and
30 feet from all dwellings. The City has requested a variance from these minimum set backs
requirements. The City has also asked that this array be located in the rear yard or west of City Hall. The
property is located in a residential district and is limited to 225 square feet. However, City Hall is more
of an institutional use and so the applicant is requesting a variance from the limitations. The code also
requires that the panels be screened; however, since there is pretty much a 24 hour presence at City Hall,
there should not be any need for security or screening measures because on limitations on visibility.
There should be no visibility from any of the adjacent neighborhoods across the street or from Beth
Jacob’s Synagogue to the west.
The Wetland Permit is necessary because the location is less than 100 feet from a wetland. However, the
City has acknowledged that there would not be any work or grading work. Most of the system work
would take place on the level flat ground next to the wetlands. All parts of the wetland would be
protected by a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Councilmember Paper asked who was going to be responsible for the design and installation of the
ground cover. City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that the City will work with Ideal Energies on
providing low maintenance sorts of ground cover. They have indicated that they would be doing the
ground cover maintenance for three years. The site will also have a three-foot high black chain-link
fence surrounding the array, with a gate wide enough to accommodate a mower.
Councilmember Paper also asked if this would be built with cross-footings. Mr. Benetti replied in the
affirmative. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that they would be anchored on steel driven piles.
Councilmember Duggan pointed out that this is a 95% variance.
Councilmember Petschel asked for clarification that the Council had agreed that this is where the panels
should be installed. Mr. Benetti replied in the affirmative and noted that the initial discussion had three
alternative sites that were presented. The rooftop option was assessed and it was determined that that
option was not reasonable. Councilmember Petschel then stated there was an extensive discussion about
the ballfield being so close and whether or not it would affect any of the panels. Mr. Benetti noted that a
panel would survive a pellet or a ball bearing hitting it at 50 mph. It was their professional opinion that a
baseball would not make any impact or damage to the system.
page 14
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 12 of 15
Councilmember Paper requested that someone check with the baseball teams that play on that field once
or twice a year to determine if anyone has hit a panel. If it is discovered that a lot of balls are hitting it,
the City should consider adding netting. Mr. Benetti replied that he does not foresee this being an issue.
Councilmember Petschel stated with this site, the solar panels that have been installed on the Public
Works building, the new pollinator-friendly landscaping at City Hall, the work being completed by the
Dakota County Master Gardeners, and the number of rain gardens that the City has installed, she
believes the City is being a good steward of the earth.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-70 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT, VARIANCE AND WETLANDS PERMIT TO THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
TO INSTALL AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEM (GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR PANELS)
IN THE R-1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (LOCATED AT 1101 VICTORIA CURVE).
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
E) AWARD OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE LEXINGTON
HIGHLANDS AND MENDAKOTA NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained the projects identified for the 2018 construction season,
including the Lexington Highlands Neighborhood, the Mendakota Neighborhood, and South Plaza
Drive.
The Lexington Highlands Neighborhood project would include Avanti Drive, Bwana Court, Faro Lane,
Summit Lane, Twin Circle Drive, Vail Drive, and West Circle Court. The Mendakota Neighborhood
would include Mendakota Court and Mendakota Drive. The South Plaza Drive improvements would run
from Dodd Road to the end of the cul-de-sac.
Staff sent a Request for Proposals (RFP) to three consulting engineers who all submitted a quote for
professional services. The low quote was submitted by WSB & Associates at $98,458.00, which would
become a part of the overall project costs for assessments, as well as any additional indirect costs that
develop through the project timeline.
Councilmember Petschel asked if staff is familiar with this vendor. Mr. Ruzek replied that WSB is one
of the largest consulting firms in the state. They have done a number of projects within the City and they
are a very reputable consulting engineering firm.
Councilmember Duggan moved to AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ENTER IN TO A CONTRACT WITH
WSB & ASSOCIATES FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED PRICE OF $98,458.00.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
page 15
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 13 of 15
F) ORDER PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORTS
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-71 ORDERING PREPARATION OF
FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE LEXINGTON HIGHLANDS NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT #201706).
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-72 ORDERING PREPARATION OF
FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE MENDAKOTA NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS
(PROJECT #201706).
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-73 ORDERING PREPARATION OF
FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT #201706).
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
G) AUTHORIZE RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR POLICE CAPTAIN
Police Chief Kelly McCarthy explained the request to authorize for the recruitment of Police Captain.
The position is fully funded for 2017 and has been vacant since January. Assistant City Administrator
Cheryl Jacobson and Chief McCarthy would work to ensure the process is fair and transparent.
Councilmember Duggan asked if the process for replacement of the Police Officer being promoted
should be started at this point. Chief McCarthy replied that this promotion would need to take place first.
Councilmember Petschel moved to AUTHORIZE STAFF TO TAKE THE STEPS NECESSARY TO
BEGIN THE INTERNAL PROMOTIONAL RECRUITMENT PROCESS TO FILL THE POLICE
CAPTAIN VACANCY.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
H) RESOLUTION 2017-74 APPROVE FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AUTHORIZE
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE CITY HALL LOWER LEVEL REMODELING
PROJECT AND EXTERIOR WALL MASONRY REPAIR
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that for several years City staff has been dealing with mold and
water intrusion issues in the Police Department and storage areas in the lower level of City Hall. Some
of the mold has been abated and other parts have been encapsulated and need to be removed. This is a
process that would require remodeling in a number of phases.
page 16
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 14 of 15
Since February 2017 JEA Architects has been working on the lower level remodeling and exterior wall
masonry repair plans. Staff now has the specifications for that work. During the planning for the
remodeling, additional sources of water were discovered inside the building. A specialist was called to
review issue. Design work has been completed for the masonry and they are recommending that the
City solicit bid alternatives to determine if only the most pressing parts of the project should be
addressed or if the work could all be completed at the same time. The plans also include remodeling
work in the Police Department to make it more functional.
Staff recommended that the Council authorize staff to advertise for bids, with a bid opening on
September 27, 2017. This would then come back to the Council for award on October 3, 2017. Staff
would like to get the masonry part of the project underway before the winter freeze.
Councilmember Duggan asked if any consideration had been given to using the 2nd floor for additional
space for the Police Department. Administrator McNeill replied that would be outside of the shared area
and is unsure it would be used as much.
Councilmember Duggan noted that when the previous restoration work had been done on the masonry
on the front of the building, the contractor only went down four or five feet. His thought was that maybe
they could have saved themselves some work if the contractor had gone all of the way down to the very
foundation. He suggested that the option be for the WHOLE of the building being done rather the just
the one part mentioned. Administrator McNeill replied that when staff looks at the budget, they can
determine if just the south side of the building and around the corner to the west is something that can be
done or whether they want to include the north side of the building also.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-74 APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE 2017 CITY
HALL LOWER LEVEL REMODELING AND EXTERIOR WALL MASONRY REPAIR PROJECT.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Administrator McNeill noted that staff would be bringing back a modification of the JEA Architects
contract to accommodate the changes to the scope of the project.
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
No announcements were made.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Petschel commented that if anyone had a chance to see KSTP’s coverage of the first
day of school at Minnehaha Academy’s new location in Mendota Heights, what they accomplished
outside and inside that building is nothing less than stunning in the two-week time period they had to
complete the project.
page 17
September 5, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Page 15 of 15
She continued by noting that South Plaza Drive is desperately in need of repair. There will be a new
building going in there soon. The City is going to be reconstructing this street in 2018 and then there
will be a lot of heavy trucking in and out of there with further construction. She suggested the City
include language in the building ordinances to ensure the streets are intact when a building construction
project is completed. Councilmember Duggan interjected that he was certain that language is already in
the City Code. Councilmember Petschel continued that this is something she would like staff to take a
look at.
Mayor Garlock expressed his appreciation to all of the residents for their patience during all of the
construction on the area roads.
Councilmember Miller cordially invited everyone to the Visitation Girls Soccer game on September 9.
They will be playing 4th rank St. Paul Academy.
Councilmember Paper noted that he visited Minnehaha Academy in their new space. It is incredible
what they have accomplished in 15 days. The Council and staff have been invited to tour the building.
He wished all students a fantastic school year. He reminded all drivers to watch for students walking or
waiting for the bus.
Councilmember Duggan noted that the businesses at Mendota Plaza and The Village at Mendota
Heights are being challenged with the construction in the area. He reminded residents to frequent our
local businesses.
Councilmember Petschel noted that she would like the City to look at branding the area shopping centers
of Mendota Plaza and The Village, and then promoting the brand. She believes this would be a benefit to
the merchants, the residents, and the City. She would like to work on that going forward.
ADJOURN
Mayor Garlock moved to adjourn.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 9:04 p.m.
____________________________________
Neil Garlock
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 18
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of a Special Meeting
Held Thursday, October 5, 2017
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special joint meeting of the City Council of the City of
Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held with the City Council of the City of West Saint Paul,
Minnesota, and the School Board of ISD 197, at 5:00 p.m. in Warrior Hall of Henry Sibley High
School, Mendota Heights, MN.
CALL TO ORDER
Superintendent Peter Olson-Skog convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Mayor Garlock, and
Councilmembers Duggan, Paper, and Petschel were also present. Absent: Councilmember
Miller.
City Administrator McNeill was present.
Also present were the Mayor and two members of the City Council, and City Manager of West
St. Paul, and the Board Chair and board members, and staff of the ISD 197 School District.
The purpose of the meeting was to update the members of the various governing boards on
progress to date on exploring the potential for jointly owned or operated facilities, and determine
whether there was support for moving ahead with shared facilities.
Jennifer Anderson-Tuttle, consulting architect for the school district, did a recap of the
previously held meetings. The school district had appointed a committee which has been
meeting for approximately one year, and during that time explored needs and options for
facilities at the various school district buildings.
She, and Superintendent Olson-Skog reviewed the needs at each of the district buildings, and
specific athletic fields. They also reviewed the timelines for adding improvements and
modifications, which would culminate in a bond referendum in May, 2018. If the referendum is
successful, construction would take from 2018 through 2021.
They indicated the school district’s anticipated ask in such a referendum would be in the $110
million to $120 million range. That would include a new competitive pool, to replace the current
one at Heritage Middle School. Their question was whether the cities wanted to participate in
that, or in any additional investments which would result in a Community Center concept.
Councilor Duggan stated that there had been a bond referendum of $57 million several years ago,
and that people will want to know the results of that before voting for a new bond sale.
Councilor Petschel stated that financial impacts on the community will be a big factor. She
noted the impacts of Fiscal Disparities on Mendota Heights.
page 19
Councilor Duggan noted the cooperation which had been done previously on the Ice Arena, and
felt that the focus of any partnership should be on strengths, rather than finances.
Councilor Paper asked what a Community Center would look like. Supt. Olson-Skog said that
there would be separate uses for schools and the community members, but that mechanical and
utilities could be shared.
It was suggested that a tour of similar facilities should be scheduled. Waconia was cited as an
example of where a city and the school district partnered successfully.
A member of the school board stated that the school district is on a schedule for the May
referendum. If the cities can commit to being part of a joint effort, the entities could work
together. Otherwise, the school district will have to move ahead on its own.
Supt Olson-Skog stated that he heard a consensus of the meeting participants that people are
interested in moving ahead jointly.
The next meeting could involve a concept plan of a community center, which could be reviewed
and discussed.
The meeting adjourned at 6:30 pm.
Minutes taken by:
____________________
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
page 20
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Special Meeting
Held Monday, October 16, 2017
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a closed session meeting of the City Council, City of
Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 1:30 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota
Heights, Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 1:30 pm. Councilmembers Duggan, Miller, Paper,
Petschel were also present. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill,
Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, City Attorney Tom Lehmann, League of
Minnesota Cities Attorney Paul Merwin and League of Minnesota Cities Paralegal Gail
Wutschke.
CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE MATTERS
A motion to adjourn to a closed session pursuant to Minnesota Statute §13D.05 subd. 3(b); for
Attorney Client Privilege for Discussion of Pending Litigation in the case of Royal Oaks Realty, Inc.,
David J. Olin, and James R. Olin Marital Family Trusts vs City of Mendota Heights, Court File No.:
19HA-CV-17-3446, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D.05 Subd.3(b) was made by Mayor Garlock
and seconded by Councilor Duggan. The motion passed 5-0. Mayor Garlock adjourned to a closed
session of the City Council at 1:30 pm.
Those present included Mayor Garlock, Councilmembers Miller, Paper, Duggan and Petschel. Also
in attendance were City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson,
City Attorney Tom Lehmann, League of Minnesota Cities Attorney Paul Merwin and League of
Minnesota Cities Paralegal Gail Wutschke.
A motion was made by Councilor Petschel and seconded by Councilor Duggan to adjourn the closed
meeting and to return to the open meeting at 2:49 pm. The motion passed 5-0.
A motion to adjourn to a closed session for the purpose of reviewing data regarding internal affairs
investigation of law enforcement personnel pursuant to Minn. Stat. §13D.05 subd. 2 (2) was made by
Councilor Paper and seconded by Councilor Miller. The motion passed 5-0. Mayor Garlock
adjourned to a closed session of the City Council at 2:50 pm.
Those present included Mayor Garlock, Councilmembers Miller, Paper, Duggan and Petschel. Also
in attendance were City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson,
City Attorney Tom Lehmann, and Police Chief Kelly McCarthy.
Councilor Miller left the meeting at 3:00pm.
page 21
A motion was made by Councilor Petschel and seconded by Mayor Garlock to adjourn the closed
meeting and to return to the open meeting at 3:13 pm. The motion passed 4-0.
A motion to recess the meeting was made by Councilor Duggan and Seconded by Councilor Petschel
at 3:15pm. The motion passed 4-0.
A motion to adjourn to a closed session pursuant to Minnesota Statute §13D.03 for Attorney Client
Privilege for Discussion of Labor Negotiations Strategy was made by Councilor Petschel and
seconded by Councilor Paper. The motion passed 4-0. Mayor Garlock adjourned to a closed session
of the City Council at 3:21 pm.
Those present included Mayor Garlock, Councilmembers Paper, Duggan and Petschel. Also in
attendance were City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson,
and City Attorney Tom Lehmann.
A motion was made by Councilor Duggan and seconded by Councilor Paper to adjourn the closed
meeting and to return to the open meeting at 4:00 pm. The motion passed 4-0.
It was stated that no official action was taken by the Council in the closed session meeting. The
Council will provide a summary of the meeting as required by Minnesota Statutes.
ADJOURN
Motion Councilmember Petschel and seconded by Councilor Duggan to adjourn the meeting at 4:00
pm. Motion carried 4-0.
___________________________
Neil Garlock, Mayor
____________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 22
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, October 17, 2017
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 Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers Duggan, Paper, Miller, and
Petschel were also present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Petschel moved adoption.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval.
