Loading...
2019-05-21 Council PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 21, 2019 – 7:00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Consent Agenda a. Approve May 7, 2019 City Council Minutes b. Approve May 14, 2019 Council Work Session Minutes c. Approve Public Works Superintendent Appointment and Maintenance Lead Recruitment d. Approve Resolution 2019-35 Accepting a Donation for a Tree in Hagstrom King Park e. Approve Purchase of Radar Feedback Speed Limit Sign for Sibley Memorial Highway f. Approve Ordinance 541 Establishing Parking Restrictions on Marie Avenue g. Approve the Building Activity Report for April h. Approve the Fire Synopsis Report for April i. Approve the Treasurer’s Reports for March and April j. Approve the Claims List 6. Citizen Comment Period *see guidelines below 7. Presentations a. Resolution 2019-36 Approve Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bids on the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvements Project 8. Public Hearings - none 9. New and Unfinished Business a. Ordinance No. 538 to Allow Personal Self-Storage Uses as a Conditional Use in the I- Industrial District (Planning Case No. 2019-01) b. Establish Fee for the Park Bench Donation Program 10. Community Announcements 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn Guidelines for Citizen Comment Period: “The Citizen Comments section of the agenda provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. All are welcome to speak. Comments should be directed to the Mayor. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per person and topic; presentations which are longer than five minutes will need to be scheduled with the City Clerk to appear on a future City Council agenda. Comments should not be repetitious. Citizen comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens, nor will any decisions be made at that presentation. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Citizen comments will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made, but rather for hearing the citizen for information only. If appropriate, the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the issues raised.” CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, May 7, 2019 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. Councilors Duggan, Paper, and Petschel were also present. Councilor Miller was absent. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Petschel moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar for discussion and approval. Councilor Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented, pulling items g.) Approve Resolution 2019-34 Approving Cooperative Agreement for Valley Park Pollinator Corridor Project, h.) Approve Saint Paul Regional Water Invoice for Watermain Offset on Dodd Road, and j.) Approval of Claims List. a. Approve the April 16, 2019 City Council Minutes b. Acknowledge the March 26, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes c. Acknowledge the April 15, 2019 Planning Commission Workshop Minutes d. Acknowledge the March 12, 2019 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes e. Approve Resolution 2019-32 Updating 2019 City Depositories of Funds f. Approve Resolution 2019-33 Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for the 2019 Sanitary Sewer Cleaning & Televising Project g. Approve Resolution 2019-34 Approving Cooperative Agreement for the Valley Park Pollinator Corridor Project h. Approve the Saint Paul Regional Water Invoice for Watermain Offset on Dodd Road i. Authorize City Hall to be Closed for Business on Friday, July 5, 2019 page 3 j. Approval of Claims List Mayor Garlock seconded the motion Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS G) APPROVE RESOLUTION 2019-34 APPROVING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE VALLEY PARK POLLINATOR CORRIDOR PROJECT Councilor Duggan questioned the payment for the Valley Park pollinator planting project. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that this would be an annual payment for three years, totaling approximately $1,150 per year. The 10-year maintenance period, after completion, would be paid for by the city, and is estimated to be $1,000 - $2,000 per year; the maintenance should be minimal unless they have to replace a number of plants due to wildlife damage. Councilor Duggan asked if this would be completed in other areas of the city. Mr. Ruzek replied that this was completed at Rogers Lake a couple of years ago and Copperfield Pond is proposed for this year. Councilor Duggan moved adoption of RESOLUTION 2019-34 APPROVE A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH GREAT RIVER GREENING AND XCEL ENERGY FOR THE VALLEY PARK POLLINATOR CORRIDOR PROJECT. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) H) APPROVE THE SAINT PAUL REGIONAL WATER INVOICE FOR WATERMAIN OFFSET ON DODD ROAD Councilor Petschel explained that the city had a Memo of Understanding with St. Paul Regional Water in December 2018 that the city would not receive a bill in regards to the watermain offset on Dodd Road. Public Works Director Ruzek noted that there were a couple of representatives from St. Paul Regional Water in attendance to discuss the project. This was in relation to storm sewer improvements that the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) was completing. St. Paul Water, as they were doing the work, decided that this was considered an offset due to the street project and was not considered a main replacement. Councilor Petschel asked when the city was made aware of this. Mr. Ruzek replied that the city received a bill at the end of February 2019. Councilor Petschel asked if the city had any recourse. Mr. Ruzek replied that, according to the agreement, the city would be responsible for these charges. However, it does not outline the process of how the City and St. Paul Water should be working together when these types of improvements are identified. Mr. Graeme Chaple, Damage Prevention Supervisor and Mr. Richard Roland, Assistant Division Manager for the Distribution Division from St. Paul Water came forward. Mr. Chaple stated that there were four page 4 offsets identified on the Dodd Road project; two at Emerson Avenue and two at Coleshire Lane. They had a number of watermain breaks at the Coleshire Lane intersection and it was decided that they would replace the watermain at St. Paul Water’s expense because it would be an improvement to their system. At Emerson Avenue, the work was completed for offsetting around the large storm structures. That had been planned to be billable back to the City of Mendota Heights. Mr. Chaple stated he failed in his communications with Mr. Ruzek to make it clear that the Coleshire mains were completed separate from the Emerson mains. The Coleshire mains did not get billed to Mendota Heights. Councilor Duggan stated that he remembered the December memo and feels the city should not be paying for the Emerson watermain. He suggested that the city pay the portion of the bill they are comfortable with, and hold payment on the part that has been addressed until it can be discussed further with St. Paul Regional Water. Councilor Petschel stated that this is a large expense that has not been budgeted for. She said that the city discuss with St. Paul Regional Water Services how to prevent this in the future. She suggested that MnDOT should be part of the discussion. Mr. Ruzek explained why he did not think that MnDOT would be part of that discussion. He also suggested that the city look at having a representative serve on the St. Paul Water Board. Mr. Roland pointed out that the bill presented was significantly lower than the original bill because St. Paul Regional Water did an internal audit and discovered certain charges that should not have been passed along. If the city would like a second review, that certainly would be acceptable. Councilor Duggan moved that payment is withheld until the City staff can discuss this with St. Paul Regional Water. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) J) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS LIST Councilor Duggan questioned the payment for a Parks mower at $16,800 and asked if that was a new mower or repairs for a current mower. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the city had a smaller zero-turn mower that was originally planned to be replaced last year but it was moved to 2019. Councilor Duggan asked if the payment to US Bank was higher than usual. Finance Director Schabacker explained that this payment is for charges employees have made using the city’s credit card, so the amount varies from month-to-month. She explained that it depends what the need is in a particular month. Councilor Duggan moved to approve the Claims List. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) page 5 PUBLIC COMMENTS No public comments were heard. PUBLIC HEARINGS No items were scheduled. