HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC September 4, 1990
~KDA
eAf( ~ rId
O(!jb
o
!Acffl
, /
ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS
TOLTZ. KING. DUVALL. ANDERSON
AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED
2500 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-1803
f31212Q2-4400
FAX. 612I2n-0083
September 4, 1990
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Puldover,~esota
Re: Construction of a Control Valve Vault
Andover, Minnesota
Commission No. 9368-04
Dear Mayor and Council:
Bids for the referenced project were received on September 4, 1990, with the following results:
Bidder
Amount of Bid
Rice Lake Contracting
Ridllnar Construction
Gridor Construction
A & K Construction
Penn Contracting
$36,850.00
41,760.00
46,660.00
55,000.00
57,900.00
Engineer's Estin1ate
$30,000.00
The disparity between our estimate and the bid prices apparently is the bidders' evaluation of the
cost to work around the many existing utilities at the project site.
It is recommended that a contract be awarded to the low bidder, Rice Lake Contracting, in the
amount of their low bid of $36,850.00. The Rice Lake firm is currently constructing similar
facilities, meter stations, for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, designed by TKDA.
To date, their work has been totally acceptable.
A complete Tabulation of Bids is attached for your information.
Sincerely yours,
6'~~
J. Thomas Kirk, P.E.
. "
,
~
JTK:j
Attachment
~
Z (/J -0 c:: c::
OAP:: ..-{ o 0
~~~ .0 ..-{ ..-{
Z ..... ..... 0 0
Iil:z .-t 0 o 0 ..-{ ..-{
'" H ;:l ;:l ~ ~
~9", c:: E-< ~ ~ ..... .....
..-{ U ..... ..... 0 0
\1 tJI ~ CIl CIl III III
'" ..-{ E-< 0 c::c::.-t .-t
~-JE-< ~ E-< 0 o 0 Iil Iil
o-1ZU 0 (/J uu
"':HIil Z 0 0 CIl CIl
5 ,~ c:: 0 ~ \0 H H' -0 ,
0 U \0 o 0 c:: 1I1 ..... c::
A(/J:I: , -0-00 u.....-o 0
IilU III P:: A \0 ..-{..-{ 0 1I1 1I1 0
'E-< P:: c:: 0 H <r ~ ~ '" III ~ III '"
00<(0<( ..-{ A 10 <f> 0010 IO"'~ 10
ZHI .-t H
HU(/J P::
:<:OP:: CIl 0
(/J1il ..-{
, (/J Iil ..c:
~0<(i:1 .....
c::
0-1~0 c:: Z 0 0
o Z ..-{ 0 CIl ..-{
E-< Iil H .-t ~
~ E-< III .....
0 U Z 0
~ ~ III
~ ... .-t
III E-< Iil
(/J E-< 0 .'<:
CIl Z S 0 0 :>1
III 0 1I1 .....
..... U 0 0 ~ ..-{
0 ~ \0 U
c:: i (- III :I:
III , .-t c:: -0
A A rl .-t ..-{ ...: ... '"
H <r 0 :< III
.. U 10 <f> :I: E-< 0~~
H
P::
0
Z
(/) H 0
A E-< ~ ~ U rl
H U .......... '"
III ~ c:: c:: 0 ..-{ 0
o O'.-{ H ..-{
.... E-< UU~ ..... ~
0 Z E-< 0 ..... CIl.....
0 S 0 III III 0 ;:l 0
8 U .'<:.'<:lll -0 III
0 0 '" '" rl C::rl
H ~ ~ U1 0-10-11il HIil
~ <Xl :I:
0<( , III III III 1I1 III
0-1 A \0 o 0 tJI ...:........tJI
H (Y) ..-{ ..-{ '" . 1I1 '"
a Iil 10 <f> ,,:,,: '" 0~A'"
U
H
,,:
~ III
Z ..c:
0 ..... , E-<
0 H "0 Z
0 E-< .... III ~
E-< U o ..-{
0-1 0 ~ .... '"
~ rl c:: ..-{ H
E-< o 0 P
(/) ..-{ III c:: c:: 0
6 .....0. o 0 Iil
~ 0 OCll.... CI) ..-{ ..-{
0) U ;:l 0 P:: c::.......... .... .....
~ 0) ~ CIl 0 000 0 c::
rl Iil ..... 1I1 III E-< ..-{ ;:l ;:l III
E-< CIl 0 U ..... ~ ~ CIl S
, Iil c:: ".-{ ~ 0.......... ,,: D.
0-1 <r 0-1 o ..... ~ ;:l CIl CIl ~ III ..-{
0 ~ Orl'" E-< ~ c:: c:: :> ;:l
P:: ,,: ;:l Z ..... 0 0 P lllrl tl'
E-< <r Iil 0 III '" 9 0 CIlUU E-< :> '" Iil
:z: 0 ~ U .....:> U c:: U .-t:>
0 I III (/) 10 Orl.-t .-: '" Hrl
U <Xl Iil ,,: rl III P U '" '" .... :> :>1 III III
0<(\0 E-< 0 D.:>D. CI) o 0 P .-tJ-l0
'-:U1E-<('") '" :z: .... S.-t ~ .-t.,-i ..-{ ~ .-t.... (l)..-{
('")00) Iil 0 o III .... '" c:: ~ o ~ :>: ~
.... I (/J CI) H A 0:>0-1 0 ~ III ..... H <l! J-l
O<Xl1il E-< H (l)..c: 0 J-l ..... :< 0
<Xl (5 0 '" 10 (l).-t CIJ Cl c:: 0 <l! .... c:: J-l 0 <ll
.,.-\~ H Z H ..c:o..c: :z: (l) (l).-t 0 O;:l.-t.-t
Q P:: H J-l H J-l H Cl:>:lil UI1l....1il
\.. .'J:'4 z Iil U ...: J-l E-< E-<
../z 0 Z (fJ E-< H c:: ~ CI) (fJ
U ,H 1,1 Iil 0 000 H H
PE-<C<:CI) '" Q E-< ....U.... H 0-1
C<:UIilCl) 0
f-<~:>H :>:
CI) o~ (fJ
~oo Q l,:j
8~~8 H E-< 0 rl
'" H Z
z (fJ -0
OA~ ..-1
~~~ .0
~;:l rl
<ll
~O_l4 I':
..-1
I tn
.~ ..-1
H' ..E-< l-1
~Uu 0
Z~
i;HE-< I':
,H 0
A(fJ:r:
~u Q)
'E-< ~ I':
..-1
~~, rl
HU(fJ
I<:O~ '"
(fJ~ ..-1
'(fJ ~ .a
N":Z .oJ
E-< H
H~CJ I':
o Z ..-1
E-< ~ tn
l-1 I': I':
0 CJ ..-1 0
l-1 Z ..., 0 '"
l-1 H '" o ..-1 l-1
Q) E-< E-t l-1 <ll l-1 Q)
U Z 0 Q)l-1..., -0
'" ;:l 0 ;:: ..., 0 ~
Q) ..., I': Q)
..., E-t ~ 0 OOrl ...:
0 Z 0 l-1Ufil 1':..-1
I': 0 0) III Q) l-1
Q) U Q I': Q) -o::l-o-o
A H r- :>.1': tn rlN<tl<tl
~ lQ l!l <ll Q) <ll o Q) Q) Q)
oj< <J> "'l4 l4 CJQ~~
~
l4
I': I': 0 0
o 0-.-1 ..-1
CI) ..-1..-1 l-1 l-1
A Z ...,...,..., ...,
H 0 000 0
III H ;l ::l Q) Q)
E-t l-1l-1rl rl
f,q U ...,...,~ ~
0 ~ 0 '" '"
0 I': I': :>. :>.
z E-< 00..., ...,
0 (fJ 0 o U..-I .0-1
H 5 0 0 -0 U
~ 0 1<:1<: <ll ...,
U , I': e ...,-01':
l!l '" '" .0-1 <tl <tl.o-I
l<: l!l :< Q) l-1 Q) :<
~ <J> ";";E-< III l4~E-t
'"
..;
:il Q)
z .a
0 ..., , E-<
0 H -0 Z
0 E-< .... Q) ~
E-t U 0-0-1
H 0 ~ .... l4
~ rl 1':-0-1 H
E-< o 0 p
(fJ .0-1 Q) I': I': ()I
Z ...,0. o 0 ~
~ 0 0 0"'.... (fJ .0-1 '0-1
0) U ::l 0 ~ 1':"""" r.. ...,
~ 0) l-1 '" 0 000 0 I':
rl ~ ..., <tl Q) E-< .0-1 ::l ::l Q)
E-t '" 0 U ..., l-1 l-1 (fJ a
, fil I': ' .0-1 ;:l 0...,..., ~
H .. H 0..., l-1 ::l '" '" fil Q) .0-1
~ ~ Orll4 E-< l-1 I': I': ~ I> ::l
~ ::l Z ..., 0 0 P Q)rl lJ'
E-< .. ~ 0 CIl <ll g 0 "'uu E-< I> <tl fil
Z 0 ~ u ...,:> 0 I': u rl:>
0 I Q) (fJ a:l Orlrl ..; <tl l-1rl
U 00 ~ rl CIl P U <ll <ll r.. :> :>. Q) <ll
";<D E-< 0 0.1> 0. (fJ o 0 ~ rl...,O
";l!lE-<'" l4 Z r.. P. rl g rl-o-I'o-I rl.... Q).o-I
",00) fil 0 o <ll r.. <ll I': l-1 0l-1~l-1
r.. 1(fJ (fJ H A O:>H 0 l-1 <ll ..., l-1 Q) ...,
OOO~ E-t H CIl;:: 0 ..., ..., :< 0
oo~o "" III Q) rl CIl CJ I': 0 Q) r.. I': ..., 0 Q)
'~HZ H ;::0;:: z lllCllrl 0 O::lrlrl
A H ..., l-1..., H CJ~~ Oa:lr..~
'. ~ Z fil ..; ..., E-< E-t
b-O<; 0 Z E-< l-1 .::: l-1 (fJ (fJ
U ,H fil 0 000 H H
PE-<~(fJ P< E-t r..o.... H H
~O~(fJ 0
t:~o~ (fJ ::>:
ZO~04 A fil
O~ 0 H E-< rl
OP< 0 IQ H Z
"
qf41V
o{2J ~ MeT
--
~~KDA
TOLTZ, KING. DUVALL, ANDERSON
AND ASSOCIATES. INCORPORATED
ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS
2500 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-1893
6121202-4400
FAA 6121202-0083
September 4, 1990
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Andover, Minnesota
Re: Hidden Creek East 3rd Addition
Andover, Minnesota
Conunission No. 9716
Dear Mayor and Council:
Bids for the referenced project were received on September 4, 1990 with the following results:
Bidder
Amount of Bid
Mille Lacs Contracting
B & D Underground
Ann and ale Contracting
Yolk Sewer & Water
Hydrocon, Inc.
Redstone Construction
Ro-So Contracting
Kadlec Excavating of Mora, Inc.
$87,390.70
92,454.00
92,575.00
93,993.30
95,465.00
96,530.95
104,156.60
105,529.96
Engineer's Estimate
$100,641.00
It is recommended that a contract be awarded to the low bidder, Mille Lacs Contracting, in the
amount of their low bid of $87,390.70.
A complete Tabulation of Bids is attached for your information.
Sincerely yours,
JLD:j
Attaclunent
)
Z Ul
OAO:
~~~
/ '0 llt
, ~ I
--'-OUl
HU~
HZU
~Hf'1
P _ H
AUl:X:
filU
- ~ ~
g;S.
HUUl
~Oo:
Ulfil
- Ul fil
"'o<(Z
~ H
~eg
~;"i!fil
Z
o
H
~
H
A
:i!
~
(Y) lD
0<(....
~~I"'-
UlO'"
o<(Ul
filfil
.,~~
\(~6
U _ H
O:Ul
~ Z [il Ul
fil;>H
AO~
~eO
:x:;"i!u
~
-,.j
.Q
....
III
to:
-,.j
tJl
-,.j
H
o
to:
o
Q)
a
.,.j
rl
Ul
.,.j
.a
,J
to:
.,.j
H
o
H
H
Q)
Ul
Q)
,J
o
to:
Q)
A
iC
rIl
~
III
5<0
o
a
~
a
~
o
o
o
....
o
'"
'"
....
-
'"
0:
fil
~
~
llt
fil
Ul
A
fil
Z
fil
llt
o
Ul
A
H
lO
~
~
t!)
0:
fil
~
A
'"
lO
0:
~
o
U
Ul
U
:.l
fil
H
H
H
~
fil
~
H
~
Ul
fil
0:
fil
fil
Z
H
(!)
Z
fil
~
~
H
Z
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
H
Z
fil
~
:><:
fil
OO~ON
o lfllDN I"'-
OqtoqtMM
.... .........
N MMM
OOOOOO<qlN""NN<QtO
OO'lNNMMI..O\DMCJ'\\DO
O'lO\Mr-tCOOOMqaCOr--1..O
.... ... ... ... ... ...
ll)Nr-tr-t (f")r-i
00000000000000000
00000000000000\000
OONN...,ooN\O\O\Dqtmooqtli)qto
Oll)MMMMNr-ir-i<ql('l')ll)Nli) COD
0..., me 1..0
N ....
Z
fil
~
:><:
fil
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOll)OO
OQ\OooooaOOOOOONOO
aor--ll)ll)OOONOaOll)ONOO
OONr-tr-tom~~~omN~~Mro
mNmw~o~MmroMmM~~~~
-
N
... .. .. ..
r-tr-tr-t~
- - -
lflN....
-
(Y)
OOOOOOOOOOOOOO~OO
ooro~~ooo~OOOOO~OO
OOU')~r--ON
OO............NN
"'N
N
rorooo
r-tr-tLOO
"'(Y)
....
LOLllLllqrOO
lflN'" (Y)ro
'"
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
OO~O~OLllOOOOOLllOLllOO
OOWLO~OMNWOO~~WLllWO
OMLllWWOOM~Oqr...,roLllN~O
... .. .. .. ...
r-t~r-tMr-t
... .. .. ..
lfl(Y)........
-
'"
- - -
lD........
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
OOMLll~OM~rooooLllomoo
OOr-tr-tMNNr-tr-tOOOO~~ 000
O~ O~ 0
~ r-tr-t r-t
~~~~~~~~~o<(~~o<(o<(~o<(Ul
H~HHHHHHHfilHHfilfilHfilH
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
........NoroOlflOOM....ro(Y)rolfl....n
Nr-tO"lLO""I'NN r-tr-t O"lN
rir-t M \D
OriNMqtLll\Dr-
oomr-trir-trir-tririri
0:
~
fil
Ul
-
o
....
I
o
_ _ fil
.. .. .. .. .. qt 1..0 H ri
:>iN "'lDroO........ 0 I
0: .... .... .... .... N I I :x: (Y)
0<( I I I I IN'" ~
~ON"'lDro........ p::
Hr-trir-trir-t ~
~~rIl~rIlUl
UlUlUlUlUlUl
Ll)Ll) r..
~lfllfllfllfllfl(Y)(Y) 0
6~(Y)(Y)(Y)(Y)(Y)0:0::;,.:;,.:x:
H:><:O:O:O:O:O:AA ~
f-ifilAAAAAUlUlAAllt
0<( ~~UlUl~ ~~fil
NO UUUlUlA
H~UUUUU:>:>
H :>;>:>:>:>lltllt~~~
HZlltlltlltlltllt UlUlO:
lOZ _cZZ~
OOCCCCCOOOO:><:
~urororororo""""UUfil
~Ul
~Ulo<(o<(
HH
AA
fil
H
o
:x: 0:
~:
o<(~
H
A
0: 0
lOfil--...
lltU
filH Ul
~llt~~
filfilo<(
lflUUl;S
Ll)(Y)H
(Y) :>~o:
:;,.o:~ljlj~
AUlUl;>fil
Ul Ul
Ulfllfl
U:>(Y)(Y)Z
;>llt 0<(
llt O:O:Ul
c A A
cOCl}CI)f:<1
ro.... Ul
UUH
Zo Zo :> :> :>
lltlltfil
H
C I: C s: r..:I
...,qtqtoQlE-i
o
o
N
N
'"
000000000000
000000000000
oqtOOl{)oQIOOMO"loQl~LO
r-ri.qN('f)MOJr-tr-tNMOO
r-\D~roMMMNooNLllro
-
Ll)
N
... ... ... ..
mLllriN
-
'"
-
....
000000000000
OOOOOOOLllOOOO
Ll)....N
ro........
(Y)
Llll'-OO
1..0 \DM co
Mr-iMM
....
LllMCOMr-t
lDNI"'-
lfl
0:>
lD
lfl
'"
OOLl)OOOOOOOOO
OLllr-OOOO\OoOOLl)
OI'-r-tLl)OlJ)Ll)\Du)OLll\O
OoQlr-tNOM~OriCOl'-m
N\D\OI.OMNNO"lI'-NLllr-
-
lD
N
.. ... .. ..
r-qtr-lN
(Y)
....
OlJ)Ll)OOOOOOOOO
OI'-r-OOOOrlOOOO"l
OOOO~OLllLOLllLl)LllLl)O
o rlNLl)M\D Ll)(Y)l-
r-I MrlNN
....
o
o
I"'-
'"
'"
-
(Y)
(Y)
000000000000
000000000000
OOCOOOOOCOLl)OON
O...,oQIOOL{)LllNCOWO"lI.O
oQIr-r-tOoQlNMriLllNCOO
... .. .. ..
COLllNN
-
lD
- -
........
000000000000
00000000000"1
OONOOOOOOLllLllOrl
or-tr-tOOI.f')U) qt(Y)O\
N "'NN(Y)
....
o<(~~o<(o<(o<(o<(~o<(~o<(lO
filHHfilfilfilfilHfilfilfilH
000000000000
000000000000
N"''''lflNnnlD(Y)ro....lfl
r-N \.Orl NOO
(X)qI r- co
~
P
ZZ[illO
HH;>
~~~~r
~~~fil
filo<(o<(~
Z~S:S:o<(
Ho<( (!)
~:s:OO
Ll)lfl~
~ 0<(
UlUlUlfil
~HUlrllUl
~~:.l:.l
UU
10
~lltllt
HH
AA
~
~
~
:x:
UllO
IH~
..,..,
~~
H Or-tN
:>....N(Y)"'lfllDI"'-O:>"'............
H
A
o
o
lfl
I"'-
o
-
ro
N
lfl
(Y)
I"'-
lfl
....
'"
N
o
o
(Y)
(Y)
N
'"
N
Z Ul
~~~
.8_0 j
, llt
'-- ~ I
HO~
~fi~
:>H~
P _ H
AUl:X:
filU
- ~ ~
g;S1
HUUl
~oo:
CIlfil
- Ul fil
"'A:Z
~ H
~eg
~;"i!fil
z
o
H
~
H
A
:i!
~
(Y) lD
A:....
~~I"'-
UlOO\
A:Ul
filfil
.,~ ~
H
~'~ Z
ill 0
U _ H
O:Ul
- Z [il Ul
fil;>H
AO~
~eO
:x:;7i!u
'0
.,.j
.Q
rl
III
to:
.,.j
tJl
-,.j
H
o
to:
o
Q)
to:
.,.j
..-l
Ul
.,.j
.a
,J
to:
.,.j
H
o
H
H
QJ
Ul
Q)
...,
o
to:
Q)
o
iC
rIl
A
H
III
S
6
~
a
~
o
o
o
....
o
0\
0\
....
-
'"
0:
fil
~
~
llt
fil
Ul
A
fil
Z
fil
llt
o
Ul
A
H
lO
~
~
C!>
0:
fil
~
A
'"
lO
0:
~
Z
o
U
CIl
U
j
fil
H
H
H
~
fil
~
H
~
Ul
fil
0:
fil
fil
Z
H
C!>
Z
fil
~
~
H
Z
H
000000000
000000000
c:ooU)oooooco
NONL.()NCOqtU"')CO
U1qtqtcom r-IO\
N(y)
Z
fil
~
:><:
fil
000000000
000000000
'-'>t"-LO0000fl100
r-Ir-INLON""ri co
qt(l)O) 0)
000000000
LOODOOOOOD
r-iODOOO\DOD
LOLOt"-Ii)OOr-lOU)
NOMCOO'\N N(.O
N(Y)
lOU)DOODOOO
NNOOOOOOO
qtLl)ooooqtqtO
........l"'-lflOO lfl
(1")CX)O)r-I '-0
000000000
000000000
OOOOOO\DOO
.......OOOODr-ilOO
(Y)qtLl)O\O\r-I NU1
- -
N(y)
000000000
000000000
ll)I'OOOOqtLOO
MMODOU"') D
100\0'\ Ll)
....
r..r..A:A:A:>t>tr..CIl
HHfilfilfilUUlHH
000000000
000000000
COOr-fr-lr-lNq40r-l
lllO lfl
....N
0:0: ~~
~~ ~s:
filfil lOfil
rIlUlC!> CIl
~:x:
~~'~~
OOS:A:O
~~~U~
UlUlU CIl
filA
llllflUl~A:
CIlH
A:Allt
H. H
AlDO:
I
CIlUl
CIlUl
:.l:.l
UU
lltllt
UUU
0:0:0:
. . .
Nlfllfl
............
....N(Y)"'lfllDI"'-COO\
-
....
o
o
....
co
(Y)
-
0\
0000000000000
0000000000000
rooaooooCODOOOO
qlL.()'-OOlOOU')<t;JlOCOU)o<Qt
qtmr-tLONCOCOU)r-INr-l
- -
....co
- - -
lfl....O\
0U10000aaOOOOD
ONCOOODLOOOOOOO
fl1N<t;JlOU)U)\DOU')(y)OOqt
U"') r-4N U1r-i
lfl N N
o
lfl
I"'-
co
'"
-
co
0000000000000
0000000000000
CO000U100\DOOOOO
<t;JlOOomNM(Y)Or-iOOU')
NN(Y)lDNOO\lflNNN
- - -
lD .... 0\
-
....
I"'-
0000000000000
DDOOLOLf)r"'-OOLOOOO
Mr-Ir-iOqi
lfl
....
U)\DOLt)("I')OOU1
NN ON
N N
....
o
o
lD
(Y)
0\
0000000000000
0000000000000
ooooooOOOOOOLO
a:>OOOLONU)OOOqlLOCON
(Y)....COlflNCOCOlflN(Y)
-
0\
-
co
-
0\
-
lfl
-
....
0000000000000
OU)l.()ooU')U')OOOOOLO
LOriIOOLOL.()\OOU)qtOCON
o ON U)
'" .... (Y)
r..:><>tA:r..r..ZCIlZlOU>t>t
HUUfilHH~O:~HA:UUl
0000000000000
00000000000000
\.DOONO
riCO ri
NN I"'-
....
DDooDOnOD
qtO CQ\.D r-irl
0\ (Y)
t!)
t!)
ZO:O:
Hfilfillfl
U ~~~
~Ul~~UlZ 0
U :>A:PPUlO:><:O
Z llUt!)t!)o<1lHHo\
OZ ,..:t~~
U8s:~"''''U5filOf;g
t;~O~::l::ll;j~CIlZHS:
H~~ PPA:filO: A~
:><:A:0",uulO0:5~~0:
filUlO lltUPUlO
:><: :I1UUlil ~ lo
~fil~:&66~9~~l:lHt!)
HZ:c!:><:UUC!>2fil:&HHZ
.e.~~fil:&CO~t!)S:AUlOH
~~ 1-)1>:....t!)lO~fil~~2
o ADlDC!>PHfilOOO
U(!)""UllOA:UllOUlO:~Ul
'"
....
(Y)
(Y)
N
~
D rl N (y)
:>....N(Y)"'lfllDI"'-COo\..........-l....
o
o
lD
I"'-
o
-
0\
N
o
o
'"
lfl
'"
-
N
0\
o
o
0\
co
l"'-
I"'-
N
o
I"'-
o
0\
(Y)
I"'-
co
o
o
lfl
I"'-
0\
o
o
....
'"
lD
-
l"'-
N
o
o
....
Z Ul
OAO:
gJfilfil
fil~~
1;_0 :.l
j llt
'- . I
- -0 Ul
HU~
HZU
A:Hfil
~ -~
AUl:X:
filU
- ~ ~
g;S.
HUUl
~OO:
Ulfil
- Ul fil
"'A:Z
~ H
H~t9
o Z
~ fil
Z
o
H
~
H
A
:i!
~
(Y) lD
A:....
~~I"'-
UlO'"
A:Ul
filfil
. ,,~~
H
-i>(~ 6
U _ H
O:Ul
-z ~ CJ)
~o~
~eo
:x:;"i!u
"
.,.j
.Q
..-l
III
to:
-,.j
tJl
.,.j
H
o
to:
o
Q)
to:
.,.j
..-l
Ul
-,.j
.a
,J
a
.,.j
H
o
H
H
Q)
Ul
Q)
,J
o
a
Q)
A
iC
rIl
Cl
H
III
~
~
~
a
~
a
o
o
....
o
'"
'"
....
-
<l'
0:
fil
~
~
llt
fil
CJ)
A
fil
Z
fil
llt
o
Ul
A
H
lO
U
Z
H
Z
o
U
o
0:
~
:x:
0:
fil
~
~
'-
0:
~
fil
CJ)
~
H
~
0:
~
6
U
fil
:;1
I
~
~
H
6
H
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
OONO~OOOOooo~o~oo
OO"'Nl"'-lfl....NooOOlDlflNI"'-(Y)O
O~~MN~ro~NO~N~~q~~
Z
fil
~
:><:
fil
.... ... ... ...
m('l')MM
-
(Y)
-
(Y)
- - -
............
fil
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
OOMN('l')mrowmooo~~~oo
OOMMMrlMNNOO~('l')~ MO
a~ O~ ~
(Y) ........
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
OONO~O~OOOOO~O~OO
OO"'Nl"'-lfllDO"'OONN"'I"'-"'O
OMMMN~~~NOMWM~~ro~
Z
fil
~
:><:
fil
... ... ... ...
OM......r-I
....
-
(Y)
-
....
- - -
............
fil
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
a a
00
O(Y)
....
r-INMLOf""-LONO
.-Ir-Ir-Ir-ir-iNMD
o
....
OOLOLOlOOO
OO'\NLO q'0
.... lfl
....
OO~OWOLOOOOODDOLOOO
O~r--~WLOW~~ooooor--oo
OLONroWroNOO~LOOOOOMOO
oo~m~OMNLOr--LOr--mD~LOLO
ONmmmr-lr-l~wr--Nr-IM~MOr--
... ... ... ...
lDN........
- -
"'....
-
....
... ... ... ... ...
....................
OOr--r--r--r--r--NNOOOOOLOOO
OWr-lr-lr-lr-lr-l~~aOOOONDO
OL{)WCOONlO
OOrir-lNNN
ON
....
......MLOOL{)OQ\'oOO
NNNL{)WML{) LOLl)
"'N I"'-
....
UlA:~~~~~~~~Ul~~A:~A:Ul
HfilHHHHHHHfilHHfilfilHfilH
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
r-Ir-INOOODLOOOMrlOOMOOLOr-Irl
Nr-tO'\L{)q1C\,)N r-Ir-t O"IN
r-tr-l M \0
-
o
....
I
a
fil
H
o 0:
:X:O:lO
~:fil
A:~~fil
H lflU
QlOMH
(Y) :>~o::
o:o:o:~
~l:l~fil
Ul
o
fil'-
lltU
H Ul
llt:>Z
O:H
l:l~
- -
... .. .. ... qt \0
<ql\.OCQOr-iri
r-l r-l ri N I I
I I I IN'"
Nqt\DCOr-tr-l
.....tr-lrlr-l
-
"'0:
A
Ul
UlOlfl
~(Y)(Y):a
O:O:CJ)
. A A
OCJ)Ul
....
fil
Ul
UUH
OZZ:>:>:>
Olltlltfil
H
fil
~
OrlN(V)~I.O\Or-
MNM~~w~romMMMMrlrlMrl
a
a
lD
(Y)
a
-
a
(Y)
000000000000
000000000000
OoQlr--ooao\OooolO
0.... I"'-lflOON"'lfl "'1"'-00
U')\OI.l)l'-NNNLt)\ON'C2'cx)
.... ... ... ...
mU')r-tN
'"
-
....
000000000000
000000000000
O.--lMOOOQWOOOrl
LOr-Ir-IU')OON LOMr--
N (Y)....NN
....
o
a
....
'"
I"'-
-
00
N
000000000000
000000000000
0000000000001.0
O...,...,OOI.{)DMNOCOCO
U)f"'-.-tlOONMC01f)NWOO
-
(Y)
-
....
... .. ... ...
OOLO....-IN
000000000000
000000000000
OONOOOCIJ)OU)Orl
U)r-Ir-IOOLOO qlNOO
N (Y)ON(Y)
....
a
'"
lD
a
00
-
00
N
000000000000
000000000000
OOCODOLOOO\QDU)U)
O...,...,COOr-Or-NOr---OO
(Y)f""'r-i\DOr-iNO'\L{)NLOCO
-
'"
... .. ... ..
oolO..-iN
....
000000000000
00000001.00000
a a
lfl....
....
N\OOU)
nMOr--
(Y)O....
....
O\.ODLOLt)r-I
o o::JINr-
N
A:~~~~~~~A:A:A:lO
filHHfilfil14filHfilfilfilH
000000000000
000000000000
N.qto\I.ON.....r-iWMOOr-lL{)
r--C\1 !"or-I NOO
CO<<;Jl r- 00
~
P
ZZ[illO
HH;>
~~~~~~
filfil
~~fil
filA:~~
Z~~ t!)
~H~oO
lfllfl~
~ A:
filUlUlUlfil
~HCJ)Ulrll
~~~:.lCJ)lO
OUU~!il
~lltllt
HH
AA
filfil
UH
HA
~:i!
filUl
Ul '-
~
Z :><:
- Z 0 '" 0
ooOH~lltlltlO
HUl~OO
~CJ)Z ~~:x:
~ZfilO:UlUl~
fil~fil HUl
~:><:IllZZ~t!)
A:x::><: filllt 0 0 Z
:><fil OHHlltH
~U~~O~
~~~~~~~
Cl~~~~~llt
..,..,:><:X::><OOPH
~~:x: ~UUUU
H
H~
ZO~====N
U\OCO\OlO\01"'"i
.
. . .
............
~i
H
O....N
:>....N(Y)"'lfllDl"'-oo"'............
H
A
a
o
N
o
'"
l"'-
N
a
a
(Y)
lfl
lfl
lfl
N
a
o
N
o
'"
-
lD
N
z Ul
OAO:
~~~
~o:.l
, j llt
. I
'- -0 Ul
HU~
o-1ZU
~Hf'1
P _ H
AUl:X:
filU
- ~ ~
g;S.
HUUl
~OO:
Ulfil
- Ul fil
~A:i:i
~eg
~;"i!fil
Z
o
H
~
H
A
:i!
lil
(y) lD
..;....