Councilmember Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for
execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items e) Approve Ordinance 515, Stop
Sign Installations in Rogers Lake Neighborhood, f) Authorize Request for Proposals for the Ivy Hills
Park Pond Improvements, and h) Approve Resolution 2017-91, Acceptance of Park Bench Donation
from Louis Strobel.
a. Approval of October 3, 2017 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of October 3, 2017 Council Work Session Minutes
c. Acknowledge September 12, 2017 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes
d. Approve 2018 Insurance Renewal and Election to Not Waive Statutory Tort Limits
e. Approve Ordinance 515, Stop Sign Installations in Rogers Lake Neighborhood
f. Authorize Request for Proposals for the Ivy Hills Park Pond Improvements
g. Approve Purchase of Fire Turn Out Gear
h. Approve Resolution 2017-91, Acceptance of Park Bench Donation from Louis Strobel
i. Acknowledge September Fire Synopsis Report
j. Acknowledge September Building Activity Report
page 23
k. Approval of Claims List
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
E) APPROVE ORDINANCE 515, STOP SIGN INSTALLATIONS - ROGERS LAKE
NEIGHBORHOOD
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that staff had met with a number of residents from the
Rogers Lake neighborhood. The Traffic Safety Committee recommended that stop signs be placed at
various intersections. The residents have had a number of complaints over the years and staff has been
looking at options to help control traffic in this area.
The Committee is recommending the installation of traffic control at some of the T-intersections to
assign who has the right of way. Standard traffic rules are that traffic on the right usually has the right-
of-way; however, with a T-intersection it is not always construed that way.
Mr. Ruzek noted that there is an existing stop sign at northbound Cygnet at Wagon Wheel Trail which is
not shown in the code. The ordinance under consideration would codify this stop sign, along with stop
signs on these streets:
• Cygnet Lane at Cheri Lane
• Kressin Avenue at Lake Drive
• Rogers Avenue at Lake Drive
• Swan Drive at Lake Drive
• Bluebill Drive at Swan Drive
Mr. Jim Martin, 901 Cheri Lane, expressed concern that having the stop sign on Cygnet would
encourage the drivers on Cheri Lane to speed. He requested that stop signs be installed on Cheri Lane as
well. Councilmember Petschel stated that this plan is a work in progress. These signs would establish
who has the right-of-way. The Council has authorized a traffic study to be completed for this area so
experts can review the traffic movements and make a recommendation to improve the traffic flow.
Ms. Diane Martin, 901 Cheri Lane, asked if the installation of these proposed stop signs should be
delayed until after the traffic study is completed. Councilmember Petschel replied that the Committee
felt that the real problem in Rogers Lake is the lack of right-of-way. The signs are being installed to
address those safety concerns now rather than later. The signage could be adjusted. Ms. Martin noted
that with construction being completed on the surrounding streets, some of the issues may be eliminated.
Councilmember Petschel encouraged Jim and Diane Martin to provide Mr. Ruzek with their name and
contact information so they could be informed of when the Traffic Safety Committee would be meeting
on this particular topic, and encouraged them to be engaged.
Ms. Sonja Hauter, 2371 Rogers Avenue, stated that she believes a stop sign at Crescent and Rogers was
unnecessary. The real issue is not being addressed, that being the traffic on Lake Drive.
page 24
Mayor Garlock stated this is the first step in establishing right-of-way. The traffic survey may show
other options. This has been an issue for a number of years. A lot of complaints have been heard and
extra time and effort is being expended to resolve the traffic issues in this area.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 515 AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3,
SECTION 1 OF THE CITY CODE.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
F) AUTHORIZE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE IVY HILLS PARK POND
IMPROVEMENTS
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that in Ivy Hills Park is a stormwater treatment pond
originally constructed in 1965; it may have been a natural wetland prior to that. This is one of the few
ponds located on the north end of the City, and it provides a large water quality benefit. There is a 60-
inch pipe that enters the pond on the east side, which drains from the Dodd Road and Delaware Avenue
intersection. From that pond, it enters another small storm sewer system and then discharges into Ivy
Falls Creek.
Staff has received a number of complaints about the odors in this pond, which is a sign that it is full of
sediment. Mr. Ruzek said that the City has pumped down the pond a couple of times to get some oxygen
into the sediment and try to kill off some of the bad bacteria. The pond does refill after every rainstorm.
He said that staff is proposing to complete a dredging of the pond. A consultant has been authorized to
do wetland delineation. The next step would be to issue a Request for Proposals to consultants included
in the City’s consulting pool. The consultant hired would test the sediment in the pond to determine if
there are any hazardous materials present. If the sediment is free of contaminants, it would be used to fill
in a low area on the north end. If contaminants are present, Public Works would request to add an
extension into an existing storm sewer where they can collect some water from that low area. Currently,
the City has $80,000 budgeted for pond maintenance.
Councilmember Miller asked who would determine that to be hazardous, and what the threshold would
be? Mr. Ruzek replied that that there are standards set forth through the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, and also by material testing companies. Some of the biggest chemicals are heavy metals – lead
and mercury, along with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). They are found in ponds that have
runoff from coal-tar based driveway sealers.
Councilmember Miller asked if there was any idea of what was causing the pollution in Ivy Hills Park
Pond. Mr. Ruzek replied that it is sediment, which includes leaves, sand, road salts, and debris that go
down the storm sewers. This pond seems to be undersized for the amount of water flowing through it. It
was originally constructed in 1965 and it was dredged once in 1992.
page 25
Councilmember Miller asked if staff has identified any other problem wetlands or ponds. Mr. Ruzek
replied that staff tested three ponds several years ago and found localized fill right at the inlets to the
ponds. All three were found to be fulfilling their treatment requirements.
Staff will be creating a Pond Improvement Plan based on the stormwater utility budget which will be
$100,000/year. The city can start cleaning two ponds per year.
Councilmember Petschel explained that ponds now fall under the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
and five or six years ago they required all cities to complete a pond inventory. Going forward they will
provide guidelines for the cities.
Councilmember Duggan asked where the storm sewer extension would be placed. Mr. Ruzek explained
that there is an existing storm sewer line that runs along the east edge of the pond through a ditch. What
would be done would be to break a hole into one of the existing manholes and run a line directly to the
east and install a new catch basin at the end of that line.
Councilmember Duggan asked what the filling in of the low area would do? Mr. Ruzek replied that if
they were able to fill that low area in, water would drain into the existing storm sewer line and the ditch.
Councilmember Duggan stated this is a huge challenge for the City. He asked, as the delineation report
is being completed, would there be an emphasis on getting reports to the City stating the condition of the
water, the steps that need to be taken to remediate, and the results of those remediation steps. Mr. Ruzek
replied that the Council will award the contract for the preparation of the Delineation Report on
November 21st. Then that consultant would provide plans, specifications, and an estimate.
Councilmember Petschel moved to authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposals for the Ivy Hills Park
Pond Improvements.
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
H) APPROVE RESOLUTION 2017-91, ACCEPTANCE OF PARK BENCH DONATION FROM
LOUIS STROBEL
Councilmember Paper explained that Mr. Louis Strobel has donated the park bench in memory of his
wife, Nancy. He also noted that this is a terrific program. He expressed his appreciation for the donation
as it helps the City and is a remembrance of someone.
Councilmember Duggan noted that former Councilmember Ms. Mary Jeanne Schneeman started this
program approximately 20 years ago.
Councilmember Paper moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-91 ACCEPT GIFT FROM LOUIS
STROBEL.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
page 26
An audience member asked the cost of donating a park bench. The reply was $1,000. City Administrator
Mark McNeill noted that these costs will be reviewed as they are possibly out of date.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
ALCOHOL PENALTY APPEALS
A) RESOLUTION 2017-90, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF APPEAL HEARINGS FOR
THE ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES IMPOSED
Chief of Police Kelly McCarthy gave a brief overview of the City’s process for alcohol compliance
checks. The department works with a volunteer who is over 18 but less than 21 years of age. On
September 8, 2017, an experienced Community Service Officer from another city was used to complete
the compliance checks. He has conducted compliance checks in Mendota Heights, Mendota, and
Lilydale for the past few years. They are instructed to wear their street clothes and use their own
identification that states they are under 21.
During this round of compliance checks, five establishments failed the compliance check. Two of those
establishments have paid their administrative fee and served their three day suspension. Three of the
establishments that failed the check requested to appeal the penalty to the City Council.
Councilmember Paper asked if five failures was a lot for one year. Chief McCarthy replied in the
affirmative and noted that last year, Mendota Heights had one failure. The department used the same
volunteer last year.
Councilmember Miller noted that SuperAmerica stated that they ran the ID through the Point of Sale
register system and still sold the alcohol. He asked what the machine said. Chief McCarthy stated she is
unfamiliar with their system , however, the ID provided to the seller showed that the buyer was under 21
years of age.
Councilmember Duggan mentioned that the construction on Hwy 110 has been hard on a lot of
businesses. However, if there is a policy to ask for ID, then the establishments should ask everyone no
matter their appearance. He believes the City is somewhat serving a double penalty – the administrative
fine and three-day suspension of sales. His recommendation would be to only issue a three day license
suspension, and also to refund the two establishments that have already paid the administrative fee.
Mr. Ian Hotsworth, district manager of SuperAmerica #4521, presented the history of compliance for the
company and noted that they consider compliance issues as part of their business. In the last five years,
as a company of 200 stores, they have had an 89% compliance rate and in the last three years they have
been able to raise that rate to 95%. This shows that they are making strides to improve their training.
They have not had any violations in Mendota Heights prior to this. Their employee that failed the check
was immediately terminated. The company took this violation very seriously and took corrective action.
page 27
They also took the step of having a third-party come into every store every month; this is a person under
the age of 30. Their policy is to card anyone who appears to be under 30 years of age. With all of that in
mind, he would appreciate any leniency on the fine and on the three-day suspension of sales.
Councilmember Paper asked for an explanation of how the ID swipe machine works. Mr. Hotsworth
replied that, depending on the ID, it is a matter of if the machine read the ID properly. There would be
an error message if the machine did not read the ID accurately, which is what he believes happened.
Ms. Theresa Li, manager of Haiku Japanese Bistro, stated that construction in the area has had a
negative affect on their business and they have had a high turnover of servers. The server in question
was not well trained and, in fact, was still in training. This is why the mistake was made and they hoped
to have their penalty lowered because of the special situation they currently have.
Ms. Ann Ulrich, co-owner of Mendoberri, stated that last week, Mendoberri marked their seventh year
of doing business in the community. They are honored to provide a casual, up-scale environment. Two
essential ingredients for their success are the professionalism and hospitality of their staff.
Unfortunately, in a momentary lapse of judgment, one of their servers failed to request identification
from an underage patron during the compliance check. They offer no excuses and take full responsibility
for ensuring their staff have the knowledge necessary for complying with the laws. Most of their servers
do hold alcohol awareness certifications and the newer employees who do not yet hold certification have
been enrolled in a Minnesota approved certification course. In addition, the Mendoberri training has
always covered how and when to card. In short, they require their staff to card everyone who appears to
be under the age of 40.
They believe the severity of the penalty must also fit the offense. They believe that a $1,000 fine, in
addition to a suspension of their license for three days, is not warranted. A suspension of their liquor
license would have a ripple effect and would not only punish the business, but it would also punish their
customers and staff. An average of $3,500 a day in revenue would equate to an approximate loss of
$10,500 over the three-day suspension. She felt that this is an unjust penalty. Mendoberri’s requested
that the penalties for this first offense be reduced.
Councilmember Paper asked if the three-day suspension was for three consecutive days. City
Administrator Mark McNeill replied that had been the practice. City Attorney Tom Lehmann also noted
that compliance is easier when the days are consecutive.
Councilmember Petschel said that the issue that is complicating this is the two establishments that have
already paid the fine and have fulfilled the 3-day suspension of alcohol sales.
Ms. Ulrich asked if the other two establishments were in the same position as Mendoberri, have they had
the same clean record and is liquor one of the core products of their business. The reply was yes. It was
stated that the City has had no issues at either of those two establishments.
Councilmember Petschel continued by stating that the Council has been very sensitive to what the issues
were this summer with the traffic and the foot traffic in The Plaza and in The Village. However, the City
Council is going to have to find a way to make this equitable for everyone.
page 28
Mayor Garlock noted that staff has surveyed the area cities and determined that the City is at the high
end with the fine and the suspension. However, since two businesses have completed their 3-day
suspension and paid the administrative fine, he believes that these three establishments should be issued
a 3-day license suspension as well. He would be willing to waive the administrative fine and refund the
other two establishments their fines.
Councilmember Duggan noted that this is the most equitable for all of the businesses involved. He noted
that these businesses have all been exemplary in helping the City with public events.
Councilmember Paper asked if there was a law or rule that states the three days need to be consecutive.
City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied in the negative, although the City would want to know what those
three days are to ensure they are in compliance. There is also no timeframe that the three days would
need to fit into. He noted that the other two establishments were suspended for three consecutive days.
Councilmember Petschel recommended the restaurants be given the decision of which three consecutive
days would work best for them. She also stated that she believes the people in Mendota Heights are
reasonable and that the restaurants would not need to explain to all of the patrons. The establishments
could have a plan and pick their dates for suspension.
Mayor Garlock recommended that staff and Council review the administrative penalties and address if
they should be reduced or adjusted in any way.
Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017–90 CONCLUSIONS OF APPEAL
HEARINGS HELD FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR VIOLATION OF
THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CITY CODE REGULATIONS with the following changes:
1. That SuperAmerica #4521, 1080 Highway 110, shall be imposed an administrative fine of $0 and
a 3 day suspension of their license. They can select the three consecutive days between now and
Thanksgiving [November 23, 2017].
2. That Haiku Japanese Bistro, 754 Highway 110, shall be imposed an administrative fine of $0 and
a 3 day suspension of their license. They can select the three consecutive days between now and
Thanksgiving [November 23, 2017].
3. That Mendoberri, 730 Main Street, shall be imposed an administrative fine of $0 and a 3 day
suspension of their license. They can select the three consecutive days between now and
Thanksgiving [November 23, 2017].
And to refund Teresa’s and Tommy Chicago’s the administrative fine of $1,000.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion
City Administrator Mark McNeill asked if there was a separate license for Sunday’s sales. City Clerk
Lorri Smith replied that Haiku Japanese Bistro has a Special Sunday license; the other two licensees
have an off sale 3.2 beer and a on sale wine with a 3.2 beer license which include Sunday sales. It would
not make a difference in the days they can choose for the suspension.
page 29
City Attorney Tom Lehmann asked that an addition be put in place that they provide notice to the City
Clerk of the three days selected so the Police Department would have that information if they would like
to do a compliance check.
Councilmember Paper asked that the licensees be given until the end of 2017 to complete the suspension.