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) ORDINANCE NO. 538 TO ALLOW PERSONAL SELF-STORAGE USES AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE I-INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-01) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this was a continuation of consideration of a zoning code amendment from Metro Storage. They were asking for approval to amend City Code Title 12-1G-1 to allow “Personal Self-Storage Facility” as a conditional use in the I-Industrial District. Metro Storage desires to build an 80,000 square foot facility in the Industrial Park. Currently, the code does not allow for any self-storage facilities anywhere in the city. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed Ordinance No. 538 by a vote of 6-1. The City Council tabled this item at their March 19, 2019 meeting and conducted a site visit of similar facilities on April 23, 2019. Councilor Duggan suggested the following edits: • Section 1: Title 12-1G-2: Conditional Uses is hereby amended as follows: “Personal self-storage facility”, provided that: . . . should be changed to “Personal property storage facility” • Item D: 300 feet between the facility and any residential use and/or zone is too low • Item E: Add “and must be kept clear” to the end of that item • Item H: Common parking spaces – he questioned how many would be handicap accessible and if some should be larger in size to accommodate the moving in and out of personal property Councilor Paper asked how they would prevent someone from living in a storage room. Mr. Benetti replied that they have on-site management policing the site, along with cameras. Councilor Paper asked how far away the Industrial District is from the nearest residential zone. Mr. Benetti replied that the nearest residential development would be Lemay Shores. After discussion, it was suggested that the number of feet from a residential use be increased to 1,000 feet. Councilor Petschel explained that when the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed uses in the Industrial Park, there was a thought that possibly the city’s permitted and non-permitted uses were not up-to-date with recent technology. There was an idea that the list had been in existence for a long time and needed to be refreshed. At that time, there was no discussion about storage facilities because it was thought to be a “no-brainer” because it did not fit with the long term comprehensive plan or with the architecture in the park, which has the feel of a campus. page 6 Councilor Duggan stated that when the city agreed to Bituminous Roadways locating in the Industrial Park, they specifically excluded the manufacturing of asphalt. Mayor Garlock noted that he went on the tour of similar facilities. There were two sizes of units available. He stated that the facility had multiple surveillance cameras on each floor. The water suppression is open but zone activated. He pointed out that the place was in immaculate condition. Councilor Petschel asked if this facility was still proposed to be three stories in height. Mr. Benetti replied in the affirmative. Under the Industrial District, a building can be up to 45 feet in height. Councilor Duggan noted that he drove by a self-storage facility and noticed a number of bright lights that were not shielded. He suggested that any lights installed should be shielded. He also suggested that there should be an appropriate amount of landscaping for screening. Councilor Petschel stated that this discussion is about changing the approved uses in the Industrial park. She helped draft the current uses and everything was done for a reason. She has not heard anything that could make this a palatable plan and does not think this is the kind of building that should be approved for the business or industrial park. She believes that three stories is too high, and particularly with something that architecturally has little to commend it. Residents can go five minutes in any direction from the city to find personal storage. She said that this is not something the residents want. Mr. Dave Carland, VP of Development at Metro Storage, LLC, introduced his team members who were with him. He pointed out that approximately 1 in 10 households use self-storage. This facility would have an extremely low demand for city services, generate very low traffic, and generate property taxes estimated to be in the range of $22,000 to $26,000. Metro Storage understands that the building would need to be suitable and gateway quality. He pointed out that there are a lot of uses already in the Industrial Park that do not add a large number of jobs. He noted recommendations from the 2016 Industrial District Study which included exploring potential revisions or additions to the uses allowed in the Industrial Park, staying current on changes in the requirements of industrial and office uses by adjusting the city’s policies and regulations as needed to respond to new developments, and to continue to work cooperatively with Industrial Park owners, managers, and tenants to keep the park successful. Mr. Carland stated that just about every suburban city now has self-storage units as a conditional or permitted use within their industrial or business parks. He mentioned the amendment proposed by Planning Commissioner Mazzitello requiring self-storage units to be placed adjacent to a state highway or within 1,500 feet of an interstate, essentially making this the only site within the Industrial District that would suffice. In terms of a proliferation of these buildings, they are market driven and Mendota Heights could probably only support two of these facilities. Councilor Duggan suggested that with the influx of traffic from the Vikings Stadium, the city needs to pay attention to the traffic impact. Councilor Paper noted that Costco will be locating just east of this location. He asked what kind of economic development that might spur in this area. Mr. Carland replied that in terms of numbers, Costco page 7 stores do not really spin off a lot of economic benefit for other retailers. Councilor Paper questioned if another use might be better suited in this location to attract those customers. Mr. Ted Carlson, with Carlson Partners, representing the property owner, stated that this proposed lot was originally designed to provide expansion room for General Pump. Approximately three years ago they began to look for a developer for this site. As they fielded calls for the property, they thought that self-storage would be a great fit because the types of buildings they construct are known for their high quality. Also, Metro Sales has a sterling reputation and this use would generate significantly more value for the city. Councilor Duggan asked if the owners would have an issue with the proposed 1,000 foot separation from a residentially zoned property. Mr. Carlson could not provide an unequivocal answer because he could not measure the distance; however, from his expertise and considering what is already in the area, he could not image that 1,000 feet would be a problem. Councilor Duggan noted that shielded security lighting should be required, along with recreational vehicles to be included in the list of prohibited outdoor storage items. Councilor Paper asked if smaller motorized vehicles, like snowmobiles, would be allowed to be stored in the units. Mr. Heilman replied that since this would be an interior only facility, it would be unlikely. Maybe an ATV or motorcycle possibly, but no larger vehicles with the way the facility is designed. Councilor Paper asked how they would regulate people from living in a storage unit. Mr. Carland replied that they train their managers and the site is monitored. They know who visits the facility. The number of daily trips would be low. He explained that two trips equal one visit from a customer. Councilor Duggan asked if there would be adequate access by emergency vehicles. Mr. Carland replied that they have not gotten to the design features yet; however, without any exterior doors to access the building they most likely would not have exterior fencing to secure the lot. All multi-story buildings of this type must have 100% fire suppressant capabilities. Councilor Paper asked if there was a way to know the distance to the nearest residential zone. Using Dakota County’s GIS map, Mr. Ruzek showed that the Dakota County CDA property and the Lemay Shores property were approximately 1,800 feet away. The Bourne Lane property was approximately 1,440 feet away. Councilor Petschel reiterated her opposition to this use in the Industrial Park. She urged the Council to consider, if they allow this building to be built, how they are going to compel what the exterior and the landscaping would look like. She asked for the City Attorney’s opinion on how to compel landscaping and an acceptable building. City Attorney Andrew Pratt replied that a CUP approval process allows for