~~I"'-
UlO'"
A:Ul
filfil
---...,Z 0
, Z Z
.-I
'~/~ 6
U _H
O:Ul
. Z [il Ul
fil;>H
20~
HSO
.:x:;"i! u
'1j
.,.j
.Q
....
III
to:
.,.j
tJl
.,.j
H
o
to:
o
Q)
to:
.,.j
rl
Ul
.,.j
.a
,J
to:
.,.j
H
o
H
H
Q)
Ul
Q)
,J
o
to:
Q)
A
iC
rIl
A
H
III
..
o
~
~
a
~
a
a
a
....
a
'"
'"
....
-
'"
0:
fil
~
~
llt
fil
CIl
A
fil
Z
fil
llt
o
CIl
A
H
lO
U
Z
H
Z
o
U
~
~
:x:
0:
fil
~
~
.......
0:
~
fil
Ul
~
H
~
0:
~
Z
o
U
fil
~
i
~
~O
HZ
000000000
000000000
000000\000
r-OOLOLOOr-iOO
(y)NlflI"'-I"'-N NlD
- -
N(y)
000000000
000000000
Ll')\DODOO~qtO
r-IriOL{)LOO 0
LOr-r-ri \0
000000000
000000000
OOOOOOONLOO
NOll)Ll)O\Or-ir-D
LOocttMr-r-ri r-It'-
- -
N(Y)
000000000
oooooaoLOO
\0 r-o 000 {'I")(Y")D
ri...-iI.t)L{)DOO 0
(Y)I"'-I"'- I"'-
000000000
\000000000
0'l000100000
LO\O~ONcoNOO
Ll)qt~O\CO r-tN
N(y)
000000000
"1("1')0000000
\Dr-OCLOOLOND
r-i..-iqtONqt 0
qtO"lCO N
....
r..r..A:o<l:A:><><r..CIl
HHfilMfilUCIlHH
000000000
000000000
roOriMr-iN'Ct01""""t
lflO lfl
....N
0:0: i:i2
~~ ~~
filfil IQfil
CIlCllt!) CIl
~:x:
~~i~~
00 A:O
~~~U~
rIlrllU Ul
filA ~
lfllflCll~A:
UlH
A
UlUlA
UlUlZA: llt
:.l:.lfil~:'ol;!
UUH I
ra..... ... H
lltllt "''''H
UUU
0:0:0:
~~CIl
CIlCllCll
ZZo<l:
000-1
UUU
fil
A
c c c
Nlfllfl
............
Z
o
H
~~
HP
H~
O:HU
f'1~~
H~~
HCIlCll
r..
:X:llt
filUO
HZO:
~~A
:><:~o:
fil fil
!)ljel
filO>=l
t!)0:~
1""""iN(Y)qtU')\Or-com
-
....
a
a
lD
(I()
lfl
-
(I()
0000000000000
0000000000000
OOOOO\OOLl)NDOOOO
qeOOO\DNNO'lr-OOOaqa
MMLOCONL{)OJOrlO"lrl
- - -
r- UlriO
....
OOOOOOU1DDOOOO
OI.OLOO\OLONOLOOOOO
('l')r-tr-iOqlLOr-LO\O("I)OOql
LO r-tN Or-l
N N '"
a
a
lfl
l"'-
I"'-
-
(I()
0000000000000
OOOLOU100c.oONOOLt)
'CtDDOODOLOLOr-ir-DON
\ODOr-CO r-iN\O r-LO\DrlL{)
OOr-ir-Nqt<x)\Or-iNN
- -
........
-
I"'-
- - -
1"'-....'"
-
....
OaOLOLOLf)U10LONOOU;
OOONLONNOqtl..DQON
qlLOU1O"l'o:tLOCONLON
(I() ....N
N
O....lfl
lDN
N
....
a
lD
'"
(I()
lfl
-
'"
0000000000000
OOOONOOOOOOOOO
NODOqtODOOOOOL{)
MOOOOJO......\ONNcYlO\D
<Ql\QIJ)IJ)N\.Or-rlr-i\.Or-i
... .........
co 1J)r-i0\
OOOONNOOOOOOO
oooaOOMOOOOOIJ)
NNMOlJ)lJ)\oOqlNOO\.O
U') ON ('1')......
N N lD
r..><><A:r..r..ZUlZlOU><><
HUUfilHH~O:~HA:UUl
0000000000000
OOOOOOOCOOOOOO
\DOON
....00
NN
00......00
CO\O r-ir-i
(Y)
OOOCO
...."'0
I"'- '"
....
t!)
t!) ....
ZO:O: (Y)
Hfilfillfl (Y)
U ~~~ N
~Ul~~CIlZ a
U ~A:PPCIlO:><:O
6ZUUt!)C!>:.l~~'"
UO H"''''U~ C!>
H~llt :;afilOZ
~~~~~~~llt~Z~5
~~o",BB:a~8~fj~
filUlO lltUPUlO
lltfj~2g~UlfilO:~fillO
Ul 00A:9A:HAH(!)
HZ :><:UUC!>;:zfi1~HHZ
~~~fil~(I()~t!) A~g~
~:g 1-)p:....C!>lO~fil..;lltA
o APlDt!)PHfilOOO
Ut!)";UllOA:UllOCIlO:~Ul
'"
;>
H
Or-iNM
l..D......comr-iHr-ir-i
a
a
....
'"
'"
a
a
I{)
lD
'"
-
(I()
N
-
I{)
'"
o
(Y)
'"
I"'-
(I()
-
a
(Y)
a
(Y)
(Y)
'"
'"
-
(Y)
'"
a
a
N
(I()
I"'-
-
l"'-
N
a
o
lfl
l"'-
I{)
-
N
'"
z. Ul
OAO:
~ f'1 ~fil
fil~
~o
- 'n, llt
. >:; I
'- /0 CI)
HU~
HZU
A:Hfil
~ J::
AUl:X:
filU
- ~ ~
g;S.
HUUl
~OO:
lIlfil
- Ul fil
"'A:Z
~ H
H~(!)
o Z
~ fil
Z
o
H
~
H
A
:i!
~
(Y) W
-<:....
~~I"'-
UlO'"
A:Ul
filfil
/ -,~ ~
-I
" /~ Z
'" 0
U _H
O:Ul
.Z ~ Ul
~O~
~eO
:x:;"i!u
~
.Q
r-l
III
to:
-,.j
tJl
.,.j
H
o
a
o
Q)
a
-,.j
rl
Ul
.,.j
.<::
,J
to:
...j
H
o
H
H
Q)
Ul
Q)
,J
o
to:
Q)
A
iC
rIl
Q
H
III
..
o
a
~
a
~
a
a
a
....
a
'"
'"
....
-
'"
0:
fil
~
~
llt
fil
Ul
A
fil
Z
fil
llt
o
III
A
H
lO
~
~
......
~
U
:><:
fil
U
fil
H
~
0:
~
6
U
o
rIl
I
o
0:
~
Ul
Z
o
U
fil
Z
o
~
III
A
[:;l
~
~
HZ
6
H
OOOOOO~OOOOOOO~DD
oO~~~~~OODDOOOMOO
OOMNM~M~o~~a~OMO~
O~MM~MMW~N~WNNM~~
ON "'lfllflO....NlflNON(Y)lflNON
Z
fil
~
:><:
fil
-
co
... ... ... ... ...
MMMMr-I
.. ... ... ...
""Mr-ir-i
LO........
OO~~~~~~~ODDOO('l')OO
OO~~~~~NNOOOOO~OO
(Y)lflO"'(y)"'lfl
r-tr-tNNr-Ir-t1'-
a
....
lflOlfllfll"'-
("'--(""--('.1\0
a
....
Olfl
lfll"'-
N
....
00....
Olfl....
ON
co
00000000000000000
OOOOooooooaoao~oo
OOOOOO~OOOOO~ONDO
OOM~r--~r--OD~aOONoor--o
~roro\O~r--~\O\Or-ImOM~\O~~
... ... ... ...
"'(Y)........
- -
W....
............
00000000000000000
OOOOOOOOOOOOOD~ao
OOlfllfllfllfllfl
00....................
lflCO
000
(Y)(Y)lfl
a
....
DDlOomoo
atONI.l) r-o
'" lfl
....
oooaoooooaaaoo~oo
OO...,O\OOlOOoooooor--oo
I.l)Or--r--NlO\Or--OOI.l)I.l)ONNOOOO
OONm~rom\OOMr-Iooom...,...,1.l)
OOI.l)~MMr-[",--\OOr-lNOr--I.l)\OOOM
- - -
............
... ... ... ...
r-IMr-ir-i
....
-
(Y)
-
N
OOOOOOOlOOOOOOOI.l)OD
oOr-["'--r--r--r--M~DOOOONOO
I.l)Or-lNMI.l)r-M~I.l)I.l)O~qI.l)OO
OOr-lr-lMMMMM~r-I\Ol.l)r-- ~I.l)
roll) ON M
N ........
lIl~~~~~~~~A:lIl~A:A:~A:Ul
H~HHHHHHHfilHHfilfilHfilH
00000000000000000
00000000000000000
r-Ir-INOroOlOOOM1"""iOOMOOl.l)r-Ir-I
Nr-iml.l)oqtNN r-Ir-i O'\N
r-ir-i (1") \C
Z
H
~
llt
-
a fil
0: .... H
[il I 0 0:
s: 0 :X:O:lO
~_ _ _ ",w~....~:fil
><N"'WCOO........O. ><~
p:................N I I :X:(Y)A:S: fil
A:IIII'N"'~ H LOU
~ON"'WCO"""" :tlAlfl(Y)H
H.................... ~ (Y) :>~o:
~UlUllllUlUl~~A:A:"'O:~~~~
lIllllllllllllllll HH AlIlUl;>fil
lfllflAQ~lIl Ul
~lfllfllfllfllfl(y)(y) 0 Ulfllfl
ZUl(Y)(Y)(Y)(Y)(Y) _ _ U:>(Y)(Y)~
OH O:O:"'''':X::>llt
H:><:O:O:O:O:O:AA ~llt O:O:Ul
~filAAAAAUlUlAAllt . AA
A: UllllUlUlUl ~~fil' OUlUl
"'0 UUrIlUlACO....
H~UUUUU;>;>
H :>:>:>:>:>lltllt~~A:
HZlltlltlltlltllt lIlUlO:
lOZ -'ZZ~
gO.....OOOO:><:....
~uoooocooooor-tr-tUUfiloQ''''''<I;;Jlqt
o
fil......
lltU
H Ul
llt:>Z
O:H
~~
fil
Ul
UUH
ZOZ:>:>:>
Olltlltfil
H
fil
~
OMN('I")<QtI.l')'-01'
000)1"""'I~M1"""4rirlrlr-l
o
....
'"
I"'-
W
-
(Y)
(Y)
o
lfl
N
a
(Y)
-
(Y)
(Y)
LO
N
....
'"
N
-
N
(Y)
ON<Qtoooaooooo
OLONOOOQ'-OOOOO
Ol'l.l')LOOOOriLOOON
OOI'NI.l')I'NN "'2'00 r-I'-O
Lf)O)'-Om..-4NMooCONMO
"- ... ... ...
o '-0..-4 N
....
-
LO
- -
N....
000'-0000000000
O"'2'I.f)OOOO'-OOOON
ONlfl
lfl........
N
lfllflOO
ool'l'N
MONM
....
I'I.l')I.l')O..-4
W(Y)....
....
000000000000
00\.00000000010
OqtCOIOOOO"'d'OOtOO
Lllri "'d'1'0100\D LOOf"'-Lll
\.O'-Of"'-oo'-ONMO\ONLOri
... ... ... ...
O)LllriN
-
(Y)
........
000000000000
OO"'2'ooooooaOM
lfl....
N....
(Y)
(Y)lflOO
rlf"'-DLO
(y)(y)N
....
o "'2'DLf)Lf)rl
o lONl-
(Y)
000000000000
Of"'-NOOOOooOOOlO
O('Y)NOOOlOlOl'oooor-
Ooo\DLf)Lf)mNN('I") "'2' NN
('Y)f"'-OooNr-iNooWNqt('l")
... ... ... ...
COI.l')..-4N
- -
........
-
'"
0100000000000
00000000('1")0001.0
OOr-iOLllOL/)WO"lrlOOr-i
Lf)r-ir-il""'-NO'\N "'d'M'-O
r-I Mrlr-iN
....
fj~~fjfjfjfj~fjfjfj~
000000000000
000000000000
N"'d'O)IONr-ir-i'-O('Y)OOrlLf)
f"'-N '-Or-i Noo
ooqt f"'- ro
~ lj~
P HA
~~~lO ~:i!
~~~~~z6:~ 6
i2~~filCOOHA:lltlltlO
zf'1~~~~~~~22:x:
HA: t!)~ZfilO:UlUl~
~s:oo fil~fil HlIl
lfllfl~ ~:><:lltZZS:C!>
~ ~A:><:fillltOO Z
filUlUlUl~><fil OHHlltH
~HUlUllll:X: ~u~~o~
~fj:.l~UllOE-t~ ~~~f::
uUfil8~2 00 ~
2lltllto:_2~~~~~
H HH~!:il~:X:><OOP~
H~AA~...:x:. ~uuuu
Z 0 I: 1:0 1:0 I: J: N I: I: c:. c: l-:)
UWOO'-OW'-Orlrlr-lMr-I~
H
H Or-lN
t>r-tNMq"1O\Or-comr-trlri
H
A
W
(Y)
W
W
o
-
(Y)
(Y)
a
....
l"'-
I"'-
W
l"'-
N
a
N
l"'-
N
....
l"'-
N
Z Ul
OAO:
Ulfilfil
~~~
Ollt
j I
" -0 (/)
HU~
~~~
~ J::
AUl:X:
filU
- ~ ~
g;S1
HUUl
~OO:
Ulfil
- Ul fil
~A:;'j
~eg
~:i1fil
6
H
~
H
A
:i!
~
(Y) lD
A:....
f-t~1"'-
UlO'"
A:Ul
filfil
,~ ~
rl
'~'~ 6
U _ H
O:Ul
.z ~ Ul
20i
HSO
.:x:;"i! U
'd
-,.j
.Q
rl
III
to:
.,.j
tJl
-,.j
H
o
to:
o
Q)
to:
-,.j
..-l
Ul
.,.j
.a
,J
to:
.,.j
H
o
H
H
Q)
Ul
Q)
,J
o
to:
Q)
A
iC
rIl
A
H
III
a
~
~
a
~
a
o
a
....
o
'"
'"
....
-
""
0:
fil
~
~
llt
fil
Ul
A
fil
Z
fil
llt
o
Ul
t:l
H
lO
~
~
"-
~
U
:><:
fil
U
fil
H
~
0:
~
Z
o
U
o
Ul
.
~
~
Ul
Z
o
U
fil
Z
o
~
Ul
A
~
~
~
H
Z
Z
fil
~
fil
"'00000,000
r-iOOOOOCOOD
~~ONNDCOOO
('f)o:)&{)q'qtt"'- ON
NNqemm I"""it.O
- -
N(y)
H
oo::rNOOOOOOO
...."'OOOONOO
"'lDONNlflNNO
nr-iLl)q'qt(Y'} N
oo::rmm w
Z
fil
~
fil
000000000
0000,00000
oo:;fOOOOODDC>
"'I"'-OlflOlflNOO
(OCOW(""'-\Or-I NLl)
- -
N(y)
OLODooooao
OMOOOOooo
OOO)OODLOLI')oo::tO
r-irioLf)Or-- 0
lDl"'-lD lfl
fil
000000000
("1")00000000
- -
N(y)
r--OOOLl)ODDO
\DO\MCO\DC\lC\lLl)D
NO('f')COwr-l NLl)
LOIi)OOOOODD
('l1qtoaooooo
.qII.l')ODLOOLOLOO
r-Ir-I('l1col.O\O 0
(Y)(X)(X) lfl
....
c..c..o<1lA:A:><><c..Ul
HHr.4filfilUUlHH
000000000
000000000
COOr-lr-ir-iNoQIOr-i
lflO lfl
....N
0:0: ~~
~~ ~:s:
filfil Plfil
UlUlt!) Ul
~:x:
~~~~~
00 A:O
~~~U~
UlUlU Ul
filA ~
lfllflUl~A:
UlH
A:Allt
H G H
AlDO:
I
UlUlt:l
UlUlZ
:.l:.l~
UUH
tz..... ... H
lltllt "''''H
UUU
O:O:O:~~Ul
UlUlUl
I: s: I: Z Z ~
NlfllflOO,4
............UUU
Z
o
H
~
~~
HP
H~
O:HU
f'1~iil
H~~
HUlrll
c..
:X:llt
filUO
HZO:
~~A
:><:~o:
fil fil
~tl~
filOH
t!)0:~
r-tN('f)qtLl)\Or--rom
....
N
'"
o
LO
lD
oooooooc::oooooo
OODONcoooooaoU)
NOaOqeOaqtoaooN
Ll)Ll)Ll)OCOOO\cnCONCOOM
oo:;fmCOLONcYlO\COr-iLOr-t
... ......"-
co 1.Dr-i0)
-
(X)
LOLOLOONNODDOOOLO
NNr--OOOr-l\DOOOON
(y)N"'Olfllfll"'-lDlDNOO(y)
o "IN COM
'" N lfl
a
a
0000000000000
0000000000000
\OODOLOOOONooaa
"'OOOONO"'(Y)OOLOO
\DWr-qoNcYl\OO(Y)Ll)r-ir-l
'"
(Y)
lfl
-
'"
- - -
lDNO
....
-
N
'"
0000000000000
OOOOLOLl)ODoQIOOOO
I..O(I')MOU)U)('-OWU)OLOO
Ll) ON Onn
(Y) (Y) LO
N
a
(Y)
N
N
(Y)
-
'"
0000000000000
ooooc:oaOOq'ODDO
qtDDomor--omDODO
\OOOLOCO"Q'OO\Du>coaoLO
\DNLOoo::rNC"'-t'--.-tr-lW...-t
-
I"'-
lfl....'"
....
0000000('1')0('1')0000
OOOO('l')O<QtOriOOOO
qt(Y)~l.l)qt~~O"'('I')OOLO
,.... ON Or-i
N N lD
c..><><A:c..c..ZUlZlOU><><
HUUfilHH~O:~HA:UUl
0000000000000
ooooooocoooooo
~OONO
riOO ri
NN I"'-
....
OOCOOOr-iOO
qtO CO~ riri
'" (Y)
t!)
C!>
ZO:O:
Hfilfillfl
~~~
~Ul~~Ul
U ;>A:PPUl
Z UUt!)t!)A:
OZ ,4
UO H"''''U
H:S:llt
~~~~gJgJffl
H:>O: PPA:
:><:A:O"'UUlO
filUlO
:><: ;r:UUfil
lltfil~~ZZ~filO:
Ul OOA:~A:
HZ :><:UUt!) [il
AO~fil ~:s:
'~2 1J~~t!l~~
o APlDt!)PH
Ut!)o<1lUllOA:UlPl
'"
....
(Y)
(Y)
N
U
Z a
8~~ :;
~~ ~ t!) H
filOZ
UlZH:S:
lltO: AO
~5~~~
lltUPUlO
~ lo
:><:fil
HAHt!l
~HHZ
UlOH
AAUlA
filo<1llltA
filOOO
UlO:~Ul
OriNM
p.r-iN(Y)"'I.l)~r-oomr-fMrlM
(X)
lfl
(Y)
(Y)
....
-
o
(Y)
lD
'"
'"
N
LO
-
lfl
o
....
a
a
a
lD
(Y)
'"
lD
-
(Y)
(Y)
lD
lfl
....
-
'"
o
....
o
N
a
'"
l"'-
I"'-
N
lfl
'"
a
(Y)
lfl
-
lD
'"
8
~
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANORA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
IMPROVEMENT OF PROJECT NO. 88-35 FOR WATER TOWER II AND
APPURTENANCES CONSTRUCTION.
WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids as set out in
Council Motion at the Council meeting of June 5 , 19 90 , bids
were received, opened and tabulated according to law wi~esu1ts as
follows:
Rice Lake Contracting
Richmar Construction
Gridor Construction
$36,850.00
$41,760.00
$46,660.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the.City
of Andover to hereby accept the bids as shown to indicate Rice
Lake Contracting as being the apparent low bidder.
BElT FURTHER RESOLVED TO HEREBY direct the Mayor and City Clerk
to enter into a contract with Rice Lake contractinr in the
amount of $36,850.00 for construction 0 the
improvements; and direct the City Clerk to return to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the
successful bidder and the. next lowest bidder shall be retained until
the contract has been executed and bond requirements met.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the
City Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19 , with Councilmen
voting in favor of
the resolution, and Councilmen voting
against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
Victoria Vo1k - City Clerk
8
~
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
IMPROVEMENT OF PROJECT NO. 90-5 FOR WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER,
STORM SEWER AND STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER CONSTRUCTION
IN THE AREA OF HIDDEN CREEK EAST 3RD ADDITION
WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids as set out in
Council Resolution No. 108-90, dated August 7 , 19 90 , bids were
received, opened and tabulated according to law with-re5ults as
follows:
Mille Lacs Contracting
B & D Underground
Annandale contracting
$87,390.70
$92,454.00
$92,575.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Andover to hereby accept the bids as shown to indicate Mille
Lacs Contracting as being the apparent low bidder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TO HEREBY direct the Mayor and City Clerk
to enter into a contract with Mille Lacs contracting in the
amount of $87,390.70 for construction of the
improvements; and direct the City Clerk to return to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the
successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until
the contract has been executed and bond requirements met.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
City Council at a
and adopted by the
meeting this
day of
, 19 , with Councilmen
voting in favor of
the resolution, and Councilmen
voting
against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
.'
<J
August 24, 1990
The Honorable James E. Elling
Mayor of Andover
CITY OF ANDOVER
1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W.
Andover MN 55304
Dear Jim,
I have sent this letter only to you and have taken the liberty
to address you less formally than normal. However, this involves
a most serious problem for us, and one which I am asking that
you please put on the agenda for consideration the first meeting
you have with the council.
...........,.,
I just returned from an out-of-state trip and have been told that
the special goose season ,does not yet include Woodland Creek.
As you may recall from an earlier discussion sometime late last
year, we have a terribly destructive, serious problem with geese
on Woodland Creek Golf Course. They came in by the hundreds,
and no matter what we did, they were literally uncontrollable.
Just so you know, at that time I called the Department of Natural
Resources, Carlos Avery office, and was told they could not help
us, they fully understood the problem, they had received numerous
complaints, and the best advice they could give me was to do what
we must. I then called the City of Andover and was informed that
they could not help us. J believe I called the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife but am not entirely certain about that. In any event,
they have responded to the problem by allowing the special goose
season where needed throughout the state. I then called Sheriff
Wilkinson and asked if he had any suggestions or any way of helping,
and.the answer was no.
In the meantime, the geese were blackening the golf course and
caused us to have to reseed two different times. We also had
to reseed the banks of our lots to the south of the course one
additional time. They were in by the hundreds, and that is not
an overstatement.
The geese are now through the molting season and the young are
flying, so we are currently seeing about 150 geese on the course
for feeding. These are all local, and there are many more locals
that will join them in the days ahead. The problem gets even
worse as the locals are joined by the migrating flocks.
:,)
830 West Main Street
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
(612) 427-7500
FAX: (612) 427-0192
~
.
The Honorable James E. Elling
August 24, 1990
Page Two
We just have to have the City understand what is happening and
cooperate with us in handling this problem. I would like to stress
that this should not be considered just Woodland's problem but
a city matter -- if for no other reason than we are located in
Andover. I ask that the city fathers be as concerned about this
matter as they would be in any other instance where extensive
damage is being done and a local business is dealing with a problem
which can be answered quite well. We must receive permission
to harvest some of the birds during the special goose season.
The special season runs from September 1 through 10, and from
December 15 to 24. The small number of birds taken will not
help but it will keep them away for quite some time.
The same' problem has been recognized"1:i'l1 i3e"ei'al;~oth'er''st'Burbs,
i.e~, Maple Grove, and special hunting zQnes were created.' This
is a 95-acre tract of ground, and hunting was both permitted
and occurred within the city limits on much smalle~ parcels.
I don't believe anyone outside our company truly understands the
monetary value of the damage which has occurred in the past.
I just want to see it stopped in the future. It is very difficult
to accurately estimate what the goose problem cost us last year>
but between reworking the soils, reseeding (twice on portions
of the course itself), direct loss of revenues, and comments from
people who were so disgusted with the mud and goose droppings
to the point of saying they didn't believe they would be coming
back, I believe a fair estimate would be in excess of $20-25,000.
To date, the only help that presumably was offered was the suggestion
to buy swan decoys. We have don~ that, even though I had also. .
been told by the DNR that it may work for two or three days but
after that the decoys are worthless. I bought the decoys knowing
that it was probably just another waste of money but felt it was
necessary so everyone would know that we have done whatever we
can on our own.
Jim, if this letter should be redrafted and addressed to the entire
council, please let..me."know"and .1 "will, ,do so. ,However 'i I do ask
that you please put this ciB'O'tne'very'onext agenda and give us your
full support in the matter, including if necessary, any debate
that should take place by council members. All of us would appreciate
it very much. Frankly, I am not sure what else we can do but
now come to you and the council with this situation.
Thanks very much.
Yours truly,
kds
:)
CITY OF ANDOVER
c~/6
f);~f/t: ;-
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Engineering
FOR
ITEM
NO. Declare Costs/
II!.
BY:
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution declaring
the costs and ordering preparation of assessment roll and
resolution for the hearing on proposed assessments for projects
90-2 and 90-14, 163rd Lane/164th Ave./Jonquil st. and Cedar Crest
Estates 3rd Addition/Cedar Hills River Estates.
At the public hearing we advised the property owners that the City
needed to assess the project this year or the cost presented would
be low by the cost of interest at 8.5% for about one (1) year.
The hearings are proposed for October 2, 1990, a regular Council
meeting; one at 7:30 p.m. and the other at 8:00 p.m.
Attachments: (2) Resolutions Declaring Cost
(2) Resolutions Setting Hearing
(2) Notices
'---.
COUNCIL ACTION
_ . MOTION BY
C) TO
SECOND BY
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
:J
to adopt the following:
DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT
STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE
NO. 90-2, 163RD LANE/164TH
WHEREAS, a contract has been entered into for the construction of
the improvements and the contract price for such improvement is
$56,645.00 , and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making
of such improvement amount to $ 13,515.00 and work previously done
amount to $ -0- so that the total cost of the improvement will
be $ 70-160.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Andover, MN:
1. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the City
is hereby declared to be $ -0- and the amount of the cost
to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to
be $ 4,385.00
2. Assessment shall be payable in ~qua1 annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years. The first of the installments to be
payable on or before the first Monday in January 1991, and shall
bear interest at the rate of 8.5 percent per annum from the
date of the adoption of the assessment resolution.
3. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall
forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of
land within the district affected, without regard to cash
valuation, as provided by law, and she shall file a copy of such
proposed.assessment in her office for public inspection
4. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment,
notify the Council thereof.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19
with Councilmen
voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
I
,\
\J
ATTEST:
James E.E11ing - Mayor
victoria Vo1k - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANORA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
~J
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION FOR PROJECT NO. 90-2 163RD
LANE/164TH AVE./JONQUIL STREET
WHEREAS, by a r.esolution passed by the City Council on September 4 ,
19 90 , the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the
cost of improvements for Project No. 90-2 ; and
WHEREAS, the Clerk has noti,fied the Council that such proposed
assessment has been completed and filed in her office for public
inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover, MN:
1. A hearing shall be held the I 2nd day of October, 1990, in the
City Hall at 7:30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at
such time and place all persons owning property affected by such
improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to
such assessment. .
,
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing
on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper
at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice
the total cost of improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be
given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less
than two weeks prior to the hearings.. .
,
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment
to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the
assessment. He may at any time thereafter pay to the City Treasurer the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. ,Such payment must
be made before October 15 or interest will be charged through December 31
of the succeeding year. I
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
Meeting this
day of
, 19___
voting
with Councilmen
in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
~ITY OF ANDOVER
~-)
-ATTEST:
James E. .Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
.)
PROJECT NO.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Andover,
Anoka County, Minnesota will meet at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard N.W., in the City of Andover, on Tuesday,
October 2, 1990 at 7:30 P.M. to pass upon the proposed assessment for
the improvement of Street and Storm Drainage Construction
in the following described area:
163rd Lane/164th Avenue/Jonquil Stre~t
The amount to belspecia11y assessed against your Iparticu1ar lot,
or parcel of land is $ 4,385.00. You may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment to the City Treasurer~ No interest shall be charged if tbe
entire assessm8nt is paid within 30 days from the adoption of thii-
assessment. You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City
Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is
made. Such payment must be made before October 15 or interest will
be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide
not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the
assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years and shall bear interest at the rate of
8.5 percent per year. The right to partially prepay the assessment
is not available.
The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at
the City Clerk's Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment
is $ 70,160.00 Written or oral objections will be considered
at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount unless a
signed, written objection is filed with the Clerk prior to the
hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The
Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of
a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such
further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable.
An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal
upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption
of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court
within ten days after servicp upon the Mayor or Clerk.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
o
Victorla Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANORA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
I
RES. . NO.
"
) MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT
ROLL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION,
FOR PROJECT NO. 90-14, CEDAR CREST ESTATES 3RD ADDITION/CEDAR HILLS
RIVER ESTATES AREA.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY RESOLVES:
WHEREAS, a contract has been entered into for the construction of
the improvements and the contract price for such improvement is
$ 50,193.00, and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making
of such improvement amount to $ 11,156.00 and work previously done
amount to $ -0- so that the total cost of the improvement will
be $ 61,375.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RF~OLVED by the City Council of the City of
Andover, MN:
1. The portion of the cost of\such improvement to be paid by the City
is hereby declared to be $ -0- and the amount of the cost
to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to
be $ 61,375.00 "
2. Assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years. The/first of the installments to be
payable on or before the first Monday in January 1991, and shall
bear interest at the rate of 8.5 percent per annum from the
date of the adoption of the assessment resolution.
3. The city Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall
forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of
land within the district affected, without regard to cash
valuation, as provided by law, and she shall file a copy of such
proposed assessment in her office for public inspection
4. The Clerk shall, tiponthe completion of such proposed assessment,
notify the Council thereof.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19
wi th Councilmen
voting in favor ofth~ resolution, and Councilmen
I
voting against, wheretlpon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
F\
\_~ ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Rt.S. NO.
) MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION FOR PROJECT NO. 90-14 , CEDAR
CREST ESTATES 3RD ADDITION/CEDAR HILLS RIVER ESTATES .
I
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council on September 4 ,
19 90 , the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the
cost of improvements for Project No. 90-14 ; and
WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed
assessment has been completed and filed in her office for public
inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover, MN:
1. A hearing shall be held the 2nd day of October, 1990, in the
City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at
such time and place all persons owning property affected by such
improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to
such assessment.