Councilmember Duggan accepted the friendly amendments, as did the second Councilmember Petschel.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilmember Paper asked for an explanation of what the plans are for the future in regards to this
type of violation. City Administrator Mark McNeill recommended that when the Council reviews the fee
schedule for 2018, it should examine this topic more closely.
Councilmember Petschel asked the community to continue to support the local establishments.
PUBLIC HEARING
A) RESOLUTION 2017-88, APPROVING STREET VACATION OF ROGERS AVENUE
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that on the south side of Wagon Wheel Trail, there is a 60-
foot right-of-way that abuts Rogers Lake. The property is surrounded by two single-family residential
homes. The property is located east of Wagon Wheel Court and west of Cygnet and Rogers Lane on the
north.
The west 30 feet was dedicated in the Caroline’s Lake View plat, which was platted in 1929. There is an
additional 30 feet on the east side that was dedicated as right-of-way as shown on the Dakota County’s
property maps.
A petition has been submitted by both adjacent landowners to have this piece of land vacated. The single
family home on the west of the right-of-way is proposed to be torn down and reconstructed but would
remain a single family home.
Due to the requirements of the land abutting a public waterway, as Rogers Avenue is, staff was required
to do a 60-day review period through the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Their letter was
received he previous day, stating that due to the proximity to Rogers Lake Park with the existing boat
access and the existing fishing pier, the DNR did not have any objections to this vacation.
Staff received two phone calls on this hearing request. Once the callers were informed that it one single-
family home being constructed, they did not object to the right-of-way vacation.
Councilmember Petschel moved to open the public hearing.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mr. Greg Quail, 963 Wagon Wheel, stated he had no objections to this vacation.
page 30
Mayor Garlock moved to close the public hearing.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-88 APPROVING A STREET
VACATION OF ROGERS AVENUE.
Councilmember Paper seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) RESOLUTION 2017-89, PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $1,370,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A
Mr. James Lehnhoff, representative from the City’s financial consultant Ehlers and Associates, provided
the background and results of the bond sale which had been held earlier in the day. Staff had a
conference call with Standard & Poor’s and their rating did reaffirm the City’s AAA rating, which is
both excellent and the highest possible.
Highlights from the S&P report included that the City has strong management and good financial
policies, has a strong budgetary performance, has strong budgetary flexibility with high available fund
balance, has strong liquidity with total government available cash at 126% of total government fund
expenditures, and has adequate debt and contingent liability position. 78% of the City’s debt is expected
to be retired over the next 10 years, which is a very positive credit position.
The sale was held through a competitive process and the City received two bids, with Baird having the
low bid with a true interest cost of 2.1055%, which Mr. Lehnhoff stated was an excellent rate for a 10-
year bond.
The par amount of the bonds was reduced from $1,370,000 to $1,340,000 because the City did receive a
premium on the bond. In combination between the premium and slightly lower cost of issuance, the par
amount of the bond reduced; however, the City still receives the same amount of proceeds.
Councilmember Duggan acknowledged that the ‘team’ of financial people at the City of Mendota
Heights consists of Finance Director Kristen Schabacker and one part-time assistant. He expressed his
appreciation of Ms. Schabacker efforts in keeping the City at an AAA rating.
Councilmember Petschel asked if Baird was located in Milwaukee, to which Mr. Lehnhoff replied n the
affirmative.
Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-89 PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE
AND SALE OF $1,340,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2017A,
PLEDGING FOR THE SECURITY THEREOF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, AND LEVYING A TAX
FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF.
page 31
Councilmember Paper seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
B) SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENT
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that concerns have been expressed about pedestrian safety
at a crosswalk at South Plaza Drive where it intersects with Trunk Highway 149 (Dodd Road). The
Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) had discussed this topic at their last safety meeting on October 9, 2017.
The Committee’s recommendation was to place high visibility pedestrian crossing signs as a short-term
improvement to the existing crosswalk. Long-term improvements would be reviewed and could require
relocation of the crosswalk to a safer area.
The proposed Dodd Road reconstruction in 2018 is supposed to have the same lane configuration at that
location as exists today. These high visibility signs would remain through the reconstruction until the
City decides to look at a possible relocation of that crossing.
The Traffic Safety Committee recommended that the high visibility signs have a rapid flash feature. The
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has allowed these in select locations; however, they
do not have that particular system on their approved list. Staff is working with them to see if they would
permit and allow this system to be installed. These systems have been shown to increase stopping by
vehicles by 80% in a pedestrian crosswalk. These have sixteen flashers on each side and they flash 180-
degrees with a very bright rapid flash to alert vehicles. They are operated by a push button system and
are powered by a solar panel with a battery.
Staff received a quote for this system of $9,100. The City would need to hire a contractor to install the
system.
Mr. Ruzek said that this Council was being asked to approve the purchase of two solar powered, high
visibility pedestrian crossing signs. If MnDOT chooses to not allow them, then staff would have to go to
the blinker-type signs.
Councilmember Petschel stated that her message to MnDOT would be that if they are not going to
approve this, then they should move the crossing so there would only be two lanes of traffic to cross.
She stated this is a dangerous crosswalk. With the improvements at The Plaza and with the Hwy 110
underpass, there will be more foot traffic in the area. She suggested an article in the Heights Highlights
urging parents to speak to their children about using the crosswalks.
Councilmember Miller liked the suggestion of the article but also stressed that a large amount of
education should go to the drivers on the road. He noted that stopping for pedestrians in the crosswalk is
the state law.
Councilmember Duggan asked if there was a warranty on the system? Mr. Ruzek replied that he has not
checked the warranty; however, the system does have a 10-year battery life. Mr. Ruzek stated that city
staff would be responsible for all maintenance, as it would be a city-owned structure.
page 32
Councilmember Duggan asked if the City had the power to say ‘no drivers on their cell phones going
through our city’. City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied that by state statute, texting while driving is
already not allowed. Talking on a cell phone is allowed; however, there is a push in the legislature to
look at adding that to the law, and only allowing hands-free devices in cars.
Councilmember Paper, referencing the battery life, asked how long the sign would hold the charge. Mr.
Ruzek answered that the supplier stated that this should operate well for 30 days, even if there were 30
days of clouds. Councilmember Paper then asked what makes these so expensive? Mr. Ruzek was
unsure, which was why the city is obtaining a second quote.
Councilmember Petschel noted that if something better comes along for this particular intersection, the
City could move this system to another location.
Councilmember Paper asked how big the sign would be, and if the lights would make the reflective part
of the sign light up. Mr. Ruzek replied that they were planning to install a 36-inch sign, the bottom sign
would be 30-inches long, and a few inches high. He then asked if there was a system available that
would have a light higher up on the pole that, when the button was pushed, would shine a floodlight type
light directly down toward the crosswalk from each direction. Mr. Ruzek replied that he was unaware if
that technology existed. With this being a state right-of-way they would have to approve any products
installed.
Councilmember Duggan moved to approve the purchase of two solar powered, high visibility pedestrian
“Rapid Flash” crossing signs.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Highway 110
underpass is scheduled for 11:30 a.m. on October 27, 2017.
Residents can bring brush to the bonfire site beginning October 26, 2017. Details can be found on the
City’s website.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Duggan reminded residents of the “Name the Tunnel” contest. The details are on the
City’s website.
Councilmember Duggan noted that the Henry Sibley High School Band is being honored by
representing the State of Minnesota in Washington DC next year. They are accepting donation to cover
trip expenses. Donations can be made at www.henrysibleyband.org.
page 33
Councilmember Duggan recognized the Fire Department for a stellar open house. With construction
taking place, the City is being challenged to find a place for the bonfire next year. He read a poem that
he had written about the bonfire.
Councilmember Duggan noted that NDC4 held their 30th birthday party last week. He felt that these are
significant things in our community, and said everyone should hold their heads a bit higher.
Councilmember Paper reminded residents that on October 26, 2017 the school district would be hosting
a District-wide Facilities Planning Project Review at Henry Sibley High School. There will be two
sessions; one between 6:00 – 7:00 p.m. and one between 7:00 – 8:00 p.m. Free childcare will be
available. They are also offering tours of the high school.
Councilmember Miller stated what an honor it is for the Henry Sibley marching band to be selected to
represent Minnesota in Washington D.C. The band has not been there since 1992. He pointed out that
there were two people in the room – including himself – who were part of the last trip to DC and were
crowned National Marching Band Champions.
He also thanked everyone who came to the Fire Department Open House.
Councilmember Petschel stated that there has been work done on the traffic issues in Rogers Lake. She
complimented the residents on their civility, kindness, and respectfulness. She said that if we all work
together we can find a permanent solution. She expressed thanks to the Police Chief and the City
Engineer who have been a big part of the work group.
Councilmember Petschel stated that, from her experience, the Traffic Safety Committee is a very
dynamic and productive group. She credited the Police Chief, the City Engineer, and the new resident
member on the committee for providing great input. She believes that when there are issues in the City,
there is much to be gained from civil discussions and working together.
ADJOURN
Mayor Garlock moved to adjourn.
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m.
____________________________________
Neil Garlock
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 34
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, October 30, 2017
Pursuant to due call and notice, 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 Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers Paper and Petschel were also
present. Councilmember Duggan arrived at 7:05 p.m. Councilmember Miller was absent.
PUBLIC HEARING
A) RESOLUTION 2017-92, ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE
MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD AND KENSINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Chad Davidson, representing the City’s consulting engineering firm Stantec, presented the resolution
adopting assessments for the Mendota Heights Road and Kensington Street improvements project. Mr.
Davidson reviewed the scope of the project, the costs of the project, the funding sources and the
assessment calculations. It was noted that the interest rate of the assessments was set at 2 % above the
interest on the bonds sold for the project.
Councilmember Petschel moved to open the public hearing.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
Mr. Greg Quail, 963 Wagon Wheel, stated concerns he had about the timing of the traffic signals at the
intersections of Mendota Heights Road/Dodd Road and Lexington Avenue/Highway 110. It was noted
that MnDOT controls the signals and will be updating the signal at Mendota Heights Road and Dodd
Road in the future.
Ed Wing, 2591 Heritage Drive, asked that the sound in the room be increased.
Mayor Garlock moved to close the public hearing.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
Councilmember Duggan asked if the proposed deferrals should be noted in this resolution.
Administrator McNeill stated that the resolution should reflect all assessments to be levied.
page 35
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-92, ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING
ASSESSMENTS FOR THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD AND KENSINGTON STREET
IMPROVEMENTS.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) AUTHORIZING SIGN REPLACEMENT FOR THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD AND
KENSINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Chad Davidson presented a request to authorize signage replacement in conjunction with the Mendota
Heights Road and Kensington Street improvement project. The signs are in need of replacement due to
their diminishing reflectivity and legibility. It was noted that street signs are typically replaced in
conjunction with street reconstruction or rehabilitation projects to be compliant with state and federal
regulations.
Staff requested proposals from two signage companies. The lower quote received was from Advantage
Signs and Graphics, Inc. at a price of $18,432.89.
Upon a question from Councilmember Paper, Mr. Davidson stated that cost for signage replacement was
included in the cost of the street project.
Councilmember Petschel moved to AUTHORIZING SIGN REPLACEMENT FOR THE MENDOTA
HEIGHTS ROAD AND KENSINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
(B) RESOLUTION 2017-93, DEFERRING THE SANITARY SEWER ASSESSMENT FOR
2535 CONDON COURT
City Administrator Mark McNeill presented Resolution 2017-93, deferring the sanitary sewer
assessment at 2535 Condon Court for the Mendota Heights Road and Kensington Street improvement
project. The property is unable to connect to sanitary sewer at this time. It is proposed to defer this
assessment for one year, or until the property owner is able to connect to sanitary sewer.
Councilmember Petschel moved to approve RESOLUTION 2017-93, DEFERRING THE
ASSESSMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2535 CONDON
COURT FOR THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD & KENSINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENT
FOR ONE YEAR.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
page 36
(C) RESOLUTION 2017-94, DEFERRING THE STREET ASSESSMENT FOR
2455 VISITATION DRIVE
City Administrator Mark McNeill presented Resolution 2017-94, deferring the street assessment at 2455
Visitation Drive for the Mendota Heights Road and Kensington Street improvement project. State statute
allows residents to defer special assessments for undeveloped property. The City can determine if an
assessment will accrue interest, set the associated interest rate, and determine if the interest is due
annually or at the time of payment. The request from Monastery of the Visitation is requesting that two
parcels be deferred. The parcel located to the south of Mendota Heights Road is undeveloped at this
time. Deferment of the assessment would be in compliance with state statutes. The interest on the
assessment would continue to accrue during the deferment period.
The parcel to the north of Mendota Heights Road is mostly undeveloped, with the exception of a small
portion of a parking lot along Visitation Drive and the southern half of the soccer field. Generally, an
assessment of this nature would meet state requirements.
Councilmember Petschel questioned how frequently an undeveloped parcel is deferred. City Attorney
Tom Lehmann stated that it is not uncommon in other cities, however, Mendota Heights does not have
many undeveloped parcels remaining. Mr. Lehmann stated that the assessment does need to be paid at
some point in time and that the City could choose to defer only the principal amount or the principal and
interest amounts. He stated that when an undeveloped parcel of land receives a deferment, it is assumed
that the property will be developed at some point in the future.
Councilmember Petschel stated this is very unusual and she is struggling with this deferment since she
knows the property will never be developed. She asked what the impact is on the City if these two
parcels were deferred. Mr. McNeill stated that if the interest were paid annually by the property owner,
then it would be less of a burden on the City.
Councilmember Paper stated that he does not see a hardship and cannot find a reason to approve the
deferment since the property owner has no intent to develop the property.
Councilmember Duggan moved to approve Resolution 2017-94, Deferring Street Assessment For 2455
Visitation Drive For The North And The South Parcels, Deferring The Principal and the Interest
Payments For 10 Years.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Council member Petschel moved to approve RESOLUTION 2017-94, DEFERRING THE STREET
ASSESSMENT FOR 2455 VISITATION DRIVE FOR THE SOUTH PARCEL ONLY, DEFERRING
ONLY THE PRINCIPAL PAYMENT FOR 10 YEARS, WITH THE INTEREST TO BE PAID
ANNUALLY.
The motion was seconded by Councilmember Duggan.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
page 37
ADJOURN
Mayor Garlock stated that the Council would be holding a closed session meeting immediately after the
adjournment of this meeting. Following the closed session, the Council would be going back into open
session to hold a work session meeting to discuss a joint facilities partnership.
Councilmember Duggan moved to adjourn the meeting.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
(Absent: Miller)
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
____________________________________
Neil Garlock
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 38
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Special Meeting
Held Monday, October 30, 2017
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights,
Minnesota was held immediately following the special meeting of the City Council, at City Hall,
1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:55 pm. Councilmembers Duggan, Paper,
Petschel were also present. Councilmember Miller was absent. Staff in attendance included City
Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, Police Chief Kelly
McCarthy, City Attorney Tom Lehmann, and Consulting Attorney Marylee Abrams.
CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE MATTERS
A motion to adjourn to a closed session for the purpose of reviewing data regarding internal affairs
investigation of law enforcement personnel pursuant to Minn. Stat. §13D.05 subd. 2 (2) was made by
Councilor Petschel and seconded by Councilor Paper. The motion passed 4-0. Mayor Garlock
adjourned the meeting to a closed session of the City Council at 7:57 pm.
Those present included Mayor Garlock, Councilmembers Paper, Duggan and Petschel. Also in
attendance were City Administrator Mark McNeill, Police Chief Kelly McCarthy, Assistant City
Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, City Attorney Tom Lehmann, and Consulting Attorney Marylee
Abrams.
A motion was made by Councilor Duggan and seconded by Councilor Petschel to adjourn the closed
meeting and to return to the open meeting at 8:45 pm. The motion passed 4-0.
It was stated that no official action was taken by the Council in the closed session meeting. The
Council will provide a summary of the meeting as required by Minnesota Statutes.
OPEN SESSION
DISCUSSION OF JOINT FACILITIES PARTNERSHIP
The meeting was joined by Architect Jennifer Anderson-Tuttle of LSE Architects, which is the firm
which had been hired by ISD 197 to help research options for school facilities.
The Council discussed a joint facilities partnership with the City of West St. Paul, ISD 197, and other
possible partners. It was stated that the School District and the City of West St. Paul are in need of
replacing their respective swimming pools. A facilities study group was exploring the possibility of
consolidating and reconstructing for efficiency. The Council is being asked if they are interested in a
partnership and explore the idea of a community center.
page 39
Councilor Duggan expressed a desire for a written agreement early in the process to set forth use
expectations, and how much Mendota heights residents would see as a benefits. Councilor Petschel
expressed her desire for a survey to gauge community support for needs and priorities. She felt that
financing could only be done by referendum, similar to the Par 3 acquisition.
It was determined that the City Council would like to schedule a workshop to discuss a variety of
facilities topics, including more information on a possible school/cities partnership, but also
information on the fire station, the former Turner gymnastics building, and information on the impact
of a possible referendum.
ADJOURN
Motion Councilmember Duggan and seconded by Councilor Petschel to adjourn the meeting at 9:25
pm. Motion carried 4-0.
___________________________
Neil Garlock, Mayor
____________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 40
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday,
September 26, 2017 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners John
Mazzitello, Michael Noonan, Mary Magnuson, Michael Toth, and Brian Petschel. Those absent:
Doug Hennes (excused).
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as submitted.
Approval of August 22, 2017 (Regular Meeting) Minutes
Commissioner Magnuson, referencing page 8 of the minutes, asked if the brackets around words
in Findings of Fact #3 and #4 were to indicate that those words were added and, if not, why were
they there. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the brackets could be
removed. Chair Field asked if it would be appropriate to capitalize the words rather than having
them in brackets. Commissioner Magnuson said she just wanted to know what the brackets meant.
She then suggested that Mr. Benetti check the recording and see if the words should even be in the
document.
Commissioner Magnuson then referenced Condition #1 on the same page, that reads “. . .
construction of any new dwelling on each lot”, and asked if the word each should be there as there
was only one lot. Mr. Benetti replied that the word each can be replaced with the.
COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2017, WITH THE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
Approval of August 23, 2017 (Special Meeting) Minutes
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017, AS PRESENTED.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
page 41
Hearings
A) PLANNING CASE #2017-22
WOODSPRING SUITES HOTELS, SE CORNER OF NORTHLAND DRIVE AND
PILOT KNOB ROAD
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this request was for a Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) from WoodSpring Suites Hotels for a new 122 room, 4-story hotel located at
the southeast corner of the intersection of Northland Drive and Pilot Knob Road. Per Title 12-1L-
6, any use allowed by a CUP in the Industrial Zone has to go through a full site plan and review
process through both the Planning Commission and the City Council.
This item was presented under a Public Hearing Review, notices were published in the local paper,
and notices were mailed out to all property owners within 350 feet. No comments or objections
were received on this application.
Mr. Benetti shared an image of the property location as it relates to the surrounding streets and
properties. The property is zoned and guided Industrial and no changes are pursuant to this
application. The size of the property is just over 3 3/4 acres. The building to land ratio is 7.5%;
well under the 50% threshold. He also shared an aerial view of the property.
Elevation plans show a mixture of stone materials, stone veneers, brick veneers, lap board siding,
and metal fascia boards; a good combination. The color scheme is indicative of a preferred
marketable element of the WoodSpring Suite Hotels.
The information packet provided to the Commission prior to the meeting included the following
elements, of which Mr. Benetti shared a brief overview:
Project Description
Building Plan/Elevations
Site Plan
Parking Plan
Grading & Drainage Plan
Landscape Plan
Lighting Plan
Utility Plan
Sign Plan
Traffic Analysis
Aircraft Noise Attenuation
Mr. Benetti concluded his report by sharing the standards that must be met before a CUP can be
issued and explained how this project met those standards.
page 42
Commissioner Magnuson noted that she is not familiar with this brand of hotel and asked if it
would include an independent restaurant, bar, or anything like that. Mr. Benetti replied in the
negative. This would most generally be used as an executive-type extended stay location with the
possibility of a fitness room but no pool, restaurant, bar, or even breakfast service.
Commissioner Mazzitello noted that he asked his questions to staff earlier so they are prepared to
answer. He then stated that it was his understanding that a stormwater model has not been
completed. Mr. Benetti confirmed and replied that it would be forthcoming. Commissioner
Mazzitello asked that a condition be added to the recommendation, which staff agreed to do.
Commissioner Mazzitello then stated that other development requests that have come through, and
even the others on the agenda this evening, included a provision for the landscape plan to meet the
City’s pollinator-friendly policy. He asked that this condition also be added to this request. Staff
agreed to do so.
Commissioner Toth, referencing the stormwater pond to be installed on the side of the property,
asked if any consideration had been made for a water retention system under the parking lot instead
of the stormwater pond and, instead, have that area designated as green space. Mr. Benetti replied
that this type of consideration is usually up to the developer. If they have the space to put in
stormwater ponds, then they usually do so as they are cheaper than the underground systems. Staff
did speak with the developer and he is open to the idea of installing a fountain feature in the
stormwater pond.
Mr. Andy Berg, Project Manager with Kimley Horn made himself available to add comments to
the staff report or answer questions. He also extended apologies from Mr. Scott Bixler of
WoodSpring Hotels for being unable to attend.
Mr. Berg confirmed Mr. Benetti’s reasons for the stormwater pond and also explained that the
pond also provides a more cost effective and easier access should any problems arise.
Commissioner Mazzitello asked if Mr. Berg was familiar with the pollinator-friendly policy of the
City and coordinating their landscaping plan through the master gardeners that volunteer with the
City. Mr. Berg replied that he was not aware of the program; however, it is something he would
be willing to work with.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
page 43
COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MAGNUSON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-22
CONDITIONAL USE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed hotel use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of
the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor depreciate
surrounding property values.
2. The proposed hotel use conforms to the general purpose and intent of this code and
comprehensive plan, including all applicable performance standards, provided all
conditions are met and upheld by the property owners during the term of construction.
3. The property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all applicable
city code standards.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. All new buildings shall be constructed in conformance to building and site plans certified
by a registered architect and/or licensed engineer.
2. Trash enclosure must be made to match the exterior finishes of the principal building.
3. Rooftop mechanical units shall be of a low profile variety. All ground-level and rooftop
mechanical utilities, other than low profile rooftop units, shall be completely screened with
one or more of the materials used in the construction of the principal structure, to be
reviewed by the Planning Department and verified as part of the building permit review
process.
4. Plant material near the entry points shall not exceed 36-inches in height, and shall not
obstruct fire department connections or hydrants
5. A performance bond or letter of credit shall be supplied by the applicant in an amount equal
to at least one and one-half (1 ½) times the value of such screening, landscaping, or other
improvements, to be submitted at time of building permit approval.
6. The Developer shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all
landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from
refuse and debris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or
landscape plan and which have died shall be replaced as soon as seasonal or weather
conditions allow. All landscape areas must be irrigated.
7. Any connections to the city’s water system shall be designed and constructed to Saint Paul
Regional Water Service (SPRWS) standards.
8. Building and grading permits shall be obtained from the City prior to construction
commencement.
9. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall be in
compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in
compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
10. All applicable fire and building codes, as adopted/amended by the City, shall apply and the
buildings shall be fully-protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system.
11. All new buildings must comply with the Aircraft Noise Attenuation standards as found
under Title 12-4-1 of City Code.
12. Any new signs proposed under this plan submittal must either be approved as part of an
accepted comprehensive sign plan; or any sign that does not meet the standards of City
Code Title 12-1D-15 must be adjusted to comply with City Code, or the Developer must
request separate variances to allow excess sign sizes.
page 44
AND WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TWO FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
13. A stormwater model is produced and submitted to the City for approval by the City
Engineer prior to final approvals.
14. The landscape plan is submitted for review for compliance with the City’s pollinator-
friendly policy.
Commissioner Magnuson asked if it should be stated anywhere in the recommendation that
includes approval of the Comprehensive Sign Plan to avoid having any discussion of variances.
Mr. Benetti confirmed that this should be included.
Commissioner Mazzitello agreed to add this as part of the motion. Since Commissioner Magnuson
was the second but also made the recommendation, no second was necessary.
Mr. Benetti asked if modifying Condition #12 to include ‘all new signs proposed as part of this
plan are approved as part of the accepted copies of the site plan’. The Commission agreed that this
would be sufficient.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its October 3, 2017
meeting.
B) PLANNING CASE #2017-24
TIM DYRHAUG, 1773 SUTTON LANE
WETLANDS PERMIT
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Tim Dyrhaug was seeking
approval of a Wetlands Permit to help facilitate the removal and replacement of some retaining
walls in the rear yard, along with select removal of dead or diseased trees and invasive/noxious
vegetation in and around the area of work. The work would also include the repair of a concrete
footing pier.
The Wetland Permit is required due to the work being done within 100 feet of a wetland or water
resource-related area. This item was being presented as a public hearing item, notices were
published in the local paper, and notices were sent to all of the homeowners within 350 feet of the
subject site. No comments or objections had been received.
The subject property is approximately 17,447 square feet in size, just under 0.40 acres, has an
existing 1 3/4 story single-family dwelling; is zoned R-1 and guided LR-Low Density Residential
development on the Comprehensive Plan. This parcel is located immediately next to three parcels
owned by the City of Mendota Heights and abuts a parcel containing an unnamed pond or water
features, which is also owned and maintained by the City.
page 45
Mr. Benetti shared images of the retaining walls that need repair despite being green pre-treated
timbers that also have trees and vegetation growing up next to them and are causing some
problems. The project involves replacement of three retaining wall systems, which would be of
natural stone or boulders rather than the pre-treated wood.
Since all of the work would be completed up near the home, no actual wetland property would be
impacted. Also, staff would ensure that all silt-fencing and bio-rolls are installed to prevent any
type of washouts or erosion control to the pond.
Mr. Tim Dyrhaug, 1773 Sutton Lane, had nothing to add to the staff report but made himself
available to answer any questions.
Commissioner Toth noted that, according to the plans, the retaining walls are less than four feet in
height. He then asked what type of stone wall he would be replacing. Mr. Dyrhaug replied that
they would be of natural fieldstone boulders.
Commissioner Toth also noted that the report indicates that no structural engineering design is
necessary at this point. He then asked if the plan was to use some kind of fabric behind the boulder
walls to keep any other soil amendments that may wash and seep through the soil in later years
from causing problems down the road. Mr. Dyrhaug replied in the affirmative.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO,
TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-24 WETLANDS PERMIT
APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed construction activities to be allowed under this Wetlands Permit meet the
purpose and intent of the City Code and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed construction work should have very little, if any impacts to the adjacent water
feature.
3. The Owner will provide for the protection and preservation of the adjacent water resource-
related area by installing silt fence and stormwater run-off protection measures.
4. The Owner will make every attempt to minimize disturbance of the area in order to protect
and preserve the natural surroundings, avoid excess loss of vegetation, and avoid any
impacts to wildlife and aquatic organisms.
page 46
5. Vegetation will be replanted, in accordance with City guidance and instructions in the
disturbed areas after construction is completed.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Any land disturbance activities shall be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
2. An updated plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department showing
vegetation to be re-planted within the disturbed areas of the project. This plan will include
pollinator friendly and/or native plantings/grasses that will grow and thrive in the over-
shaded area of the rear yard.
3. For the agreed upon temporary right-of-access to the city-owned land to the south,
including all work to install, remove and restore said temporary access/construction road,
the Owner/Applicant shall provide evidence or proof of insurance that the City of Mendota
Heights is waived from any and all liability, and named as an added insurer to the
homeowner’s insurance policy or contactor’s policy.
4. A cash bond, letter of credit or agreed upon surety in the amount of $1,000 shall be
submitted and held by the city for a period of at least one (1) year from completion of all
work, to ensure all new landscaping has survived, and the access roadway has been
properly restored.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its October 3, 2017
meeting.
C) PLANNING CASE #2017-25
JIM CARLSON, 1562 WACHTLER AVENUE
AFTER-THE-FACT WETLANDS PERMIT
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Jim Carlson, the owner of 1562
Wachler Avenue, requested a Wetlands Permit for work being done within 100-feet of a wetland
or water resource-related area. Since most of the work has already been completed; approximately
90%, this was considered an after-the-fact permit.
This item was being presented as a public hearing item, notices were published in the local paper,
and notices were sent to all of the homeowners within 350 feet of the subject site. No comments
or objections had been received.
The subject property is 1.77 acres in size and contains a 5,345 square foot single-family home. It
is zoned R-1 and guided LR-Low Density Residential on the Comprehensive Plan.
On August 3, 2017 staff was notified by a concerned resident that extensive grading and
landscaping was being done on the site. Upon investigation by the City Engineer and Mr. Benetti
a Cease and Desist Order was issued and an appointment was made with the applicant, who was
out of town at the time, to discuss the issue. At that meeting Mr. Carlson was very embarrassed
page 47
that he did not know or understand the process. He is new to the community and did realize that a
permit was necessary. He agreed to stop all work, to install bio-filtration rolls, and he has agreed
to not do any further work until approvals are received.
Mr. Benetti shared images of the subject property and the work that had already been done. This
work included removal of some buckthorn and other invasive weeds and plants along the edge of
his rear yard and along the creek edge. When he discovered that he also owned a small area of land
on the other side of the creek, he began the process of grading a new access trail down to the creek
edge and installed a small wooden foot bridge to allow access to that area without crossing his
neighbor’s property. Mr. Carlson would like to finish the work by installing some Class-5 or
similar angular rock roadway leading to and from the foot-bridge for traction.