this. He believed it was to the Council’s benefit to have a little bit of flexibility in what they want to see with CUP use. It is always a risk to amend the zoning code to allow something as a permitted use because they would have lost control of it. Councilor Petschel asked if this should be handled through a draft ordinance or through a Conditional Use. Mr. Pratt replied that there was only one city [Cottage Grove] that had conditions in the actual page 8 ordinance. Every other city has a CUP mechanism but they do not list specific conditions like this in the ordinance. The city would still have the flexibility later on to impose conditions on each individual project. The benefit of having this in the code is that the applicants would know what is expected of them. Mr. Benetti noted that the Industrial District category currently has standards for building elements and architectural elements. Under the Conditional Use Permit process, the city could ask for more as part of the conditions. Councilor Duggan asked if there would be park dedication funds contributed in this case. Mr. Benetti replied that since this would not be a re-platting of land, there would not be any park dedication fee. Councilor Duggan suggested the 300 foot distance from a residentially zoned property be changed to 1,400 feet. Councilor Paper asked how the city could limit the number of these facilities. Mr. Benetti replied that the reason they built all of these standards in was to limit this use to a certain area. However, as the city attorney indicated, if the Council makes the standards too restrictive and the ordinance could get challenged in court. This is not what the code amendment should be about. The code should allow for other users to come in or have a fair chance. Councilor Paper and Petschel suggested this be tabled and discussed at an upcoming workshop meeting. Councilor Duggan moved to table ORDINANCE 538 TO ALLOW PERSONAL SELF-STORAGE USES AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE I-INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-01) to the May 21, 2109 City Council Meeting, subject to having a council work session prior. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) There was then a discussion of variances. City Attorney Andrew Pratt advised the Council that each applicant for a variance stands on its own through the practical difficulties test. Variances exist because they sanction a use that is not allowed in the zoning ordinance. He reminded the Council of the three touchstones of the variance process: 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner 3. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties Once the Council undertakes all of those analyses, and they also consider the effects of the variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community; traffic conditions; effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety; effect on the value of surrounding properties and upon page 9 the Comprehensive Plan; and the granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant but necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty, they typically do not have residential expansions with issues. If the Council took no action, the request would get approved by the fact of not doing anything. Typically, the Council would apply an extension or do something. B) RESOLUTION 2019-29 DENY [OR APPROVE] A VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1751 JAMES ROAD (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-05) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Nick and Liz Banovetz have requested a variance to build an addition onto the side of their home. The property is just under 3.5 acres and includes a two-story, 3,600 square foot house built in 1958. The front yard setback is off of James Road at 35.4 feet, the west line setback is 37.8 feet, 52 feet from the rear, and 19.2 feet from the east line. The proposed addition would be a single story 11.4’ x 14.8’ (165 square feet) on the east side of the home. The addition would encroach, at its closest point, 2.13’ into the 10-foot setback. The applicant stated that this is the best area for the addition. Mr. Benetti shared the practical difficulties tests that must be met to grant a variance and explained how this request met those tests. All of the immediate neighbors indicated their support. Mr. Nick Banovetz and Ms. Liz Banovetz, 1751 James Road, stated they have put in a lot of work to update the house. One of the limitations of the house is that the main level only amounts to 15% of the total square footage; it is tight and has an awkward layout. There are a number of practical difficulties with the current layout. They want to have a seating area that is attached to their kitchen to allow them to have a table and chairs. They have been working with an architect and have reviewed all of their options. This addition would allow an open concept between the eating area, the kitchen, and the living room. This would bring the home up to modern-day standards Councilor Duggan noted that he visited the property. He noticed that the backyard is narrow but is a continuous open space. He could not see this addition being placed anywhere else, other than where it was being proposed. It is placed in a way that it would enhance the property. Councilor Petschel said that she had also visited the property. She believed that if the city were going to approve a variance, it needs to be founded in fact and be consistent. She is supportive of the variance. The issue with this house is that it is not centered on the lot. They would have no need for a variance if the builder had centered the house in the middle of the lot. That is hardship that was not generated by the current homeowner. Councilor Paper also reported meeting with the family. He questioned the practical difficulty since the patio was installed by the homeowner in the back of the home, it was not pre-existing. Mr. Banovetz replied that what they were trying to avoid is the elongated dining room. Without this addition as proposed, they would not have an eating area for their family. Councilor Petschel asked for clarification that the patio has both old and new aspects. Mr. Banovetz confirmed. It was not completely new. page 10 Councilor Paper asked if the new addition would be wide open or would it have pocket doors or French doors. Mr. Banovetz replied that it would be completely open. Mayor Garlock stated that he stopped by the property. The house is not centered on the lot and this request is practical and, in his opinion, is their only option. He would be supportive of the variance. Councilor Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2019-29 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1751 JAMES ROAD (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-05) based on the practical difficulty that the house was not centered on the lot when built. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) C) RESOLUTION 2019-30 APPROVE [OR DENY] A VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 916 ADELINE COURT (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-08) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Breanna Zarmbinski and Paul Shrewsbury were requesting a variance for an encroachment of 8.8 feet into the 30 foot front yard setback standard to construct a new 16’ x 8’ fully enclosed foyer, which would include a 4’ x 16’ partially covered deck. The property is a trapezoidal shaped and just under 0.36 acres. There is currently an open covered entryway in the front. The property is currently 30.8’ off of the front property line and meets all of the required setbacks. Councilor Petschel asked how far the neighbor’s front porch extends from the front of the house. Mr. Benetti replied that the neighbor did receive a variance in 2013 for that front porch extension. It had the same set of criteria that was recognized by the Planning Commission this time. Councilor Duggan questioned if the curvature of the lot on a cul-de-sac would necessarily meet the criteria of a practical difficulty. City Attorney Andrew Pratt stated that the most challenging part of the practical difficulties test is the uniqueness of the property not created by the landowner. Obviously the curve of this street was not created by the landowner. But the point is also well made that just because there is a curve in the street doesn’t mean that they cannot apply setback measurements. It seemed to him that it would be a challenge to the homeowner to do anything as far as an expansion or even a small bump out without violating some of setback. Councilor Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2019-30 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 916 ADELINE COURT (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-08). Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) D) RESOLUTION 2019-31 APPROVE A WETLANDS PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2458 BRIDGEVIEW COURT (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-09) page 11 Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Philip and Margaret Johnson are requesting a wetland permit to remove an old deck and replace it with a new style deck in the same area. Any new construction related improvements, grading, or removals near a wetland or water resource body requires a wetland permit review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The home sits approximately 50 feet off of the wetland. The new deck would be located in the same footprint as the old deck. Councilor Paper asked for confirmation that the new deck would not be any closer to the pond than the original deck. Mr. Benetti confirmed and noted that the new would be placed on the old pilings and there would be very minimal disturbance. Councilor Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2019-31 APPROVE A WETLANDS PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2458 BRIDGEVIEW COURT (PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-09). Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) E) AUTHORIZE LEGAL SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that City Attorney Anthony Pratt has accepted a job with a different law firm, and said that has been several years since the city requested proposals for municipal law services. Staff has drafted a proposed RFP for general municipal services, which spells out the requirements. Staff also suggested that Council appoint two of their members to serve on the selection committee. City Attorney Andrew Pratt has agreed to serve as city attorney until such time as the RFP process has been completed. He would continue to bill his hours at the same rate, which is approximately $150 per hour and a $200 flat rate for City Council meetings. Staff views this as important for continuity. Councilor Petschel and Councilor Duggan volunteered to be members of the selection committee. Councilor Duggan suggested a change in the RFP. Under Scope of Work, a. it reads “. . . whereby a developer or applicant requests the court that the action be overturned”. He suggested that the word ‘overturned’ be replaced with ‘changed’ or reduced’. Staff agreed to this edit. Councilor Duggan requested an inclusion of the Comprehensive Plan under Scope of Work, d. Staff agreed. Councilor Paper, referenced VII. City Information, 7, which claims that the city generates approximately 245 hours of general legal services per year. Based on that, he asked if any of that time was spent on Police Department issues. Mr. McNeill replied that those would be from a different account. Councilor Duggan suggested, and Councilor Petschel agreed, that they should appoint an alternate to the selection committee. Councilor Paper volunteered to be the alternate. page 12 Councilor Petschel moved to direct staff to advertise the RFP for General Municipal Legal Services, and to appoint Councilors Duggan and Petschel to serve on a preliminary selection committee, with Councilor Paper as the alternate, and to designate Andrew Pratt to be Interim City Attorney until otherwise designated. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) F) SET CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATES City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that after seven public hearings, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to the City Council. Because there may likely be additional comments, staff recommended that the Council hold a work session. The Council agreed to hold the work session on Thursday, May 16 at 5:00 p.m. It was noted that, as usual, the work session would be open to the public. Mr. McNeill reminded the Council that they needed to set a work session date and time to receive an update on the escrow account for the ABC Building at The Village, and for discussion of personal self- storage. The Council agreed to set this work session meeting for Tuesday, May 14 at 1:00 p.m. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that May 9 at 6:00 p.m., is the rescheduled parks cleanup. This will be held at three parks and residents are encouraged to visit the city’s website for details. The 5K and Park Celebration is on June 1st. Check the city’s website for details. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Petschel recognized the local winners of the Athena Award. They are Tori Nelson from Henry Sibley High School and Sophie Kishish from Visitation High School. She also wanted to say a sad farewell to Minnehaha Academy as they leave their temporary home in Mendota Heights and move home. Their Athena Award winner was Terra Rhoades. Councilor Paper noted that he had the pleasure of attending two ground breakings last week. One at Henry Sibley High School and the other at Friendly Hills Middle School. These are transformative projects for the entire community and are very exciting for District 197 residents. Next week is the 30th anniversary of the D.A.R.E. program at Visitation. Councilor Paper wished a very happy 10th birthday to his son, Levi. Councilor Duggan wished everyone a Happy Mother’s Day. page 13 ADJOURN Councilor Paper moved to adjourn. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Miller) Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m. ____________________________________ Neil Garlock Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 14 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the City Council Work Session Held May 14, 2019 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a work session of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at the City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 1:00 pm. Councilmembers Duggan, Miller, Paper and Petschel were also present. City staff present included Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator; Community Development Director Tim Benetti; Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director; Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director; and Lorri Smith, City Clerk. ADDITION TO THE AGENDA Mayor Garlock made a motion to add to the agenda, after item #3., titled 4. Discussion of How to Proceed with Proposals Received for the Sale of The Village vacant lots. The motion was seconded by Councilor Duggan and passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ON PERSONAL SELF-STORAGE USES Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained the request amend Code to allow “Personal Self-Storage Facility” as a conditional use in the I-Industrial District. Metro Storage desires to build an 80,000 square foot facility in the Industrial Park. Currently, the code does not allow for any self-storage facilities anywhere in the city. At the May 7th Council meeting, the Council discussed the distance that should be required between a storage facility and a residential use or zone. Mr. Benetti showed the various distance measurements from the proposed site using the Dakota County GIS mapping system. It was noted that 1,320 feet would still allow another self-storage facility in the southwest quadrant of the city. Councilor Petschel questioned if a self-storage facility could be allowed as a conditional use. She also questioned if the city could prevent self-storage facilities that have garage door access directly to the individual’s storage unit. It was noted that item F. stating that all storage space openings shall be oriented internally to the facility and shall not directly face a public highway. Mr. Bob Heilman, VP of Development at Metro Storage, LLC, stated that some cities require a maximum or a minimum number of acres for a self-storage facility to be allowed. They also noted that the facility would be built to allow for the largest firetruck to have easy access around the building. page 15 It was suggested that recreational vehicles be added to the list of prohibited vehicles and a maximum of three drive-up bays be included in the ordinance. The Council also agreed that a self- storage facility should not be closer than 1,320 feet to the nearest residential district. DISCUSSION OF RMF GROUP – ESCROW ACCOUNT City Attorney Andy Pratt reviewed with the Council what is owed to the City by RMF Group, the management company of The Village at Mendota Heights. The City sold the ABC parcel to Mendota Heights Town Center, LLC, the developer of the property, for $295,505. $265,954.50 of that amount was deferred and was to be repaid to the City over time. The City was to assist in the development by selling off various parcels of land. The proceeds from the land sales were deposited into an escrow account and were to be primarily used to construct parking facilities. Attorney Pratt noted that the escrow account for this development was closed in 2013. The Council discussed how they would like to proceed with this issue. The Council decided to not pursue this issue. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS RECEIVED FOR THE SALE OF THE VILLAGE LOTS City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that five proposals have been received in response to the Request for Proposals advertised for the sale of the city’s vacant lots located near The Village. The Council was advised they could go into a closed session meeting of the City Council to discuss the specifics about the proposals and to negotiate a contract with the winning proposal. The Council members discussed the importance of taking public input before a final decision is made. The Council decided the meeting to discuss the five proposals will be held on May 21st at 1:00 pm in the City Council Chambers. The meeting will be open to the public but public input will not be heard. DISCUSSION OF RECREATIONAL FIELD USE / FEES CHARGED City Administrator Mark McNeill and Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson discussed with the Council an issue with Mendota Heights Athletic Association’s reservations for soccer field use. It was noted that the association has notified the City that they will not be reserving City soccer fields for use in the fall. It was noted that a newly formed soccer club has submitted an application to reserve the soccer fields in the fall. DISCUSSION OF 2019-2020 GOALS This item will be discussed at a future meeting. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 pm. ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ____________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 16 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Public Works Superintendent Appointment and Maintenance Lead Recruitment INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to approve the appointment of John Boland to the position of Public Works Superintendent and authorize staff to begin the recruitment process to fill a Maintenance Lead Worker positon. BACKGROUND The City Council authorized staff to conduct the recruitment process to fill the Public Works Superintendent position due to the impending retirement of Terry Blum. Staff is pleased to recommend the appointment of John Boland to the position. Mr. Boland has served the City of Mendota Heights for the past 28 years, both as a public works employee and firefighter. John was promoted to Maintenance Lead in 2014 and oversees the maintenance and upkeep of city parks and public spaces. Throughout his tenure, he has worked with the streets and utilities divisions to promote collaboration and efficiency within the department. John holds a certificate from Hamline University for completion of the Minnesota Public Works Association Leadership Academy. If approved, the promotion of John Boland will result in a vacancy within the Public Works Lead Worker position. Staff is requesting authorization to conduct the internal recruitment process to fill the lead position. The 2018-2019 Teamsters Labor Agreement requires the City to post vacancies within the bargaining unit for five working days so that members of the bargaining unit can be considered for the vacancy. Staff anticipates there will be internal interest in the position. BUDGET IMPACT The Public Works Superintendent and Public Works Lead Worker are included in the 2019 budget. page 17 ACTION RECOMMENDED Staff recommends that the City Council approve the appointment of John Boland as Public Works Superintendent, effective June 10, 2019 with an annual salary of $87,028, which is step three of pay grade 14 of the city’s 2019 Compensation Plan. Staff further recommends that the Council authorize staff to conduct the internal recruitment process to fill a Maintenance Lead Worker position. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the appointment of John Boland to the position of Public Works Superintendent, effective June 10, 2019, with the pay provisions listed above and authorize staff to conduct the internal recruitment process to fill a Maintenance Lead Worker position. page 18 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2019-35 Accepting a Donation for a Tree at Hagstrom King Park COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2019-35 accepting a donation from Tyler Wilsey. DISCUSSION By state law, all donations to the City must be accepted by the City Council by means of a resolution. Tyler Wilsey has donated fifty dollars for a new tree at Hagstrom King Park. An area in the park near his home had pine trees that had to be removed due to disease. The city replaced one tree and a second tree was planned to be planted in 2020. Mr. Wilsey desired the second tree to also be planted in 2019 and asked if he could provide a donation for the second tree. The City is grateful for the generosity of this donation. BUDGET IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 2019-35, formally accepting the donation of fifty dollars for a new tree in Hagstrom King Park. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion adopt the following Resolution 2019-35, “FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF A DONATION TO THE CITY”. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 19 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2019-35 FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF A DONATION TO THE CITY WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights desires to follow Minnesota Statute 465.03 “Gifts to municipalities”; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Statute requires a resolution to accept gifts to municipalities; and WHEREAS, the City has previously acknowledged gifts with a resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights have duly considered this matter and wish to acknowledge the civic mindedness of citizens and officially recognize their donations. NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights accepts a donation of fifty dollars by Tyler Wilsey for the purchase of a new tree in Hagstrom King Park. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 21st day of May, 2019. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 20 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Purchase Order for Solar Speed Signs COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve a purchase order for two solar powered, radar feedback speed limit signs. BACKGROUND The city has received a number of complaints on Sibley Memorial Highway in relation to traffic volumes, speed and large vehicles. The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) discussed the issues at their April 22, 2019 meeting. DISCUSSION The Traffic Safety Committee is recommending adding two solar powered radar feedback signs on Sibley Memorial Highway near London Road. The city will be required to have a MnDOT permit for this installation. A large volume of traffic was diverted to this section of highway while the high bridge was closed. This traffic has not appeared to return to normal after its reopening. Residents are also concerned that there is a straight shot from Cherokee Heights Road and Baker Street all the way to I-35E without any traffic control. I have reached out to MnDOT to inquire about a stop sign at Cherokee Heights and Sibley Memorial Highway. If additional improvements are installed on Sibley Memorial Highway or if the traffic levels return to their historic levels, the sign can be relocated to another area. BUDGET IMPACT The city received a quote of $6,460.28 for the two solar powered radar feedback signs. The solar powered radar feedback signs are proposed to be funded through the street department sign budget RECOMMENDATION The Traffic Safety Committee recommends that Council approve the purchase order for two solar powered radar feedback speed limit signs. page 21 ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the City Council pass a motion approving the purchase order for two solar powered radar feedback signs from TAPCO of Brown Deer, WI. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 22 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Ordinance 541: No Parking on Marie Avenue COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve Ordinance 541 amending City Code; Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3 prohibiting parking on portions of Marie Avenue. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights has a proposed rehabilitation project planned for construction in 2019. Current no parking areas on South Plaza Drive are identified as: Marie Avenue North Between Dodd Road and Delaware Avenue South 50 feet wide, centered on the pedestrian crosswalk located across Ridgewood Drive DISCUSSION With Marie Avenue being a State Aid Street, MnDOT requires the “No Parking” areas be updated. The proposed parking restriction would add: Marie Avenue South Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 200 feet west North Between Dodd Road and Sutton Lane Both Within 70 feet on either side of Trail Road BUDGET IMPACT The “No Parking” areas are required to be identified with street signs. Street signs will be installed with the 2019 street project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Ordinance 541 be adopted. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the city council pass a motion adopting Ordinance 541, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE”. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 23 City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 541 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota ordains as follows: The following streets are hereby added to Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3, Paragraph C of the City Code: Parking prohibited on Certain Streets: No person shall park or leave standing any motor vehicle on the following streets or portions thereof in the City: Street Side Location Marie Avenue South Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 250 feet west Marie Avenue North Between Dodd Road and Sutton Lane Marie Avenue Both Within 70 feet on either side of Trail Road Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this 21st day of May, 2019. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 24 5/3/2019 Mendota Heights Building Activity Report Mike Andrejka, Building Official April 1, 2019 thru April 30, 2019 January 1, 2019 thru April 30, 2019 January 1, 2018 thru April 30, 2018 January 1, 2017 thru April 30, 2017 Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected SFD 0 -$ $0.00 SFD 1 629,742.00$ $6,776.14 SFD 3 1,717,925.00$ $18,856.62 SFD 4 1,920,000.00$ 21,337.81$ Apartment 1 9,135,000.00$ $63,519.64 Apartment 1 9,135,000.00$ $63,519.64 Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 1 4,523,000.00$ 33,080.62$ Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 6 1,146,000.00$ $13,438.13 Townhouse 2 450,000.00$ 4,516.88$ Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ -$ Misc 44 449,302.64$ 6,987.21$ Misc 118 1,879,564.47$ 24,898.14$ Misc 128 2,334,662.47$ 32,399.47$ Misc 162 1,892,579.16$ 29,294.81$ Commercial 7 8,955,000.00$ $22,289.50 Commercial 8 10,455,000.00$ $35,418.14 Commercial 2 5,250,960.00$ $38,287.14 Commercial 10 672,880.00$ 10,614.31$ Sub Total 52 18,539,302.64$ 92,796.35$ Sub Total 128 22,099,306.47$ 130,612.06$ Sub Total 139 10,449,547.47$ 102,981.36$ Sub Total 179 9,458,459.16$ 98,844.43$ Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Plumbing 21 $3,595.24 Plumbing 67 $7,606.74 Plumbing 86 $8,163.22 Plumbing 55 4,418.13$ Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 -$ Sewer 0 $0.00 Sewer 0 $0.00 Sewer 17 $1,275.00 Sewer 13 988.00$ Mechanical 11 $4,253.01 Mechanical 86 397.00$ $11,815.41 Mechanical 181 $17,404.39 Mechanical 108 12,539.81$ Sub Total 32 7,848.25$ Sub Total 153 19,422.15$ Sub Total 284 $26,842.61 Sub Total 176 17,945.94$ License No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Contractor 28 $1,400.00 Contractor 207 $10,350.00 Contractor 197 $9,850.00 Contractor 220 11,000.00$ Total 112 18,539,302.64$ 102,044.60$ Total 488 22,099,306.47$ 160,384.21$ Total 620 10,449,547.47$ 139,673.97$ Total 575 9,458,459.16$ 127,790.37$ NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan review fee and valuation totals page 25 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Scott Goldenstein, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: April 2019 Fire Synopsis COMMENT: Fire Calls April saw the Mendota Heights Fire Department being called out for a total of 32 incidents. There were 26 calls in Mendota Heights, one in Mendota, two in Sunfish Lake and three outside our contracted coverage area. The three calls outside our area included a mutual aid request to a structure fire at a home in Inver Grove Heights, and we were requested to two apartment fires with South Metro Fire, one in South Saint Paul and one in West Saint Paul. The calls themselves broke down as follows: Under the classification of actual fires: In addition to the three structure fires that we responded for mutual aid to our neighboring departments, we also responded to a large commercial building that had a fire break out in a conveyor belt area leading to a dumpster. The fire was held in check via the sprinkler system and then put out in its entirety with Engine 10’s crew. This crew also activated auto-aid from South Metro Fire. We also responded to a grass fire that began when an ember from an above ground fire pit ignited the surrounding grass. The homeowner was able to extinguish the fire and our crews primarily investigated. Finally, we responded to a burnt food call in a multiunit residential complex. Lastly, we responded to a burning smell at a large commercial facility where a very hot, blackened outlet was found in their employee lunch room. The outlet was de-energized and their maintenance supervisor was advised. Under the classification of medical calls: We were paged to five medical related calls this past month. One of the more unique calls, included a husband and wife that drove to the station believing that he was having a medical emergency. The station is typically not manned but firefighters had just cleared the fire hall from a previous call and were able to assist the individual and he was sent to the hospital. Under the category of hazardous situation calls: There was one gas leak call, three powerline down calls, and one unidentified smell call that ended up being due to sewer line cleaning in the area. page 26 Under the classification of good intent calls: We responded to one smoke scare that appeared to be due to a possible belt issue on a HVAC unit. We also were paged to four calls that were dispatched and cancelled before our arrival. Under the classification of false alarms: We responded to eight false alarms. Four of the calls were due to burnt food at a residence, one was burnt food at a group home, one was a residential false alarm, one was a commercial false alarm, and one was a commercial pull station. Finally, we had six calls that cancelled before our arrival. April 2019 Department Training Opportunities: April 10 18:30 Firefighter Safety & Survival This was a mandatory drill going over multiple stations allowing firefighters to practice procedures on the fire ground to improve their safety. It included SCBA (air pack) training, RIT (Rapid Intervention Team) training in case of a firefighter mayday on scene, and a hose maze. April 11 07:00 Scenarios This drill had firefighters going through random scenarios establishing correct radio communications, priorities and initial actions. April 17 18:30 General Meeting April 22 18:30 Pump Operations Firefighters were assigned to an engine that went to different areas in the city and each firefighter was required to go through pumping with the truck, hooking up to their own hydrant, and keeping their firefighters with a constant flow of water. April 23 07:00 Firefighter Safety & Survival This was a mandatory drill going over multiple stations allowing firefighters to practice procedures on the fire ground to improve their safety. It included SCBA (air pack) training, RIT (Rapid Intervention Team) training in case of a firefighter mayday on scene, and a hose maze. page 27 Number of Calls 32 Total Calls for Year 116 FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED:NUMBER STRUCTURE CONTENTS MISC.TOTALS TO DATE ACTUAL FIRES Structure - MH Commercial $1,200 Structure - MH Residential $1,000 Structure - Contract Areas $0 Cooking Fire - confined 1 $5,000 *$5,000 Vehicle - MH $13,000 Vehicle - Contract Areas $0 Grass/Brush/No Value MH 1 Grass/Brush/No Value Contract TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES Other Fire 1 OVERPRESSURE RUPTURE $5,000 $0 $0 Excessive heat, scorch burns 1 MEDICAL Emergency Medical/Assist 5 Vehicle accident w/injuries Extrication ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH)$5,000 Medical, other HAZARDOUS SITUATION MEND. HTS. ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS $0 Spills/Leaks 1 Carbon Monoxide Incident MEND. HTS. ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $13,000 Power line down 2 Arcing, shorting 1 MEND. HTS. TOTAL LOSS TO DATE $20,200 Hazardous, Other SERVICE CALL Smoke or odor removal 1 CONTRACT AREAS LOSS TO DATE $0 Assist Police or other agency Service Call, other GOOD INTENT Good Intent Dispatched & Cancelled 6 Current To Date Last Year Smoke Scare 1 26 94 58 HazMat release investigation 0 8 5 Good Intent, Other 1 2 1 FALSE ALARMS 2 2 7 False Alarm 3 10 4 Malfunction 1 Total:32 116 75 Unintentional 7 False Alarm, other FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH MUTUAL AID 3 INSPECTIONS Total Calls 32 INVESTIGATIONS RE-INSPECTION WORK PERFORMED Hours To Date Last Year MEETINGS FIRE CALLS 580.5 1962 1287 MEETINGS 39 254 159.5 ADMINISTRATION TRAINING 402.5 1306 638 SPECIAL ACTIVITY 117.5 174 965.4 PLAN REVIEW/TRAINING FIRE MARSHAL 48.5 163.5 TOTAL:0 TOTALS 1139.5 3744.5 3213.4 REMARKS:SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS *$5,000 loss for trash or rubbish fire, contained listed under other, fire Lilydale Mendota Sunfish Lake Other MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT APRIL 2019 MONTHLY REPORT FIRE LOSS TOTALS LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS Mendota Heights page 28 page 29 page 30 page 31 page 32 page 33 page 34 page 35 page 36 page 37 page 38 page 39 page 40 DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2019-36 Approve Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvements COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize and advertisement for bid for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project. BACKGROUND The preparation of the feasibility report for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project, was authorized by the Mendota Heights City Council by adopting Resolution 2018-58 and 2018-59 at the City Council meeting held on August 7, 2019. The Minnesota Statute 429 process is required because the city intends to assess a portion of the project. The feasibility report for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement project was accepted by the Mendota Heights City Council. The Council called for a Public Hearing on January 15, 2019 by adopting Resolution 2018-100 at the December 18, 2018, City Council meeting. The recommendation in the feasibility report was to proceed with this project. The proposed streets to be rehabilitated are Mager Court, Marie Avenue (Trail Road to Dodd Road), South Lane (Linden Street to the cul-de-sac), Spring Creek Circle, Wesley Court, and Wesley Lane. A shared use pedestrian trail is also proposed to be constructed from Maple Street to Mager Court. Based on our observations, as well as our pavement management system, a majority of these streets have deteriorated to the point where it is no longer cost effective to patch the street and rehabilitation is necessary. Council ordered the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvements at their January 15, 2019 meeting. page 41 DISCUSSION Street Rehabilitation – Mager Court, South Lane, Spring Creek Circle, Wesley Lane, and Wesley Court Proposed improvements for Mager Court, South Lane, Spring Creek Circle, Wesley Lane, and Wesley Court will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2.5” bituminous base course. It will also include a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, curb and gutter repair, and catch basin repair. To achieve the desired pavement section, the reclaimed material will be temporarily removed to excavate the subgrade. Storm water improvements consist of adding additional catch basins and installing rain gardens in this neighborhood. The street and trail approaches along Lexington Avenue will also be improved. Street Rehabilitation – Marie Avenue Proposed improvements for Marie Avenue will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2” bituminous base course and a 4” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, curb and gutter repair, bump outs at Trail Road, watermain replacement from Dodd Road to Sutton Lane, land bridge repairs, storm sewer revision at the intersection of Trail Road, and ADA improvements which include trail rehabilitation. The pedestrian underpass replacement has been pushed to the Phase II portion of Marie Avenue for construction in 2020. Street Rehabilitation – Dodd Road Trail A shared use pedestrian trail is proposed from Maple Street to Mager Court. Staff was unable to secure the necessary right-of-way from Mager Court to Marie Avenue. It is staff intention to revisit this block again when an intersection improvement is made to the Marie Avenue and Dodd Road intersection. Additionally, development of the lots on the Village site may affect the construction of this trail close to Maple Street. Staff intends to work with the selected developer once that is determined. BUDGET IMPACT The total estimated cost of the project is $2,044,893.24. PROJECT COSTS ITEM CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT TOTAL Total Project $2,044,893.24 $408,978.65 $2,453,871.88 Totals $2,044,893.24 $2,453,871.88 The Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project is proposed to be financed by special assessments, municipal state aid (MSA), municipal bonds, and utility funds. Funding sources and amounts are shown below: FUNDING SOURCES ITEM COST ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT MUNICIPAL BONDS UTILITY FUNDS MSA Total Project $2,453,872 $324,500 $878,262 $351,110 900,000 Totals $2,453,872 $324,500 $878,262 $351,110 $900,000 Street improvement projects are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners. Pursuant to the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy adopted by the city council on June 16, 1992, the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners as follows: page 42 • All units with a driveway located on a street in the project area in the single family home portion will be assessed as a street rehabilitation per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy using a unit assessment. • City costs include bridge repair, storm sewer, pond improvements, and trails in addition to its share of the overall project. The city is also being assessed for its frontage on Marie Avenue. Saint Paul Regional Water is responsible for the costs of the watermain replacement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the council approve the plans and specifications for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project, and authorize the advertisement for bids. The full plan set is available for review at city hall. ACTION REQUIRED If City Council wishes to implement the staff recommendations, pass a motion adopting A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE MARIE AVENUE AND WESLEY NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. This action requires a super majority vote. page 43 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2019-36 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE MARIE AVENUE AND WESLEY NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Public Works Director reported that the proposed improvements and construction thereof were feasible, desirable, necessary, and cost effective, and further reported on the proposed costs of said improvements and construction thereof; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore directed the Public Works Director to proceed with the preparation of plans and specifications thereof; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for said improvements and have presented such plans and specifications to the City Council for approval. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED; by the Mendota Heights City Council as follows: 1. That the plans and specifications for said improvements be and they are hereby in all respects approved by the City. 2. That the Clerk with the aid and assistance of the Public Works Director be and is hereby, authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said improvements all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes, such as bids to be received at the City Hall of the City of Mendota Heights by 10:00 A.M., Wednesday, June 26, 2019, and at which time they will be publicly opened in the City Council Chambers of the City Hall by the Public Works Director, will then be tabulated, and will then be considered by the City Council at its next regular Council meeting. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty first day of May 2018. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST _________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 44 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor Garlock and City Council; City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: REVISED Draft Ordinance No. 538 – an Amendment to City Code Title 12-1G-1 to allow “Personal Self-Storage Facility” in the I-Industrial District (Planning Case No. 2019-01) Introduction Attached for Council’s review and final consideration is a revised draft Ordinance No. 538, which would amend City Code Title 12-1G-1 by allowing “Personal Self-Storage Facility” as a new conditional use in the I-Industrial District. This memo packet contains a revised (track-changes) version, along with a clean version for review. These new or added changes are being presented herein as part of the discussion held at the May 14th City Council Workshop meeting. Discussion The City can use its legislative authority when considering action on a zoning code amendment request and has broad discretion, provided said action is constitutional, rational, and in some way related to protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the public. Recommendation As noted at the previous May 7th city council meeting memo packet, this amendment item was initially presented before the Planning Commission at the January 22nd and February 26th regular meetings, with