'"'-
. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing
on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper
at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice
the total cost of improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be
given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less
than two weeks prior to; the hearings. I
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment
to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the
assessment. He may at any time thereafter pay to the City Treasurer the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must
be made before October 15 or interest will be charged through December 31
of the succeeding year.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
Meeting this
day of
,19_
voting
wi th Councilmen
in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
')
\-ATTEST:
James E.Elling- Mayor
Victoria Vnlk - City ~lerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
)
-~
PROJECT NO.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Andover,
Anoka County, Minnesota will meet at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard N.W., in the City of Andover, on Tuesday,
October 2, 1990 at 8:00 P.M. to pass upon the proposed assessment for
the improvement of Street and Stor~ Drainage Construction in the
following described area:
Cedar Crest Estates 3rd Addition/Cedar Hills River Estates
The amount to be specially assessed against your particular lot,
or parcel of land is $ 4,910.00. You may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment to the City Treasurer. No interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
assessment. You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City ,
Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in.which such payment is
made. Such payment must be made before October 15 or interest will
be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide
not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the
assessment shall be payable i- equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years and shall bear interest at the rate of-
8.5 percent per year. The right to partially prepay the assessment
is not available.
The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at
the City Clerk's Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment
is $ 61,375.00 . Written or oral objections will be considered
at the meeting. No appeal may be t,ken as to the amount unless a
signed, written objection is filed with the Clerk prior to the
hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The
Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of
a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such
further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable.
An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal
upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption
of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court
within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
. ,
)
\_1
VIctorIa Volk - city Clerk
'.
)
/
****************************************************************
~.************************************************************~*
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
:: uWHAT~.SHAPPENING 1._ ::
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
:: September, 4 1990 ::
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
:: - We Missed putting the Charlie Veiman Fire ::
.. Department Bond watchdog Committee item on the **
:: agenda. please add it to the agenda if the ::
.. Council feels it appropriate. **
.. **
.. **
.. - Enclosed is the agenda packet for **
.. **
.. September 6, 1990. **
.. **
.. **
.. - The Public Accuracy test for the voting **
:: Equipment will be held at Andover City Hall on ::
:: September 6, 1990 at 4: 00 PM. ::
.~ **
:: - Dave Carlberg started last Monday and has ::
.. attended two Planning and zoning meetings **
.. **
.. already. **
.~ **
~~ **
.. - Pumkin City is being cleaned up. Sauter & Sons **
:: started on 8/30/90 ::
.. **
~. **
~. **
.. **
.. **
.~ **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
.. **
~. ~
.. **
~~ **
.~ **
.~ **
.. **
~. **
~. **
.~ **
.. **
.. **
.. ~
.. **
~. **
.. **
.. **
~. **
~. **
~. **
.~ **
.. **
.jC. **
~ ~
~.**************************************************************
..............................................................~.
DATE: September 4, 1990
''\
'--./
ITEMS GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Regular City Council Meeting Minute - August 21, 1990
Metro Mosquito Control Newsletter
Regular Planning and Zoning Comm. Mtg. Minutes - August 28, 1990
Land Use Advisory Committee Agenda
Letter from Mrs. Gwen L. Vagle
Letter from Exploration Technology Inc.
Anoka County Sheriff's Department Monthly Contract Prductivity
Regular Planning and Zoning Comm. Mtg. August 14, 1990
Hidden Creek East 3rd Addition Final Plat
PLEASE ADDRESS THESE ITEMS AT THIS MEETING OR PUT THEM ON THE NEXT
AGENDA.
~.J
THANK YOU.
.;....~.,..~:--....- ,-";~ .-'"'. ,~~ ,..-..
.
--
'.
. 10 c C
, Offlce of 'f/1! C; u
ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
KENNETH G. WILKINSON - SHERIFF
1
.-,
Courthouse - 325 East Main Street - Anoka, Miflnesota.,55303
612-421-4760 V a Ii~' {;" -j...,,:,- 7,' _.
R II U; f, f~ J P -k~.
CITY OF ANDOVER ,1'W/'-~~-"~ "'~..~ '!__~! 9/
MONTHLY CONTRACT PRODUCTIVITY REPORT J ~~~_~_~990 ILl
1 ' CITY _ --'~;
Month: Ju Y ,199 0 ~N;JOvr:!?
This report reflects the productivity of the Andover contract
cars, 3125, 3135, 3145 and 3155. It does not include activity
by Sheriff's Department cars within the City during non-contract
- hours, nor, activity by other Sheriff's Department cars within
the City-during contract hours._ . .
Arrests: Traffic
42 Radio Calls 631
2 Complaints 478
3 Medicals 17
1 P. I. Accidents 5
35 P.D. Accidents 7
13 Domestics 14
0 House Checks 58
20 Business Checks 311
. 20
87
11,256
DWI
Arrests: Felony
G.M.
Misdemeanor
Arrests: Warrant
Papers Served
Warnings
Aids: Public
Other Agencies
TOTAL MILES PATROLLED:
Captain Len Christ
Anoka County SHeriff's Office
Patrol Division
:~
. Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer
-,0
ce.
.
9/f/1o
~)
August 16, 1990
To my Honorable Mayor and City Council:
My name is Mrs. Gwen L. Vagle, of 16300 Makah St. N.W.,
Andover, MN.. I have been at this residency for five
years now, and of Anoka for sixteen years. I am' re-
questing appointment to the Equestrian Council for
the city of Andover. My husband and I have been in-
volved in the breeding'and raising of Arabian hors!=s
since we lived here. I have become quite knowledge-
able of the care that goes into the raising/having
horses, and am interested in wOL'king along with the
other members of this council. Thankyou for your acknow-
ledge~nt on fuhis matter.
"
Respectfully yours, 'r)f
~,,~q:J~
Mrs. Gwen L. Vagle ~
16300 Makah st. N.H.
Andover, MN. 55304
(612) 421-2956
~~)
.:J
~J
;;; e(! 9v-J-C/o
LAND USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, August 29, 1990
3-6 p.m.
Room 1A
AGENDA
1. Roll call
2. Approval of agenda
3. Approval of minutes of August 15 and 22
4.
Evaluation of Density Alternatives (continued)
5.
Lot Size and Clustering Options
6. Adjourn
, Anne Hurlburt
Anne Hurlburt
A meeting has been tentatively scheduled for September 5 at 3:00
Mean Park CeNn, 230 East Fiflh Street, SI. Pau4 MN 55101 (612) 291-6359 roD 291-0904
/0 (!(! 9--O-9-9D
~
Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 TeL 612-291-6359!IDD 291-0904
MINUTES OF THE LAND USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Room 2A
August 15, 1990
3:00 PM
Committee Members Present: Jim Filippi, Jude Okney, Michael Hoffman, Dick Little, Frank Simon,
Gerald Stelzel, Judy Grant, Adrian Rygg, Neil Weber, Mary Hauser, Council liaison.
Committee Members Absent: Larry Bakken, Linda Thorsvik, Edwina Garcia, Pat Miller, William
Casey, Steve Bubul.
Council Staff Present: Anne Hurlburt, Bob Overby, Paul Baltzersen, Tori Flood.
Others Present: d'Arcy Bosell, Zoning Administrator, City of Andover.
Chair SteIzel called the meeting to order at 3:20 pm. The meeting agenda and minutes from August
1 were approved later in the meeting, after a quorum was present. The minutes were amended to
add a sentence to page 2, the first paragraph, stating "Education of new rural residents is crucial to
alter urban service expectations".
RURAL AREA HOUSING TRENDS AND ISSUES
Paul Baltzersen presented the Housing White Paoer. which examines housing trends in the general
rural use and the rural centers. Data for the report is from 1980 and does not reflect growth or
changes to date, but does provide an indication of the character of the area. The report looks at the
housing stock within the rural area, the type, age and value of the housing. Rural housing is mainly
single family and is predominately newer. The report said that the Council forecasts a 34 percent
increase in total households over the next 20 years. Of this, 6 percent is projected in the rural area.
The demand for IUral housing will parallel that for the urban area. With a decline in the number of
households being formed it is anticipated that the rural area housing growth rate will also decline.
Extensive residential development in the rural area could undercut the investments made in urban
infrastructure within the MUSA and could cause duplication ~ the rural area. The Metropolitan
Development and Investment Framework (1vID1F) recommends that the density in the general rural
area not exceed 4 units per 40 acres. A decrease in the demand for housing will reduce the rate of
growth, but will not change the need for a guideline for rural development in order to preserve rural
character, protect agricultural land, and prevent the premature extension of urban services, since
there will continue to be additional residential development in the rural area.
The committee discussed the Council's forecasts and how they are determined; why the demand for
housing is forecasted to decline; the cost and value of rural area housing; the costs of commuting to
and from work and its effect on people moving to the rural area; the census and the Council's new
forecasts.
~-)
1
~)
()
It was noted that Richard Little was not present and did not participate in the discussion on rural
area housing.
EVALUATION OF DENSITY ALTERNATIVES - MA1R1X
Anne Hurlburt described the evaluation matrix which was developed for committee members to
organize the analysis of density alternatives as provided over the past few weeks. The committee
discussed each of the criteria in detail and the importance of each relative to the others. Committee
also discussed the impact of rural development on the highway system; the amount of traffic
generated by employment centers and/or large employers in the rural area; how the list of criteria can
be applied based on the characteristics of an area; how densities in an area could be determined
based on soil type, distance from the MUSA, proximity to agricultural areas, etc.; how performance
standards could be established and implemented.
Committee rated the rural density alternatives criteria according to importance; 1) Water quality
(groundwater/septics, surface water runoff), 2) Urban sewer service, 3) Impact on agriculture, 4)
Highways, 5) Locating large scale urban uses, 6) Transition area development, 7) Transit, 8) Human
services, and 9) Local government services (fire, police, solid waste). Housing and School services
were not rated. Motion was made to approve this list of criteria. Approval was seconded and motion
carried.
Anne explained the + and - ratings for each of the density alternatives. Committee discussed a new
format for the matrix so t~at discussion can continue at the next meeting.
The next meeting will be on Wednesday, August 22, 1990 at 3:00 pm in conference room 2B.
Respectfully submitted,
Tori Rood, Secretary
LUACXIV
August 20, 1990
2
70 et!.
9rrJ - yo
:~ )
Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612-291-6359!fDD 291-0904
MINUTES OF THE LAND USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Room 2B
August 22, 1990
3:00 PM
Committee Members Present: Jim Filippi, Jude Okney, Michael Hoffman, Dick Little, Bryan
McGinnis, Adrian Rygg, Bill Casey, Mary Hauser, Council liaison.
Committee Members Absent: Gerald Stelzel, Frank Simon, Judy Grant, Neil Weber, Linda Thorsvik,
Edwina Garcia, Pat Miller, Steve Bubul.
Council Staff Present: Anne Hurlburt, Bob Overby, Paul Baltzersen, Tori Flood.
Others Present: d'Arcy Bosell, Zoning Administrator, City of Andover.
Vice chair Filippi called the meeting to order at 3:25 pm. The meeting agenda was not approved
since there was not a quorum.
EVALUATION OF DENSITY ALTERNATIVES - MATRIX
Anne Hurlburt described the revisions to the matrix, based on suggestions from the committee. The
revised matrix: lists separately the criteria Highways and Transit, rather than combining them under
the criteria Transportation. The criteria have been listed in order of priority as determined at the
LUAC meeting on August 15. Columns were added so that recommended performance standards
and density for each of the criteria could be added. Housing and School services were taken off the
matrix, since it was agreed that the data collected did not permit an evaluation of the five alternatives.
Since there was no quorum, no recommendations could be made on the matrix. -
LOT SIZE ANt> CLUSTERING ALTERNATIVES
Anne Hurlburt presented the paper which includes the following: how existing Council policy
developed and how flexibility has been applied; the need for flexibility in implementation of a density
policy; the general principles and criteria for flexibility strategies; a review of flexible development
tools; and case studies and local examples. The report listed seven conclusions, including: the
Council's rural area density policy limits the amount of development and that details of
implementation are left to local government; cluster zoning, transfer of development rights (IDR)
and other tools described in the report can provide for a more efficient development pattern and
protect agricultural and environmentally sensitive areas better than large lot zoning; the area over
which density standards are computed should be increased to provide for more flexibility for
clustering;the minimum lot size for residential development with on-site waste disposal systems should
be based on MN Pollution Control Agency (PCA) standards; and the Council should develop
educational materials and model ordinances to inform and help local governments implement cluster
zoning, maximum lot size standards, etc., in order to more efficiently accommodate rural area
~~)
1
development, preserve agricultural land and limit environmental impacts.
-\
'----./ The committee discussed the use of overlay platting in transitional area development; how
performance standards and zoning can be adopted into plans and enforced by local governments; how
and why agriculture should be protected; that education for new rural area residents should be
provided;how clustering works and where a cluster of homes should be located within a 40 acre
parcel.
Discussion on the density matrix and on lot size and clustering will continue at the next meeting on
Wednesday, August 29, at 3:00 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
- Tori Hood, Secretary
LUACXV
August 23, 1990
-~-J
2
. ,
o
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, S1. Paul, Minnesota 55101
DATE:
August 21, 1990
TO:
Land Use Advisory Committee
FROM:
Comprehensive Planning Division Staff
SUBJECf:
Rural Development Strategies. Lot Size and Clustering Alternatives
INTRODUCTION
When it adopted the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Chapter (MDIF) in
1986, the Metropolitan Council decided to reexamine its policies for the general rural use area for
lands not suited for agriculture. The Land Use Advisory Committee is providing input in the
following issue areas:
Appropriate rural area land uses
Development Density
Implementation Approaches
Planning for areas in transition from rural to urban
The purpose of this paper is to review implementation approaches, such as' lot size or clustering
policies, that might permit the overall density policy to be more readily adapted to individual
communities within the metropolitan area.
This paper includes the following:
A review of how the existing Council policy developed and how flexibility has been
applied
The need for flexibility in implementation of a density policy
General principles and criteria for flexibility strategies
A review of flexible development tools: what they.are, how they work, their advantages
and disadvantages
Case studies and local examples
Conclusions
BACKGROUND
Current Council policy for the general rural use area (see Figure 1) evolved from an earlier
density guideline, which recommended a maximum residential density of one housing unit per ten
acres, with a minimum lot size recommendation of 2.5 acres. The maximum area over which the
density could be calculated was not specified. The policy was in effect during the late 1970's and
early 1980's, when the Council reviewed local comprehensive plans and amendments prepared in
response to the 1976 Metropolitan Land Planning Act. Its purpose was to maintain low densities
:~
2
Development and Investment Framework
, .
Figure 1
(,-,,-~ ~ - i) ·
N~ II -- r
. Fully Developed Area ,,_~ I) r-',-rl> I, ~ ~
C Developing Area ~' ~.
Freestanding Growth Centers - ~\ ,--~,.- ~-"~ ~ \ f
~ ,I~ .A~ KA --, r. ~ ~\.~..
~ Commercial AgriCUltur:~1 Area .~~ N'~ f- .. (~) .:. "r-
~ ,~ - I I /" I ~
o General Rural Use Area ~ '~l 1';::- . """ ' _ ~.~' ~ ~ I ~ :- L
........ t:.:. :&.r- ~l\ - - '" :..J '" ~. ,
g Metropolitan Centers ~ ~ ~ -,I.><r--. _ L::i' '!' ,WAS ~1~SroN I
@Regional Business ~ ~ 1::::1./+ ~+--'\ I/' ~""'S '( ~
Concentrations ~~ '- ;S::: ~ ~ ~... '[;J J>. ~ ~~. ,,,,,~,,y
~ .... >- ~E~ NEPlN I'" ~"V
~ Rural Centers ~~' _ 9--,....; , . _ 1f."L:1IIo.
~ :;: _ If'L ""'" ~__ ~ ~~
fu~~~ :_...7 ~'J~'-
~,,,--:::::~.f~ ~ ~ :::
........ 0... ":'-.. ' '---........ r--. '-J 'F'--': - (. Ii . . N _
~~""~~ ...!O -L ~/,., f\ _ ~ (
~~ ...,,~ .~~ ~~;- '~ VI I\~~ ~~~~_.;.'.:"G;~
,........~"'~ ~"' ",,",...... :/1) . 11--' '\ '-~"'~"V
~.~~ '~"--"--"-"'~ Zr d':'- ~ -.' J" '- ~~.....
:'-.. ~-.....: - :/-~.~. ~ ,: ::>."'! ~ /
t--... "'-. ........ ""-' 0~ ~~~ ':J ;::;r '- . i- 0-./ ~ ..... . .~I;'"
".......... "-- "-- " ,,:::-..; LIZ-.., ,",c"llO. - p<...,? = ,~ - I "-- ..
t--..~:'-.. :'-.. 0 ~~ ~. )' "":"~Jf:-JI r--'"r~ ~ ~B
::---:r-..."""" ~~~~ A/'/ \. r::k. "-,, ~~~
~"- ~y ~~ ,:::" ;';"" ,,-,,L ~ ~~~~~~~ ........c
~~~..j~~ .' Il.'-h r--:: t'\ ,~~~~~I\\
~ ~ l.L" ''-~~ \;') :--.. "--" ""- "';..">< ........ ..... L........ '"" "'''-.....1 (.
,;/~-~~~tst I\.. . \ ~'-'~ ~~~~~ --
: ~~~~~~ . aOM'~ =.~ ~ ~ ~~~~
~.~ y~ .~~~~~~~~
~ ~~~~~ ~
~::::-..; ~~ v....
:-....:...... ~~~
GENERALIZED
GEOGRAPHIC POLICY AREAS
~
;
I
!
,
r
!
i
I
I
f
~
Note: Areas are shown as of May, 1988. ^ precise location of the urban service area for any community is available from the Metropolitan
Council Data Center, 612 291-8140. The line between the developing area and the rural area is referred to as rhe metropolitan urban
service area boundary.
o
3
in the rural area to preserve agriculture, maintain the rural character of the area, and to prevent
the premature need for extension of metropolitan services. Many local governments, especially in
areas good agricultural areas, adopted comprehensive plans that were consistent with the policy.
Noncompliance and requests for flexibility to the policy were more common in non-agricultural
areas.
A notable example of a plan review in which the Council approved some flexibility to the policy
was in Columbus Township. The Township's plan showed 2,410 acres zoned for five acre lots (in
the general rural use area), but designated 15,682 acres for agriculture at 1 housing unit per 40
acres (defined by Council policy as the commercial agricultural region). The overall density
permitted for the entire township was calculated to be no more than 1 housing unit per 18.5
acres. This was found to be "laudable" and consistent with the Council guidelines (Columbus
Township Plan Review, Sept. 1981.)
Other communities proposed vilriations which were not found to be consistent. East Bethel
proposed 2.5 and 5 acre lots sizes, with an overall "holding capacity" of one unit per 10 acres of
developable land until 1990. The Council's review noted that clustering could preserve large
areas of open rural land, but that the density limit was not tied to a specific land area and it could
allow large scale development to concentrate in one area. Given the lack of a density cap and
the lack of a mandatory on-site system maintenance and inspection program, the plan was found
to be inconsistent with the general rural use area policy (East Bethel Plan Review, Oct. 1981.)
A number of community plans showed rural development densities that were found to be
inconsistent with the Council's policy. While these aspects of the plans were not specifically
"approved" by the Council, neither did the Council use its authority under the Land Planning Act
to require the local government to modify the plan. Early during the plan review process the
Council said that with adequate performance standards for on-site sewage disposal systems, the
probability of collective on-site system failures necessitating metro sewer service was not high.
Therefore, it was found that such inconsistent policies probably would not have "potential
substantial adverse impact on the metropolitan system which would necessitate modifications of
the plan" (Ravenna Township Plan Review, March 1979.) In plan reviews and subsequent
amendments, the Council later began to informed local governments that "any premature
extension of sewer service to resolve sewage disposal will be entirely the responsibility of the city
and no metropolitan funds will be provided" if densities inconsistent with Council policies were
implemented (Hugo Plan Review, March 1985.)
The policy was revised in the 1986 Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework. The
2.5 acre minimum lot size was dropped, and the requirement that density be calculated over 40
acres was added. The changes added some flexibility to the policy, and provided the guidance
lacking in the earlier policy for a "density cap". Provided that the 1/10 density is not exceeded,
there is flexibility for local governments to develop their own lot size and other zoning or
subdivision regulations. Figure 3 on page 6 illustrates how the density standard may provide
flexibility for developing 40 acres for 4 housing units, without strict adherence to a particular
minimum lot size.
:J
Many rural communities are still operating under comprehensive plans that were reviewed by the
Council under the previous standards. As the Council reviews amendments or updates of local
plans, the current MDIF policies are being applied.
4
WHY IS FLEXIBILITY NEEDED?
There are a number of reasons to support some flexibility in the implementation of a rural density
policy:
The character of the rural area varies, and the policy needs to adapt to different
circumstances. Some areas have good agricultural soils are actively farmed, and other
areas are not. Some areas have lakes, wetlands, wildlife areas, large areas of public lands
or different soil conditions. How can implementation of the policy respond to these
differences?
Acceptance of the density policy has varied. Some local governments adopted the
recommended one per ten density, but others have adopted higher densities with 2.5 or 1
acre lot sizes. Could more flexible implementation make an overall density standard more
acceptable?
A low density, scattered residential pattern may be more difficult and costly to provide
with a wide array of services (such as street maintenance, public safety and utilities) than a
compact or clustered development pattern. Could flexibility encourage a more efficient
and cost-effective development pattern?
Flexibility may be more supportive of Council goals to preserve agriculture and maintain
rural character. Scattered residences on large lots may be more disruptive to agricultural
operations than clustered development or smaller lot sizes at the same density.
PRINCIPLES AND CRITERIA
In evaluating the different techniques and alternative strategies several principles and criteria
should be kept in mind. A rural area development strategy should be sensitive to the following:
intrinsic suitability of the land - what the land is best suited for given such conditions as
soils, vegetation and terrain.
environmental protection - including protection of groundwater and surface water quality
from failed on-site waste disposal systems and stormwater runoff.
efficient development pattern - encouraging development of an efficient roadway network
and cost-effective extension of utilities.
ease of service - the ongoing cost and efficiency of providing public services, such as
school bus transportation, snow plowing, police and fire protection.
ease of administration - some development alternatives may require staff resources and
expertise beyond that available at some local units of government.
equitable sharinl! of costs - a development alternative should provide equitable sharing of
costs and services. Rural services should not be funded at the expense of urban residents,
nor should one property owner benefit while costs are borne by others.
~
5
achievement of Councill!oals - some development alternatives are better than others in
supporting the Council's goals of preserving agriculture, retaining rural character and
preventing the premature extension of metropolitan services of sewer and highways.
anticioated urbanization (transition areas) - land that is expected to be urbanized shortly
needs to be considered differently from other rural land. The rural development pattern
can make it easier, or impossible, to resubdivide and extend services when the land is
urbanized. An upcoming paper on transition areas will further explore these issues.
SURVEY OF IMPLEMENTATION TECHNIQUES
Many different zoning flexibility devices have been developed. The basic categories of techniques
reviewed in this paper are lot size, clustering, performance zoning and transfer of development
rights.
Minimum Lot Size
A minimum lot size is the simplest and probably the most common zoning standard for
implementing a density policy. By specifying the minimum land area needed for a house, the
maximum density is controlled. Common lot sizes in the rural area are 2.5, 5 or 10 acre lots.
Figure 3 on page 6 illustrates development at these lot sizes, and the resulting densities of 16, 8,
and 4 units per 40 acres, respectively. Note that all lot sizes use the full forty acres leaving little
uninterrupted open space. Historically, these lot sizes are common because they represent
simple meets and bounds divisions of the surveyor's "quarter-quarter" section (40 acres). The
Council's earlier recommendation of a 2.5 acre lot size may also have been influential.
Minimum lot size or large lot zoning (one acre or more) is widely used across the United States.
The purposes of large lot zoning include keeping residential densities low and therefore
protecting agriculture land, preserving open space and protecting environmental features. A
criticism of large lot size zoning, however, is that it results in an inefficient development pattern
and wastes land because the lots are too large for the house, but not large enough for another
use such as farming.
The principal advantages of minimum lot size zoning are that it is easy to administer and legally
defensible (if related to a valid public purpose and is not exclusionary). However, there are also
disadvantages. Local units of government may believe that large lots are a way to increase their
tax base; yet the services that may need to be provided at a later date (such as sewer and water)
are prohibitively costly. When used extensively, the amount of developable land may be reduced
when large lots prevent the subdivision of land to smaller, more affordable lots or result in an odd
configuration of parcels including "flag lots" and inaccessible parcels (Figure 5, p.7) which are
difficult to serve. Large lot sizes may also increase the cost of housing.
,J
A minimum lot size can limit residential development to low densities, preserve agriculture, and
may help protect environmentally sensitive areas; if the lot size is large enough. There often,
however, are more effective, less costly and less land-consuming means to accomplish these ends,
such as cluster development. The Council has raised this issue in its reviews of local
comprehensive plans. In its review of the Burns Township plan (Dec. 1980) the Council
expressed concern that a five acre minimum lot size with no other limit on overall density would
Figure 3
6
Figure 2
Density
. ~
1 Housing Unit
Per 10 Acres;
Various Lot Sizes
Minimum Lot Size Illustration
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
.
.
. .
. .
2.5 Acre Lots on 40 5 Acre Lots on 40 10 Acre Lots on 40
4 Housing Units
Per 10 Acres
.
.
. . . .
. . . .
Figure 4
Cluster Zoning
. . 40 Acre Parcel
· · Four 2 Acre Lots
32 Acres Preserved
7
()
Figure 5
ODD CONFIGURATION OF PARCELS
.;
a
s."
a
,..
-
....OUT\.aT f
A
,
1\
Inaccessible Parcel
c
,:
.
i
1
Flag Lot
!
2
,-
~
~
~
JU---___
..........._~.~
~..__.._-
~)
8
result in an inefficient use of land and that more land would be removed from agricultural use
than if the lot size were smaller and the overall density were limited. In fact, it may be desirable
to use a maximum lot size, rather than a minimum to achieve some of these goals. An example
will be seen in the case study of Carver County.
Clusterin~ and Planned Unit Develooments
Cluster development is widespread but is not as common as large lot zoning. Clustering refers to
the grouping or concentration of housing units in one area of a site in exchange for lower
densities, or not developing the remainder of the land. Figure 4 (p.6) illustrates a simple cluster
development consistent with the Council's current density policy. With a clustering policy the
number of units that may be built is based on the established density; in this case four houses
could be built on 40 acres. The sketch shows that four units may be built in one corner of the
site, leaving the remainder in open space or agricultural use. The individual lots could be as small
as practicable given other considerations setbacks or septic systems.
Clustering provisions in zoning ordinances may be simple or complex. One method of
implementing a clustering plan is through planned unit development (PUD) provisions in a zoning
ordinance. A PUD can permit negotiation between a developer and a local unit of government
for flexibility to allow combinations of land uses which may not be permitted under a single
zoning category, or for set backs or minimum lot sizes different from "conventional" zoning
restrictions. In urban applications planned unit developments often take on complex forms
involving higher residential densities mixed with commercial and industrial development.
Clustering may be an optional alternative to a conventional lot size policy. Or, it may be required
for all developments or combined with other techniques to provide incentives to use clustering.
One possible incentive would be a density bonus. For example, a developer might be permitted
to develop 4 units per 40 acres with clustering, but only 3 per 40 if clustering is not used.
Clustering has many advantages. It can permit siting of houses to take advantage of a site
amenity such as woods or lakeshore. It can be used to overcome site disadvantages, such as
permitting houses to be concentrated in areas with good soils for building. The costs of public
improvements can be reduced by requiring shorter distances for roads and utilities. There may be
other savings on site development; grading, for example. This may help reduce the cost of
housing. Cluster development is especially suited to protecting sensitive environmental features,
such as wetlands, since the technique permits retaining substantial portions of a site undisturbed
as open space. Clustering may permit farming to continue by grouping all development in a
portion of the parcel, leaving a remaining parcel of an adequate size. It may give opportunities to
create buffer areas where residential development is permitted next to farmland.
A primary disadvantage of cluster development is that it is more complicated to administer than
conventional zoning. It requires expertise at the local level to manage. Clustering may require
more up-front costs for planning and engineering, and may take more time to process. While it is
more complicated than conventional zoning, in rural applications clustering need not present the
complexity of most PUD's in the urban area. Simple applications are possible, and examples will
be presented later in this paper.
. .
o
9
Several issues for clustering that need to be addressed:
Defining developable land. Some communities have proposed including large public land
areas, such as a regional park or a wildlife refuge, to determine the permitted number of
units to be developed under a clustering approach. While adding these areas will result in
a larger number of units permitted, there is no right to develop associated with public land
and these areas should not be included. It is appropriate to consider other undevelopable
land such as wetlands, steep slopes, areas of poor soils in computing a density as long as
there are developable sites for buildings that are permitted within the cluster area.
Maximum area for clustering. The current policy allows clustering on a 40 acre basis.
There has been a concern that clustering based on a larger area could result in urban
scale development. The current policy would preclude a concentrations of more than 16
units at the intersection of four 40-acre parcels. Should a larger area be considered?
Does the overall density limitation eliminate the possibility of demands for urban services,
even if larger clusters are allowed?
Computing density over a larger area would give greater flexibility. If computed on a
section basis (640 acres) the maximum number of units that could be concentrated based
on the current 1/10 density would be much larger (64 per section, or in theory 256 at the
intersection of 4 sections). This size of development is more characteristic of an urban
area and may require a higher level of services. Calculating density over a larger area
would require complex calculations, and will be more likely to require additional tools like
transfer of development rights in order to implement them. As the size of the area and
the number of land owners increases, clustering becomes more complex. Figure 6 (p.lO)
illustrates a cluster development on 160 acres. At a 1/10 density, the maximum number of
units that could be concentrated would be 64.
Minimum area for clustering. A part of any clustering scheme will be the minimum
amount of land required for each unit. This may be determined by a lot size, or by a
performance standard. Current Council policies would indicate that a minimum should be
determined by standards for providing individual on-site sewage disposal systems. This
minimum size could possibly be decreased with the use of community drainfields. A
common drainfield could be located in that portion of the site with the best soils for the
system. Other systems that could be considered include spray irrigation and treatment
ponds. These systems could provide an option for cluster development that cannot or
should not be served with conventional on-site waste disposal systems.
Policy 1-11 in the Council's Water Resources Manal!ement Guide states that "group on-
site sewage disposal systems are acceptable to abate pollution problems caused by existing
small urban concentration not designated as rural centers." A change in policy may be
needed to permit the application of community systems to new cluster development in the
rural area. In addition to the policy change, arrangements and payment for the ongoing
operation and maintenance of community systems would have to be considered. Many
communities and homeowners may not find them acceptable.
:J
10
. ,
Figure 6
Illustration of Cluster Development
on 160 Acres
(One Housing Unit per 10 Acre Density)
Agriculture
.
Open Space .
'9~.
......
16 Homes
Possible Community
Drainfield Location
o
11
Performance Zoning
Performance zoning is another variation from "conventional" or "standard" zoning. Standard
zoning specifically permits certain land uses and has rigid development standards for each district.