Commissioner Magnuson asked if a structure of this type – the bridge – be required to meet any
building code or standards. Mr. Benetti replied that there is no building code requirement for this
type of structure.
Commissioner Mazzitello asked how the foot-bridge was imbedded into the creek bed. Mr. Benetti
replied that when he and the City Engineer walked across the bridge they were impressed with its
stability. There was no sway or rocking at all. However, Mr. Carlson could probably address how
it was built.
Commissioner Mazzitello asked, because the creek is a water body and the work has been done
very close to the creek, if there was any necessity to get either the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
or the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) involved in a review of what has been done. Mr.
Benetti replied that, from a staff level, they felt that the DNR was not needed because it was not
an affected or identifiable wetland feature on the wetlands map. Also, the Army Corp of Engineers
usually only provides oversight on navigable waters, which this is not.
Mr. Jim Carlson, 1562 Wachtler Avenue, came forward and, in response to Commissioner
Mazzitello’s query, noted that the bridge is secured very well and would hold 9,000 pounds easily.
He has also installed some sidewalk blocks underneath so it would not sink and he put boulders
along side the bridge. He also spoke to his neighbor who indicated that in the 20+ years he has
lived there the water has never come up that high.
He moved in last fall and when he walked down to the creek this spring he noticed that the previous
owner had used the area as a brush and wood dump. He started some of the grading to enable the
removal of this debris – which included some large tree trunks – and make it look nice again.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
page 48
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
Commissioner Mazzitello noted that he had been working with the neighbor to the south, Mr.
Sweeney, on a project that has nothing to do with this one and he is not under any contract with
Mr. Sweeney; however, he wanted to inform the Commission and the public for transparency.
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-25 AFTER-THE-FACT
WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed construction activities to be allowed under this Wetlands Permit meet the
purpose and intent of the City Code and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The project includes erosion and sediment control measures in compliance with the City’s
Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
3. The Owner will make a concerted effort to eliminate or reduce any impacts to the adjacent
water feature by establishing a protective buffer area along the creek within the subject
property.
4. The Owner will provide for the protection and preservation of the adjacent water resource-
related area by installing silt fence and stormwater run-off protection measures.
5. The Owner will make every attempt to minimize disturbance of the area in order to protect
and preserve the natural surroundings, avoid excess loss of vegetation, and avoid any
impacts to wildlife and aquatic organisms.
6. Vegetation will be replanted, in accordance with City guidance and instructions in the
disturbed areas after construction is completed.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Any land disturbance activities shall be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
2. Owner/Applicant must establish and maintain a wild growth buffer area at least 25 feet in
width from the established creek edge
3. The 25-ft buffer area shall comprise of new vegetation cover consisting of wild-native mix
seeding and pollinator friendly plantings within the buffer area, with plantings to be done
by this fall.
4. Owner/Applicant shall install and maintain silt fence or approved erosion control measures
along all disturbed areas and the edges of the creek until the vegetation is properly
established, as determined by the City.
5. A cash bond, letter of credit or agreed upon surety in the amount of $1,000 shall be
submitted and held by the city for a period of at least one (1) year from completion of all
work, to ensure all new landscaping has survived, and the access roadway to the new
footbridge has been properly restored.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
page 49
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its October 3, 2017
meeting.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
A) DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED VISION & GOALS
Mr. Phil Carlson, AICP, Consulting Planner from Stantec noted that the process of updating the
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan was started late last year; however, with the shuffle
of planners and such there was some delay.
Mr. Carlson stated that every community in the Twin Cities seven county area needs to have a
Comprehensive Plan done by the end of 2018 that will fit with the Metropolitan Council’s
(MetCouncil) format and template, and answer the questions and provide the information that they
are looking for.
Stantec is planning a series of three meetings in the next month with the Planning Commission to
go into the next phase – Goals and Policy. Afterwards, they will develop alternatives – the draft of
the draft – of the plan; develop some implementation steps; and then go through and prepare the
full draft plan next spring and summer. A series of community meetings has also been tentatively
planned to obtain citizen input on what might be in the plan.
Mr. Carlson explained that what they would like to go over is the Preliminary pieces of this section
of the plan – Vision and Goals. This starts with a broad picture of what are the issues in Mendota
Heights today – what do you think is good and bad. Mr. Carlson wants to start a process to look at
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (S.W.O.T.) – what are the issues and how does the
Commission see Mendota Heights today.
The next piece is the Vision Statement – a concise statement that says this is what we intend for
the future. He would like the Planning Commission to look at the current Vision Statement to
ascertain if it still reflects what they feel about the community; would they like to change, modify,
update, add, delete – or do they even see the need for a Vision Statement.
Mr. Carlson had included in the information packet, provided to the Planning Commissioners prior
to the meeting, several pages of goals that were divided into the various elements of the plan. He
had no plans to review those in detail at this point; however, he would like for the Commissioner
to become familiar with them and be prepared to talk about them at the October 11, 2017 special
meeting. At this meeting they would also revisit all of the issues raised this evening, the Vision
Statement, and then the goals in detail.
Hopefully, at the regular meeting on October 24, 2017, they can pull everything together and
finalize the goals.
Chair Field suggested that this part of the meeting be more informal than a typical Planning
Commission meeting to allow more give and take. Mr. Benetti and he had discussed possibly
adjourning this to a more of a roundtable; however, they felt in the interest of time and presenting
page 50
this to the public by means of the broadcast – this would be the best environment to share some of
the work that does need to be done for important work in the next several months. Subsequent
meetings would be – with the exception of the formal Planning Commission meeting – would be
more informal and conversational. As the chair he would welcome the publics coming and
participating in the process.
Commissioner Noonan asked if the intention was to take the commission through a S.W.O.T.
analysis tonight. Mr. Carlson replied that the intent is to take the commission through the first part
of it. Commissioner Noonan stated that he felt particularly unprepared to engage in that discussion;
there was no indication to them to put their thinking caps on before the meeting and come prepared.
If they had the opportunity just to think about it, the quality of what they would offer would be
much more deliberative, thoughtful, and comprehensive than trying to have them throw out ideas
off the cuff.
Commissioner Magnuson noted that the Commission had talked from time-to-time about changing
various zoning requirements – such as creating some special category for institutions in residential
zones – would that appropriate to think about as part of this plan or is that something that gets done
independently after the development of the plan is completed. Mr. Carlson replied that this could
be one of the issues and one of the things that is brought up in this plan. It does get a bit detailed
but it could be a part of the implementation steps. It would be appropriate.
To address Commissioner Noonan’s concern, Mr. Carlson stated that they could go through and
have the meeting next time if they are more informal and feel more prepared. He believed they
could do that and still keep on schedule.
Commissioner Toth stated that being newly appointed to the Commission he has questions for
staff and the Council. He is unprepared to answer or give ideas of where he may see the pro-
activeness of the City moving forward. He agreed with Commissioner Noonan’s comments also.
Commissioner Mazzitello asked if it would be an appropriate step now to talk about what the ‘heart
of the plan’ is, what a Vision Statement is, what a Mission Statement is, what goals are for, how
the policies back up the goals, etc. to help get the Commission into the mindset for the next
meeting. Chair Field stated that he believed that would be perfect. While the idea of going through
on a broad brush what they are accomplishing, they also should feel free, if something comes up
that they think is important to be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, to mention it so it is
not overlooked at a later meeting.
Commissioner Noonan stated that attached to the report is a series of goals. He then asked if these
goals prescribed by the MetCouncil as part of their planning handbook or are these goals that have
a legacy with the City and the Commission is looking to continue to work and upgrade them. Mr.
Carlson replied that the goals that were attached were a sample for the Commission to start with;
however, they did not come from the MetCouncil. There is a specific list of information that the
MetCouncil wants to be given by the time the City is done with the plan. Part of them came from
the current Comprehensive Plan that was done in 2008; but that plan did not have goals in very
many parts of the plan. He then pulled some from other communities that are typical goals for
those elements.
page 51
Chair Field asked for the 2008 iteration of the Comprehensive Plan be sent to the Commissioners
so they have that baseline. It was agreed that this would be made available.
Mr. Carlson then provided a very high level purpose of the Comprehensive Plan and how it is put
together for the newer Commissioners.
Additional general discussion occurred as to what would be appropriate to discuss, add, or change
during the Comprehensive Plan process, what materials should be made available during the
process to facilitate educated discussions, and appropriateness of various topics.
Staff Announcements / Update on Developments
Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted the following:
Planning Case #2017-17
Alltech Engineering Conditional Use Permit to allow an over-height fence in the industrial district
was approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
Planning Case #2017-18
Landscape Architecture Inc. and Peter & Jen Eisenhuth Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use
Permit to allow certain construction activities in the critical area overlay district was approved by
the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
Planning Case #2017-19
Mike Swenson – Michael Development of MN, LLC Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use
Permit, and Wetlands permit for the proposed Mendota Heights Apartment Development was
approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Benetti noted
for the Commission that this item passed on a 3-2 vote to approve.
The city is conducting a public hearing at the October 3, 2017 City Council meeting to consider
the vacation of a segment of Hilltop Avenue right-of-way situated between the Larson Greenhouse
site and the old Mendota Motel site. The developer intends to bring the final plat of his Mendota
Heights Apartments development to the October 17, 2017 City Council meeting or future meeting.
Chair Field asked what the genesis was on the 3-2 vote on the Michael Development application.
Mr. Benetti replied there were some objections and concerns about what was presented and
addressed under the overall PUD application process, specifically the allowances given for
increased density, reduced setbacks, impervious surface percentage, reduced distance between
buildings, sight lines and other development standards granted under the PUD approval. Chair
Field asked if there were any surprises. Mr. Benetti replied in the negative.
Planning Case #2017-20
City of Mendota Heights & Ideal Energies Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Wetlands Permit
for the city’s new ground-mounted solar array field was approved by the City Council as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
page 52
Planning Case #2017-21
Minnehaha Academy Interim Use Permit was approved by the City Council as recommended by
the Planning Commission.
Adjournment
COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN,
TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:42 P.M.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)
page 53
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 11, 2017
A special meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Wednesday,
October 11, 2017 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners John
Mazzitello, Mary Magnuson, Michael Toth, and Brian Petschel. Those absent: Michael Noonan,
Doug Hennes (both excused).
Staff Present: Consulting Planner Phil Carlson (Stantec), Community Development Director
Tim Benetti, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek; and City Administrator Mark McNeill.
Chair Field welcomed the participants, and stated that this was a special meeting of the Planning
Commission to consider a first look at items relating to the updating of the City Comprehensive
Plan. He said that there would be subsequent meetings, including public hearings and open
houses, to take and consider public input.
Consulting Planner Phil Carlson then began the presentation, and spoke of the anticipated
schedule. He passed out cards, in which participants would be asked to write a six word
sentence about what Mendota Heights might be like in the future.
S.W.O.T. Analysis
Mr. Carlson led the participants in a “SWOT” analysis, in which the Commissioners listed
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the City of Mendota Heights currently, and in
the future. They began by reviewing and including a number of suggestions which had been
submitted by Commissioner Noonan in an e-mail (as he was unable to attend this meeting), and
added to each category with their own suggestions. The items listed by the participants are noted
as follows:
Strengths
• Low Taxes (5)
• Low Crime Rates (5)
• Overall Accessibility (transportation) (3)
• Rural Feel (3)
• Proximity to Mpls./St. Paul/MSP Airports
• Business Park Employment Base
• Stable Residential
• Diverse Education uses
• Mix of Private vs. Open Spaces
• Community Institutions (schools, churches, civics uses)
• River amenities
page 54
• Recreation areas (parks / golf courses / trails
• History (institutional knowledge / generational)
• Public Safety / Public Works (very responsive)
• Industrial Park - “room-to-grow”
• Nearby attractions
• Mix of Housing Stock (style, economics, rural feel)
• Non-Bureaucratic (nimble, responsive government)
• Recreational uses / Trails
Weaknesses
• Limited Amenities (5)
• Financially Constrained (need diversity) (4)
• Lack of Commercial/ Retail services (3)
• Limited Development Opportunities (2)
• Airport Noise (2)
• Resistance to Change (2)
• Age of Housing Stock (2)
• Lack of Public Transit / Transportation Programs (2)
• Lack of Diverse Housing Stock (1)
• Cellular service (poor in parts) (1)
• Lack of Medical Services (clinics, doctor offices, special med services)
• Lack of Affordable Housing
• Overhead Power Lines
• Lack of Broadband service
• Dual-Income Families / Stability
• Aging Population
• Limited Starter Housing Opportunities
• Impacts of Vikings development (Eagan)
Opportunities
• Aging Population (encourages younger populace to move in) (6)
• Vikings development (5)
• Bourn Lane Properties (city-owned lands off Hwy 13 & south of Resurrection Cem.) (5)
• Select Redevelopment (4)
• Proximity to Minneapolis / St. Paul cities / MSP Airport
• Revamp Hwy 149 (Dodd Road) and Hwy 110
• Added Population (adjacent cities) / Added Customer Base
• Resurgence of Downtown St. Paul
• Expanded Food / Retail in the Industrial District
Threats
• Development in Adjoining Communities (especially traffic) (4)
• Aging Infrastructure (4)
• Increased Air Traffic (3)
• Age of Housing Stock (3)
• Tear-downs/Mega-Mansions
page 55
• Stagnation – due to maturity of community
• School capacity
• Losing Aged Populace
• Emergency {Plans/Disaster Awareness
• Pipelines (leaks, explosions, environmental damage, etc.)
• Invasive Vegetation (i.e. buckthorn, sumac, etc.) & Insects (i.e. emerald ash borer)
• State Legislative Actions / Un-funded Mandates
• Bluff Area Impacts (erosion, deforestation, new/expanded development)
• Local Businesses “poached” by Adjacent Cities
Once these were identified, Commissioners were asked to list their top priorities in each
classification. The most significant issue(s) were marked with a color-coded dot to represent the
commissioners’ priority or vote under each category, which are noted in the (red #) after each
issue above.
Members of the audience were invited by Chair Field to comment. Concerns were expressed
about impacts on neighborhoods from developments; the Metropolitan Council seeing density as
a positive; Mendota Heights having lost the focus of being “spacious and gracious”; a lack of
access to healthcare; increased traffic; and how to maintain ponds and waterways.
Positives included the collective wisdom of the senior residents of the community; strong and
diverse faith communities; and playground and ballfields being used by younger families.
Vision and Mission Statements
Mr. Carlson stated that the City had an existing Vision Statement, which was not a requirement
of the Comprehensive Plan, but could certainly be included. He notes that the existing Vision
Statement is now 58 years old. The consensus of the group was to include it, and that it could
give a snapshot of where the City could be in the next 20 years.