fully noticed public hearings. The commission chose to recommended denial (on 6-1 vote) of the proposed ordinance amendment request, based on certain findings. Action Required The City Council may choose to affirm the recommendation from the Planning Commission and make a motion to deny the proposed Ordinance No. 538 as presented; or the Council may choose to forgo this recommendation and adopt the revised draft Ordinance No. 538 as presented herein. The Council may also elect to modify any part of the draft ordinance, and staff will make any requested revisions accordingly. Final action on this item requires a simple-majority vote of the council. page 45 SUGGESTED CHANGES – FROM 05/14/19 COUNCIL WORKSHOP DISCUSSION CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 538 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE G. INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO ALLOW PERSONAL SELF-STORAGE FACILITY AS A CONDITIONAL USE The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain: Section 1. Title 12-1G-2: Conditional Uses is hereby amended as follows: Personal self-storage facility, provided that: A. Any and all storage shall be inside the building. Exterior storage of personal vehicles, recreational vehicles, trailers, and equipment is strictly prohibited. B. The storage facility shall have a security system adequate to limit access to persons renting at the facility. C. Facility shall not be located closer than one-quarter (1/4) mile from any residential use and/or zone. D. All drive aisles and parking surfaces must be curb and guttered, with asphalt or concrete. E. The use shall have no more than three (3) overhead doors or bays to be used for entering/exiting the facility . F. Access to any fenced-in exterior area shall be available to emergency responders in a manner acceptable to the fire marshal. G. Common parking space available to all visitors shall be provided at a rate no less than one space per six thousand (6,000) square feet of storage area. Deleted: <#>Maintenance and servicing of vehicles stored on site is prohibited, except for minor maintenance such as tire inflation, adding oil, wiper replacement, and battery replacement.¶ Deleted: three hundred feet (300') Formatted: Font color: Green Deleted: to Deleted: All storage space openings shall be oriented internally to the facility and shall not directly face a public highway or major collector Deleted: the interior of the page 46 Section 2. Title 12-1G-2-2: Prohibited Uses is hereby amended as follows: Personal self-storage facility Section 3. This ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication. Adopted and ordained into an ordinance this 21st day of May, 2019. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST ___________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk (Strikeout text indicates matter to be deleted, while underlined text indicates new matter) Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 page 47 CLEAN COPY CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 538 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE G. INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO ALLOW PERSONAL SELF-STORAGE FACILITY AS A CONDITIONAL USE The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain: Section 1. Title 12-1G-2: Conditional Uses is hereby amended as follows: Personal self-storage facility, provided that: A. Any and all storage shall be inside the building. Exterior storage of personal vehicles, recreational vehicles, trailers, and equipment is strictly prohibited. B. The storage facility shall have a security system adequate to limit access to persons renting at the facility. C. Facility shall not be located closer than one-quarter (1/4) mile from any residential use and/or residential zone. D. All drive aisles and parking surfaces must be curb and guttered, with asphalt or concrete. E. The use shall have no more than three (3) overhead doors or bays to be used for entering/exiting the facility. F. Access to any fenced-in exterior area shall be available to emergency responders in a manner acceptable to the fire marshal. G. Common parking space available to all visitors shall be provided at a rate no less than one space per six thousand (6,000) square feet of storage area. page 48 Section 2. Title 12-1G-2-2: Prohibited Uses is hereby amended as follows: Personal self-storage facility Section 3. This ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication. Adopted and ordained into an ordinance this 21st day of May, 2019. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST ___________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk (Strikeout text indicates matter to be deleted, while underlined text indicates new matter) Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 page 49 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 21, 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Establish Fee for Park Bench Donation Program COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to establish the fee required for installation of park benches through the Park Bench Donation program. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights established a Park Bench Donation program in 2001. The original policy states that the standard bench shall six or eight feet long, mounted on a concrete slab, with side arms, back and the total cost should not exceed $1000. The required donation at the time was $500 and any additional funds were to be paid for from the Special Parks Fund. The required donation amount was $750 in 2013 and increased to $1000 in 2014. There are approximately 10 benches that have been added to city parks through this program. DISCUSSION Staff audited the costs of this program which is showing that current costs are approximately $1,700 for the purchase and installation of the specified bench and concrete slab, not including labor. Labor involves assembly of the bench and anchoring to the concrete base. The City Council is asked to set the required donation amount for a bench to be installed through this program. The Council may also establish the funding source if the donation amount doesn’t cover the installation cost--the Special Park Fund, Parks General Levy, etc . could be used to subsidize any shortfall. Staff currently has two interested parties looking to request a bench through this program. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that the Council establish a subsidy and is concerned with the price increase. BUDGET IMPACT There has been about one bench installed every other year through this program. The budget impact will be dependent on the funding source and if any subsidy is established. page 50 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends $1700 as a donation amount, which should be reviewed and adjusted annually. This amount would mean that there would be no subsidy of bench donations to be provided by the City. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the City Council establish the fee for the purchase and installation of a bench through the Park Bench Donation program. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 51 Park Bench Donation Program From time to time, citizens may wish to memorialize friends or relatives through the donation of a Park Bench to the City’s parks and trail system. The process for bench donation will be as follows: 1. Minimum donation required, per bench, shall be $1700 (subject to yearly review, due at time of application) 2. Bench may be placed throughout the Mendota Heights Parks and Trail System with the recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission 3. Recognition or memorial plaque will be attached to back of approved standard bench design 4. Text of memorial plaque shall be approved by the City Council 5. Cost of the recognition or memorial plaque is included within the donated amount 6. Minnesota Statue requires all donations to be officially accepted by the City Council PARK BENCH DONATION FORM DATE: ______________ NAME: ______________________________________________________ ADDRESS: ____________________________________________________ PHONE: ______________ Email: _____________________________ I would like to make a contribution for installation of a Park Bench at the following location: __________________________________________ _______________________ __________________________________________________ __________ I would like the following message placed on the recognition/memorial plaque attached to the back of the bench: (Plaque area is 2" by 10") __________________________________________________________ _ ___ ______________________________________________________ __________ I understand that the desired bench location and text of the recognition/memorial plaque must be reviewed and approved by the Park and Recreation Commission and the City Council. Signature of applicant: ____________________________________ page 52