Performance zoning, in contrast, sets standards that specify the permissible impacts which must
not be exceeded for a development to be found acceptable. If the standards are met, any use is
allowed in the zone. The standards may cover a wide range of development criteria, including
buffer zones, landscaping, roads, utilities, impact on natural resources and many others.
Performance zoning has many advantages. It moves from fIXed requirements and seeks to
maximize freedom and flexibility in the development of land. Increased choice is provided within
zoning districts. Land uses are separated only to the extent they have negative impacts on one
another. It considers the capabilities of the land and only permits development consistent with
defined standards. As a replacement for conventional zoning, performance zoning can reduce the
adverse effects of development and promote a desired level of quality in new development.
The disadvantage of performance zoning ordinances is in the increased skill required to administer
them. Comprehensive performance standards on a community wide scale with a case by case
determination pose potentially large staff workload requirements. Land capability standards
require specific technical information describing such things as erosion potential, protection of
groundwater and flood risks. This requires that large data sets be developed and maintained by
the local unit of government or that the developer provide the information.
The use of performance zoning is growing within the United States, especially in the areas of
environmental protection and implementation of planned unit development and subdivision design
ordinances. However, pure performance zoning systems are rare and none appear to have been
implemented in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. As a practical maUer, performance zoning is
generally used in connection with conventional zoning. Within the metropolitan area, it is
relatively common to implement performance standards in the form of overlay zoning districts to
protecting sensitive environmental features, such as wetlands, floodplains, and watercourses.
It is common to see performance standards combined with other development standards. For
example, a minimum lot size ordinance may also incorporate standards for preservation of
wetlands (perhaps requiring additional setbacks, not including wetlands in the minimum lot area).
Enforcement of the performance standards are key, and may be difficult for small communities
without staff resources. In these cases, the standards should be very clear and understandable,
based on readily available information, and less subjective.
A common application of performance standards relates to on-site waste disposal systems. The
required lot size may vary depending upon the characteristic of the soils and their ability to
assimilate sewage discharges. An example of how this type of standard may affect lot size is
shown in Figure 7 (p.12). A house may require only a one acre lot where soils are excellent for
on-site systems, but may requires five acres where soils are marginal. Where soils are not suited
for on-site waste disposal systems, no development would be allowed.
~)
The Council provides guidelines for performance standards for on-site sewage disposal systems.
According to the Council's Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan, local governments
must include detailed standards and ordinances in their comprehensive plans, and adopt
12
management and control systems consistent with federal and state laws and Council guidelines.
Adoption of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards for design and installation of
septic systems are recommended. These standards are themselves performance based and include
standards such as soil percolation rates, set backs, slopes, ground water level and floodplain
restrictions. The Council recommends a higher level of performance standards, including an
inspection program, if a community permits higher residential densities than the current 1 per 10
density policy. Not all local comprehensive plans are consistent with these requirements. The
extent to which communities that have adopted standards in their plans enforce the requirements
is not clear.
Transfer of Development Rights (TOR)
Transfer of development rights (TOR) is an approach to zoning where the right to develop is
separated from the property and may be transferred to another parcel. The rights can be used on
additional properties of the owner or sold to others. In some cases a TOR bank is established to
facilitate transfers and insure a market under adverse circumstances. The tool is still in its
infancy. A number of programs have been initiated throughout the United States. They include
Montgomery County, Maryland; New Jersey Pinelands; California Coastal Commission; Tahoe
Basin, Nevada; and San Luis Obispo County, California. TOR may need to be specifically
authorized in state enabling legislation unless the planning and zoning law is broadly written to
include it. Minnesota law appears broadly written.
Figure 8 illustrates a simple example of TOR. In this example, landowner "A" owns forty acres of
land that has been assigned two development rights, based on an overall density standard of one
housing unit per twenty acres. "A" wants to divide the land into lO-acre lots. He has three
choices. He can develop two lots on twenty acres, leaving twenty acres undeveloped. Or, he may
buy two additional development rights from another land owner and develop all forty acres. Or
he can choose not to develop the land and sell the development rights to another.
The advantages of TOR are that it can be used to protect environmentally sensitive areas, open
space or natural or historic amenities. It may be means of compensating landowners in areas
inappropriate for development, removing political or financial pressure for those lands to be
developed. If properties were all assigned the same development rights, a TOR system could
eliminate the value shifts and inequities of zoning that arise when, for example, one site is
designated for multifamily housing and another for single family housing creating different land
values.
The disadvantages of TOR are that it may require a high level of expertise and staffing in design
and administration of the system. TOR is also sensitive to market fluctuations including housing
demand, inflation, and lending policies of private and public institutions. It is also new and runs
counter to traditional notions of property rights which may reduce its political acceptability.
Interest in TOR appears to be growing, and increased awareness and simplification of the
technique is expected to lead to greater use. Within the metropolitan area, no community has
adopted a TOR program in place of conventional zoning. Several jurisdictions use
limited versions of TOR in their clustering ordinances.
13
:~
Figure 7 Performance Zoning
Overlay- Suitable Soils for On-Site Disposal System
Excellent Soils
1 acre lot
.
~
Marginal Soils
5 acre lot
Unsuitable Soils
No developable lots
~
~
.
- 40 Acres-
Figure 8 Transfer of Development Rights
One Household per 20 Acres Overall Density
Choice 1.
Choice :2
Choice 3
.
. . .
. .~ .
2 D. R. Assigned
Sell 2 D. Rights
Develop NO Lots
.
'\
-J
2 Development
Rights Assigned
Develop 2 Lots
2 D. R. Assigned
Purchase 2 D. Rights
Develop 4 Lots
- 40 Acres-
14
In another variation of IDR, development rights may be purchased by a local government or
other entity, with no intention of transferring them to another party. This purchase of
development rights may take the form of a permanent open space or agricultural easement or
deed restriction. Development rights can be purchased, or they can be donated by the landowner.
Development easements should not be purchased in areas that are anticipated to undergo
urbanization in the future.
CASE STUDIES
A sample of state and local case studies that illustrate uses of variations or combinations of these
techniques follows. No examples of regional growth management systems which explicitly employ
these techniques were found in a review of the planning literature (see for example The Costs of
Alternative Development Patterns, James Franck, Urban Land Institute 1989). Some related
examples may be found in state strategies, but they are most common in local government plans
and ordinances, as it is at this level that the authority to enact land use controls rests.
State Strate~ies
New Jersey (Perfonnance Standards)
New Jersey has prepared a comprehensive development strategy for the whole state which
is currently under review by local units of government (The Preliminary State
Development and Redevelopment Plan for the State of New Jersey. volumes I-II-III,
November, 1988, prepared by the New Jersey State Planning Commission.) The approach
uses a tier system which is similar to the geographic policy areas of the MDIF. Tiers are
gradations in the level of public services. The plan was prepared to manage rapid urban
growth which was exceeding the ability to provide public services, respond to citizen
concerns over environmental and fiscal matters, and to avoid a moratorium on
development.
Development in the rural area is to be limited to low density residential uses and to non-
residential uses that are related to and dependent on natural resources occurring in the
rural development area or on agricultural activities or products. This is to be achieved
through a number of tools including a base-line development capacity equal to 100
persons per square mile. This capacity would be increased or decreased based on local
conditions such as infrastructure capacity, natural resources carrying capacity and impacts
on agriculture. Performance levels for rural roads are to be established and there is to be
coordination between city and county development controls. State funding and technical
assistance will be provided to establish local land banks to acquire vacant land and provide
for more orderly development. All improvements for new development are to be privately
funded.
Florida (Clustering)
The state of Florida has conducted a study to identify the public service costs of land
development patterns in Florida in eight case study areas. This study was one of the first
to evaluate the costs of development from actual conditions rather than hypothetical
prototypes. The eight case study areas were classified by the forms of development
, .
o
IS
pattern within them. The forms included scattered, contiguous, linear, satellite and
compact.
The report concludes:
"111e conclusion that can be drawn from this effort is that the intuitive insights and
theoretical studies on the public cost of development have a basis in reality: compact, infill
and higher density land development is more efficient to serve than scattered, linear, and
low density sprawl development. Based on this evidence, it is incumbent upon local
governments, supported by leadership provided by the State of Florida, to encourage
future development patterns which avoid inefficient types of sprawl development,
engender and support compact and infill development types, and assure that the full direct
and indirect (marginal) public costs of serving all new development are paid by those who
receive the benefits provided by public services." (The Search for Efficient Urban Growth
Patterns. Florida Department of Community Mfairs, June 1989, page 21.)
County Strateliies
Howard Countv. Marvland (Clustering, Perfonnance Standards, Purchase of
Development Rights)
Howard County, Maryland is located between Montgomery County and Prince George's
County (Washington D.C. area) and Baltimore County (Baltimore area) and is
experiencing pressure for development. The county includes one medium-sized city,
Columbia (the new town), several smaller towns and a large rural area. The eastern area
includes Columbia and is urbanized. The western portion includes agriculture and
scattered residential development. The county's comprehensive plan (Howard Countv.
Marvland. The 1990 General Plan, January 1990) calls for preserving agriculture and for
controlling residential development. Agriculture is preserved by purchasing the
development rights, using revenues from a charge on all land transfers.
Cluster zoning is used in the west in areas designated rural conservation that are still
largely uncommitted to residential development. Clustering is permitted at a density of
one dwelling unit per five acres, with a minimum lot size of one acre for homes with
individual well and waste disposal systems. A smaller lot size of no less than 33,000 square
feet (3/4 acre) is permitted when communal drainfields are employed and appropriate.
Farming is to remain the predominant land use. To preserve blocks of farmland, a density
exchange option in a designated overlay zone is also available which permits the
development of one dwelling unit per three acres in a clustered design. Some parts of the
west have areas with large lot suburban residential development. In these areas, the
permitted densities are between one unit per two acres and five acres. Clustering is
permitted under specific circumstances in these areas. Figure 9 (p.16) shows an example
of a clustering layout from the Howard County Plan.
Carver Countv. Minnesota
(Maximum Lot Size, Clustering, Perfonnance Standards)
,-\
'J
Carver County, located in the western portion of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, has
adopted an innovative cluster development option within its comprehensive plan which
-
Figure 9
t-
OO
w
3:
-J
<(
II:
::J
II:
W
J:
t-
U.
o
z
o
t-
~
II:
W
00
W
II:
a.
-
-
-
...
--
..
-
16
_.,
.-'
.--.~, ....... ..
re' . ,,_.. ;:.,. ,<'"
. "'~'.~; . :.y:~':: ".
>
c
~
t-
en
w
en
<C
CJ
I
"
Z
-
II:
W
t-
en
~
..J
CJ
N
II)
~ ~ CI)
.- Cl =' 1I).c
.5 ~.50~0
Cll=.:O-
.~ xeCl);;-g
Ul.~WCl)-5C1)CI)
CD__ ...c_=C:
.t:-"'-o '0
_ 0 Q).A Cl _
~ -- VI ... C :::J
0.. Ui U Ul =,.- 0
.2Q)~eoUi,.
Q) '0 ra u >"x ~
>'O.:ra.!!!CI)E
Cll_U_CI)OCl)
'O='C)='.t:_.t:
.E~c~:-:'O=
- Q)->.CllO
rarllC)=,.t:Cii_ .
Ul (5 Ul 0 0..- Ul '0
o-'E~~S!oQ)
g.S!CllrllCl-Ei;
... C) rIl'O 0 oc'O E
a.raCllrao..
, ... 0 0 II) c Cll
<M 0....._._ ra...
..
..
...
..
..
-
Cll
'0 Cll>
c Cll ... ra
rIlra.:Cll~.s!
-CI)_..c
.2E-=a,32
CI)...ooc='....;
",oiii...oOl:!
C)-OCll_~'w
CJ''OE'Uo....'E
CllC raCl.....-
crac...crac
O-.-ra.-oo
- ca.J::. ... ... 0-
-0-(,,) = C:a;
o Cll Cll Ui'-...
'S Cl~.2.2 raE Cll
ora_cC) 0..
>.'ErIlCll...CllO
ra ra Cll II)C) Cll .t: Cl
- rIl .t:-c
... ~ rIl '0 't: ... .-
Srarac=,~E
Ul'A E raLl. c ~
::J v, _. _
(j~Cll~SJ:2Cll
.- ra ~ =' .- 0 .t:
................0_...
rIl
ra
Cll
...
ra X
Cll '0 Q)
:s c c
-raCll
rIlC)_
~"2 'iij~
- Q) Cll ~
~~~a.
0.. ra'iij Cll
~_c:ca
ClOCll_
OrllrllC/)
o..Cll>'_
-0 =C
-~raCll
Clra-x
c E a5 ='
::= E Cii
.~ Cll c a.
x Q) .
a.>.;eCD
,.. Cll '0 '> -5
ES~o
r- 'w ... _
. .
./-,
',J
17
covers the unincorporated townships in the county. The option permits cluster
development in amenity areas such as woods or near lakes, where such development will
not interfere with agriculture and have minimal impact on county roads and services.
The intent is to cluster residential development in areas of high or medium suitability and
to preserve agriculture, within the overall density of 4 units per 40 acres. The maximum
permitted cluster density is four per forty which may be modified to eight housing units
per eighty acres in the case of some large parcels.
Most of the land in Carver County is designated for long-term agricultural use, and is
planned and zoned for a density of 1 unit per 40 acres. If the township approves, a land
owner can request a rezoning and a conditional use permit to allow development at a 1
unit per 10 acre density, if an evaluation shows the property is suitable for cluster
development. To determine "suitability", the county has mapped environmental
information such as long term agricultural land, agricultural soil capability, and the
suitability of soils for on-site waste disposal systems. Clustering is permitted in areas of
high and medium residential suitability (see Figure 10, page 18) meeting all of the
necessary conditions. These conditions include suitable soils for on-site waste disposal
systems, adequate roadway access, and non-interference with agriculture.
The minimum acceptable lot size is that necessary to accommodate two on-site sewer
systems and the residential structures. A maximum lot size is that needed to include
wooded, wetland, open and lakeshore areas in the residential lot while restricting the lot
to sizes no larger than required for residential purposes. Each lot is to contain the
minimum amount of prime and good production land. These standard generally result in a
minimum lot size of two acres and a maximum lot size of 5 acres.
The Metropolitan Council has found Carver County's plan to be inconsistent with current
Council policy, in that it permits clustering on a 80-acre, rather than 40-acre basis. There
was also a concern that the County take care that zoning changes not disqualify land from
the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves program.
Community Stratel!:ies
Woodbury
(Clustering, Perfonnance Standards)
The city of Woodbury permits cluster development at four lots per forty acres in the rural
area outside the city's Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Each cluster can have three lots
with a minimum of 3 acres buildable land and one larger lot remaining. The three acre
minimum lot size must be above and beyond any land required for stormwater ponding.
The regulations governing cluster development are contained in the city's subdivision code.
The lots must be established by preliminary and final plat. The city has performance
standards for new private roads for clusters, which must have access to a public street.
The road must meet established engineering standards, and maintained must be assured
through private agreements or covenants. The roadway must in dedicated right-of-way
and be no longer than 1000 feet in length.
)
Figure 10
a.
H
~
I~
~W
~3
18
C.1
<t
>- ~~"I"
I- <t~
H .
~ f:li
~ ~j~~
~ ~~ I' !
oo #~ ~ ; ; ]
..J n.~ I I ;: 'I
~ <tOO ; ~ I ': ,
!z :1:5 J ~ i 1
~ ~ ;l I ~
H w'5tlL
OO'~iH I.
~ :t"i$lii
CJ lllllJlOOI
H
J:
,
.
..,m!i:,"', ~I:
1:.1"" oJ.
~lL..'~
,.. I
", :
.....
.. ..'~~.....~ ,
~~
19
Chanhassen
(Clustering, Perfonnance Standards)
The city of Chanhassen requires a 2.5 acre minimum lot with a one housing unit per ten
acre gross density. A 100 acre parcel could be developed with 10 single family lots and
the remainder as an outlot. (An "outlot" is any remaining parcel from the subdivision of
land which is not to be developed.) Restrictions on the development of the outlot are
recorded with the title. Two drainfields, an existing and a backup location, are required by
the city's building code, and the locations must be shown on the plat. Meeting this
standard sometimes requires lots larger than 2.5 acres.
Cotta~e Grove (Clustering, Perfonnance Standards, TDR)
Cottage Grove has adopted a zoning ordinance which permits clustering in three of its
zoning districts and contains characteristics of a simplified transfer of development right
system. In the Ag-l and Ag-2 districts the permitted density is one per forty and four per
forty respectively with a minimum lot size of 1.5 acres. Subdivisions are permitted which
contain restrictions to enforce the effective density. The density transfer provision of the
ordinance states:
"Where there are two or more contiguous quarter/quarter sections under single ownership
the owner may, by conditional use permit, cluster the permitted number of dwelling units
in one quarter/quarter section. All lots created under this provision must meet all of the
other district requirements, including those for setbacks, driveway spacing and lot area.
One of the conditions of approval shall be the filing and recording of an agreement signed
by all of the affected property owners, relinquishing any right to a residential building site
on the quarter/quarter section from which the building site eligibility has been transferred."
An R-l district has a 3 acre minimum lot size but includes provisions for clustering with
1.5 acre lots. The balance of rural land is to remain as permanent open space. The
density in no case would exceed one housing unit per three acres. Deed restrictions
requiring the permanent reservation of these areas as open space are required before
building permits for cluster development may be issued.
The ordinance also includes performance standards and requires a minimum 1.5 acres to
be on slopes of less than 13 percent (the main constraint for septic systems in the city)
and that soil borings and percolation tests are required for each lot as part of a subdivision
application. A subdivision plan is required for any lot exceeding 24,000 sq. ft. (slightly
over a half acre) or 160 feet in width.
Rural Desil!n Stratel!V
Connecticut River Valley. Massachusetts
)
A distinctly different approach is that used in the Connecticut River Valley of
Massachusetts. Although using some of the same tools as other areas, it introduces the
concept of design into the planning for rural development. This design approach could be
incorporated in a local comprehensive plan. It may be useful for communities in the
general rural use area as well as rural centers.
20
The Connecticut River Valley is a scenic area of western Massachusetts that includes
mountains rising from fertile valley farms, old mill towns, historic villages, several small
industrial cities, and the river. Changes in the economy had brought the decline of
marginal farms and industry, but recent, rapid economic development in services and high
technology and an influx of commuters has created a threat to the character of the
countryside.
The Center for Rural Massachusetts was created in 1985 to conduct research useful to
state agencies and local governments located outside metropolitan areas. In 1986 the
center received a grant from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Management (DEM) to develop practical guidelines for rural landscape protection. The
guidelines blend together regional planning and landscape architecture, creating a new
discipline called "Rural Landscape Planning". The center was motivated by a concern that
unless effective landscape planning tools were developed, there soon would be no truly
rural Massachusetts but one conventionally suburban with only vestiges of the traditional
rural landscape .
The Center developed a design manual (Dealinl!: with Change in the Connecticut River
Valley: A Desil!:n Manual for Conservation and Develooment, the Center for Rural
Massachusetts, 1988) for the Connecticut River Valley Landscape Planning Project. The
manual describes eight sites which reflect different settings and develops alternatives for
each. Three sketches for one of the sites are shown in Figures 11 through 13. Figure 11
shows the site before development. The alternatives shown in Figures 12 and 13 each
contain the same amount of new development. They illustrate the difference in impact
between conventional land development with standard zoning and subdivision practices
and imaginatively using innovative techniques to preserve rural character.
The conventional development scenario (Figure 12) has the following characteristics:
The town road is straightened, destroying farmland and scenery
Farmland is carved up into large frontage lots
Wetlands and wildlife habitat areas are subdivided, and made vulnerable to future
incursions.
Historic character of farmstead is destroyed by adjacent development
Homes are built in old growth timber and along scenic ridge lines
Future timber management is precluded by large lot development.
The creative development scenario (Figure 13) has the following characteristics:
The town road is designated as a scenic road, moderate improvements are made
within existing right-of-way
Town enacts a mandatory open space development provision for farmland
Developer locates 28 lots on 24 acres, saving over 100 acres of farmland and forest
Farmland, wetlands, wildlife habitat, old-growth forest, ridgelines and scenery are
preserved
Farmland continues to be leased to neighboring farmer.
F:I
~
::I
:::I
::I
::I
~
::I
:3
::I
:a
3
:I
~
:II
:a
::zI
:II
:II
::a
Q
::a
:II
:II
'Figure 11
21
,
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
,
,
,
\
;
,
,
,
,
I
,
, I
\ I
\ I
\ I
" I
\ I
, I
"
,
,
\
I
I
\
\
,
\
,
,
\
i
: ,
,
I
'-',
I \
, \
I \
/ \
I \
I '
/
-V\IedInd,'
.....................
rJ\ j
) ~ !.
V.' /1--'\\,
/ ,
,-' "
.r \,
/'/ '\
I
\
I
\
I
\
\
L
Connecticut
C
,
,
/
,
I
I
I
I
r
I
r
r
I
I
I
I
I
,
.
.
\
.
-................................
-.,
...............::::..---
....:.-.-
.-'
""""'-
Valley
m.n1IIG CO""I'I"""
~~v...,
1--.. o.ar,.......T_....
~ FllW,w......,...
UtiIIIdIII: "'-T_w.-..s.-
~ 1Aa.M&.lW.........
Design Guidelines
Plan of Site C Before Development
s.
fi(!
i
I
,
\
,
,
,
,
------
-(])
:-:....~:--::.
Connecticut Valley Design Guidelines
Figure 12
22
m
'.
~!J"_l'"
, _ n.
r..-----.-..-..'-O.'-----.
i
I
C..-.---.-..-..---------
1\
~\ '.
~.._.._.._._----,----,
)'...."
" R...-.,.1
, i'
, .'!
J i ;>
.l.-.___...______________.___
\
\
-,II
'--'&:1
C
I:
I!!:
II
~
Eli
C
a
II!
I:
lei
a
c
c
I:
l:-
I:
It
I:
I:
I:
IE
E
E
I
..... ....lMd._ ..
AI'ld1!dll rut. Piaem 0# ~t4lIt ..,
?"'~~-~---------------
I '
I ~=--
i; .___._.._
\.--.-,.---..----.--
i
,
---:'-. ';-'. ------..----.
, / "
',1 \
I \~
,.' \
: ;-.--------..--.--.-----------.-1
.' 11----_. \
J' ~~ ' S"S$ ___------;-..\
\ ..-.."-", , I
\,. ---'------ . :
....-'- I
:...----- .
. ;;,...--- .
~- -'- ."'~ c......... , J
' ' .___-----1
(, \1 /~ ___-...-....- f
, '/.. .-----------...--- :
, __~...- I
';,'~ ,j
't> ' ._..-..-..-.~-..-..-. \
:~~ _..J
,,- .-..-" \
_-----~;;..;::t---- t
~ '-r.'" n,~ ...........lMd._' ,\
r;':::::::== ~.~ MlCI~_n:OIPlaernolMJ~ _---'..
~....-....-:~:~~..-:,~:,'-)-,.
-I
.-----4.
frIIrw'l"owtl Road lo.. 901 with)(J' 'Nde
~~~~T~R~..
0wK1el' h:I 0Mdes ExiImg f
"
,
I l~"',,, i.:,<"
!-------~----------~--------
!
I
!---------------------------
j ~~~~:at~/;~&~21lm.
! Z~"'.:"l>:."t'" ":::"'Lmbd t'
;. <,,".. '.
".~'
\".i,. ..-- J
"7'--,-"-,---,,,--'-' '7
\~-:=c='----":':";':' ~ f.
~ !
....:-...._..-.-..-..-;1'"
,~"",: /,---
\\\~ (-
-.-...:;-....,-,\ \ ' \'
n,.f_..~~\/- \
no 24 4-6 Aoel<n. ~', '/ \'.
~=r~II:I~._,',\; . ~;
",1, _..-..-\
'~" \-....-". . ~.
,~~ \\..~
\ 1(. PIIalIII"~lMp~~
.a_aa_.._.a":"'i f ~~;;.~f'::~~lDIL
" ,r:--------.-------y.,.
,i~ ,.
. I,' .",,-.~ J'
t~~>../././. ;
, "
r-a;;;;-~~c:,,-;;;:o '2S0'---ra--aa----a- .
J Quob w E...ny E~ Cll'\ \
.' bylM1'e!.d. "sdutwrlO_Typr ..J
,. ~w.ldlifeHDuill?ilcKlo
___aa_aa_______a~~.;__________
,
\
:....-._________a______
,
Wedrds , ~ lYe r:>MdN r.to " :
Mul~~rdlYel.efts.bjrcttDJ
h::v'SlOnI ol Otwlq:ment , 'MIdife Valle ,.+
and~VMeIYe~
,
\
\
I _.---.
- .'f-:-:::-'.'-------.-----.--..---
I
\
~-----_.._.----_.._--_.._..---
\
\
L..,_,__..__,_,.____,_____,.__.
~
Connecticut
Cl
Valley Design Guidelines
EXLmNG CONDmONS NEW DEVELOPMENT (Co_Ucm.I)
I..uMw1E TrfIIIdII". V.II., Type: Si-.M 1'..11,.........1: Dft.m.I
I..aMMc Deolryr......T_.... T_...~{Reloc:IlUM
LIl~ FWd, w.n.a.d,'", n..trr. u.: "AaafH_
l/tItltln: NeT_W.ter...s-w LIl~ FrwaupANROl'f___....Roecl
Z-Iq: 14cft MI... 158' rr..&qt
_(1)
O'Neill Propm)"
~-:--:~
"
Plan of Site C After Conventional Development
Connecticut Valley Design Guidelines
It
~
~
I
;:iI
J
:=I
~
t:::I
'::::&
':::;
-
r, )
::a
:::I
::I
Figure 13
23
-
. '...'
----'
I
/
tr
c~,
),'li!---.. "".........eo-
:=:-'
!
L--
,
,
i.
I
I
,
~'---"
'~
I
I
i
i
\
i
I
--"I
,
I
I ,I
" _,-----, t-"",..."""",.eo- \
L-\, --- >\,.J' ~,--_.I
: ~" , ' ,-,,< ,." ~.::,~..t"\,
\ ---..--..----;:: .'. ~""}.~~___.:~".~':'_ i
\-..--. _.--~ \\ ~oI':lXo.~o.eiJ!dRftrrittmo:., _
. nAlllao.5O'~8I.tfer(~Thrnwa::'~
\ r--- - .--.-----":.\ HIIW. Restriaed I.M1d Is lftMd II) ~ 1&'m1l''- f
, \, \, \' ,'" r.'P-, c-.-.__ \
... - __ onPri'lwf(fttf:SlindIORMnIit \
M:n- m. RetnIiN... ~ '\ 1;, .~\.....:::-. - ~~~~ ~ br .
l.nlledP'aluM.u.u. , . ...._......--
~,..~,.,;;,:;-;tt. I J;....\ \; '1'
w.""",___", \ ""-1'
lDt8d~. .. ..-\-...
, v'" '" \
l. \ ._.__..--..- \, \
'\--------- ~ \
I r
~ !
-~ .
i:
\
\
i
i
I
/
" '
, I
.'""..,t
....~" , , ,.1
"r
,/
j'
__..----"\ I
---- \ :'
,...--.. ---.~\ I
~~.;:-- -.-4-,,,,,,,-,,,,;;;
7.. .--- '~.lAo.UIts
" _ --1""<""'" Ca')"'O" 00-.
" --1---'--'.--i ./
.--- - \ I
\, .~ \.1'
-' ---.-"\ ;'
-. - ----' "
,\ __'- \t;
, -- .......-l.
-t --" .
<..' ..--.- \
--..- ,-
\
\
\
!
-FtwftrEdge(~
lI~u~
--
I
./
""...."~I
... '---c-.-.__
~ an~-.11JO'1kIfw.za..
\
,)
"""'lIIdSt.,..with
~~-~.
i
'\ /"~'-"-"-"-"-'--__1 et~~w
- ~ "- o..w',
j -~I', ' ./- -"- 'Caomon........_ i ~_ ::~
{. ~-r-'_I'_ ::.~~~ '/ .:
\ ~~=::,' "', . r-'r--,~' ~>
'\ _....4"-"-_..."'!, ! 'I ~ ..! _', r ,,- .-.i It
~~S.1.I.Db~u...=:!:.. . j
: ~ ~~-- I . .. --" ,:
t.Md.Arl "~Oft~ _ "
\ ~~=..~r_ : / . ~' II ! tI ..',./ ,_,:..--..--..--..--..--. ,~
Lu_u_..____..JL.. ..-1. ..L. ..L.
Connecticut Valley Design Guidelines
C 2 txISnNG COl'fDmONS NEW HVI:LOPMENT (er..tM)
l..udl.w. T.....",V.u., Tn- ....,....,..................
O'Nelllf'TDtMnJ ~-. =~~~ o-.t,I I::t:-':::'~
~:;' ~~~:::...,=.. ~ r:::==.fJ:,.~
1M1"I.DIDfT4nOff ST'aAnGY
Hwz-a.c.: o,..s,.c.(a.w."..,...
...--
s.w. &.p; ::::::::., ~ s..-a,..
OIItwr__ ,...,.....,T...IIIIP-7........,. Ala
_m
:;~~
Plan of Site C After Creative Development
24
The manual notes that standard zoning techniques may actually encourage the creation of
wasteful land use patterns. This approach illustrates many of the advantages of clustering.
Tools for integrating new development into traditional town or rural landscapes are
described. They include site plan review, control of signage, protective development
strategies for riverfronts and lakefronts, protection of farmland and open space, and
managing commercial development along roadways.
--~
/
The approach was developed in Massachusetts. To use the tool, guidelines and
recommendations that are suitable for rural communities in Minnesota are desirable. The
University of Minnesota Design Center for the Urban American Landscape may be ideally
suited to adapt these design concepts for use in Minnesota.
A site plan review process similar to Massachusetts might be employed in Minnesota. In
Massachusetts, the site plan review is conducted as a modified Special Permit (conditional
use permit). Most all buildings and developments other than single or double family
residential units or farm buildings are subject to review. General review criteria
supplemented with more specific design guidelines and performance standards are
employed. A list of items for submittal are provided the applicant in providing the
necessary information. The board may require a bond or performance guarantee to
ensure compliance, and it may suspend any permit or license when work is not performed
as required.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Council's rural area density policy limits the amount of development. The details of
implementation are left to local government. When implemented as a simple, large lot
size recommendation, it wastes land and produces an inefficient land use pattern which
can be costly to provide with services.
2. Cluster zoning, transfer of development rights and other tools described in this report can
provide for a more efficient development pattern and protect agriculture and
environmentally sensitive areas better than large lot zoning. The use of these tools has
been demonstrated either locally or in other parts of the country.
3. The area over which the density standards are computed should be increased to provide
for more flexibility for clustering. Based on the current 1/10 density, 160 acres is an
appropriate maximum area for computing density, as it would limit concentrations of
development at an urban scale that could result in demands for urban level services. If a
density greater than 1/10 is adopted, a smaller area should be considered.