Discussion turned to the difference between a Vision Statement, and a Mission Statement. It was
stated that the Vision Statement is aspirational; the Mission Statement is how you get there.
After considerable discussion and input, a first draft of the revised mission statement was
formulated as follows:
“Mendota Heights will continue to be a high quality, family oriented residential community,
with the feel of the (small town feel in an urban setting) country and the amenities of a city.
While it is centrally located in the metropolitan area, the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers
form a natural green belt around it, allowing the community to maintain a quiet, private
way of life, unique in the Twin Cities. Mendota Heights achieved its successful business
community and exceptional residential neighborhoods by following the detailed
comprehensive plans set forth by its forefathers over xx years ago….”
“Mendota Heights will be recognized as a, high quality, family oriented residential
community, with a spacious, natural small town, rural feel and the amenities of a city.
- Spacious and gracious
page 56
- Continue what we have now, not more high density
- Vision is aspirational, Mission is what you do to get there
- Include as background
- Community is to children as to me
- Large wetlands, near water, streams
“Innovative and forward thinking on the part of community officials has resulted in a
planned community, which affords a quiet lifestyle for its residents while providing a full
array of services and employment opportunities. The community has preserved an
abundance of parks and open spaces, encourages spacious residential development, and has
planned for diversified, high technology offices and business areas. Excellent schools and a
well-educated populace complement the traditional but progressive character of the City.
Civic pride and aesthetic excellence are high priorities in Mendota Heights.”
Consensus was that the Vision Statement should be included as part of the “Background” section
of the Plan. Commissioner Mazzitello volunteered to draft a Mission Statement to consider at
the next meeting.
Discussion of Goals
Mr. Carlson led the group in a review and updating of the goals in the current Comprehensive
Plan, including the Chapters and elements of the Goals. He advised the participants that the
goals could be very general, or be specific to Mendota Heights.
The Land Use Goals were reviewed, and modifications were suggested (in red text) below:
GOAL 1: THE LAND USE PLAN WILL SERVE AS THE FOUNDATION FOR
LAND USE DECISIONS IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS.
POLICIES
• Develop in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan for land use, economic
development, housing, transportation, parks and other community facilities.
• Review and amend the Comprehensive Plan as necessary to ensure consistent
development policy in current and future development decisions.
• Zoning and rezoning decisions shall conform to the Land Use Plan.
• Balance land use designations to meet projected demand.
GOAL 2. PRESERVE, PROTECT AND ENRICH THE ESTABLISHED
RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT AND CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
POLICIES
• Subdivision and zoning standards will emphasize high quality site and
architectural design.
• Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level
in community development and building.
• Parks, trails and open spaces will be planned within walking distance of all
residential areas.
• Encourage development and planning of land that provides for reasonable
connection to surrounding neighborhoods.
page 57
• Public buildings and properties will be designed, constructed and maintained to be
a source of civic pride and to set a standard for private property owners to follow.
• Historic preservation will be considered in land use decisions.
GOAL 3: SUPPORT INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN
DESIGNATED AREAS.
POLICIES
• The City will use available resources to meet development and redevelopment
needs.
• Encourage appropriate transitions and buffering between potentially incompatible
land uses.
• Enhance viability of commercial/retail uses, and encourage complementary retail
uses that support neighboring commercial and industrial uses.
GOAL 4. ENHANCE AND PROTECT THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.
POLICIES
• Provide for maintenance and further natural restoration of ecological systems
including lakes, ponding areas, aquifers, and drainage areas
• Encourage sustainable and energy efficient design in all public and private
construction.
• Take into account air quality and noise impacts in land use and infrastructure
decisions.
• Follow best practices in land use and infrastructure decisions that impact
stormwater runoff.
• Pollinator friendly, native plantings, ecological stewardship, eliminate invasive
GOAL 5. REDUCE THE IMPACT OF AIRCRAFT NOISE WITHIN THE
COMMUNITY.
POLICIES
• Increase public participation and representation through the Noise Oversight
Committee (NOC) and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) through
the Airport Relations Commission
• Achieve noise reduction through advocating modified takeoff procedures and
corridor compliance.
• Advocate an equitable distribution of aircraft traffic and a more equitable runway
use system.
• Monitor the continued implementation of the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) airport
Comprehensive Plan.
• Advocate for specific noise control measures through operational changes and
advance technology.
• Establish a physical capacity for the Mendota Heights/Eagan corridor and transfer
general aviation use to other reliever airports.
• Notify and work with MnDOT in the event that potential airspace obstructions are
encountered.
• Consider aircraft noise and safety issues in all land use and zoning decisions.
page 58
It was decided that the discussion of the remainder of the goals would be held as part of the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission, which would be held on October 24,, 2017.
Adjournment
Chair Fields adjourned the meeting at 9:18 pm
Minutes Taken By:
Mark McNeill,
City Administrator
page 59
DATE: November 7, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Fiscal Agent Approval
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to act as a Fiscal Agent so that a grant can be accepted on behalf of the
City’s Fire Relief Association.
BACKGROUND
The City of Mendota Heights has been asked to act as the Fiscal Agent in receiving a grant from
the St. Paul Foundation for the Mendota Heights Fire Relief Association. The St. Paul
Foundation has a donor that wishes to donate $10,000 to both the Police Department and the Fire
Relief Association. Mendota Heights Fire Relief Association is set up as a 501(c)4. This
designation prevents the St. Paul Foundation from issuing a check to them. The City can act as
the Fiscal Agent to receive the $10,000 for the relief association.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council pass a motion to approve the City of
Mendota Heights to act as the Fiscal Agent in receiving a donation from the St. Paul Foundation
for the Mendota Heights Relief Association.
page 60
DATE: November 7, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Portable Radios Purchase
Comment
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to approve the purchase of portable radios for use by the Fire
Department.
BACKGROUND
The fire department’s portable radios are 10 years old and scheduled to be replaced in 2017. Due
to the rapid advances in radio technology, Motorola will begin to phase out support for our
current radios beginning in 2018. Once we leave the fire apparatus, these hand held radios are
our only means of fire ground communication. Any issues related to timely and cost effective
maintenance of these radios has the potential to impact fire ground operations.
BUDGET IMPACT
The replacement of these radios was anticipated and funds are allocated for this project in the
2017 Budget—the City has been levying for this purchase for multiple years. The department is
seeking Council approval to purchase 24 radios--17 of the radios will be mounted in our
apparatus and the other 7 are assigned to the fire officers.
Ancom Communications of Burnsville currently holds the state contract for portable fire radios.
The published price to purchase 24 radios and related accessories is $94,714.50 Ancom is
offering a $12,000 trade in value for all of our old radios, which will reduce the total expenditure
to $82,714.50
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend City Council authorize the purchase of portable radios from Ancom
Communications.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the purchase of 24 portable radios from
Ancom Communications, at a price not to exceed $82,714.50.
page 61
DATE: November 7, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: Recreation Program Coordinator Hire
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve the hiring of Meredith Lawrence as Recreation Program
Coordinator.
BACKGROUND
Staff has completed the recruitment process to fill the Recreation Program Coordinator vacancy.
The City received 23 applications from interested candidates for the position.
Staff is recommending that Meredith Lawrence be hired for the position. Ms. Lawrence is
familiar to the city and comes highly recommended. She is a recent graduate of Augustana
University with degrees in Sports Management and Business Administration, with a strong
emphasis in Marketing. Meredith has worked as the city’s Tennis Instructor for the last four
years and has been assisting with end of the season needs within our recreation programs and at
the Par 3.
If approved, Meredith would begin official employment on November 8, 2017.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that city council approve the hiring of Meredith Lawrence as Recreation
Program Coordinator. Starting salary will be $51,770 annually, which is Step A of pay grade 17
on the Employee Position/Pay Compensation schedule.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the hiring of Meredith Lawrence as
Recreation Program Coordinator, effective November 8, 2017.
page 62
DATE: November 7, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: Resignation of Police Officer Michael Shepard
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to accept the resignation of Police Officer Michael Shepard.
BACKGROUND
Police Officer Michael Shepard submitted his resignation effective November 3, 2017. Terms of
his resignation are in the attached Settlement and Release Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council accept the resignation of Officer Shepard, effective
November 3, 2017.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, accept the resignation of Officer Michael Shepard,
effective November 3, 2017, and authorize the City Administrator to sign the attached Settlement
and Release Agreement.
page 63
1 Settlement and Release Agreement This Settlement Agreement and Release (“Agreement”) is made and entered into between Michael Shepard (“Employee ”), Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., (“Union ”), and the City of Mendota Heights (“City”). The Parties agree as follows: WHEREAS, Employee is employed by the City of Mendota Heights as a police officer, and wishes to tender his resignation from employment for medical reasons; WHEREAS, Employee and the City now desire to fully and finally settle all issues, differences, and potential claims between them in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals described above and for other good and valuable consideration made below, all of which is acknowledged to be sufficient consideration to support this Agreement, the Parties mutually agree as follows: 1. Termination of Employment. Employee represents, understands, and agrees that he irrevocably resign s his employment with the City effective Friday, November 3, 2017. Said resignation shall be submitted in writing to City Administrator Mark McNeill. Employee agrees he will not apply for future employment with the City of Mendota Heights. 2. Consideration. The City shall pay Employee and Employee shall accept the following: a. The City agrees to pay Injury on Duty (IOD) pay in accordance with Article XIX of the operative labor agreement, beginning September 21, 2017 for a period of one hundred twenty (120) working days, or until Employee may be approved to receive PERA benefits, whichever date comes sooner. Employee shall not accrue any further vacation, personal leave or holiday time after September 21, 2017. b. City agrees to continue to make the City contribution towards health and dental insurance benefits through the effective date identified in 2(a) above. Employee is responsible to make the required Employee contribution. c. Employee shall receive his contractual severance pay after the pay period ending November 10, 2017. 3. Release and Waiver of All Claims. a. “Employee’s claims” as used in this Settlement and Release Agreement means any rights Employee has now or hereinafter to any relief of any kind from the City whether or not Employee knows about those rights, arising out of or related to his empl oyment with the City and his separation from employment including, without limitation, the following: 1) Claims for breach of contract, fraud or misrepresentation, deceit, assault and battery, defamation, all forms of unlawful discrimination and/or harassment, page 64
2 negligence, intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, pain and suffering, reprisal, unfair labor practices, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, negligence or other breach of duty, wrongful termination of employment, retaliation, status as a whistleblower, breach of public policy, vicarious liability, invasion of privacy, interference with contractual or business relationships, reprisal; and 2) Claims for violation of the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, the Employee Retirement Security Act, Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the ADA Amendments Act (“ADAAA”), the Federal Fair Employment Practices Act, Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) the Equal Pay Act (“EPA”) the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) the Minnesota Human Rights Act, laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, the Workers’ Compensation Wrongful Discharge statute, Minnesota Whistleblower statute, Minnesota Stat . §181 et. seq., or other federal, state or local civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination, and any other claims for unlawful employment practices; and 3) Claims for alleged injuries or damages or compensation for bodily injury, personal injury, wage loss benefit, reinstatement, medical expenses, emotional distress, fines, penalties, exemplary and punitive damages, attorney’s fees, costs and expenses, interest, and claims for injunctive relief. 4) Waiver of right to contest separation from employment under the City of Mendota Heights Personnel Policies, Minn. Stat. §197.46, the Veteran’s Preference Act, and the labor agreement between the City and the Union , or any other applicable rights to challenge his separation from employment. The Union agrees not to file or process a grievance or make any further claims of any nature regarding the employment of Employee with the City. b. Employee ’s Agreement to Release Claims Against the City. In exchange for the promises of the City contained in this Agreement and the payments by the City and other valuable consideration as set forth in paragraph 2a-c of this Agreement, Employee releases all of his claims against the City that he now has whether or not he knows about them. Employee agrees that the City does not owe him anything in addition to the promises of the City contained in this Agreement. The Agreement satisfies all claims and obligations between Employee and City including any and all obligations that arise out of or relate to Employee’s employment or separation from employment. Employee has no claims to any compensation, benefits, or payments of any nature except those explicitly stated in this Agreement. Employee will not bring any lawsuits, commence any proceeding relating to any claim, file any charges or complaints, or make any other demands of the City based upon page 65
3 Employee’s claims except as permitted by law, and if the law permits Employee to commence a proceeding, Employee agrees that he may not seek or recover any monetary damage or other relief as a result of any such proceeding. Employee fully and completely releases, waives and forever discharges, and promises not to sue or make any other demands against the City related to any and all manner of claims, demands, actions, causes of action, administrative claims, promises, agreements , contracts, rights, liability, damages, claims for attorney’s fees, costs and disbursements, or demands of any kind, including but not limited to, all claims arising in tort or contract, or any other federal, state, and local laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations or orders or any other claims in any manner relating to Employee ’s employment and separation from the City arising in law or equity, whether known, suspected, or unknown, and however originating or existing which Employee has or which Employee at any time heretofore had or had a claim to have, against the City to the date of the execution of this Agreement. If in the future Employee asserts any claim released herein, such claim shall be dismissed with prejudice, and reasonable costs and attorney’s fees shall be awarded to the City in the amount determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding the above, it is understood and agreed that nothing contained herein shall affect Employee’s right or entitlement to benefits in accordance with the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act, Public Employees Retirement Association, and/or continuance of healthcare coverage in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 299A.465. c. Consideration Period . Employee understands that he has twenty-one (21) calendar days from the date he receives th is Agreement, not counting the day upon which he receives it, to consider whether or not he wishes to sign the document and release his claims as set forth above. Employee agrees that changes to the Agreement, whether material or immaterial, will not restart the twenty-on e (21) calendar day acceptance period. Employee acknowledges that if he signs the Agreement before the end of the twenty-one (21) day period, it is because he has decided that he has already had sufficient time to deci de whether to release all of his claims. d. Right to Rescind. Employee has the right to rescind (cancel) this Agreement only insofar as it extends to potential claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) by informing the City of his intent to revoke this Agreement within seven (7) days following Employee ’s execution of it. Employee likewise has the right to rescind (cancel) this Agreement only insofar as it extends to potential claims under the Minnesota Human Rights Act by written notice to the City within fifteen (15) calendar days following Employee ’s execution of this Agreement. page 66
4 The seven (7) calendar day rescission period and the fifteen (15) calendar day rescission period shall run concurrently and not consecutively. To be effective, any such rescission must be in writing and hand-delivered to the City or, if sent by mail, it must be (1) postmarked within the seven (7) calendar day or fifteen (15) calendar day period; (2) properly addressed to City Administrator Mark McNeill, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118; and (3) sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. It is understood that the City shall have no obligation whatsoever under the Agreement in the event of such rescission by Employee , and the Agreement shall not become effective or enforceable until the rescis sion period ha s expired. Employee agrees that i f he exercises any right of rescission, the City may at its option either nullify this Agreement in its entirety, or keep it in effect as to all claims not rescinded in accordance with the rescission provisions of this Agreement. In the event the City opts to nullify the entire Agreement, neither Employee nor the City will have any rights or obligations whatsoever under this Agreement . 4. Release of Claims by City . City releases Employee , his agents and representatives from each and every claim, demand, charge, action and cause of action of any kind or matter at law or in equity, based on his employment, and any action, conduct or decision occurring during employment, or including and up through the termination of his employment with City , whether or not any such claim is known to City at the present time. In addition, City understands in releasing these claims they have the right to seek independent counsel to advise them regarding the terms of this Agreement. However, Employee acknowledges that City is not releasing any claims that may arise after this Agreement is executed. 5. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties , and supersedes all prior oral and written agreements and communications between the Parties. The Parties agree that there were no oral or written inducements or representations leading to the execution of this Agreement between the P arties other than those contained in this Agreement. 6. Non-Admission. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to be nor will it be deemed to be an admission of liability by the City that it has violated any contract, policy, state, federal, or local statute or ordinance, administrative regulation, or principle of common law, or that it has engaged in any wrong-doing whatsoever. 7. Voluntary and Knowing Action. Employee represent s and agrees that (a) he has had the opportunity to be represented by legal counsel; (b) he has read this Agreement and fully understands the terms and conditions contained herein; (c) he relies solely upon his own judgment regarding the proper complete and agreed consideration for, and la nguage of, this Agreement; (d) he has not been influenced to sign this Agreement by any statements or representations by the City , or its agents or attorneys, not contained in this Agreement; and (e) he enters into this Agreement knowingly and voluntarily. 8. Non -assignment of rights: Employee agrees he is the only person who is able to assert any right or claim arising out of his employment with or separation from the City. Employee promises he page 67
5 has not assigned, pledged or otherwise sold such rights or claims, and he has not relied on any promises other than those contained in this Agreement. 9. Invalid Provisions. If any part of this Agreement is determined by a court of last resort, or a lower court if no appeal is taken, to be unlawful, invalid, or otherwise unenforceable, the balance of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 10. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 11. Participation of Counsel: This Agreement shall not be construed more strictly against one Party than against another solely by virtue of the fact that it may have been drafted by counsel for one of the Parties, it being recognized that, because this Agreement resulted from arms length negotiations, the Parties have contributed substantially and materially to the preparation of the Agreement. 12. Headings and Captions: The titles and captions of paragraphs and subparagraphs contained in this Agreement are provided for convenience of reference only, and they shall not be considered a part of this Agreement for purposes of interpreting or applying this Agreement. Such titles or captions are not intended to define, limit, extend, explain or describe the scope or extent of this Agreement or any of its terms, provisions, representations or conditions in any manner or way whatsoever. 13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed simultaneously in two or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 14. Purpose of the Settlement and Release Agreement. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §13.43 subd. 2(a) (6), the City states the reason it is entering into this settlement is to formalize the medical resignation of Employee, and resolve and potential disputes regarding his employment with the City. This Agreement may be signed simultaneously in two or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year set forth below: Dated: _____________________ ______________________________________ Michael Shepard Dated: _____________________ ______________________________________ Mark McNeill, City Administrator Dated: _____________________ ______________________________________ Isaac Kaufman on behalf of Union page 68
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Subject: Architect Study—City Hall West Wall Masonry
Date: November 7, 2017
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
The Council is asked to approve a study of a situation with the masonry brick on the west wall of
City Hall, by JEA Architects.
BACKGROUND:
JEA is the firm which is handling the remodeling specifications and contract of the lower level of
City Hall. That work also includes the reconstruction of portions of the south and north exterior
brick, so as to correct structural issues that date from when the building was built in the late
1980’s.
While exploring those issues, it was discovered that the may be an abnormality in the placement
of backfill against the face brick on the west side of the building. Normally, the lower level of a
commercial building is constructed with poured-in-place concrete, or concrete block. The latter
is what was used for City Hall. Above grade, there is usually face brick applied, which is
separated b y a small void between the two types of brick—this is called a “cavity wall”.
What appears to have happened in the case of Mendota Heights City Hall is that at some time
after the building was finished, backfill was placed down two to two to 2.5 feet against the face
brick. This covered “weep holes”, which are used in controlling water within the building.
The concern is that, over time, the force of the additional dirt which has been placed against the
buried face brick may cause that brick to collapse inward into the air void between the two
columns of bricks. While it has not happened in the nearly 30 years that the building has been
in use, there is a possibility that it could happen. It would be less expensive to resolve this issue
before that happened.
page 69
This is work beyond the scope for which JEA is under a current contract with the City. JEA was
asked to provide a proposal to study and recommend remedies for the west wall issues.
BUDGET IMPACT:
JEA has proposed to do the investigation and make recommendations at a cost of $3100 to
$3300. While this cost includes structural engineering consultants, it does not include civil,
mechanical, or electrical engineers, should those be needed. Costs for those would be billed
separately to the City.
RECOMMENDTION:
I recommend accepting the proposal of JEA Architects to do research and recommend repairs
options for masonry issues on the west wall of City hall, for a cost not to exceed $3300.
Because of the lateness of the season, it is likely that any recommended repair work will need to
wait until spring. The City Council will be advised as to recommended remedies.
ACTION REQUIRED:
It the Council concurs, it should, by motion, accept the proposal of JEA Architects to do research
and treatments options for west wall masonry issues of City Hall, for a cost not to exceed $3300.
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: November 7, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2017-26
Critical Area Permit – 733 Woodridge Drive
Introduction
The City Council is asked to approve a Critical Area Permit to Mr. Sean Hoffmann, which would allow
the construction of a new cedar-wood pergola, a fence, and the removal of invasive and undesirable trees
in and along the bluff area in the rear yard of the residence. The property is located at 711 Woodridge
Drive.
Background
The subject property is located in the R-1 One Family Residential zoning district, and situated within the
Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. For properties located in the critical overlay area, any new
construction activities or tree/vegetation removal work requires approval of a permit by the City Council.
At the October 24, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, a Planning Staff Report was presented on this
item (attached hereto); and the applicant/homeowner was present to answer any questions. The Planning
Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing at this meeting; with no objections from the
neighboring residents (refer to 10/24/17 PC meeting minutes - attached hereto).
Discussion
The City of Mendota Heights is using its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on general
zoning and land use requests such as these applications presented herein, and has limited discretion. A
determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable code standards is required.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the Critical Area Permit for the property
located at 711 Woodridge Drive, with certain conditions and findings of fact to support said approval. If
the City Council wishes to affirm this recommendation, make a motion adopting RESOLUTION NO.
2017-96 APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT TO SEAN HOFFMANN, LOCATED AT 711
WOODRIDGE DRIVE.
Action Required
This matter requires a simple majority vote.
page 92
10/24/17 PC Meeting Minutes – Excerpts
A) PLANNING CASE #2017-26
SEAN HOFFMAN, 711 WOODRIDGE DRIVE
CRITICAL AREA PERMIT
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Sean Hoffmann was seeking a critical
area permit to construct a new cedar-wood pergola fence and remove some invasive trees in their rear
yard. The property is located in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, which requires a critical area
permit for all development activities requiring a building permit or special zoning approvals.
As this is a public hearing item, notices were posted in the local Southwest Review and letters were mailed
to owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Staff received one inquiry from a residential neighbor.
After responding to the question over the phone the neighbor was very pleased that nothing was being
done physically in the bluff area as far as any grading or any additions. She then stated that she had no
issues with the request.
Mr. Benetti shared aerial images of the property and pointed out its location in proximity to residential
streets, the neighboring properties, and the critical area bluff line edge. The property is 0.66 acres in size
and contains a 2,870 square foot single story residential dwelling.
In June 2014 a landslide event occurred in the bluff area a couple houses down from this property,
resulting in the installation of a very large and expensive concrete retaining wall by that homeowner. Mr.
Hoffmann indicated that a similar landslide event took place almost 17 years ago on his property, which
also resulted in the installation of concrete block retaining walls in the bluff area. Some of the requested
work would be to help facilitate protection of these wall features.
Mr. Hoffmann would like to remove some box elders (approx. 1 to 1.5 inches in diameter) along the
backside of the wall, 5-6 Sumac Shrubs, two Siberian Elms, and an Amur Maple; of which are considered
undesirable and invasive plants.
Mr. Benetti explained that the desired pergola structure would be installed and anchored on the existing
concrete patio and no part of the bluff line would be affected by this installation. No grading or soil
disturbance or excess vegetation removal would occur as part of this project.
Mr. Hoffman also asked to put in up an open, cable-wired style fence along the backside of the bluff line,
basically where the lawn meets the bluff line. This would be an added safety measure for his young
children playing in the rear yard, as the drop-off from the edge of the lawn at the bluff line is severe and
the grades are very steep.
As part of this analysis, staff did look at the plans to prevent and mitigate irreversible damage, promote
orderly development, and to preserve and enhance the Critical Area’s value. Mr. Benetti also shared the
pertinent provisions in Section 12-3-7 of the code as it pertains to this request and how the plans meet
those provisions and standards.
The pergola, although it is a structure per se, it does not require a building permit as it does not fall under
the building code regulations. The city’s building official determined that a pergola, no matter the size,
because it does not have any extraneous code enforcement or code measures it becomes more of a
landscape feature. Therefore, they do not need a building permit for the pergola; however, they will need
a fence permit.
The planned fence is cable-wired fence which would provide much better views through the fence; meets
the 30% opacity standards; and should be less obtrusive or noticeable from the adjacent properties and;
therefore, is in general compliance of the Critical Area standards for new features.
page 93
Staff sent the application materials to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and to the
City of St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department. The DNR acknowledge receipt of the application
request and had no objections. They did provide recommendations related to the future maintenance or
prevention of vegetation growth near the retaining wall (sprayed with herbicide). No comments were
received from the City of St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department.
Commissioner Noonan asked why staff recommended that the trees and vegetation removal be performed
by qualified tree and landscaping professional/firm as there are many homes in there that may not be in
the bluff area but are under undertaking significant tree removal to deal with invasive species and such. It
seemed to him that it worked against the whole notion of looking after their own property and the sweat
equity that could be put into their own property. Mr. Benetti replied that this condition may be more of a
holdover from the first case he worked on when he came to work for the City of Mendota Heights. In that
case, he worked with Consultant Planner Phil Carlson who heavily supported the fact that, in that case,
the work that had to be done on that property should have been done by a professional landscaper. Mr.
Benetti had been carrying that over since then and since Mr. Hoffmann had indicated that is landscaper or
lawn professional was going to do the work, he left it in there as an add-on condition. However, it is his
property and he could do the work himself if he wanted to.
Commissioner Magnuson, stating that she did not want to over-lawyer this, asked that if the Commission
decided that the pergola is not a structure within the meaning of the critical area permit, shouldn’t they
just take it out of the findings entirely. Mr. Benetti replied that the Commission could remove it if they
wished. Commissioner Magnuson read condition #5 in part; “the proposed wooden pergola features does
not increase the extent (livable space) or height of the existing principal structure” and noted that it seems
to say that it is a structure but it complies with the critical area code. That would mean that the City would
have to conclude that the patio was part of the existing structure and she was unsure that it was. Mr.
Benetti agreed that this portion of the condition could be removed if the Commission wished.
Commissioner Magnuson then asked if someone were to build a landscape feature in their yard, would
they have to get a critical area permit. Mr. Benetti replied that it would depend on what they were doing;
the extent of their work. If a property owner were building a structure – like a shed or such like – that
would require a permit.
Commissioner k asked for confirmation that the existing retaining wall was built approximately 17 years
ago, which Mr. Benetti provided. He then asked, as the trees continue to grow, if there were currently any
signs of failure to that wall. Mr. Benetti replied that he looked at the retaining all from the road and did
not see any signs on the main (bottom) wall. He also noted that the request does not contain any
engineering of the wall; he simply wanted to remove existing plantings to prevent future damage.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mr. Sean Hoffmann did not have any additional comments to add to the staff report.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (Hennes)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-26, CRITICAL AREA PERMIT
APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, AS AMENDED:
page 94
1. The proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District, and is
consistent with the general policies and objectives of the comprehensive plan; including (but not
limited to) the following goals and statements:
a) Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and character of the
community.
b) Enhance and protect the natural and living environment.
c) Provide for maintenance and further natural restoration of ecological systems.
d) The prevention and mitigation of irreversible damage to (the MRCCA) and the preservation and
enhancement of its natural, aesthetic, cultural and historic values is in furtherance of the health,
safety and general welfare of the city.
2. The Applicant will make a concerted effort to remove a minimal number of invasive trees on the
subject property; and keep and preserve existing significant trees in and around the bluff line area.
3. The work proposed involved is reasonable and within the spirit and intent of the Critical Area.
4. The proposed work is in keeping with the character of the area.
5. The new fence [and pergola feature] will not be obtrusive or detract from any views from nearby
properties; and the proposed wooden pergola feature does not increase the extent (livable space)
or height of the existing principal structure.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Removal of trees and vegetation, including any invasive trees or unsuitable vegetation must be
performed by qualified tree and landscaping professional/firm.
2. Removal of trees and vegetation limited to the box elders near the bottom retaining wall; the two
(2) Siberian Elms and one (1) Amur maple located near the top edge of the bluff line; the sumac
shrubs along the top edge of the bluff line; and any buckthorn or other undesirable invasives that
may be present or evident during removals.
3. All work on site will only be performed between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00 pm.
4. A separate fence permit must be obtained prior to fence installation work.
Commissioner Noonan explained his reasoning for the removal of Condition #1 by stating that on two
separate occasions the Commission had included that type of condition largely in the case of individuals
jumping the gun – getting in and doing substantial and intensive removal of vegetation and the
Commission felt that in order to mitigate the impact that was done they needed to bring in a professional
firm. Chair Field replied that leaving this in would create the folklore that it is required on all; this is a
distinction properly made. However, if Mr. Benetti feels in a particular case that it is warranted, he should
not be shy about making that recommendation. All agreed.