4. The minimum lot size for residential development with on-site waste disposal systems
should be based on Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards, and meet performance
standards recommended in the Council's Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan.
5. The Council should develop educational materials and model ordinances to inform and
help local governments implement cluster zoning, maximum lot size standards,operformance standards, simplified transfer of development rights or acquisition of
C)
')
~ ~~
25
development rights in order to more efficiently accommodate rural area development,
preserve agricultural land and limit environmental impacts.
6.
The Metropolitan Council should consult with the Center for Rural Massachusetts, and
the University of Minnesota Design Center for the Urban American Landscape regarding
the developing of rural design guidelines and establishing a local review process to
introduce design into planning for the rural area. As a first step, a planning forum on this
topic should be held to introduce it and determine the level of local interest.
7.
The Council should review the pros and cons of community sewage treatment facilities to
determine if any changes in policy may be needed to encourage implementation of the
clustering and density policies.
. '
c<,'\}IJ;,,>?,"l^,,
! ,~,.~..~,"LI;'" ..;..~:~.:...
',:.1"" '. '~"
r~'~~:?~
,j~:~\,"'".S:.::::"-
\~~~if;;~7
"I',,<l--,....,',/~':/
I.;.:.tl~~--.;;-.'"
tori
-t-Y-L
./
LA~'-!F QUALITY FOODS
<_J
90 WEST PLATO BOULEVARD
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55107
August 13, 1990
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
(612) 296-5226
Ms. Anne Hurlburt
Metropolitan Council
Mears Park Centre
230 East Fifth Street
SI. Paul, MN 55101
Dear Ms. Hurlburt:
I would like to congradulate the Metropolitan Council for undertaking a re-evaluation of it's rural
area development policies. I have been following this study with great interest, and would like to
offer my comments regarding some of the current discussions taking place.
Under the Metropolitan Council's current policies, the rural area is divided into four districts:
(1) Commercial Agriculture, (2) FreestandiDg_~1Q.WtlLC_er11e~, (3) Rural Centers, and
(4) General Rural Use Area. The current focus of the study is on the General Rural Use District
which is understandable because this district appears to be a catchall district containing everything
not placed in the other three. The General Rural Use District contains viable farm operations
(which should be preserved), unique and sensitive environmental areas, wetlands, general open
space, existing commerciallindustrial areas, existing rural density housing, and transitional areas
planned for urban development.
Each of the districts needs to be evaluated in terms of whether or not they are effectively carrying
out the goals of ~he Metropolitan Council. These basic goals include: (1) Preservation of
agricultural lands, (2) Preservation of wetlands and unique and sensitive environmental areas,
(3) Compact and efficient urban growth, (4) Economic and efficient delivery of services, and (5)
Protection of the environment (land, air and water resources). It is my opinion that the general
rural use district is not effectively accomplishing these goals. The current density policy for this
district which allows one nonfarm dwelling per ten acres (or 2 1/2 acre lots in areas of
noncompliance) is neither preserving agricultural land nor promoting compact efficient urban
development. I also feel that simply changing density limits and/or uses allowed in the district will
not improve it's effectiveness in carrying out the Council's goals.
In order to better implement the goals of the Metropolitan Council, I would like to suggest the
following:
The Council should develop policies and criteria for the preservation of agricultural lands,
unique and sensitive environmental areas and open space. The Department of Agriculture's
Agricultural Land Preservation Program would be willing to assist the Metropolitan Council
in developing policies and criteria for agricultural lands. Based on these policies and
criteria, the Metropolitan Council should determine which areas within the general rural
use district should be preserved. Appropriate areas within this district should then be
placed in the commercial agriculture district with a density limit of one nonfarm dwelling
. per forty acres. It would also be appropriate to create spot commercial agriculture
:J districts (islands) within the general rural use district in order to preserve unique areas.
,~ .. u.___
',U~~~~OTA
""@l.>"'.I
~...._:;'WH
~
1 .
ENJOY THE HIGH QUALITY AND INFINITE VARIETY OF MINNESOTA FOODS
A:-< EQUAL OPPORTUNIn <\\?LOYEK
/
, '.
//
August 13, 1990
Ms. Anne Hurlburt
Page Two
2. In response to calls for relaxed urban development controls in the general rural use
district, the rural centers district could possibly be expanded slightly (or a separarate
district established) to include commercial/industrial areas now in the general rural use
district. This district should include existing commerciallindustrial development and
planned commercial nodes where a limited amount of commercial development is
appropriate such as freeway interchanges. Opening up the general rural use district to
commercial/industrial uses would not be consistent with the goal of promoting compact and
efficient urban development.
3. If items #1 and #2 above were completed, the general rural use district would include
areas planned for urban growth, existing rural residential development, and some open
space/marginal agricultural areas. The general rural use district policies should focus on
encouraging compact urban development for which services can be economically and
efficiently provided while allowing for a diversity in residential development types and
flexibility for the local community. In areas to be eventually served by public sewer and
water, subdivision of the land needs to be planned in a way that will allow for the further
splitting of lots when the services are installed. Local plans should also direct development
to the areas where it is most appropriate and prevent premature growth in other areas. A
, density policy of one nonfarm dwelling per ten acres should not be applied across the board.
Areas to be protected from premature development should perhaps have a density limit of
one nonfarm dwelling per forty acres while developing areas should allow for more
concentrated or clustered development. Development policies for the general rural use
district could be, on a broader scale, developed in a manor similar to how a local community
establishes standards for a planned unit development. Lot sizes can be reduced and densities
increased in certain areas in exchange for protecting open space from premature
development in other areas.
Ideally, the Metropolitan Council's policies should discourage any urban development from occuring
outside the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA). Urban development outside the MUSA is
inconsistent with the goals of preserving agricultural lands, promoting compact efficient urban
growth, and economic and efficient delivery of services. A study-done_fof_the_Department-'of'
Agriculture comparing a fifty unit residential development in three different locations within
Wright County found that the lowest density -rural 'development had the largest net taxloss:tolocali
governm'ent The total cost for public servic3s for the development in the City'of Buffalo 'was ' "
$114.62 per unit greater than the taxes generated versus a deficit of $485.85 and $499.22 per
unit for the two rural developments. If you would like copies of the study for your Council
members, I would be glad to supply them.
There is one more issue I would like to discuss before closing. In the report entitled Housina While
Paoer. dated August 8, 1990, Paul Baltzersen states in the section "Trends in the Rural Housing
Market":
"Although there is a decline in the number of households being formed, rural housing
development could increase if the preference for a rural location grows - possibly brought
about by the perceived desirability for raising children, lower gasoline prices reducing the
cost of travel, a desire to escape what are considered urban problems, more nearby
suburban jobs or improved road access."
-------
,- '\
"- )
,-,\
- ~/
..---
, '
.
-~
..---
August 13, 1990
Ms. Anne Hurlburt
Page Three
Outside of the fact that gasoline prices will probably increase, the flip side is that the increasing
concern of the public about the environment could cause a dramatic decrease in the demand for rural
housing. Once people understand the impacts of rural nonfarm development on our land, water and
air resources as well as energy consumption, support for stronger policies governing rural
nonfarm development will follow.
To cite an example, Waseca COUl~,ty (a pilot county in the State's Agricultural Land Preservation
Program) undertook. an extensive two year planning process resulting in the adoption of a farmland
preservation plan and revised zoning ordinance. During the planning process, the county held
public meetings and involved all the township officials. Between 1978 and 1987, 364 permits
were issued for non-agricultural residential dwellings in rural Waseca County. Since adoption of
the new zoning and subdivision ordinance in January, 1988, the county has not issued any building
permits for nonfarm dwellings in the unincorporated areas of the county.
Although the metropolitan area is much more complex than Waseca County, I think the Metropolitan
Council should capitalize on the current interest in the environment and use this opportunity to
educate the public about the long term environmental consequences and costs of rural nonfarm
development. During the 1970's the Metropolitan Council initiated a public debate on the
preservation of agricultural land which resulted in the adoption of a 1/40 density policy in the
commercial agriculture areas. This policy has now been fairly well accepted, perhaps it is time for
the Metropolitan Council to take another step in preserving our local resources.
I recognize that the Metropolitan Council may be getting pressure from some local units of
government to relax it's' policies for the general rural use district particularly in areas not
containing prime agricultural lands. At first glance, it may appear that development of this land is
not in conflict with the preservation of agricultural land, however, some types of capital intensive
farming such as sod and potato farms and livestock operations have proven profitable in these areas.
Also, the' sandy soils in these areas are often not well suited to urban development which relies on
individual septic systems.
If you have any questions about the comments contained in this letter or if I can be of further
assistance, please feel free to contact me.
Yours truly,
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
V.../M K. ?J~
Douglas K. Wise, Program Administrator
Agricultural Land Preservation
cc: Robert Overby, Metropolitan Council
Paul Burns, Assistant Director, Planning Division, MDA
Jerry Heil, Director, Planning Division,MDA
Jim Nichols, Commissioner, MDA
~
i
,,-J
f!A..) CITY of AN[)OVER
l'';~f,"-::'':f'c:<;- Regular City Council Meeting - September 4, 1990
7:30 P.M.
Call to Order
Resident Forum
Agenda Approval
Approval of Minutes
Discussion Items
1. Kangas variance
2. Woodland Creek Special Use Permit
3. Leet Variance
4. Hidden Creek East 3rd Final plat
5. Award Bid/90-5/Hidden Creek East 3rd
6. Accept Easement/Hidden Creek East 3rd
Staff, Committee, Commission
7. Lower Rum River Permitting procedure
8. Award Bid/Dump Truck
9. Award Bid/88-35/Pressure Control Valve
10. Certify Mowing Charges
11. Grace Lutheran Church Assessments
12. Hire Receptionist/Secretary
13. Special Assessments/Tax Forfeit property
14. R/W Acquisition-88-9, Tulip Street N.W.
15. Siting/N.W. Area Fire station
Non-Discussion Items
16.
17.
18.
Award Bid/90-14/Cedar Crest/Cedar Hills River
Estates
Declare cost/Pumkin City Cleanup
I
Declare Costs/90-14i 90-2
Approval of Claims
Adjourn
, -"
'-J
-J
~_.
-~.,l"'....
fA');
.r\!
\:>,. ,c',
<~'~~"7--~ -':
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE Se;,<-p"',,.r 4.
1 qqO
, -,
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APP,~~~R
NO. Approval of Minutes AGEl A
Admin.
ITEM V. VOlk\\' BI
NO.
BY:
r
The City Council is requested to approve the following minutes:
July 17, 1990 Regular Meeting
July 18, 1990 Special Meeting (Perry absent)
August 7, 1990 Regular Meeting (Elling absent)
August 16, 1990 Special Meeting
August 21, 1990 Regular Meeting
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO
'--/
:J
@""'"
-'il."'"
rj\"""\ ,
'J
..;
I.::;. .-,
"\~~t~"'"__" __~~ ~
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
FOR
Discussion Items
Engineering
ITEM
NO.
1. Kangas Variance
BY:
~
Todd J. Haas
The city Council is requested to review the request of a variance
by David and Michelle Kangas to build a 12' X 14' deck onto their
existing home. The variance request was made due to the
encroachment that will violate the side yard setback of Ordinance
8, Section 6.02.
Mr. Kangas has made a request to the Building Department for a
permit to build a deck and was denied because of the encroachment
into the setback area.
In reviewing the request, research was made by staff to the
preliminary plat (part of the Creekhaven Development) for any
language that would apply to this particular lot. As part of the
preliminary plat resolution (see attachment) the home and driveway
was to be located as far west as possible on the lot to remove it
from the intersection.
The home is located 20 feet from the west property line. The home
should have been built 10 feet of the west property line as
required by the resolution.
The following chart depicts the setback information for this
proposal:
Yard Setback Proposed Setback Required
Front Not applicable 35
Side (Crosstown Drive) 28 35
Rear Not applicable 30
Side (West lot line) 20 (Existing) 10
* 7 foot side ard variance needed.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
,
-~
o
Page Two
Kangas Variance
september 4, 1990
Ordinance #8 allows the citi to grant a variance to the
requirements of the zoning Ordinance if the strict interpretation
of the Ordinance will cause undue hardship to the property owner.
The city Council should review the request using the following
criteria:
1. Does the strict interpretation of the Ordinance cause
practical difficulties and/or unnecessary hardships to the
property owners?
The structure, as regulated by Section 6.02 of Ordinance 8, is
required to have a 35 foot side yard setback to maintain
uniformity with lot adjacent (lot south of Kangas lot). Since
the two homes have been built, Crosstown Drive (used to be
Crosstown Boulevard) has been converted from a County Road to
a City Street (designated as a Municipal State Aid Street).
2. Is the hardship caused by the unique physical features of the
land, including shape or condition of the parcel?
Due to the existing location of the home, a hardship may be
caused from a builder error in locating the home which should
have been built closer to the west lot line.
3. Will the variance. be detrimental to the public welfare?
A line of vision has been established at the 40 foot setback
line. When the street was converted to the City the setback
changed to 35 feet. A 5 foot deck width would be allowed
which may change the line of vision with the home south of the
Kangas lot. An additional 7 feet may affect the line of
vision.
4. Is the variance necessary to allow the property owner the
reasonable use of this property?
I am not convinced the request to allow the property owners to
encroach 7 feet into the setback area should be granted.
~)
A very similar request was made (May, 1989) to the Building
Department by a resident to allow a deck to encroach in the
setback area. The Building Official worked with this property
owner to avoid an encroachment and redesigned it so that the
deck was constructed with a 4 foot wide deck walkway along the
side to the rear of the house (2464 - 136th Lane NW, see
Diagram A attached). From staff review, Kangas' proposal can
be redesigned so that the deck is in the rear.
City Council Options
A. The Andover City Council may recommend approval of the
variance request by David and Michelle Kangas for a 7 foot
side yard variance to allow the construction of a deck on the
property described as Lot 2, Block 2, Creekhaven, Anoka
County, Minnesota.
o
Page Three
Kangas Variance
September 4, 1990
The City Council finds that the proposal meets the mInImum
criteria established in Ordinance 8, Section 6.02 including:
the strict interpretation of the ordinance causes the
hardship; the hardship stems from the unique shape,
topography, or physical features of the land; the variance
will not be detrimental to the public welfare and; the
variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the property.
B. The city Council may recommend denial of the variance
requested by David and Michelle Kangas for a 7 foot side yard
setback variance to allow the construction'of a deck on the
property described as Lot 2, Block 2, Creekhaven, Anoka
County, Minnesota.
The City Council finds that the proposal does not meet the
requirements set forth in Ordinance 8, Section 6.02. The
Council finds that the applicant fails to show a hardship due
to the unique shape or topography of the parcel and the land
owner would not be precluded reasonable use of the property.
C. The City Council may table this item.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends Option B. There are options to reduce the deck
size and construct the majority of the deck on the rear side of
the home.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission unanimously recommends denial of the
variance for a 7 foot side yard setback to encroach in the setback
area for construction of a deck on the property described as Lot
2, Block 2, Creekhaven, Anoka County.
The Commission finds the proposal does not meet the requirements
set forth in Ordinance 8, Section 5.04 and 6.02. The Commission
further finds that the applicant fails to show a hardship due to
the unique shape or topography of the parcel, and the land owner
would not be precluded from reasonable use of the property.
~-)
~~
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE VARIANCE TO ORDINANCE 8, SECTIONS 5.04
AND 6.02 OF DAVID AND MICHELLE KANGAS TO ALLOW FOR A SEVEN FOOT
SIDE YARD ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SETBACK AREA FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
A DECK ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, BLOCK 2, CREEKHAVEN,
ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
WHEREAS, David and Michelle Kangas have requested a variance
to Ordinance 8, Sections 5.04 and 6.02 to allow a 7 foot side
yard encroachment into the setback area; and
WHEREAS, the Andover Planning and zoning Commission reviewed
the request at their August 14, 1990 meeting, and recommended
denial of the request; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the request at their
September 4, 1990 meeting and found that the slope and unique lot
shape do not create a hardship; and
WHEREAS, the hardship is based on the unique physical feature
of the property including topography, shape or condition of the
parcel; and
WHEREAS, strict enforcement of the regulation would not
preclude reasonable use of the property; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Andover denies the variance request of David and Michelle
Kangas to Ordinance 8, Sections 5.04 and 6.02 to allow for a
seven foot side yard encroachment into the setback area for
construction of a deck on the property described as Lot 2, Block
2, Creekhaven, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this
day of
, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
/ ~
~/
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
C)
.~~~~
l~.
~
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304. (612) 755-5100
Property Address ~~~
VARIANCE REQUEST FORM
!c'3.'?+;: Aw A/W - AmioiJu-
Legal Description of Property:
(Fill in whichever is apporpriate):
d...
Block
r2
Addi tion (!rt?~l:I1V..v~n
Lot
Plat Parcel PIN
(If metes and bound~, attach the complete legal)
********************~************************************************
Description of Request J;./Oi-l./) " ';'ke.- -frJ bi<.'/J
(l
de cJ 17ft
(!
,'"IT /'),'{r
of
~f',
{)(If, '(1
I
I~?;"
1N11I"('h
-f.~c.~_s
I
1/,,,,
1.;2. ." X /4/
,
'<:::;1~th<,.,J "'+ ,');,rlf'J
t.n,~~
,
\.J I
Section of Ordinance
Current Zoning
*********************************************************************
Name of AppJ,icant J)o.virf j- M/r.he.//I' k{w/J ,-.;
Address c5:~d;;' 13X-!/, A'le., ;\///0./ - .4hj~,/~ r
, "
Home Phone (j..r::-..\ 757-1. 7SS- Business Phone ((.,1.2..) L):f'rr-qt~,f:~{MI'r,hr'../I,,~
Signature
Date
*********************************************************************
Property Owner (Fee Owner) ('5f1f'>ft'_ (1:5 (/h""r'_
(If different from above)
Address
~)
Home Phone
Business Phone
Signature
Date
*********************************************************************
C:J
, ----
,.-J
VARIANCE
PAGE 2
The following information shall be submitted prior to review by the
City of Andover:
1. A scaled drawing of the property and structures affected
showing: scale, and north arrow; dimensions of the property and
structures; front, side and rear y~rd building setbacks;
adjacent streets; and location and use of existing structures
within 100 feet. '
2. Application Fee: Single Family - $50.00
Other Requests - $75.00
. Date Paid IJ/;'/qO
/ I '
/
~54c~9
Receipt #
CRITERIA FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE
In granting a variance, the City Council shall consider the ad~ice and
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and:
1. If the City Council finds that the request if it will be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance.
2. If it find$ that strict enforcement of this Ordinance will
cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the
individual property under consideration.
3. If it finds that denying the ~equest does riot deny reasonable
use of the property.
4. Eco,nomic considerations shall not ,consti tute an undue hardship
if reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of
the Ordinance.
I .
~)
CAINE a ASSOCIATES
LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
17720 Highway 65 N.E. - H;rm Lake, Minnesota 55304
\
434 - 7646
)".:J -0JOQ
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR:
DESCRIBED AS:
C & H
C-4R4C<"
ABOVf ' FlOOR
,ft-4-tz (-tIS'! S/{4l'
/',1(:Al I N(] S' .. 8!C
\ SlOPf 'REEI.~ 1.11/111/;:0,
, '\" 0,<" 10 .;-P,40:: '.. .If IS"
<J:>c9 ' ~ l'EP'cc~.;,..rlr/f
~\ all/'
<S C:-Oa --<1/ _ c..---'~
'>d~' ~~
. CO vs-... ~...: ",0 ."'-..
I .~........... C"' . /t: ~
.' 1;'0'0 / ~........
II 1..........'~"'q'1.9 I ',~ 0 %~
I. I ,,-<'.;> 00,0 '" \ ~ .'B,
.v / "'..J .\-1. / \/0/ -:cc
1/ / f\J,' '1'" 1-1")CI)
$..'.~ I G.-s> t.l ....., \ ~~\,
~ '1. 1< ~ '/ ".s- I .q
',\3' 'J.. ...'/0.;> , .....~.>
~~ I I. -'... ,.,,:~i::...:r;~) '......... /
., , I I ... .. 'c-.;;( ,
":": ,......, 1;.3 "":Jt'::J .... I,...
...,. ..... . . ........ "-
/ '" ~",o. 1-::"'- L.
~ 0'-"", ..... ... L'J
"'Go ~. I r-'>. i
/ qa.6~ J'~ a ,~., / "0
I ,../''/>. : J
(II <:' / . . ~C' / ~ "0
~./ .~
0'>..... ..-/00,1 I <'
. '. /" - / ~..f...c,/~,..,
"/.__<:>/"q/ _~ /. / ~ '--~ I .
l -?qc>...., ~ / I . \\
'V,~ / ~~
........ ........ O;<,.--;:~, 1~1' ~
........... ,J <<'~ /, . .
........ ........ <:"0co-:>,< I ~
'.......... J f II S \(.
A. /.""" ~
.v<:: 00 . ........ j .
~":;i. Oy .......",...
<9' ....... . ..., r.
~4..- -8 I J \J'
~ JCIOO.O Denotes EXisting Elevation ........ '/
W (io:J.z) Denot~s Proposed Elevation -j -1"10 Z.l
Denotes Direction of
- Propo:sed Surface Drainage vi
Proposed Top of Found. Ell. - 10. 3. '1 .
Proposed Garage Floor El.- 10J.S-
Proposed 8smt.. Floor 'El.;' 96:6
Lot 2, Block 2, CREEKHAVEN,
according to the recorded
plat thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
IOUI
Verify all setback requlreleot!
and proposed bnildlnq eleratlona
for cOlpllance yith all
requireleota before cooatructlon.
~
100. Z ....
~'t:--
I
A
/
/
I
1
/
)
- SCALE: I I;C;" .30 FeET.
o OENOTES 1/7 INCH IROH PIP/! S/!T.
. O/!HOT/!S FOC/NO IRON //tONC/l/ENT. .
8CARIN(;$ SHOWN ARE ASSlIMED.
G Ot::,VOTes trOB AND TACK SET.
';-0
I HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS SC/RYEl', PlAN,
OR REPORT WAS PREPAREO 81" AlE OR IJVOER
SlY OIRECT SC/PERYISroN ANO THAT I AM A
DULY REG/STEREO LAND SI.IRVEtOR tlNOER
THE LAWS 0' THE STArE OF JrlINNE sorA.
100.4- -l-'
I ~C:../ /, 1'. ~ (l ~
. (!)~ U
. OATE ..-:Tlv.'" 3.0, n~REC. NO. IU51
J08 M::l 89-2ZO
SEe. 3 =? 1: ':/? R 74-
I~.'::~:-,. ;U.~~.-\.
".::<7 :.~--*..~... ~
U{~I
Lj.',
i '_1,-:. .
~~\i.
1/ ! fr h-"i! ~~~Ti~:~~;; :;:':.;~
, \- '..1~' y
*~::.~ ',.w.l:1t:IT-
f .~:".' ~ ,..... L--.__
"
.r )
'-~
"
,-
".
i
I
I
!
I
i
I
!
I
r-
I
,
.J
\
..'
.. .
"
'.
.'
.,
,
.,
~:;?:?;\~~~ P~'11i,!r::
,
i
'j
....:...
I.....
- ,.
......-;.:..
:.....,
. '--
./ .~.::-....~,../
....... .
l
I
i
I
STATE"-, ZiP_I
./>"~
; .! ......"
!
I
I
'-'.
".
~~-.
:'r.~:..:~f-'..
...-.:~;?~. . - .
.. .,/-
.~
.......:.'
...
...:::~~.~>: '~:o. .~~.... .
- ..~ :'~;;rI1.>' J
~,-~ ~*_ '4'
":.'-' ..
...,
---<. ~
'.,
,,/
:. ~
........l/
~~~
I
'".
\
\
\
)
J
:
:....:..- "..'
-'
....
\'>.
,
i
;
'. '
/
~.\
.........
"
"
-~......~ .
/
/
/
!
"
'.
,.
.'
-:':::;~. ~'..'
'- ....,
'-~ \
~.'
I
I
j
/
.
I
I
.'
/
,.
./............
.
:.....
.'
,
!
.'
,-
,.
seALS:.I ,;;.
'... .
. ....,.
.'
"-
....
/
;'
i
/
,.
'....
.-,
'-./ '......
/
'.,
i
/1
.'K
':. '1,,"0
....:.7..~7'..
(,.:,',~=,' '::',:
'.
,1ft.
.. \.
'.-
.I
-,:...
{-. ~
~ -~
. ._1
\
r.,.:'I'"
.'....1
.,."
,;
'-,
DATE,
COV~~ .
'.....
-.,
'...,
.........
.~.~.
'.,
i'
"..}
.~} ...
~
.....
* ;..-0-..,.
'...
......,
',.
....
......
,
,.
/
,..
/ '-,
"-
'. . ......
';,/:~i,. .........,
<,:.'..,/
/ ",,'...... . jl."^--.....
, " ..... ~:
./~ ...~; , ).\*!-6' ~:;$...=......:,
. '~'~:.~:... ...:::>;')\"' :~l~::.~" /. .... .<\-;~.:Y:::. ;"
\' "/......... ','. 'L. .'"-J ';
I. " ~"'l -...... ~
..-;:; .' ' - -. ,/ .~. ',/.> .'....::::1/
.~a:7:~..._.-... ......., "i'..,......../;,.Ir,.~..
"... ',~':' ..........., - >.....y
..;-: :.- . . .......;/ , ...
"::':""':.'_.'~,.:~, .,'~.' . ;.c , _
--' ..:-(:>'",~ "
.,,:,'a';:-
..:.:~.~~;:: ..~ .
'. '*-.:;-.,,-..~
l
/'~.
,
",
f
I
I
, -
....,~.-/
....,
.
.--
,,'
i
;'
'.
........':',.
,..
....".
..'
.. "i.~'.; .
-'
.............
.' '.'
. ...... 0":'
..~. ......,...
: ...._-~.:
J
I
"
"
'"
."-':..-.- .:
,'-:-" - .'
I'"'~''''' /
;~ '..~~ ~.~.i /
...... -.. ..~ I
...................J... ~:~~: /
",:"0,";:'1
........,.. I
: :~._.-.1' ;'
-'~...'...y'
". ..~._'.":".
I
.-'
i
I
I
"
/
I
,I
i
/
/
,
...
....
i
.
.
.
/
I
../
/
:
.
~: .~....
.'.J
f
/
.'
!
"
,/j
IUS~ r.HJc,:r:.\lICS ON C OF AI
C'lllols
~
,
rfH,rARED GY
, ,
E: ~ :,. .' .' . r;c;r;,~'':r.r.;:) ','.J i);; I" A. G. . 1_: t::'
C:~:T~..\~ 5T/~7rc."~ GC~'!
~
I
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.RIOl-88
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CREEKHAVEN AS BEING
DEVELOPED BY R & B INVESTMENTS IN SECTION 33-32-24.
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the
Planning and zoning Commission has conducted a public hearing and
reviewed the preliminary plat of Creekhaven; and
WHEREAS, the plat has been reviewed by the Andover Review
'Committee; and
WHEREAS, there was no large amount of negative comments; and
...
WHEREAS, as a result of such hearing and review, the Planning and
zoning Commission recommends approval of the plat siting the
following: 1) that Lot 2, Block 2 shall front on 138th Avenue and the
driveway shall be placed as far to the west as possible to remove 'it
from the intersection; 2) further that the future of Outlot A was
disc~ssed by the Planning Commission and it was the consensus of the
Planning Commission that because the outlot was included to clea~,
title to that parcel, it was considered and allowed as an acceptable
lot within the plat; however, it is not to be interpreted to imply
that this lot would be used for anything other than residential as it
does not meet the non-residential lot size criteria for any non-
residential district in the City of Andover. .
WHEREAS, the City Council is in agreement with the recommendation
of the Planning and zoning Commission.
,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Andover to hereby approve the preliminary plat of Creekhaven with_the
following: 1. Variance for Lot, 1, Block 2 to be allowed to front on
Crosstown Boulevard from Ordinan~e 10 Section 9.02(C); 2. Subject to
park dedication determined by the Andover Park and Recreation
Commission. .
Adopted by the City Council of the City of .Andover this 7th day of
June , 1988 .
CITY OF ANDOVER
. ~.~~r [
Ken Or te- Actlng Mayor
ATTEST:
~) , \ , . J ~ 1
t --- '
'c t"_ (;:--\.;C\ ,/ I'~
'!,~\ .. .
victoria volk - City Clerk
accoruJ.u~ ~u ~u'-- r-'~"""- -- -------
Dashed lines denote drainage and utility easements.
Bench Mark: Top Nut Hyd. at Xavis and 136th Lane N.W. Elev
.
I
,~
'.
Proposed driveway will slope at ~O percent
E920 denotes existing elevation
P921 denotes proposed elevation
other proposed elevations
at top of foundation 883. C?
at .,garage floor 883.5
at lowest floor BtJo. ~
top of curb at driveway 8 n.
Type of House, ~pl;~ e.n.j.r~
= 882.50
883.2
880,2.
at front of house
at rear of House
walkout elevation
at rear of house
Q::
/3 Cs:, T h L 0.. f1 e. IV. f)/.
o
<<'I
. Ea.sf.
77.33 '.
?JO "
0;,' ~'\. - - - ------,
87'.7 ~ .)'. / , 0 ,S
88Of' r ~ I <::l
I I '" ,d I ~
, 10 1'-, ~
I 0--'30' 2"1.' I' ~
I 1
I~
I /~'\
I~f I
I !
I . p I /.;
"' I . /0' I
~ E.& '1. Lf. -
{i ~:5=t
loL______ I ~
'" 7Z .,'t" I
II' '~,.,
to
30()
<.)
~
'-
I
\
,
87&:z..
E. Lj-
cc..s+
/ I
IO~ ,
\ ,
.30
I '~-
I
97.33 .'
~
I heMY ClIttlty Ulat Ulla IUrvIY, plan, or report wu prepartd by me or
under my direct IUper;ialon and that I am a duly "Ii!aterad Und
$urvIYot under the 1~\lI& of thl St&~ of Min~ta I
. ~ ~.h .'l" /' () (j{>., ,< , / ','
\ CltI j-20/-88 RIiNo. '10104
81'1.1-
~
"'.
/
.----
5~~ f b-Yl. P,9;
.s-~/Y1
IS',
Lv,.,~
hou,>e...
11"/ I
~~,;~
--__u___._____
.:J :See Pry}e. 2 do,1
4 O-f rrl [fY10 "~.(.(,,,:,r-~
I,. r
r-' re
in....} 0
e 87:>.8
P 67(,:,,/
~. , Inch equala 40 fMt
o IndiQaw II'Gn Monument
Book
Job No,
'.
/2 LJ8
~).."
:~
, .
ATTACHBENT TO CONTRACT FOR DEED
Sellers obligation to convey title to Purchaser of the following described
property is contingent on Seller aquiring said property without. cost or
expense to Seller, by vacation of said property by the City of Andover.