Transcriptionist note: [ ] = insertion of text; strikethrough = deletion of text
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (Hennes)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its November 7, 2017 meeting.
page 95
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2017-96
RESOLUTION APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT
TO SEAN HOFFMANN TO ALLOW CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION AND
REMOVAL ACTIVITIES IN THE CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT
(LOCATED AT 711 WOODRIDGE DRIVE)
WHEREAS, Sean Hoffmann (the “Applicant”) applied for a critical area permit to allow
the construction of certain improvements and tree/vegetation removal activities in the Critical
Area Overlay District, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2017-26, located at 711 Woodridge
Drive, and legally described in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
planning item at the regular meeting of October 24, 2017; whereby a planning staff report was
presented and received by the commission, comments from the Applicant and general public
were received and noted for the record, and upon closing the hearing, the Planning Commission
recommended unanimous approval of the critical area permit request for the property located at
711 Woodridge Drive, with certain findings of fact and conditions as noted herein.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that
the Critical Area Permit as proposed under Planning Case No. 2017-26 is hereby approved with
the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay
District, and is consistent with the general policies and objectives of the
comprehensive plan; including (but not limited to) the following goals and
statements:
i. Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment
and character of the community.
ii. Enhance and protect the natural and living environment.
iii. Provide for maintenance and further natural restoration of ecological
systems.
iv. The prevention and mitigation of irreversible damage to [the MRCCA]
and the preservation and enhancement of its natural, aesthetic, cultural
and historic values is in furtherance of the health, safety and general
welfare of the city.
B. The Applicant will make a concerted effort to remove a minimal number of
invasive trees on the subject property; and keep and preserve existing significant
trees in and around the bluff line area.
C. The work proposed involved is reasonable and within the spirit and intent of the
Critical Area.
D. The proposed work is in keeping with the character of the area.
page 96
E. The new fence will not be obtrusive or detract from any views from nearby
properties.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Critical
Area Permit for 711 Woodridge Drive, as proposed under Planning Case 2017-26 is hereby
approved with the following conditions:
1. Removal of trees and vegetation limited to the box elders near the bottom
retaining wall; the two (2) Siberian Elms and one (1) Amur maple located near the
top edge of the bluff line; the sumac shrubs along the top edge of the bluff line;
and any buckthorn or other undesirable invasives that may be present or evident
during removals.
2. All work on site will only be performed between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00
pm.
3. A separate fence permit must be obtained prior to fence installation work.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th day of November, 2017.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
________________________________
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 97
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description – 711 Woodridge Drive
PID: 27-37700-01-022
Lot 2, Block 1, except the westerly 8 feet thereof, IVY HEIGHTS ADDITION, Dakota County,
Minnesota
page 98
Planning Staff Report
DATE: October 24, 2017
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2017-26
Critical Area Permit
APPLICANT: Sean Hoffmann
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 711 Woodridge Drive
ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential
ACTION DEADLINE: December 10, 2017
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Mr. Sean Hoffmann is seeking a critical area permit to construct a new cedar-wood pergola feature, a fence
and approval to remove a few invasive and undesirable trees in and along the bluff area, located to the rear
yard of the residence. The subject property is located at 711 Woodridge Drive, which is located within the
Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. Title 12-3-5 of the City Code requires a critical area permit for
all development activities requiring a building permit or special zoning approvals.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is a 0.66 acre parcel, and contains a 2,870 sq. ft. (finished) single story residential
dwelling. The property is accessed from Woodridge Drive only, and has a relatively flat, level yard space
from the front to the rear yard area, except where the yard meets the bluff line on the back edge of the lot.
page 99
In June of 2014, a landslide event occurred in the bluff area along the back-yard area of the neighboring
property located at 731 Woodridge Drive (Perlman-O’Shaughnessy residence), which resulted in the
installation of a very large and expensive concrete retaining wall by the homeowners. According to Mr.
Hoffmann’s narrative, a similar landslide event took place almost 17 years ago on his property, which also
resulted in the installation of concrete block retaining walls in the bluff area, with lower one shown in the
Google Street image below.
Mr. Hoffmann’s professional landscaper suggested that in order to prevent the failure and expensive
replacement of this wall system, it would be ideal to remove a number of small, box elder trees that are
growing on the back side of this wall, and any buckthorn that may be evident. Mr. Hoffmann intends to
have these invasive plantings removed; and as per the suggestion of the DNR, this area behind the wall
should be sprayed with herbicide to prevent future growth of other invasive trees and vegetation. The
removal plans also include the select removal of two Siberian Elms near the top edge of the bluff line, along
with an amur maple tree, and approximately 5-6 sumac shrubs near the edge. All of these trees/shrubs
varieties are considered undesirable and invasive plants.
The drop-off from the edge of the lawn at the bluff line is severe, and the grades are very steep down to the
Sibley Memorial Hwy road bed, with an elevation beginning at 910-ft. down to 870-ft. Mr. Hoffmann
intends to provide an open, cable-wired style fence (see image below-left) along the back edge of his yard
near the established bluff line, in order to provide added safety measures for his young children playing in
the rear yard. The new fence will require a separate zoning (fence) permit for approval.
To complete the landscape plans in this area, Mr. Hoffmann also intends to install a 21’ x 14’ cedar-wood
pergola feature (see image above-right), which will be placed and anchored on the existing concrete patio
located along the rear side of the home. Although this wooden pergola is by definition a “structure” – the
city’s Building Official deems this a landscape feature, which is not regulated or identified as a structure
requiring a building permit. Therefore, the Planning Commission may consider excluding this pergola as
it pertains to any related accessory structure standards of the Zoning Code.
No grading or soil disturbance or excess vegetation removal will occur as part of this project.
page 100
ANALYSIS
Critical Area Overlay District
According to Title 12-3-2 of the City Code, the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District is:
…to prevent and mitigate irreversible damage to this unique state, local, regional and national resource to
promote orderly development of the residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and public areas, to
preserve and enhance its values to the public and protect and preserve the system as an essential element
in the city's transportation, sewer and water and recreational systems…
The pertinent provisions of the Critical Area Overlay District that apply to this application are:
Section 12-3-7. Existing Structures and Uses:
D. Existing Residential Uses: Residential buildings on parcels developed and built upon prior to
June 1, 2003, that otherwise conform to the standards and regulations of the zoning ordinance,
and which comply with the standards and regulations of this chapter with the exception of the
slope requirements, may be expanded with the addition of attached or detached structures,
provided that:
1. The expansion or accessory structure shall encroach no closer toward the river than the
existing structure.
2. The expansion or accessory structure shall comply with all other performance standards
and regulations of this chapter and the zoning ordinance.
3. The proposed expansion shall be processed in accordance with the procedures for site plan
review as listed in section 12-3-17 of this chapter.
As noted previously, the pergola is intended to be placed over an existing concrete patio; and is not
expressly identified as an accessory structure per State Building Code regulations. Therefore, this
landscape feature appears to comply with general Critical Area standards, and should not cause or create
any negative effects upon the bluff line or impact any river/valley views in this area.
The proposed 3-foot tall, cable-wired fence would be placed along the top edge of the bluff line, to ensure
appropriate fall protection from the adjacent back yard space. The cable wires provide much better views
through the fence; meets the 30% opacity standards; and should be less obtrusive or noticeable from the
adjacent properties, which all fall into general compliance of the Critical Area standards for new features.
In addition, no soil disturbance or excessive vegetation removal will occur, beyond what is required for the
removal or those trees identified by the Applicant (and approved) under this permit.
INTERAGENCY REVIEW
In addition to the public and private property owners within 350 feet of the subject parcel, public hearing
notices and application materials were sent to the following agencies for review and comment:
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR)
• Acknowledged receipt of the application request and indicated they had no objections; and provided
recommendations related to the future maintenance or prevention of vegetation growth near the
retaining wall (see attached email (10/16/17)
City of St. Paul – Parks and Recreation Department
• As of the preparation of this report, no comments were received.
page 101
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the Critical Area Permit request for 711 Woodridge Drive, which would allow a new
fence, pergola and removal of invasive trees and shrubs in and around the bluff area, based on the
findings of fact that the proposed project is compliant with the policies and standards of the Critical
Area Overlay District, with certain conditions established by the Planning Commission;
OR
2. Denial of the Critical Area Permit request for 711 Woodridge Drive based on the findings of fact
that the application does not meet the policies and standards of the Critical Area Overlay District;
OR
3. Table the request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Critical Area Permit request for the property located at 711 Woodridge
Drive, based on the attached findings of fact, and with the following conditions to be affirmed or modified
by the Planning Commission:
1. Removal of trees and vegetation, including any invasive trees or unsuitable vegetation must be
performed by qualified tree and landscaping professional/firm.
2. Removal of trees and vegetation limited to the box elders near the bottom retaining wall; the two
(2) Siberian Elms and one (1) Amur maple located near the top edge of the bluff line; the sumac
shrubs along the top edge of the bluff line; and any buckthorn or other undesirable invasives that
may be present or evident during removals.
3. All work on site will only be performed between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00 pm.
4. A separate fence permit must be obtained prior to fence installation work.
page 102
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
Critical Area Permit
for
711 Woodridge Drive
The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests:
1. The proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District, and is
consistent with the general policies and objectives of the comprehensive plan; including (but not
limited to) the following goals and statements:
a. Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and character of the
community.
b. Enhance and protect the natural and living environment.
c. Provide for maintenance and further natural restoration of ecological systems.
d. The prevention and mitigation of irreversible damage to [the MRCCA] and the preservation
and enhancement of its natural, aesthetic, cultural and historic values is in furtherance of the
health, safety and general welfare of the city.
2. The Applicant will make a concerted effort to remove a minimal number of invasive trees on the
subject property; and keep and preserve existing significant trees in and around the bluff line area.
3. The work proposed involved is reasonable and within the spirit and intent of the Critical Area.
4. The proposed work is in keeping with the character of the area.
5. The new fence will not be obtrusive or detract from any views from nearby properties; and the
proposed wooden pergola feature does not increase the extent (livable space) or height of the
existing principal structure.
page 103
SYLVANDALE RDSIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYWOODRIDGE DRWACHTLER AVELAURA STSUNSET LN
KNOLLWOOD LNIVY FALLS AVEARCADIA DRMAPLE PARK DR
LO
N
D
O
N
R
D
IV
Y
H
I
L
L
D
R
DODD RDBUTLER AVE
CASCADE LNM
E
D
O
R
A
R
D
IVY FALLS CT
LAURA CT
SYLV
A
N
D
A
L
E
C
TFALLS VIEW CTMEDORA C
T MAPLE PARK DRDakota County GIS
711 Woodridge DrivePlanning Case No. 2017-26 City ofMendotaHeights0490
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
10/19/2017
page 104
236211
205159 210908583126
19218076107103
100
64
59754238
3025
2
2
209
811611727
709
711
1133714
701
731
WOODRIDGE DR
SIBLEY M
E
M
O
RI
AL
H
W
Y
CASCADE LN
Dakota County GIS
711 Woodridge DrivePlanning Case No. 2017-26 City ofMendotaHeights060
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
10/18/2017
page 105
page 106
page 107
711 WOODRIDGE DR. (TOP ELEV.)04/04/2017page 108
711 WOODRIDGE DR. (REAR ELEV.)04/04/2017page 109
SITE PHOTOS – 711 WOODRIDGE DRIVE
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
From:Skancke, Jennie (DNR)
To:Tim Benetti
Subject:RE: Critical Area Permit for 711 Woodridge Dr.
Date:Monday, October 16, 2017 8:03:14 PM
Hi Tim, all this seems fine, so long as the pergola isn’t higher than the existing structure, which
I’m quite sure is the case. They might consider having someone spray some herbicide along
their wall to prevent future volunteer trees that might do this again.
Jennie Skancke - Area Hydrologist (Scott, Dakota and Carver Counties)
MnDNR | 1200 Warner Road | St. Paul, MN 55106 | T: 651-259-5790 |
Jennie.Skancke@state.mn.us
From: Tim Benetti [mailto:timb@mendota-heights.com]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 5:05 PM
To: Skancke, Jennie (DNR) <jennie.skancke@state.mn.us>
Subject: Critical Area Permit for 711 Woodridge Dr.
Jennie: Can you please review the attached Planning Application for a Critical Area Permit we
received from Sean Hoffmann, 711 Woodridge Drive.
His landscaper says they should remove some box elders growing behind the bottom retaining wall.
They are also requesting to remove a diseased Siberian elm; a not-so-good-looking amur maple and
sumacs along the front edge of the bluff.
I am available for any questions. Thank you.
Tim Benetti
Community Development Director
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
(651) 255-1142
timb@mendota-heights.com
page 114
DATE: November 7, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2018-2019 Teamsters Labor Agreement
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION.
The City Council is asked to approve a two-year labor agreement with Teamsters Local 320,
representing Public Works employees.
BACKGROUND
Attached for review and consideration is the 2018-2019 contract between the City of Mendota
Heights and the Teamsters Local 320, for which there is a tentative agreement. The 2018-2019
agreement is consistent with the direction which staff received from the City Council.
Changes and updates to the 2018-2019 contract include:
• Article 2 Recognition – Changing position classifications to Public Works Maintenance
Worker, Public Works Leadworker and Public Works Mechanic
• Article 21 Wages—A 2.5% cost of living adjustment for 2018 and 2.5% for 2019,
implementation of a pay scale for the Public Works Maintenance Worker position that is
comprised of five steps and a one-time wage increase of $.50 at step one for this position.
• Article 22 Working Out of Class – Delete sections 22.1, 22.2 and 22.3 and implement a
one-time hourly increase of $.20. Pay scales would then be:
Effective 01/01/2018
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
Hire Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Maintenance Worker $21.22 $23.15 $25.58 $28.01 $30.44
Leadworker $31.73
Mechanic $31.73
page 115
Effective 01/01/2019
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
Hire Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Maintenance Worker $21.75 $23.73 $26.22 $28.71 $31.20
Leadworker $32.52
Mechanic $32.52
• Article 22 Clothing – The clothing allowance has been adjust to $420 for 2018 and $430
for 2019. Section 22.3 is added regarding annual boot allowance in the amount of $100
annually. Boot allowance can carryover from year to year, up to a maximum of $200.
• Article 23 Insurance – The city will provide $1, 600 per month for 2018 per employee
towards health, dental, life insurance, short term disability and long term disability.
2019’s contribution shall be adjusted by whatever is determined to be granted to other
employee work groups.
• Article 28 Injury on Duty—Adding Employees injured during the performance of their
duties for the EMPLOYER and thereby rendered unable to work for the EMPLOYER
will be paid the difference between the employee regular pay and Workers Compensation
insurance payments for a period not to exceed one hundred twenty (120) working days
per injury, not charged to the employee vacation, sick leave or other accumulated paid
benefits.
• Article 30 Educational Incentive—Adding Waste Water Operation Certification D with a
monthly payment of $20.00 to the list of eligible certifications and licenses.
• Appendix A Drug and Alcohol Testing—Adding the City of Mendota Heights
Drug/Alcohol Testing policy.
Negotiations were positive with Teamster representatives. The Teamsters members have voted
to approve the tentative contract.
BUDGET IMPACT
Costs associated with the negotiated agreement are included in the 2018 city budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and the
Teamsters Local 320, covering Public Works employees for 2018-2019.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the 2018-2019 labor agreement between
the City of Mendota Heights and the Teamsters Local 320.
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124
page 125
page 126
page 127
page 128
page 129
page 130
page 131
page 132
page 133
page 134
page 135
page 136