Thac porcion of Crosstown 8oul.evard Northwest (Anok~ County St~c~ hid
HiC)hw.:.y No. 18) and thae portion of l30th Av.::nul.l Norchwe,;c .:..:Jjc.ininlj
LOt: 1, Block 3, NonTHI/ooDS ADDI'rloH, de:scribed as folloW$:
COffimcncin<] ac che most norcherly corner of ::iilid Loc 1; cllL:l\cc:
Souchc':'::ie~rly alon<] the northca,;cerly lin.:: of said Lot: 1, .:.
d i 5 can c.:. 0 f 1 7 0 f e t:; t tot h to poi n t 0 f b e CJ inn i n g 0 f c II c C Li C C 0 i L.. (I j
co be described; thl.lnce Southeascerly along che soucnl.l.:.~t~r1y
exeension of chl.l Northeasterly line of said Lot 1, .:. di~l.:.nc~ of
30 fec:c; chance Soucheastl.lrly, Southt:;rly and Souehwascerly b
diseancc: of <17.12 ft:et along a c.:.ngl.lnti",l curve co Clle ri(Jht,
having a radius of 30 feet and a central angle of ~O dL:~rL:'::s;
thenc.:. South\~.:.starly, par",ll.::l with the;: Southc:astc..-ly lin" of
s~id Loc 1 to an intersection with the souche",stcrly c:xc.::nsion
of the southwe::iterly line: of said Lot 1; thence Norcl"'cscc:rly
a discanc.:: of 30 feec to thl: most southerly corner of said
Lac 1; thc:nce Norche",sterly, Northerly ",nd Norchwestc:rly along
che southeascerly line of said LOC 1 to the point of beginning.
AJ i
"
. ,-.- /,' //
;( / t-"/'Ld./ ~~;z::r// it!. . ~
Donna L. Green
. '
-;/) . ( #
.~~( )1'1.7)~~/
Dona 1 d M. Roux /
01/ d.l-rJL
Her ert H. Blommel
/)
,'7J
/)
.;':~>-~ #)....
Q
. ~r r
:J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
4 September 1990
Discussion
ITEM 2. 1445- NW Round Lake
NO. Blvd.:SUP for Area
Identification Sian
Planning/Zoning
\\~j
&
~~~~u;:E"
Br/l
BY: d'Arcy Bosell
The Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed the special use permit
request of Woodland Creek Golf Course to erect an Area
Identification sign on the property located at 1445- NW Round
Lake Boulevard (Outlot A, Brandon's Lakeview Estates) at their
regular meeting on August 14, 1990.
It is the recommendation of the Commission that this Special Use
Permit Request be granted.
Attached please find the Planning & Zoning Commission packet
materials, the meeting minutes of August 14, 1990, and a proposed
Resolution for your review and approval.
If you have any questions prior to the meeting, do not hesitate
to contact me.
COUNCIL ACTION
, -"
',~
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
~'\
,-)
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST OF WOODLAND
CREEK GOLF COURSE and A. R. BULLICK TO ERECT AN AREA
IDENTIFICATION SIGN ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS OUTLOT A,
BRANDON'S LAKEVIEW ESTATES.
WHEREAS, Woodland Creek Golf Course and A. R. Bullick have
requested a Special Use Permit for the purpose of erecting an
Area Identification Sign on Outlot A, Brandon's Lakeview Estates,
and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission has reviewed the
request and has determined that said request meets the criteria
of Ordinance No.8, Section 5.03, 7.03 and 8.07; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission finds that the
request will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general
welfare of the Community; it will not cause serious traffic
congestion or hazard; it will not depreciate the surrounding
property values or impair scenic views; and the request is in
harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive
Plan and the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and there was no
opposition to said request; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends t~ the
City Council approval of the Special Use permi~ requested;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Andover hereby .agrees with the recommendation of the
Planning & Zoning Commission to allow for the erection of an Area
Identification Sign on said property; with the following
conditions:
1. There shall be only one (1) sign per development.
2. The maximum square footage of the sign shall be thirty-
two (32 s.f.) square feet.
3. The sign shall meet the setback requirements as set out
in Ordinance No.8, Section 8.07.
4 .
That a Sign Maintenance Agreement be executed which sets
out the details for maintenance for said sign, the form
to be approved by the City Attorney.
:)
.~
Page Two
In Re: Res. No.
4 September 1990
5. That said sign be erected within one (1) year from the
date of the granting of the Special Use Permit; failure
to make significant progress would render the request
null and void.
6. That an annual review by the Staff be made to assure
compliance with the Special Use Permit.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 4th
day of September, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
James E. Elling, Mayor
Victoria Volk, City Clerk
'-)
~
0"'\1
..i'\, J
""'"'-.... ':""-
........'"-.-.("'>.,......J
CITY of ANDOVER
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
August 14, 1990 MINUTES
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and
Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Rebecca
Pease on August 14, 1990, 7:31 p.m., at the Andover City Hall,
1685 Crosstown Boulevard, N.W., Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners Present: Bill Coleman, Steve Jonak, Bev Jovanovich,
Randal:Peek~ and Wayne Vistad
Commissioners Absent: Ron Feriis
Others Present: d'Arcy Bosell, City Zoning Administrator;
Todd Haas, Assistant City Engineer; and
John Bills, Chairman, Equestrian Council
REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Commission reviewed the minutes of the Planning and Zoning
Commission held on July 24, 1990.
( MOTION by Coleman, and seconded by Jonak to approve the Minutes
of the July 24,1990 Meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
1445X N.W. ROUND LAKE BOULEVARD, . WOODLAND CREEK SPECIAL USE
PERMIT: AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGN--PUBLIC HEARING
This is a request for a Special Use Permit for Woodland Creek
Golf Course to erect an area identification sign fo~ the purpose
of directing the public to the golf course, which is located
east of Round Lake Boulevard on South Coon Creek Drive.
Bosell reviewed the request with the Commission and stated
the request meets the criteria set forth in Ordinance No.8,
Sections 3.02, 7.03 and 8.07. She also stated that a maintenance
agreement needs to be drawn up for review by the City Attorney
to govern malntenance of the sign and sign area as to mowing,
visual quality! etc.
The City received inquiries from two residents concerned about.
the lecation~ of the sign when trying to turn onto Round
Lake Boulevard. Bosell stated that both parties seemed satisfied
that the sign would not pose a hazard to visibility after
their questions were answered.
:J
?lanning & Zoning Commission Minutes
\ August 14, 1990
'-J Page -2-
~
PUBLIC HEARING
At this time the Public Hearing portion of the meeting was
opened. There were no other COmments,
MOTION by Vistad and seconded by Coleman to close the Public
Hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
It was requested that the height of the sign be included the
maintenance agreement drawn up by the City Attorney.
MOTION by Vistad and seconded by Peek that the Andover Planning
and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of
the Special Use permit by Woodland Creek Golf Course and
A. R. Bullick to erect an area identification sign on the
property located at approximately 1445X N.W. Round Lake
Boulevard, Outlot A, Branson's Lakeview Estates, for the purpose
of directing the public to the golf course, which is located east
of Round Lake Boulevard on South Coon Creek Drive.
The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety
and general welfare of the community. It will not cause serious
traffic congestions or hazards. It will not seriously depreciate
surrounding property values, and it is in harmony with the
general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and
Comprehensive Plan.
r..
~,~.
A Public Hearing was held and there were slight questions from
previous people that were not here, but there was generally no
,opposition.
It is the recommendation that this Special Use Permit does comply
with Ordinance No.8, Section 7.03 concerning area use permit of
all projects of five acres or more. This should also comply with
Ordinance No.8, Section 8.07, Subsection (~) in that:
The area for development is larger than five acres;
(1)
(2 )
(3 )
There shall be only one sign per development;
/ /
The maximum square footage of .the sign is
32 square feet in area;
(4 )
The sign is located 10 feet away from any property
line.
This permit is subject to significant
::.J one year, or this permit becomes null
progress being made within
and void.
~
( :'_)
'-./
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 14, 1990'
Page -3-
This Special Use Permit is subject to a one year review.
"
I
i
This recommendation is subject to a signed maintenance agreement
to be drawn up by the City Attorney and signed by all parties.
Motion carried unanimously. This item will go to the City
Council on September 4, 1990.
ORDINANCE NO. 23 AMENDMENT DISCUSSION ,CONTINUED. KEEPING OF
EQUINES (HORSES AND MULES)
Bosell stated she had not received a response back from Attorney
Hawkins as of this date.
She also relayed comments from Pat Schroeder expressing concern
about a lack of public land to ride horses and Ms. Schroder's
opinion in favor of riding on privately owned land with written
permission of the owner.
Equestrian Council Chairperson John Bills stated that he would
like to open the meeting up to comments at this time, since he
had no further information to relay since the last Planning and
Zoning Commission Meeting.
DON EVELAND. 14744 Crosstown Boulevard said in retrospect after
the last meeting that he was not really comfortable with limits
of no more than 2 equines per acre for over five acres of land.
He was also uncomfortable with requiring permits as discussed at
the last meeting.
ERNIE TRETTEL. 1412 Andover Boulevard was very concerned about
the requirements for permits and was concerned about a
grandfather clause for existing horse owners.
He stated that he had ~alled 25 surrounding cities and only one
city, Victoria, required a permit to keep horses. Only two of the
cities he called do not allow horses. Seven of the cities had no
limit and no permit requirements and regulated by maintenance
iaws.
1/
He also stated that raising horses is an agricultural pursuit and
cannot be compared to home occupations or dog kennels. He felt
that requiring a permit would be putting an undue burden on
people who meet all of the other criteria, and ,the regulation
should be done through maintenance ordinances.
<J
8
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE 14 Auqust 1990
AGENDA ITEM ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR
3. 1445- NW Round Lake Bl. AGENDA
Woodland Creek SUP: Area Planning/Zoning ~~
Identification Sign
Public Hearing BY: d'Arcy Bosell ~ / BY:
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to consider the
Special Use Permit request of Woodland Creek Golf Course to erect
an Area Identification Sign on the property located at
approximately 1445- NW Round Lake Boulevard (Outlot A, Brandon's
Lakeview Estates) for the purpose of directing the public to the
golf course which is located east of Round Lake Boulevard on
South Coon Creek Drive. The Special Use Permit request has been
joined by A. R. Bullick who is the property owner of the lot on
which the sign is proposed to be located.
Ordinance No.8, Section 7.03 Special Uses - In All Districts,
provides that an Area Identification is permitted in all projects
of five (5 a.) acres or more. Section 3.02 of Ordinance No.8
provides a definition of an Area Identification Sign and states:
"A free-standing sign which identifies the name of a neighborhood
... or any combination of the above, could be termed an area."
Section 8.07 regulates the signs themslves and at Section B(3)
Sign Size and Placement Standards, it provides the details as to
where the sign can be located. This sign will not be
illuminated. The sign must be set back ten (10') feet from any.
street right-of-way line and five (5') feet from any residential
(zoned) property line. It also provides that "signs on vacant
lots shall be permitted in accordance with these regulations."
Section D(l)h gives the specific details for the
erection of an Area Identification sign and provides more
specifically that:
(1) The area for development is "larger than five (5 a.)
acres.
( 2 )
The golf course was part of a Planned Unit Development
presented to the City and not only is the golf course
larger than five (5 a.) acres, the entire plat is much
larger than five (5 a.) acres.
There shall be only one (1) sign per development.
,--.."
<J
( 3 )
This section would restrict the number of signs allowed
as Area Identification Signs to one (1). The request
before you would allow for that one (1) sign. .No
additional signs would be allowed.
The maximum square footage of the sign is thirty-two (32
s.f.) square feet in area.
~
Page Two
In Re: 1445- NW Round Lake Boulevard
Woodland Creek SUP: Area Identification Sign
14 August 1990
The proposed sign is to be two-sided and the sign area
per side is 28.91 square feet. The sign area is within
the size allowed under this Ordinance.
(4) The sign is located ten (10') feet from any property
line.
The location of the sign is proposed to be ten (lOt)
feet from the right-of-way of Round Lake Boulevard. It
must also be ten (10') feet from the property line to
the north. This section of the Ordinance is more
restrictive and thus, the ten (10') foot dimension will
prevail.
A public hearing notice has been published in the Anoka Union and
notices have been mailed to property owners within 350' of the
property. To date, no response has been received.
Based on the information above and the Ordinance, it is the
recommendation of Staff that the Special Use Permit be granted.
It should be further noted that a Sign Agreement be prepared and
presented to the City Attorney for review which would govern
maintenance of the sign and sign area as to mowing, visual
quality, etc. The SUP should have an annual review also. And to
be consistent, the notation of the sunset clause has been
included. This is not necessary but does provide a gentle
reminder to the applicant that they have a year within which to
take action and if they fail to do so, the request becomes null
and void. -
If all is in order, this matter would be presented to the City
Council on September 4, 1990.
~
""
'--J
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN SPULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Property Address /44.><x. WUU~LAr(F iSL~1
Legal Description of Property:
(Fill in whichever is apporpriate):
LotOLTrW-r A Block Addition ]i2.e~s LA(E\JIEIAJ &r./.J.7L-$:,
Plrif metes an~a~~~;dS, attachP~~e ~m~~e~~1~g1~OS-~
*********************************************************************
Reason for Request -:C~FOIZ.MATlOtJ S'6N buz.e"-i", "'Cj to
~t)O~'@t..J~ CReel'- Golf 00\)R~e...
Section of Ordinance 1~()~'P <6'.01_ Current Zoning 1<. ~
*********************************************************************
Name of
Applicant ,^,OO~LANO C2EEK Golf C.OO~e.'
3Z.00 Soo-th COOt) Uf!et<.. 'DR \ \Je. A ~bc)"'t1L
~2~- OSl!]
Date ., 2-
Address
M~ .s--S""3D4
Horne Phone~ Busipess Phone
Signature ~
*********************************************************************
Property Owner (Fee Owner)
(If different from above)
A .K. B()LL, ~k
c..oofIJ KAPIlJ5 H N &5" 4~~ -Af>T' d.ZI (
Phone 4 'J.- 7 -I -:l ~ 7
Date 7~/?--fl'l
,~-)
Address \\'15 TUUP St.
Horne Phone 421- l2..lI1 Business
Signature (J2 Jl-L j MJ~~~~
,
*********************************************************************
.~
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
PAGE 2
Attach a scaled drawing of the property and structures affected
I - showing: scale and north arrow; dimensions of the property and
structures; front, side and rear yard building setbacks; adjacent
streets; and location and use of existing structures within 100 feet.
'''\
, -.../
The names and addresses of all property owners within 350 feet of the
subje~t property must also be provided.
Application Fee: $150.00
Filing Fee: $10.00
Amended Special Use Permit Fee: $50.00
Date Paid '1a3-90
Receipt # ,'563qs-
CRITERIA FOR GRANTING SPECIAL USE PERMITS
In granting a special use permit, the City Council shall consider the
advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and:
the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals
and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands,
existing and anticipatep traffic conditions including parking
facilities on adjacent streets and lands,
the effect on values of property and scenic views in the
surrounding area, and
the effect of the proposed use on th€ Comprehensive Plan.
~J
:~
June 26, 1990
TO Whom It Hay Concern,
It is hereby agreed that Woodland Development Corporation
will be solely responsible for the maintenance of said sign
located on Lot A ., Block n/a , Subdivision.* Woodland does
hereby agree and fully expects to maintain the sign. and the
surrounding ground around it within three feet of any
direction of the sign.
Sincerely,
^
)
*Outlot A, Brandon's Lakeview Estates (1445- NW Round Lake
Boulevard)
;jr <:? "7.
S. <?
~. ../
.I.>. .I
$0+
.y
o
. .
, ,.
'. .'~.
Q
,r
N870Q6'Og.7"E- - -
- 200,00
"li~
E ,,'"
osemenl 0 .
.... ~
o Q ~
'o'? 'l. '9'6' .
0,9 V ^ s-.
.. /( ',/.
~ ~
"'6' . ct 0 <? +
S- '^ ~
:?' (,. / /~ '
""-:> ',' ~/
...-. /. :.> ~
-i- "... ,(') So
.? <.y '0
6>,9 ~ $)
'0,.9 o.rt't
"'"
?,
Drainage
&
U t ilily
---
2..8r06'OS"W
_ _ _ .:...2,32.44
---'--
~... '
\ti /
/:: 0'
~/ ," 'J.>" ~,
~ ;O~.~,O~' O'
.;, C> ~o'q,.\
l>- / e .'
"",' / ",'<' " ~ "
v ' ,,' -?'-# '\. 0'
// .,.,., 0 0 o,e
/ / ^ ~ ",-.:f. 0' ,.<'
/ / <0" . y..\; ,.' . . .
./ . <v OJ _ -;.. '" ~ ~ 0 · ,,' ':,. ". ,::::.., ;
/ ,; '" .... ''a..OV 0"/ f;:-'" .,./:::.
/~ . >,: . 0 V .h . ..-..:.... .'
"~.' '" .... '" Q' '. .h /.;.,
/ .. ~ l' . ":<' 7:":"
/ ;{ V 0 ,,0 {.'.j:.,.... ,::,~.:.
/ ~ 0' 0.... T 'l,o" ..... .... '.,":::
,p . ~o .;' ..,....
/ rC> / 0":\ C-. .... '" "J ,\" '. /.
.' ,. / .,.0 -.} > .'. "'. .'.
'" / .:;..' i;' . if ..1 ..v' ',' '..,:.., '" ...,'
r / .,0"" V ~.... ,>' ........ .:...'
,<:J'//', / ~,,<o ~' ^o . ~ q,.00 .... :..... ?-:'"
y._ Q ,0 ~o" V vY 0"" '
~~, .QQ / o.,~., 0 dO .,0;:' ... ,,:'
ob .,'?;,,~~," ,';'-,>0:," ~ ..,. -.t'.... ..br ..,.::/:/
OON .. <{p ..' .0 ' .<' .....
'00 .. . (f · ...' ."
(0 00 tn' /... ~ ,~ <>.. .......
. '. ",.;' .... " .
~" .M / 0 ~ ,,'" ,.' '';..'' .....y.
'. "'" .' e / ".' " '. r:'"
, ' 86~'-- ,!)."'I W ",'7". 0 ",'" ~ ' . ...... .
:' ~ r.Q~' of ' "~,,," '. . ..' /.-:::..:
_ ) ,.. V .. .
"',. "0." ....:.-.
. ..' .'
4. 'v 0
~.. ''';:: 5,."" · ./
.. D
_,' . ~ed
7so ~
..,' ~ / ..'
_U'h'~/Y ,
.:........
....::..
,'. .....
--
....
.... ..
. .',
....
r ~l "tII
-i
.'
Note:
Not to
scale
"-
"
" oS' .
. '6':
'-.,"IS'. ~
~s-. 7~
,""0
, .
,,{'
4
"
So
yr
I
i
i
I
~I
H
o
'"
..
o
o
Z
WoodlanoCreek ~
GOLF COURSE
i'tl WOODLAND ~REEK I
- p'::" -~. ,'h" q
~ [I - GOLf touR5f I
E ... to' !"'b.!! d
~ lL:~~~=-::: 0
- L\~ EAST Ou ~ :/3" I
~ 154000:.) c..fEE~ .DR Jf 323 a~\i} 17S5-2IlJ2
;)' 'h." I
I
!
I
i
I
,
Z02>LS ~ InCH8
y. Z.
4 I <03.0 1'D7"Al., ~ IJJQ1e.:s
3200 South Coon Creek Drive
Andover, Minnesota 55304
(612) 323-0517
'0
tv I /I II
~ I
ij f
i I
~
!
~
I
1
j
,
j
~
OOUBLE SI~S .
,
i
1
I
j
~
~J
~
/" .,J
. ~~: <t
-- ~~ .: - .
~CO
:\lajcstic
Oalis
/.
o
''::.'~'.';>;;:'''''''':~~';'''.
.., "',
H 'i
[~ .~
':'~>, S
~:>--.., ,rj.-;l
..tt:~::.~-:::~"""
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N,W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning & Zoning Commission will
hold a public hearing on Tuesday, August 14, 1990, at 7:30 pm or
as soon thereafter as the agenda allows, at 1685 NW Crosstown
Boulevard, for the purpose of considering the Special Use Permit
Request of Woodland Creek Golf Course to erect an informational
sign on the property located at 144-- NW Round Lake Boulevard
(Outlot A, Brandon's Lakeview Estates).
All proponents and opponents will be heard at such hearing and
written responses will also be received.
A copy of the application and proposed location will be available
at Andover City Hall for review prior to said meeting.
~L
Victoria Vol~City
Clerk
Publication dates:
August 3, 1990
August 10, 1990
'J
Q
()
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE
4 September 1990
ITEM
NO.
3. 15357 NW Nightingal
Street:Variance (Leet)
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Planning/Zoning i)~
BY: d'Arcy Bosell ~
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Discussion
The Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on August
14, 1990, reviewed the variance request of Carol and Randy Leet
to construct a horse barn closer to their residence than allowed
under Ordinance No.8, Section 8.19(F). The request is to place
the barn approximately eighty (80') feet from their residence as
opposed to the one hundred (100') feet required by the Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 23, Section l(d) also requires that the structure
be at least one hundred (100') feet from any occupied residence.
It is the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission that
the request be denied as there is no hardship demonstrated
pursuant to Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04.
Attached please find the Planning & Zoning Commission packet
materials, the meeting minutes of August 14, 1990, and a proposed
Resolution for your review and adoption.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
:~ TO
SECOND BY
()
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE VARIANCE REQUEST OF CAROL AND RANDY LEET
TO CONSTRUCT A HORSE BARN CLOSER TO THEIR RESIDENCE THAN ALLOWED
BY ORDINANCE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15357 NW NIGHTINGALE
STREET.
WHEREAS, Carol and Randy Leet have requested a variance to
construct a horse barn eighty (80') feet from their residence;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed this
request pursuant to Ordinance No.8, Section 5~04 and Section
8 . 19 ( F); and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission finds that the
request does not meet the criteria of hardship as set out in
Section 5.04 and recommends that this request be denied;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the
Planning & Zoning Commiission and finds that:
1. the request does not meet the hardship criteria set out
in Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04 in that there are no
circumstances unique to the individual property to cause
such a hardship, and
2. the request would not be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the Ordinance, and
3. denial of the variance will not constitute an undue
hardship as there is reasonable use of the land still
allowed. .
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 4th
day of September, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
James E. Elling, Mayor
Victoria Volk, City Clerk
~)
Andover Planning & Zoning Commission
('\ August 14, 1990
IV Page -6-
(-
Haas stated that staff does not feel this request meets the
criteria for a variance in that there are options to reduce the
deck size and/or construct the majority of the deck on the rear
side of the home.
MOTION by Coleman and seconded by Vistad that the Andover
Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council
denial of the variance request by David and Michelle Kangas for a
seven foot side yard setback variance to allow for the
construction of a deck on the property described as Lot 2,
Block 2, Creekhaven Addition, Anoka County~
, .
The Commission finds the proposal does not meet the requirements
set forth in Ordinance No.8, Sections 5.04 and 6.02. They
further find that the applicant fails to show a hardship due to
the unique shape or topography of the parcel, and the landowner
would not be precluded from reasonable use of the property.
Motion carried unanimously. This item will go before the City
Council on September 4, 1990.
15357 NIGHTINGALE STREET N.W. (LEET) VARIANCE SETBACK FROM
RESIDENCE FOR BARN
G."
.~. ........
-<~'
Bosell stated that ,this is a request to consider a variance to
allow Carol and Randy Leetto place a barn approximately 80 feet
from their residence as opposed to the 100 feet required by the
Ordinance. The Leets have indicated that placing.the structure
at the 100 foot mark would cause them undue hardship in that
their property is very low at this point and would require a
s~bstantial amount of fill.
They are also concerned that with the addition of the fill
material, it may affect the drainage onto adjacent properties.
Carol Leet stated that she feels they would not need to do any
grading if the barn was placed 80 feet from the house.
Haas stated that he and Bosell made a physical inspection of the
property. It is his opinion that there would be only minimal
grading required at the 100 foot site, and that there would also
be minimal grading required at the 80 foot site.
MOTION by Vis tad and seconded by Jovanovich that the Andover
Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council
denial of the variance request by Carol and Randy Leetat 15357
closer to their residence.than allowed under Ordinance No.8,
Section 8.19(F).
~
:")
,-- )
.. j
I '-
Andover Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 14, 1990
Page -7- ~
The request is to place the barn approximately 80 feet from their
residence as opposed to the 100 feet required by the Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 23, Section l(D), also requires the structure be at
least 100 feet from any occupied structure.
Under Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04, the hardship in granting a
variance has to do with the characteristics of the land and not
of. the property owner. Under Subsection (D) also, economical
considerations should not be constituted an undue hardship if the
reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of the
Ordinance.
Assistant City Engineer Todd Haas has made a visual inspection of
the property; and based on his measurements and site inspection,
the barn could be placed at the 100 foot mark with very little
difficulty. He also further noted that either location would
need grading to be done prior to construction of the barn. In
his opinion, there is no hardship issue associated with this
request.
Mot~on carried unanimously. This item will go before the City
Council on September 4, 1990.
ORDINANCE NO. 29 DISCUSSION CONTINUED. DISEASED TREE ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT
Bosell stated that Ray Sowada is on vacation.
MOTION by Coleman and seconded by Jonak to table this agenda
item.
OTHER BUSINESS
Bosell stated that they are continuing the interviews for a new
City Planner and have narrowed the field down to three
applicants.
There being no further business on the approved agenda,
Chairperson Pease declared the meeting adjourned at 11:33 p.m.
"
.'
Respectfully submitted,
~~ :::~J4
/~) Recording Secretary
I
f '
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE 14 August 1990
AGENDA ITEM ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR
AGENDA
6. 15357 NW Nightingale St ~
Variance: Setback from Planning/Zoning
Residence for Barn ~LJ
BY: d'Arcy Bosell BY: .
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to consider the
Variance request of Carol and Randy Leet at 15357 NW Nightingale
street to allow them to construct a horse barn closer to their
residence than allowed under Ordinance No.8, Section 8.19(F).
The request is to place the barn approximately eighty (80')feet
from their residence as opposed to the one hundred (100') feet
required by the Ordinance. Ordinance No. 23, Section l(d) also
requires that the structure be at least one hundred (100') feet
from any occupied residence.
The Leets have indicated that placing the structure at the 100'
mark would cause them undue hardship in that their property is
very low at this point and would require a substantial amount of
fill. The concern was also expressed that with the addition of
the fill material, it may effect the drainage onto adjacent
properties.
Section 5.04 of Ordinance No.8 provides the criteria for
consideration of a Variance and states specifically that "where
there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in any
way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this
Ordinance, an appeal can be made and a variance granted. The
hardships or difficulties must have to do with the
characteristics of the land and not the property owner."
Subsection (0) further provides that "the city Council may grant
the variance if it will be in keeping with the spirit and intent
of this Ordinance and if it finds that strict enforcement of this
Ordinance will cause undue hardship ~ecause of circumstances
unique to the individual property under consideration. Economic
considerations shall not constitute an undue hardship if
reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of the
Ordinance."
..
The Planning & zoning Commission must answer the following
questions in making its recommendation:
1. Will the granting of the variance be in keeping with the
spirit and intent of the Ordinance?
This setback provision of the Ordinance is found under the
title of "Other Nuisance Characteristics". and would lead one
,)
o
Page Two
In Re: 15357 NW Nightingale Street
Variance Request
14 August 1990
to believe that because of some inherent difficulties
associated with the raising of animals other than
domestic, special consideration should be made to separate
this use from occupied residences, whether that of the
applicant or adjacent property owners.
This particular property is very rural in nature and is
bounded on all sides by various uses including a large
agricultural enterprise to the south, horses to the west and
north and vacant land to the east.
The Equestrian Council, in proposing changes to Ordinance No.
23, maintained the 100' separation. It may be assumed that
there was some rationale for maintaining that separation.
2. If the Variance is denied, such denial will cause undue
hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual
property under consideration.
Todd Haas, Assistant City Engineer, has made a visual
inspection of the property and based on his measurements and
site inspection, the barn can be placed at the 100' mark with
very little difficulty. He felt that there would need to be
a branch from one tree removed. He further noted that in
either location there would need to be grading done prior to
the construction of the barn. It is his opinion that there
are no hardship issues associated with this request.
Based on the information provided above, it is the recommendation
of staff that this Variance request be denied as it does not meet
the criteria of Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04. .
This matter, if concluded at this meeting, will be forwarded on
to the City Council for action on September 4, 1990.
,~
'J
:)
>
.....
J
"
.=1
"'" -
, '1-..... .,
,ij
...1.J
',,:-
, .)
. ~~-
_0.>',,> "'-..
'~~
-
\R
.~ ~
~~
t l:>
'" '"
~ '!) '!)
~"T\iIf)NI.J.H'9IH
~
~
C5l6'
Qlt>:S1
C\J
9PQ#C\J
0212
(TJ
C\J
0'21
%Zl~
W&~lilil
~
\~~ '
~ 1
~ ~ -
c.f...t- ,
a:
. ~~-J ~
.o-<C :i
~~ZUJ:
~-5__58'1
o
1:13MO.1. l:t3.1.\fM. i/~J ~
SljJOM O!lqnd
'l/uonelS aJ!:1 S9LI >
Ii:l\3\ ~
.
~~
-
~
"bi
~ \\
...., ;>
ril
<>
"
~
cl
!i\
'"
-;''':l- ~
~ I:::: ...", "-- 0;
il: ! ~ 1 ~/1 E '" ~ ~
USI .. 1ft11.J I \. ~ ... ~ ~"> t'- i ~
....,.,~.J- q ~ O'~'!ll.
~ ~~; '" ~ r,....-r.'-\t3$<~It<>t; """-' ~~_ s".
~ / U } ~ ~ ...A.I S ....... lpj 91-r W~t:z _ ~ :r :t
t~~'""~ ~~~~~~1Ol
v,y;J ...... "'t ~ ~ $-;" ~I l2rl S.'tlllSo1 ~I S2~
.....~;: ~ ;."" ',,.,, "t.~ 61.,., "" brl:o'f ~ ti40I
~ ,~ "" ~ "'t.:::-: ~ oe,"" lt~ ..... r
.,1,\ ....::.. ~_~~.JO~~ I~ ~~~ ..
..~W 't z: ~ L~ :':;;SI~'.:7Jj/~ i2<Sl~~J..'" ".- Q
":tf&W' ~ ~~!! 97S1 'Z~ N$ili!:/SI "2lQ O.r ~ D
1ffj( .. I"~"""",,,,>J -1.,
':3' 6#J<f ....]1:.... :-t'Es, K~, "'w': ~SI ~I ZZI;ol. ~(.,/:y <,
~ ... ... ::/r ..~ .. <L - if I "\.~
;rHSl~$~ :0': ;I'.~I -".sS/~I~f' h'S1 ~I ~
~ fl.' ~N JS ~7c)v5' ~ I~I 4 't'"x:..(z.~ r;;;
l1~~:u.s ..,
.... ~j;:;;:tt\.\ JM; ~ ~ .*/!I~I~ ,?l lCWcI
NO
I -
UUGJ.~
L<Z'
b'lil
lib"ll
'%
cu'
( 0}
o ::z. ~
~
~o
;0
:l:
ffiu
>cn
O::E
Ow
Z..J
<(w
OC9~
'" /I~ ~ .
;! .
a: . ~
~ :t ~
.
..
- ~
~ V ~
a- "
> 0%", ~... 2' ~
bioI :t
l -~ "" I 0'" I
UbI OHI
I,,_~ -
~
91 "<Ill -I)=,
IUU
"C1^"1Ii
l):l
or
.,,"%1
I~I r-
eD
1/2C\J
9",,1
.12'
~
~ oX;;
O~
'21,
~
0;;
-
-
~
.
~
~
<l3'l1
~
-,
I ""'u
~
~
~
gIll
f--
"""
-
9Hl
~
~
m
~
~
~
~!:~ ~
:L'!> "
~ (~" ~
, OS,! ~
~ .~I--$-~
z. -i ;:?
i:11'V1.J.11~ 0
o N
,,,, I ( E ~
NN\OJ...CSO:al:>
f
......
o
SJ
"
"""'Z
"..,,,,
()
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
Property Address
\6'~s'l
VARIANCE REQUEST FORM
60 ~~-+\r-, c::!S\~ ~~ AJ W
~ OI.~~.
Legal Description of Property:
(Fill in whichever is apporpriate):
Lot
Block
Addition
Plat Parcel PIN
(If metes and bounds, attach the complete legal)
*********************************************************************
Description of Request W<:. ~l'r'\ro,p +" 'a,,;\& c.. ~r%2-"co..r-(\
'90 ka:\- ~\"''^^ 4e.. (\pw-e-rl- re.s'\~..p (0\), 0'""''') ~CD.!)c.,e
'\ ^ "'("~ +r., VlAPE/A:- ~_ \(")(j ~o\- or&\^~~ ~~~ \"'''IJ\~
~\O\c-e.- ~ b,)\\~~^~ \^ ~9_ \<'>\~_~ ~A 0('\ l'J,?r ~orr'i-~
Specific Hardship lo6'o~"",?~v-. ~
Section of Ordinance 68, ~~.6?lqif)Current Zoning
d ~ c:f<!.-. I cd)
,
*********************************************************************
Name of Applicant 0o.co\ ~ ~^~+
Address \~~S fJ fV~~,,~ ~)L...)
Home Phone ~IJ.O'6'95' Business Phone (r..,.\) %:LJ-6-8'~~:2
Signature (\~ ..p. loD~ Date '6' h .~ n
*********************************************************************
Property Owner (Fee Owner)
(If different from above)
~
Address
J
Home Phone
Business Phone
Signature
Date
*********************************************************************
C)
i
)
VARIANCE
PAGE 2
The following information shall be submitted prior to review by the
City of Andover:
1. A scaled drawing of the property and structures affected
showing: scale and north arrow; dimensions of the property and
structures; front, side and rear yard building setbacks;
adjacent streets; and location and use of existing structures
within 100 feet.
2. Application Fee: Single Family - $50.00
other Requests - $75.00
Date Paid 8-r.Jfo-C)L'>
Receipt #
~-<1b~
CRITERIA FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE
In granting a variance, the City Council shall consider the advice and
recommendation of the Planning and zoning Commission and:
1. If the City Council finds that the request if it will be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance.
2. If it finds that strict enforcement of this Ordinance will
cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the
individual property under consideration.
3. If it finds that denying the request does not deny reasonable
use of the property.
4. Economic considerations shall not constitute an undue hardship
if reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of
the Ordinance.
l:Xl .
~ ~
r )~
\..()
<;) ~
V) Vi
~ h.
C) ;c:
~ ~
h. ~
~ ~
)) ~
~ ~
~ ~
h. '1
V)
~ ~
~ ~
I::i ~
~
'1
~
~
...
'"
~
<>
I~
~ ~ 1\::-
\
K
~
,~
~
~
,-t<
~
1\
0 Q
~
~ 1"-
C) ~
~ .....
Vi ~
~ ~
II
~ ~
~ ()
~ ~
~ I'lj
~ :-t
~
~
:'1
.;
~t)t::o""
;:;~...~~
,.."C~~~
"''''i:1'':;; .
~"',,()...
fJ)~..,~"
~~~~~
..,,,,~l.f)~
~ (:) ~ "b ""C
,." .... =tr..,
'"'):~ ~~
~~~~~
'1 l..,.,~
"''''~''i!:
() ~. .,"
~""'~.....~
"'..~<::
~;:;..,fWt~
~~.....~~
,." ~..""l:
~~~p
1.""t t3~
, "'.. ';:-~
'.
~
-..j
J...
;.)
t
;
(
~
"
~. '"
,1\ ~
~ ,~~
1 "
\:\.
,~ IS
~ 11)(
f\
I'l
,I'l
~
~
\
~
(AIVUriA (A.J. IiW r ff/ W f"LA I ivc
NQ/O
'\\
l\j
,-COUNTY
,
\ 50"00 '/S 'E:-
~. "GM- us 00 ,/ ,/. . h'E'// "" '.?2
45'5.1717/1. Q 1 --_" -hI' Z/S. 02. -. No //1'e, /"'- .J~c..
4.;rS.CJO~ ~\ 5.?WOiJ.E,f NE,uT//'I/"'AL----"E
D J ...\1 215'- 02 -1_ \ 17" VL7......
Ii ,,) '" I
, :lrul~ll.
I /.~ -~
Cl .'-
I "c~ C)
I ~';-l - ~'cs.. .~
I . - ~. :.r~
'0' -;;,
I D'~- ~ ~~
I $-(; ~ ~,
:3 ---"/;~~! '", ~4V~
l -/~tJtJ' ~ v -i-
~ i-a--
~ ~ ;~~
~ -l> 0_ -i'~_:J
-X'I-I-
'\ 1;_
1:
~;~
~~
\>(t> "')
")
ROAD
~0,
.~ ~
.~ !
P I
'{ :
~
~
\ri
,'J
~
10~.,.
f\ .... "-
Il,~~
\!'I\lj
11.1'~
I ~l\3"
I ~. () I::i
?IS',OO -- .., ~ C>
\l';o.J .
\ 50.ZIZO'W, ,~ I.I.l ~
~ J C>IJI
~
s::> l)
. ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~.
~
..
<\
~ U\ I
~tX)~
~ (J) "
'l.Yi'"
,\l'
""0
(j D
lli
I
I
/1
,
, :
,
, 1Y'0"zt'zo 'E.
ZI5.00 0'/
,
I
~
?'
!'II
1
J
,J
~
IS'
V,
I
2/S,00 -.~,
#,0" 2/'217 ~
'-...a~//../
Mi?; E7y !/d~ 4-:/:'-
A/t::/~ 2/'P/?'::"::-
,')
,_I
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NQ 4. Hidden Creek East
?
Engineering
BY:
The City Council is requested to approve the final plat for Hidden
Creek East 3rd Addition final plat.
The final plat is in compliance with the preliminary plat.
It is recommended that the plat be approved subject to the
following:
1. The City Attorney presenting a favorable title opinion.
2. Security to cover legal, engineering, street sign and
installation costs to be determined by the City Engineer.
3. The developer escrow for the uncompleted grading of the site
which is to be determined by the City Engineer or if the
site is completed, a letter from the developer's engineer
that lots and streets are graded according to the grading
plan submitted and approved by the city.
4. The final plat not to be signed by the Mayor or Clerk until
there is an executed Development Contract, escrow paid (15%
of the total costs for the improvements fot the property
{streets, utilities, etc.}) and a contract for the
improvements awarded.
5. Street light costs to be paid to Anoka Electric Cooperative.
Costs to be determined by Anoka Electric Cooperative.
6. Revised preliminary plat and grading plan if needed by the
City.
7. Park dedication as required by the Park and Recreation
Commission.
MOTION BY
"-
I
.j TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
..~
'-./
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF HIDDEN CREEK EAST 3RD
ADDITION AS BEING DEVELOPED BY GOOD VALUE HOMES IN SECTION
34-32-24.
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat of
Hidden Creek East 3rd Addition; and
WHEREAS, the developer is responsible to obtain all permits
from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, Coon Creek Watershed
District or any other agency that is interested in the site.
WHEREAS, the developer has presented the final plat of Hidden
Creek East 3rd Addition; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed such plat for
conformance with the preliminary plat; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Andover to hereby approve the final plat of Hidden Creek
East 3rd Addition contingent upon receipt of the following:
1. The City Attorney presenting a favorable title opinion.
2. Security to cover legal, engineering, street sign and
installation costs as determined by the City Engineer.
3. The developer escrow for the uncompleted grading of the
site which is to be determined by the City Engineer or if
the site is completed, a letter from the developer's
engineer and/or surveyor that lots and streets are graded
according to the grading plan submitted and approved by
the City.
4. The final plat not to be signed by the Mayor or Clerk
until there is an executed Development Contract, escrow
paid (15% of the total costs for the improvements for the
property (streets, utilities, etc.}) and a contract for
the improvements awarded.
5. Street light costs to be paid to Anoka Electric
Cooperative.
6. Revised grading plan if needed by the City.
:J
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED citing the following:
':J
1. Park dedication as required by Park and Recreation
Commission.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this
day of
, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
o
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Engineering
..p~
APPROthED FOR
AGENDA
.
ITEM
NO.5. Award Bid/90-5/
Hidden Creek E
BY:
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution accepting
and awarding contract for the improvement of project 90-5 for
watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and streets with concrete
curb and gutter in the area of Hidden Creek East 3rd Addition.
The bid opening is scheduled for Tuesday, 10:00 A.M., September 4,
1990. Bid information will be handed out at the meeting Tuesday
evening.
MOTION BY
:.J TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
~-\
~
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
IMPROVEMENT OF PROJECT NO. 90-5 FOR WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER,
STORM SEWER AND STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER CONSTRUCTION
IN THE AREA OF HIDDEN CREEK EAST 3RD ADDITION
WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids as set out in
Council Resolution No. 108-90, dated August 7 , 19 90 , bids were
received, opened and tabulated according to law with results as
follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Andover to hereby accept the bids as shown to indicate
as being the apparent low bidder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TO HEREBY direct the Mayor and City Clerk
to enter into a contract with in the
amount of for construction of the
improvements; and direct the City Clerk to return to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that'the deposit of the
successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until
the contract has been executed and bond requirements met.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the
City Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19 , with Councilmen
voting in favor of
the resolution, and Councilmen
voting
against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Engineering
~
BY:
ITEM
NQ 6. Accept Easement/
Hi
BY:
The city Council is requested to accept the Quit Claim Deed which
gives the City an easement on the unplatted part of the
development of Hidden Creek East 3rd Addition for a watermain
loop. See attached drawing showing location.
MOTION BY
:,J TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
'~)
'-j
~AOljSTt\ \I\\~~ \ ~
\I\~L
=
i5
<D
ell
-.I
en CJl .:. u. N
UPLANDER Sf NW
=+-
&:
ro
s
(5 <D CD -.I '"
(..ol
.I> '"
IV
"
<;
~
'"
~
'^
..,.~
= N (;j ~ (;
i
I
'>I
'>I
"" ell
:l. <D
I
t>
< IV -.I
IT! -
Z -
~
I N
,
I c:;;
I
I l>
THRUSH ST. NW
IN
u:.
t
...:
(\'
~
'"
'-" .I>
'"
;'
!!! o..~
c.!
~ -.!
"...
!t
~:
co
.
l:l:
IV
IV
C>l
~
-
-yo
~
-.I;
,-,
\.J
G(""""~U..'D.
. I' I'tt}~~ ~ :~f
." - 'It J(1'.;,; . _ ,.1"
......... "\ -ro'"' .. . ~'..'P~~'
.-r\"I5;'1..~'" 'W~"""'"~ 'TI.'" J""~N""
'-'. lv. r.! .i:l'""
~~~/ " "I 6 , _ ..Jrl.,~... Ii !1~.'"
,."., 'I'"(P)M. E-'~"-"
J~ 11 "J'" . :'~;~";.'
,,!J.. i~ .. ..u ..~
I
August 17, 1990
Mr. Todd Haas
Asst. City Engineer
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd.
Andover,MN 55304
Re: Hidden Creek East Third Add?tion
Dear Mr. Haas,
~~
I have enclosed the Quit Claim Deed granting an easement
to the City of Andover for drainage and utilities. The
e a s e m.e n tis n e c e s s a r y for the wa t e r m a i n 1 0 0 pre qui red for
the development of Hidden Creek Third Addition.
:~)
. 'I) \:^' ! l1 1.( "'.j! ", P'lf . . P"':;';.~(~n:t1 BIIII,!:,," . 1.160 9:lrtl L.al~~ N.r., BI;llU('. r.tN 55,1 :t'.", :l':~5 . ~7t...p'-: ~.I" '} \, 'f!
\
\
Q"II (;1.110\ 1)0:0..1.
CU~p.I.t1Dn 10 Col'1loullo...
Form No. 31-M.
,1,,1., Il,,,, '" .I""" '1,..1,.
1>1;11 III '''I.' Un;l", on ('"1' '"~. ,Ill, jll!! . !~I~"'k. (Ih' \~~l'(I_I_:;.:1
'lCbts 3J nbcntu rc, )f Il.M Ihi'.......17th.................. day ol......August................, 19..90..
b.twun ...................... .....GQQQ...yal.u~...H9m~s ......Inc.................................. .............................. .............................. .....
I .
it cor'poration under the laW8 of the Slate (l1...........M;L.I.1D_~.~9.ta....h...
..............................,..................Gi,I;Y....Qt..l\n..d..<>Y'lL........................................................... . ,.................................. ...................... ............................
a corporati.JJn under the law. of th-e State of......,......MJ.n.n~.s.Qt.a......
party of the ~r.C(md part, I
I '
mitnr~~rllJ. ' ThaHh. .aid party of Ih. fird part. in conrilkration of Ih. sum of
.'Of)~...P9..\.l~t;.,..~mJ...9,l;h~t;,..g.9.<>d....9.m;I..y~.l\l!!QI e...c.oos.ic;je/;:i\Upo::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::c:::::::::::::::::::::- DO LLA RS.
to it in hand paid by t1~ .aid party 01 t1~ .econd part, the receipt wh.ereof i6 hereby aclcnou:ledd,-d,
dot'-8 lurtCby arant, Bar.tain, Quitclairn, and Cant'ey unto the said party of the second pad, it, 'tLCUSlorl
and a5"i(ns, FOI'eller, all the t,'ad.. ......__ or parceL... .". a/land lyint and bdnt in t1~ County o/......~!]9.~~._
... ..... and Stale ol.Alinnesota. de.cribrd al follow., lo-wit1 .
~)
I
u..., party a/the /il'st part, and
m.1
A 20.00 foot wide eas~ment foe deainage and utility pueposes
ovee, undee, and aceoss the Southwest Quaetee .of the Southwest
Quactec of sectioh 34, 'l'uwlIship 32, Rdnye 24, AnoKa County,
Minnesota. The cente~line of said easement is desc~ibed as
fDllDWS:
CDmmencing at the NDrtheast CDenee of Lot 2, BIDck 1. HIDDEN
CREEK EAST SECOND ADDITION. accDeding to the plat .of reeDed
thereDf. in said AnDka County: thence West 57.98 feet alDng
the North line .of said LDt 2. BIDCk 1: thence Noeth 167.13
feet tD the point .of beginning of the centeelinetD be
desceibed: thence East 247.98 feet and said centee1ine theee
te~minating. I
\
l!ro n)nue nub to il)olb IlJr ~nl11e. TodeU,,( wilh all U<< hu.ditamenl. and appurlmanc," I"'r...
unto l}(~lon~int or in anywist' ap,,('.rlalhin~, to ale ..aid party of th~ ,(cond part, it. ,tucessor, and ani/1M,
Forn'er.
o
'J
3111 t!tr~lhl1ol1!, Nlbcrror. T'" ,aid firsl paTty lun cau.'J.d Ihe..
pr(unts to be executt.d in. it! corporate nam.e by it........y.!.C;.~..................
P,'uuunt txadxDtX..................................M....................a nd i16 corpQrat~ .eal to
b. "'reunlo afll.ud Ih. day and y.ar fir'I above written.
...IE!"..,......................................
By.....,
I I,.....Y.i,!".El,..................Pr...id."t
II'"...................................................,
.._.h_._.____._____._._..___. ....----------
I
I
I
I
~"
I"
i.
,
~J
,)
Cou,ntyof
~tnte of .fflinnesota,
Anoka
}."
The fOTC~()in!! instrument. H"a.~ (J('kTlow(n/d,/'t1 h'lorr 711('
Ihi.... .1Zt.l1. day of.
"y.
,~l<~l/lff.
of
ft..
.John R,.. .!'et"cson..
4N,HII
August..
,I,'} 90.
..v~ce....President:.
lIIIU lit till. A';I :"II. 1111" OF UI I 1<.1 JI Olt A<;ENTI
I"HII 01' '''linK 1111 A(;INI'; 1111F. OF OFUU-R OR AGENT)
Good Value.Homes, Inc.
1"...~\1 (II' f 11111'11..\ 110" Af-KNUW1.IIU;ISt;)
;:z~"~.r;;;."'"""'
C'irG"...n;u: OF rf.lI.S0!f TAl(IN(: ^,..kNOWI.r.I)CMEN rl
Mi.nnesot:a
..,...;~~... . ....... "':':'~:"OJlrc)It;.~'j~;'~)"
~~.."... lA-VONNA C. NEWSTROM
:~~ NOTARV PUBLIC_MINNEl!IOTA
'l.~j;.~.t" ANOKA COUNTY
t.4., Commlnl(lll {oD;'''' JAN. 1. t99Z
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY
GooQ_Y~~l!~_ Barnes, _Ioc ~_n_.__ ____
_11-6-9 -93c(k~ane._N. E-,-':::~'_ __
Blaine. Minnesota 554~jf"'"
~
~
~
!
~
0=
~ .g
~.
O~
=
"
o
U
....
'"""
~3
......l
ci U
>;
o
:3
.
f-<~
._=
g ~ ~
hl OU
o
I-
"
-E !:!
o "
u '"
u w
"" t:
>. t:
~ t;f,
o
u"O
'0 ~
~ ~
(5.lit
.-^-
'~ .2':;
~ i::
~ :.:::.,
t r.:::
c.-
C
.::::: a::
c
~
- ,
, ~
'" ~
.2-
- ,
~ ~
~~
~::>
~ .~ '!'
t .:::::
\
\
~
~
,
-
;;:
..:i "'=
o ':;::..::::
C ... i::'-
e.c '::> to ~
t S. ~
c '-
';; ""-'
c ~
~ t
~ ~
t ~ '.....
~ - ~ }J~
: [ .
'"
~
:::. -. '?
Notacy. !,ublic::...
(Tlfll! LIlt ..'l..:"I""I
;:; ~
~
c
~
h
~
.: ~
~ ~
:~
~
Ii ~ .g
~
r;:
'I ~
'I 0:::- ~
I' C
:f~
II..... t
II ~ ~.
'I;.. -
~
.-
-
- ~
'0-
~ ~~
~~
c c
~ c
"'-'"
..
t;
,
~
,
-c
~
..e ~
''''' q
.::;
'"
-.
-
~
;;:
~
o .
'-
'-
;:;
~C-I
.. ~
"
I" .~
I:: .:::
I,~ ~
Ii: ~.<;
,.;:; t ...
~l::---' ~::
"
l:
.'"
-:
I
i
I
.J
I
I
I
I
.,
.,
"
~
""
'"
"l
, '\
'......./
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NQ Staff, Committee,
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NQ 7. Lower Rum River
Permittin Procedure
BY:
James E. Schrantz
FOR
Engineering
The City Council is requested to review and comment on the
Permitting Procedures proposed by the Lower Rum River Water
Management Organization.
The WMO is asking each city to review and comment on the procedure
before the WMO adopts it as part of the plan.
We are proposing that each city will, through their Finance
Department, handle the permit fee and escrow with the developer.
This way the WMO doesn't have to have a financial staff to
administer the permit process. The WMO is working on the permit
itself and will finalize the procedure after we receive the
comments from the member cities.
Also enclosed are some thoughts of the WMO's attorney.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
"
'-..J TO
SECOND BY
To
cc
. .
0/1-/96
o
I
LOWER RUM RIVER WMO
ALTERNATIVE PERMITTING PROCEDURE
I.
Project sponsor submits the proposed project to the City
II.
City determines review authority
A. LRRWMO reviews the following proposals
1. Municipal/government sponsored projects
2. Projects directly affecting Class A or Class Bwater resources
3. All industrial and commercial development of greater than *~~
acres ......
4. All projects requiring a variance from the WMO's standards
B.
City
1.
2.
reviews all other proposals including
Residential developments
Industrial and commercial development
the following
of less than ~acres
III. Coordination
A. LRRWMO returns the proposals with any requirements to the City for
administration ,
B. City submits on a monthly basis a summary of all new permits issued
to the LRRWMO
C. City submits on a monthly basis a summary of in~I'e.c.f/~11...5
IV. Construction Observation - City visits the projects on a monthly basis
to ensure compliance with construction erosion control regulations
V. Final Review - Upon proj ect completion City verifies that all water
quality structures and requirements have been incorporated in the
project.
N~ Ie)
J:::er;. .' \{ e
/2cG/()'v'~ 8/k/~5
(I)
(21 t:>kl-l d.tt!. ddeJ f;7V>'fJ<.<;/YJt--(PJ/lV- Crn-fV"2/~) )).?
. ..."
oJ
LAW OF'F'ICES
WURST, PEARSON, LARSON: UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
Q
,.. ~A"'TN""'.f04I~ .NCLUDI....G ."'O,....SlOH....L ......OCI.TIO.....
1100 F'IRST B....NK PL....CE WEST
A_ THO""lAS WURST. P."".
CURTIS A. PEARSON. P.""
,J....MES D. LARSON, P."".
THO....AS r. UNOERWOOD, P."".
CRAIG M. MERTZ
ROGER "-'. f'ELLOWS
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TlE.l.IE.PHONE:
CeiIO!:) 33e .AZOO
July 23, 1990
,.....)( NU..-4BER
(612) 33e-2e25
r~~.--_
'"[j re.:: r"':'; r:....~ '1" I' . "", .--,
~f~~.~~Jl~1
Mr. James Schrantz
Chairman, Lower Rum River WMO
1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W.
Andover, MN 55304
Re: Meeting of July 18
Dear Jim:
You invited me to your meeting on July 18, 1990, along with Tim
Kelly of the Coon Rapids Watershed District. Discussions were held
regarding a couple of alternative proposals' that are before the Commission.
It is my understanding that two members of the Commission are in favor of
local municipal control and you and one other member believe it is necessary
to have a more central organizational control working with the member
ci ties. After the meeting, you and I spent a considerable amount of time
discussing what had been said and the views of the various parties. I
thought I would try to put on paper some of those thoughts.
I
I think with the materials presented to you by BWSR on June 20th and
the legislation which has been adopted, the Lower Rum Ri ver WMO will have to
become more active in the management of the watershed.' Tim Kelly indicated
that the Coon Creek administration and operating budget is somewhere around
$240,000. Most of the other watersheds I am working with are making
substantial expenditures in testing water quality, managing the watershed,
and administering the permit process within the watershed. The Lower Rum
River adopted a budget of $12,000 for next year which will provide for very
limited work by your WMO. Your Commissioners may need more assistance from
staff on the engineering, legal, and administrative side of management. I
would think that a modification of the two alternatives could be prepared
and adopted which would take into account your views and the views of the
other Commissioners. The Commission has to realize that by state law and
the Joint Powers Agreement, it has the responsibility for managing water
quality and water quantity in the watershed.
.~
The Lower Rum is very fortunate in that you seem to have minimal
quanti ty problems. It does not appear you need large capi tal expendi tures
for improvements in handliug the quantity of water in the watershed. It
does appear from our conversations that not much solid consideration or
regulations have been established to govern the water quality of runoff
waters entering the Rum River. We talked about concerns relating to the
water which will be carried off parking lots at major shopping centers and
off of streets, etc. without any controls. It appears to me that this may
~.
WURST. PEARSON. LARSON. UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
o
have been the method of operation in the past, but water quality is so
important that the Commission should not miss opportuni ties to maintain or
improve water quality. The developers should build into their plans a
system which will reduce or remove many of the pollutants picked up on the
parking lots at shopping centers, etc. before those waters are allowed into
the Rum River. It also appears that without a central engineering review
and without a procedure to administer common standards throughout the
watershed, we can end up with each of the cities using different standards
or interpreting water regulations differently. Many watersheds place the
major responsibility for field work, permi t issuance, etc. on the
communi ty, but the Commissions are reviewing plans in accordance wi th their
established cr iter ia to see that all of the communi ties are requir ing the
same protection levels in the quantity and quality areas. Most of the
communities are doing extensive testing of water quality so they can
establish a benchmark to see if it is getting better or worse or what kinds
of problems exist in the watershed. I think Mr. Kelly and engineers who are
specialists in water matters have pointed out that it is a question,of time
before the federal Clean Water Act :is going to require cities to get federal
permits before waters are released into the river. If the Commission takes
an active role at this time and is protective of the water quality, there
will be fewer problems for future Commissioners to try to correct. It also
is more efficient to build in protective measures rather than to go back and
retrofit the problem.
Your Joint Powers Agreement does not meet the existing state law.
I pointed out to the Commission when'I first reviewed it that materials had
been left out to the point where your cost formula is incomplete. Everyone
seemed to think this would not matter because they knew what the intention
of the Commissioners was in drafting the document. It would appear to me
that this should be considered by the Commission so that you can budget for
revising the Joint Powers Agreement so it complies with existing law and
corrects the major defects in the original document.
Jim, this is kind of an overall review of things that were discussed
and some of the things that you and I discussed in our discussions after the
meeting. I hope you don't find this presumptuous, but it sounds as if there
are going to be some changes ..>n the Commission in the near future, and the
next Commissioners should have a sound foundation on which to build if they
are going to go forward to implement the watershed plan and to review and
administer the local plans. In my opinion some additional work now will
save you from state or Metro Council interference in the future. It is .
obvious that some agencies are very desirous of obtaining the
responsibility for managing the waters in the metropolitan area, and the
biggest argument they have is tha~ the local groups are acting
.-.J
o
,)
WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
irresponsibly. I hope this is of some aid and assistance during your
discussions next month.
Sincerely, ~
(2;
./'/ ~ ~~
C' ~pears n ~
Attorney, Lower Rum River
Watershed Management
Commission
CAP:lh
cc: Commissioners
Ms. Mava Mikkonen
'.
C)
)
'--/
I
LOWER RUM RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
Flood Plain Shoreland Erosion & Water Stormwater Wetland
Regulation Protection Sediment Quality Managment Jurisdiction
Ordinance Control Program Plan Ordinances
ANDOVER
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
ANOKA Y N INN Y N
I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COON RAPIDS Y Y INN Y N I
--------------------------------.---.----------------------------------
RAMSEY Y Y N N Y Y I
Y - Existing regulation adequate
N - regulations need to be adopted.
(ifJ".'
. ) ~'"'"
'... -'.:
. .~ c
~~'~~O'...~-'
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
DATE
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Commi ttee,
Commission
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Public Works
ITEM
No.8. Award Bid/
Dump Truck
Frank Stone
BY: Superintendent
~
y~ FOR
1/
Bids were opened Wednesday, August 29, 1990 at 10:00 A.M. in
Andover's Council Chambers. There were five bids received; two
were from the same bidder, Hoglund Bus Company.
Below are the bids as received:
Hoglund Bus Company 1991 International
Monticello, MN Model 4900 $61,243.66
Hoglund Bus Company 1991 International
Monticello, MN Model 2554 $61,999.34
Boyer Ford
Minneapolis, MN 1991 Ford $62,626.00
Lakeland Ford
Lakeland, MN 1991 Ford $62,335.65
North Star Int'l. 1991 International
2554 $62,196.71
Hoglund Bus Company of Monticello is low bidder with both of their
1991 International Models 4900 and 2554. Jim Schrantz and I went
to the Anoka County Highway Department and talked with Bill
Foster. The County has many of both models of these International
trucks but, they have problems with the Model 4900 as the
radiators are not big enough to cool the engine causing
overheating, plus a few other problems. They have had no problems
with the Model 2554 which seems to be very close to the size truck
we are using.
I would recommend we accept the bid from Hoglund Bus Company for
Model 2554 at a price of $61,999.34.
continued
COUNCIL ACTION
J
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
" '\
'-...)
Page Two
Award Bid/Dump Truck
September 4, 1990
They are using a J-Craft dump body and hoist with Falls plow and
sander. J-Craft and Falls were the low equipment supplier on all
bids.
All bids included 6-cylinder diesel engines which are the prime
engine (a lot of power and good performance). The 3208 Cat engine
we have in all our other trucks does not meet emission control
standards, from what I am told so, they were not bid by any
dealer. Just about everybody has been getting the 6-cylinder and
are happy with the performance.
This truck would not be delivered until February or March of 1991
due to the back up at the Falls Plow Company so, we will probably
be using one contract truck again this winter.
I will not be at the Council meeting but Jim Schrantz will be able
to answer any questions.
My estimate for this bid was $55,000. The truck prices are going
up. I hope you will accept this bid. We sure are in need of
another unit.
:-)
r
~
,.
i..
,.
~. .
~ .
r
L
t
~'
t
t\
L.
fr >
( ':
r ;
r~~'r
i..
it
, ;}..
f"
.' ,
l'e. . oJ.
~- :<.;;'\~~ .~.
t';t
f<':'~:
r::!.J
t:;;.
r.',,;'
l'.'
~ . !
~" ~...
~\~;:'$";.::
~ ..
[;0
ri<:.~'
~,>. ..
t"",..'
.:;:.-y:{
-, .l _:.~:
>~~>
~-)
(90",
..rA
\.
-~
~~''"
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Committee,
Commission
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
No.9. Award Bid/88-35/
Pressure Control Valve
Engineering () ~
BY: James E. sc~ntz
:Sff"
/
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution awarding
the bid for the pressure control valve to control the pressure in
the two water towers.
The bids will be received on September 4th and the results
presented at the Council meeting.
The bids were ordered and the idea of going back to the two level
system was discussed at the June 5, 1990 Council meeting.
COUNCIL ACTION
)
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
C)
:J
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANORA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
IMPROVEMENT OF PROJECT NO. 88-35 FOR WATER TOWER II AND
APPURTENANCES CONSTRUCTION.
WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids as set out in
Council Motion at the Council meeting of June 5 , 19 90 , bids
were received, opened and tabulated according to law wi~esults as
follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Andover to hereby accept the bids as shown to indicate
as being the apparent low bidder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TO HEREBY direct the Mayor and City Clerk
to enter into a contract with in the
amount of for construction of the
improvements; and direct the City Clerk to return to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the
successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until
the contract has been executed and bond requirements met.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
City Council at a
and adopted by the
meeting this
day of
, 19 , with Councilmen
voting in favor of
voting
the resolution, and Councilmen
against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CJ
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE September 4. 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Committee, Comm
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NO. Certify Mowing Charges
10.
BY:
V. Vo1k lb.
APPROVED FOR
AGEND~
J/IJ
Administration
The City Council is requested to adopt the attached resolution
certifying mowing charges to the taxes for the property known as
PIN 13 32 24 13 0004.
Despite several attempts to contact the property owner to mow the
weeds at the property located at 341 Constance Boulevard, no
response was received. Therefore, Public Works personnel mowed
the weeds on June 1, 1990 and again on June 26, 1990.
The total amount to be certified is $362.00.
COUNCIL ACTION
,'J
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NO. R
A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING TO THE 1991 TAXES, CHARGES FOR MOWING
WEEDS AT 341 CONSTANCE BOULEVARD N.W., ANDOVER, MN (PIN
13 32 24 13 0004).
WHEREAS, a complaint was received regarding weeds growing at
341 Constance Boulevard N.W.; and
WHEREAS, several attempts were made to contact the property
owner to mow said weeds; and
WHEREAS, no response was received from the property owner
and Public works proceeded to mow the weeds on June 1, 1990 and
again on June 26, 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Andover to certify to the 1991 taxes the amount of
$362.00 for mowing charges on the property known as PIN
13 32 24 13 0004.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria volk - City Clerk
o
~)
@"""
"-'4_,:"__
rj\.'''. ,
.'j
.:
'\:>.. /'.'/
.~~~--,. -:;.
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE September 4, 1990
Staff. Committee. Comm.
Finance
Howard D. Koolick~
BY: Finance Director
APP. R~~~ FOA
ACi0
B,I
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NQ 11. Grace Lutheran
Church Assessments
REQUEST
The Andover City Council is requested to ~eview and discuss the
information concerning the assessments on Grace Lutheran Church.
BACKGROUND
At the last City Council meeting, information was requested about
the assessments for the church and the payment history.
The church is owner of two parcels. One parcel (PIN Number 32 32
24 42 0007) has one assessment against it, the other (PIN Number
32 32 24 42 0009) has two assessments levied against it. The
amounts originally levied are $26,881.20 for the first parcel and
$36,711.69 and $150.00 for the second parcel. All three
assessments were 20 year assessments with the final payment being
in 2001.
The next page shows a history of the billings and payments for the
three assessments.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
"-
) TO
SECOND BY
0 32 32 24 42 0007 32 32 24 42 0009
$26,881.20 $36,711,69 $150.00
Year Date Date Date Date Date Date
Due Billed Paid Billed Paid Billed Paid
1982 9-7-82 3-21-83 9-7"':82 3-21-83 9-7-82 3-21-83
1983 11-15-83 10-29-84 11-15-83 10-29-84 11-15-83 10-29-84
1984 3-30-84 12-15-86 3-30-84 12-15-86 3-30-84 12-15-86
8-31-84 8-31-84 8-31-84
1985 4-15-85 1-12-88 4-15-85 4-10-90 4-15-85 1-12-88
8-30-85 8-30-85 8-30-85
1986 11-20-86 11-20-86 11-20-86 1-12-88
1987 3-26-87 3-26-87 3-26-87 1-12-88
1988 8-25-88 8-25-88 8-25-88 4-10-90
1989 5-26-89 5-26-89 5-26-89 4-10-90
1990 7-6-90 7-6-90 7-6-9{) ...........,-,
In 1984 and 1985, the church was billed in two installments. All
billings for the eight years shown above have included delinquent
amounts as of the date of billing. For example, the billing sent on
11-20-86 included the installments from 1986, 1985 and 1984.
Total amounts due are as follows:
32 32 24 42 0007 32 32 24 42 0009
Year Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest
1986 650.73 2,658.88 888.70 3,631.23
1987 720.35 2,589.26 983.79 3,536.14
1988 797.44 2,512.17 1,089.05 3,430.88
1989 882.77 2,426.84 1,205.58 3,314.35
1990 977.22 2,332,39 1,334.58 3,185.35 5.44 13.02
Total 4,028.51 12,519.54 5,501.70 17,097.95 5.44 13.02
)
\
I discussed these amounts with Pastor steve McKinley. He indicated
that the former Mayor (and City Council, I believe) said the church
should pay as they are able and the City would carry the rest on their
books until the church paid off the entire balance. He did not
remember a discussion about paying only the interest. (As the amounts
above show, in the early years of these assessments, the majority of
the payment is interest.) I .
;')
',----J
-....
,
,
'./
The church treasurer, Clint Tronsil, Pastor McKinley and I met to
discuss these assessments. Both are aware of the problem and along
with the church board do consider these assessments important. Mr.
Tronsil indicated that a check for the 1986 assessment on PIN 32 32 24
42 0007 would be paid in September. He also thought that since the
church just refinanced their mortgage at a lower rate, that they may
be able to pay the other 1986 assessment before year end.
I explained the City Council's concern over the growing delinquency
and outlined several options that the City may consider including
certification to the County and potential extension of the roll.
The church is interested in working with the City to deal with this
situation and asked that they be kept informed of any action taken by
the City Council.
Both Pastor McKinley and Mr; Tronsil have meetings on Tuesday night.
and are unsure if they will be able to attend the City Council
meeting. They both expressed willingness to appear before Council at
a subsequent meeting should Y9u desire to discuss this with them.
"
~J
tr'.",,:
l01..',
",1'\,:
\::.. '.<
~'>)~,,,...-. .~
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE Seotember 4. 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Committee, Comm
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NQ Hire Receptionist/
12. Secretary
Administration
v. VOlk~\'
APPROVE&:OR
AGENQ:1
BY: /
BY:
v
The City Council is requested to appoint Rhonda Ristow as the
Receptionist/Secretary at a starting salary of $7.42 per hour
with an increase of $ .50 per hour after satisfactory completion
of her six month probationary period.
We received 125 applications for the position and Jim and I
interviewed six of the candidates.
Attached are Ms. Ristow's application and resume.
MOTION BY
- -,
'-J TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
L
. ,
, ..,
~
APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT
(PRE.EMPLOYMENT aUEsnoNNAlREJ IAN EaUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYERI
,~
PERSONAL INFORMATION
NAME Q (
PRESENT ADDRESS
PERMANENT ADDRESS
PHONE NO.
CITY
ARE YOU 18 YEARS OR OLDER? Yes
STREET
DATE
~
~
ZIP
STATE
ZIP
ARE YOU EITHER A U.S. CITIZEN OR AN ALIEN AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE UNITED STATES?
NoD
DATE YOU SALARY
CAN START DESIRED
IF SO MAY WE INQUIRE
OF YOUR PRESENT EMPLOYER?
$l~
ARE YOU EMPLOYED NOW?
WHERE?
REFERRED BY
EOUCATION
*NO OF '
, YEARS
ATTENDED
lo
~
~.
GRAMMAR SCHOOL
HIGH SCHOOL
, ,
COLLEGE
TRADE. BUSINESS OR
CORRESPONDENCE
SCHOOL
"
JJ
~
WHEN?
'~"
*010 YOU
GRADUATE?
, '
SUBJECTS STUDIED
~
B
o
r
m
GENERAL
SUBJECTS OF SPECIAL STUDY OR RESEARCH WORK
SPECIAL SKILLS
ACTIVITIES: (CIVIC, ATHLETIC ETC.)
EXCLUDE ORGANIZATIONS. THE NAME OF WHICH INDICATE T
"J
. AGE. MARITAL ,STATUS. COLOR OR NATION OF ORIGIN OF ITS MEM8ERS.
U.S. MILITARY OR
NAVAL SERVICE
RANK
PRESENT MEMBERSHIP IN
NATIONAL GUARD OR RESERVES
o
YOPS' FORM 328S 189.81
:CONTINUED ON OTHER SIDE)
*The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1987 prohibits discrimination on the basis of age with respect to individuals who are at least 40 years of age.
LITHO IN U.S.A.
FORMER EMPLOYERS (LIST BELOW LAST THREE EMPLOYERS, STARTING. WITH LAST ONE FIRST!.
DATE
.r' 'C?NTH AND YEAR
\.....~OM
TO
FROM
TO
FROM
TO
FROM
TO
WHICH OF THESE JOBS 010 YOU LIKE BEST? ':rl\ l\D\) Q ~ )\ r\(' .
WHAT 010 YOU LIKE M~ST ABOUT THIS JOB? \J (If\'I~~ J
REFERENCES: GIVE THE NAMES OF THREE PERSONS NOT RELATED TO YOU, WHOM YOU HAVE KNOWN AT LEAST ONE YEAR.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF EMPLOYER
SALARY
POSITION
REASON FOR LEAVING
NAME
ADDRESS
BUSINESS
YEARS
ACQUAINTED
.
THE FOLLOWING STATE:MENT APPLIES IN: MARYLAND &. MASSACHUSETTS. [Fill in name of statel
IT IS UNLAWFUL IN THE STATE OF TO REQUIRE OR ADMINISTER A LIE DETECTOR TEST AS A
CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT OR CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT. AN EMPLOYER WHO VIOLATES THIS LAW SHALL BE
SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND CIVIL LIABILITY.
~
"
IN CASE OF
EMERGENCY NOTIFY
E
"I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE ANO COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND
UNDERSTAND THAT. IF EMPLOYED. FALSIFIED STATEMENTS ON THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL.'
I AUTHORIZE INVESTIGATION OF ALL sTATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN AND THE REFERENCES LISTED ABOVE TO GIVE YOU ANY
AND ALL INFORMATION CONCERNING MY PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT AND ANY PERTINENT INFORMATION THEY MAY HAVE, AND RE.
LEASE ALL PARTIES FROM ALL LIABILITY FOR ANY DAMAGE THAT MAY RESULT FROM FURNISHING SAME TO YOU.
I UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT, IF HIRED, MY EMPLOYMENT IS FbR NO DEFINITE PERIOD AND MAY, REGARDLESS OF THE DATE
OF PAYMENT F MY I\GES AND SALARY, BE TE INATED AT ANY TIME WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE AND WITHOUT CAUSE."
DATE ~
SIGNATURE
DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE
INTERVIEWED BY
DATE
REMARKS:
NEATNESS
ABILITY
HIRED: 0 Yes 0 No
POSITION
DEPT.
SALARY/WAGE
,
DATE REPORTING TO WORK
,_0 'o.PPROVED: 1.
2.
3.
,
'-
EMPLOYMENT MANAGER
DEPT. HEAD
. GENERAL MANAGER
This form has been designed to strictly comply with State end Federal fair employment practice laws prohibiting employment discrimination. This Application
for Employment Form is sold for general use throughout the United States. TOPS assumes no responSibility for the inclusion in said form of any questions
which, when asked by the Employer of the Job Applicant, may violate State and lor Federal Law.
r
'-....-
,
'J
'-J
'--
RHONDA J. RISTOW
11236 Norway Street NW
Coon Rapids. MN 55433
CAREER OBJECTIVE:
Desiring to establish a career in a position that offers contact
with the public. opportunity for advancement, and a professional
environment in which I can utilize my experience.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Innovex, Inc. 1313 5th Street South. Hopkins. MN 55343
\
Receptionist/Secretary (2/89 - present)
answer phones. screen calls. take messages
greet clients and other outside visitors
travel arrangements
distribute incoming rail. stamp outgoing mail and
deliver to post office
order office supplies
word processing
operate fax machine
typing (letters, memos, purchase orders, etc.)
filing for Purchasing Department
...........,."
Campbell-Mithun-Esty, 222 South Ninth Street. Minneapolis, MN
55402
Receptionist (7/88 - 2/89)
answer phones, etc.
special projects
Office Services Staff Person (3/88 - 7/88)
replacement person for receptionists
various duties depending on floor
food service
set up food orders and deliver
mailroom, sort and deliver
office .supplies, fill orders and deliver
Carson Pirie Scott, Rosedale and Ridgedale
Sales Associate (8/87 - 3/88) Rosedale
Sales Associate (3/88 - 6/88) Ridgedale
State Farm Insurance. 1332 Thomas Avenue. St. Paul, MN 55103
.r)
Secretary (11/86 - 0/87)
greet policyholders
answer phones
make changes to policies
telemarketing
EDUCATION:
Bemidji State University (9/81 - 2/86)
Liberal Arts, Elementary Education
Bemidji lIigh School - Diploma 1980
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Committee, Comm
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NO.
/3.
Special Assessments/
Tax Forfeit Property
BY:
V. VOlk\~'
::y6"
Administration
Attached is a letter from Gene Rafferty, the Anoka County Land
Commissioner, requesting the city consider reducing or forgiving
special assessments on three tax forfeit parcels of property.
The properties are shown on the attached maps.
Parcel 24 32 24 24 0004 is a buildable lot with soil correction;
Parcel 24 32 24 24 0003 is unbuildable. These lots could be
combined to make one buildable lot. The assessments on these two
lots total $6,359.90 while the county lists the value of the two
at $6,500.00.
parecl 05 32 24 33 0003 is unbuildable because it does not have
city sewer and water. It is 18,000 square feet and is not large
enough for a private septic system and well. The property owners
on either side of this lot could be contacted to see is they
would want to purchase the lot, split it in half and combine the
two halves with their lots. The value of this lot is $400 with
$354 in special assessments against it.
V:Attachments
COUNCIL ACTION
.)
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
..~..
.
COUNTY
OF
ANOKA
Office of Land Commissioner
COURTHOUSE
ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303
612.421-4760
EUGENE J. RAFFERTY
Land Commissioner
Ex\. 1879
August 21, 1990
Vicki Volk, Clerk
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd.
Andover, MN 55303
RE: 24 32 24 24 0003 - 0004 and 05 32 24 33 0003
Special Assessments and Possible Combination
Dear Vicki:
24 32 24 24 0003 has special assessments against it of $2,771.06 , while the total on 24 43 24
24 00004 is $3,588.84. The value of 0003 is $3,000, while the price on 0004 is $3,500. We ask
the council give consideration to reducing or forgiving the specials to make the property more
saleable.
\
The two lots abut each other. The city has 0004 listed as buildable with soil correction, while
0003 which forfeited in 1988 is shown as unbuildable. We offered the latter at private sale in July
1990 but there were no takers.
We 'would ask the city's opinion as to combining the lots and offering it as one buildable lot.
I
05 32 24 33 0003 has a value of $400 with specials against it of $354. We ask the council to
consider reducing or forgiving the special assessments.
Any help you can give us in this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Yours very truly,
~JI~
County Land Commissioner
GR:dj
J
cc:
Commissioner Haas Steffen
Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer 1
"~"I '
..1\0 ri.. 1\1
"'_~~ 0
. ~~ '-/
. IG"
:.0
D
a.
,
~
OS
~
,
,.
,
;:;-
<>>l'
~~
7J8~_
::1
H
..
6:37
r./9n
"'!':.? 1_,1/1
'~i~.~~l~~~-~ ~_.~~
~~~~~~~'
~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
... '
"f"'"" .
. \.1': ::":J
o
F
,
~
..
~
~. ~
~ ~~ ~
r
o
~
.
~
~~: ~
"- t'\: \1'>.. \
/III: '-tP
,..
'" LARCH
'"
ff'
"'"
U1 ~ ct\~
U1 '5:39
-I ff'
:r ,..
"'" ~
~5''J~ ,
---rD' ,
.
.
~~'
~ ~ /?l
'" KUMQUAT
f'1 .
'0
,
--.'o;;':~~
, -..0" l4>1 "-' \
'-' ,
,
n'
o
~ ~ ~1 t,~ ~
, ,'b
I /86'
'. I
~'o;:-':,,, ~
-.....;...~''II, ~ \
I II .:s;..--
~
r
"{>
--
ST.
..
;,.,
~ ~ ~
~ ?\, ,
-f .
;X .
~
!\"
~~ ~
,,~t::i' ..i:.
~~6'~\...>\
~.....~ '.:
~
,,~
~~.
i~,
/',~..
~~~;
~
,
o.
.
.
1/
I
I
.'
..
JpD
~j..
. .-'u,.ffc.~:,~ :'.'::
bl'f;-
.D~ \,. :=:....
~\ ~
, :.:.~-
/ ~~~
: .~'s;,\
---'h
.
I
.
,
"
,
,
,
:
f
f..
,
~,l ~
'----', ~
'N" i~
../~ -"
,
,.
,
,
.'
'''. /tU, "'.
~
, "
, ,
',-'
.
.
,
,
i
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
"..- ~
,
.
,..,,,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
~
.'
~
"
~~
l~ ~ E.
;\..~
,
,
,
,
..........
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
/~...
, ,
,__" I
, ,
I ,
C__../,'
,
.
,//
.
.
.
.
.
..
,
~
/
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
/ .~
I
.
/
I
,r--.--------4--
.
\ ....-....
,,'
"
"
-,
.J
."
....---.......
,
,
.-
,
,
,
. ,
:' ~:/
t'~
~-
'"
~
--~---
,
-f:~"7-.-
o
@
~
~
,.
"
.<
/;t't'
/y/;-"';:5 H(
.-
~
)'!"t'
.\/',<:,...'5..1'
-'
.~
..,00,
)>0
.n . t\)
l"'1;tl.
.",n
~"':'Ol\ ~
~J>') ~ '"
-..L ~
",.' yA:i:J
'f.
r--..
--.
(;l
o
o
vI
;,~!
~.
~ ~ ~
Z
fTI
.'/.t'
~,~~jiii \;:
~ .
...3'ib3 .--"~ .
~S80j~
, "'-
, -08a5"~
'\ ~- '"
/.<'C
.Y/;''''.J.~ t. t
S T.:' ~
/E'C
A:/:-,,{..H'II,
~
""
'~ ..,."//- .:, )
I" XENIA:;
,.
/,5,1
N~
,
~
,
~
.,
~
z
~
.
~
Ii
~.
"
~ 3~1 ~
,~.:'
.',!",,~
~
.1"
,A.:'/:.-....:.;(-j,.
.,,/j
',\ . '"1' .
.,.
~- '
"
fl
-",
t: ~
1:
"'-
(~
~
."
~-
..
"
.~ "
~.
~
~.
::,
, <'"
~
~
,
~
~
"d
,.- "\
U
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
ITEM
NO. ,/
/-r...
Right-of-way Acquisiti
88-9/Tulip Street
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
n Enginee'ing r;()~
BY: James E. SChLt~tz
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
APPROV~FOR
AGE A
..)6
//
The city Council is requested to approve the acquisition of an
easement for storm drainage along the north property line of 15908
Tulup Street, owned by Paul Houle.
This is where we acquired an easement in the rear lots between
Tulip Street and Vintage Street. The Council approved acquiring
the pond last year. At that time, Paul Houle was willing to give
the easement but he always put off the signing of the document.
Last year, December of 1989, his septic system failed. In April
of 1990, the City sent him a letter giving him 10 days to fix his
sewer system (standard procedure).
According to Paul Houle, he had some problems. He said the road
restrictions were still on and that he had frost still in the
ground in his back yard. He never contacted the staff so we could
have extended his time. He continued hauling in small loads of
rock and digging in the frost. He is angry at the City because it
cost him extra. Neither he nor his contractor contacted anyone at
City Hall to discuss an extension of time. So, of course, he
isn't going to give the easement.
We paid Mr. Muccicciaro for the easement for the pond and have
offered Mr. Houle $500 for the part of the pond on his property at
the end of the storm drainage pipe. He wants an additional $1500
for the easement along the property where the storm sewer is.
See attached drawing.
We will be applying for MSA funding.
COUNCIL ACTION
.-J
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
(J
("
. )
(
I I
-~ I .\
-:r
, - I I I
/CO-IZ I
PIIe@
/.Z'6'/. I
...~.--$---
--_.__.~
o
_..... OPTION 3 .
~- ....
;' --
;' ....
.---...... "
I --....,
I .... .....
,
\ ,
,
<.J
:!:
g
'"
'"
..
"M
... ~::
~ ~~:
.: 2:~i__
'" :.!~-
. . ......~I ~
~ z. ~~ ~
'5 ~ i~ ~
'" ~" "'"
~-, . \(
'"
...
~
...
ELrV,-T"ON AI"!'.O"..
.... .,
""':........
--
rA~H1ENr~
ToTA L I'I\E"'. 1Q.'~O
'5'3' V,NT,.c.E
Huc.C,,"U:.GIA R,O
o
i
InOl v,,,,.
"' _.. '0_" ":';.~:;:'~_'._ _"_'_ "___.
HAH~eN
.,. )
'-
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE c9pt9mbgr, 4, 1999
'\
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APP~fbFOR
NO. staff, Committe, AG DA
- . --' Administration I
ITEM Siting/ NW Area Fire BY~'
NO'1!). Department BY: _
l<'
j
Attached is the report from the Andover Fire Department
steering Committee.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO
,:]
I
I
:J
<J
nuu.....J..L .J'.;,.I 1'''.1 1t:.J..;....J....J .L!.)o. L...n.....n nQ~U"""J.MII::.~ ll'i..... 1t:.L- l'iU-O..Lc:. "+..,:)"'+ :i!,,);:It:i
H"H':) t"'1Cle:
August 30; 1990
TO: Andove~ Mayo~ ~nd Councllmembe~e
FROM: Bob Peach, Chal~man, Fire Depa~tment 5tee~lng Committee
SUBJECT: Eaet/West Road In area of 1G5th Avenue
LI~ted below a~e the ~easons the FI~e Dcpa~tmcnt would prefec to site
the Northwest fire station In the vicinIty of 165th and CoRd 58 and
why It I~ In the CIty'e best Inte~est to construct an east/west road
at 165th to connect Round Lake Boulevard and Seventh Avenue.
1. That location would provide north, east, southwest and westerly
access onto county roads. The p~oposed 171st site would have no
west access, and the easterly acce~~ would be th~ough
neIghborheod area!!. ..: . .
2. It Increases response areas to the City Ilmlt~. Site responses
using the 2.5 mile criteria:
165th 171et
N to Cl ty limIt N to CIty limit
S to 0.25 mIle short S to 1.26 mile short
E to 0.25 mile sho~t of Vordin E to VerdIn
W to City IIml t W to Roanoke Curve
3. The 1S5th site cuts the travel time on Valley Drive in half.
4. The site also makes the IndustrIal area 3/4 mlle closer.
5. FIrefIghter response timee to both stations are slmiliar. Ueing
the locations of current firefighters and factoring In ~tops and
.turns, response tImes a~e 'eetimatedl
lS6th
10 FI~eflghters ave~age 2,95 ml
12 FJ~efl~hters average 3.29 ml
171!lt
10 FIrefIghters ave~age 2.90 ml
12 FIrefIghters average 3.10 ml
6. The 165thslte eliminates a substantial gap b6tween station
servIce a~eae.
7. The 16Sth site with the new road e~rvee approximately 1150 home~.
The 165th ~lte wIthout the new road serves approximately 10~O
homel!!l.
The 171~t ~Ite ~ervlee approximately 860 homes.
e. The nearest fl~e hyd~ant 15 1 mIle close~ to the 166th elte wIth
cutoff. .
9, Backup service from the South statIon is 1.5 miles closer to the
165th site and Is 2,25 mIles close~ from the east etation with
cutoff ,
~ Mayor and CIty Councllmembere
~ August 30, 1990
Page 2
; -I
10. SIting the Northwest station at 165th and providIng the 1~6th
cutoff Improves the police and medical response times in the
City.
11. That p~oposal also provides continuIty In an east/west direction
through the City and enables traffic to avoId already conJested
Bunker Lake Boulevard and CoRd 9.
12. The 165th outoff would not be built wIth Cltv taxes. the ~ropoeal
b~Ing fInanced either by the county or with MSA funde.
13. The 171st ~venue site for the etatlon will requIre the
improvement of Tulip In the near future at a eimlllar or higher
coat to the constructIon of the 165th cutoff.
We urge the Council to look at the total long-range emergency servIce
plan for the City. The constructIon of an eaet/weet road between
CoRd 9 and Seventh Avenue Is desparately needed not only tor emergency
eervicee but for orderlY traffic flows through the City. Siting the
Northweet statIon In the vicinity of 165th prOVides protection to the
greatest number of resIdents In that area. which Ie the goal of both
the City and the FIre Department.
i
1
,~)
~
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Engineering
~y
APPROV.~rl FOR
AGENZ i
ITEM 16. Award Bid/90-14/
NO. Cedar Crest/Cedar
Hills River Estates
BY:
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution accepting
bid and awarding contract for the improvement of Project No. 90-14
for street construction in the area of Cedar Hills River
Estates/Cedar Crest 3rd Addition.
The results of the bids were as follows:
1. W. B. Miller, Inc.
2. Forest Lake Contracting
3. Aero Asphalt, Inc.
$47,802.50
$52,088.75
$58,572.50
Only four bids were received at the time of the bid opening.
The estimate from the feasibility report for construction was
$50,880.00.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
.':) TO
SECOND BY
~
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
IMPROVEMENT OF PROJECT NO. 90-14 FOR STREET CONSTRUCTION IN THE
AREA OF CEDAR HILLS RIVER ESTATES/CEDAR CREST 3RD ADDITION .
WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids as set out in
Council Resolution No. 105-90, dated August 7 , 19 90 , bids were
received, opened and tabulated according to law with results as
follows:
1. W.B. Miller, Inc.
2. Forest Lake contracting
3. Aero Asphalt, Inc.
$47,802.50
$52,088.75
$58,572.50
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
of Andover to hereby accept the bids as shown to indicate
Miller, Inc. as being the apparent low bidder.
the City
W.B.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TO HEREBY direct the Mayor and City Clerk
to enter into a contract with W.B. Miller, Inc. in the
amount of $47,802.50 for construction of the
improvements; and direct the City Clerk to return to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the
successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until
the contract has been executed and bond requirements met.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
City Council at a
and adopted by the
meeting this
day of
, 19 , with Councilmen
voting in favor of
the resolution, and Councilmen
voting
against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
-~ victoria Volk - City Clerk
~-)
(F;"">-
~.'<",
$(
."
I..\>. ,-,'
.~:~~:--.,.- ~';" ;'
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
september 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Non-Discussion Items
Engineering
APPROVED FOR
AGEl D~
BY, I j)
/
ITEM
NQ 17. Declare Costl
Pumkin City Cleanup
BY: James E. Schrantz
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution declaring
the cost and directing preparation of assessment roll and the
resolution for hearing on proposed assessment for the clean up of
the debris and rubbish at Pumkin City.
The assessment is proposed for one year at 8.5% interest.
Enclosures: Resolution Declaring Costs
Resolution Ordering Hearing
Notice
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
-' TO
SECOND BY
,
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
:]
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT
ROLL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF DEBRIS/RUBBISH CLEAN UP , FOR
PROJECT NO. 90-18, PUMKIN CITY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY RESOLVES:
WHEREAS, a contract has been entered into for the construction of
the improvements and the contract price for such improvement is
$62,500.00 , and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making
of such improvement amount to $2,500.00 and work previously done
amount to $ -0- so that the total cost of the improvement will
be $65,000.00 .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Andover, MN:
1. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the City
is hereby declared to be $ -0- and the amount of the cost
to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to.
be $65,000.00
2. Assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 1 year. The first of the installments to be
payable on or before the first Monday in January 1991, and shall
bear interest at the rate of 8;5 percent per annum from the
date of the adoption of the assessment resolution.
3. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall
forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of
land within the district affected, without regard to cash
valuation, as provided by law, and she shall file a copy of such
proposed assessment in her office for public inspection
4. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment,
notify the Council thereof.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19
wi th Councilmen
voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
,-\
, -J
ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
~ MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
DEBRIS/RUBBISH CLEAN UP FOR PROJECT NO. 90-18, PUMKIN CITY.
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council on September 4
19 90 , the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of
cost of improvements of Debris/Rubbish Clean Up for Project No. 90-18
and
,
the
WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed
assessment has been completed and filed in her office for public
inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover, MN:
1. A hearing shall be held the 2nd day of October ,in the
City Hall at 8:30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at
such time and place all persons owning property affected by such
. improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to
such assessment.
.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing
on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper
at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice
the total cost of improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be
given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less
than two weeks prior to the hearings.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment
to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the
assessment. He may at any time thereafter pay to the City Treasurer the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must
be made before November 2 or interest will be charged through December 31
of the succeeding year.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
Meeting this
day of
, 19___
voting
with Councilmen
in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
~:=> ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
o
PROJECT NO.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Andover,
Anoka County, Minnesota will meet at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard N.W., in the City of Andover, on Tuesday,
October 2, 1990 at 8:30 P.M. to pass upon the proposed assessment for
the improvement of Debris/Rubbish Clean Up in the following
described area:
Pumkin City
PIN 34-32-24-31-0009
In particular, the south 241.708 feet of the NE 1/4
of the SW 1/4 of Section 34, Township 32, Range 24,
except for the west 483.416 feet thereof.
The amount to be specially assessed against your particular lot,
or parcel of land is $65,000.00 You may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment to the City Treasurer. No interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
assessment. You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City
Treasurer the' entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is
made. Such payment must be made before November 2 or interest will
be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide
not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the
assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 1 year and shall bear interest at the rate of
8.5 percent per year. The right to partially prepay the
assessment is not available.
The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at
the City Clerk's Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment
is $ 65,000.00 Written or oral objections will be considered at
the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount unless a
signed, written objection is filed with the Clerk prior to the
hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The
Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of
a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such
further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable.
An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal
upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption
of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court
within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk.
o
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
~J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
September 4, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NO. Declare Costs/
IS.
BY:
Engineering
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution declaring
the costs and ordering preparation of assessment roll and
resolution for the hearing on proposed assessments for Projects
90-2 and 90-14, 163rd Lane/164th Ave./Jonquil St. and Cedar Crest
Estates 3rd Addition/Cedar Hills River Estates.
At the public hearing we advised the property owners that the City
needed to assess the project this year or the cost presented would
be low by the cost of interest at 8.5% for about one (1) year.
The hearings are proposed for October 2, 1990, a regular Council
meeting; one at 7:30 p.m. and the other at 8:00 p.m.
Attachments: (2) Resolutions Declaring Cost
(2) Resolutions Setting Hearing
(2) Notices
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
)
..--/ TO
SECOND BY
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANORA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
o
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
DIRECTING PR~PARATION OF ASSESSMENT
STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE
NO. 90-2, 163RD LANE/164TH
A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST AND
ROLL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION' FOR PROJECT
AVE./JONQUIL ST.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY RESOLVES:
WHEREAS, a contract has been entered into for the construction of
the improvements and the contract price for such improvement is
$56,645.00 , and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making
of such improvement amount to $ 13,515.00 and work previously done
amount to $ -0- so that the total cost of the improvement will
be $ 70-160.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Andover, MN:
1. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the City
is hereby declared to be $ -0- and the amount of the cost
to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to
be $ 4,385.00
2. Assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years. The first of the installments to be
payable on or before the first Monday in January 1991, and shall
bear interest at the rate of 8.5 percent per annum from the
date of the adoption of the assessment resolution.
3. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall
forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of
land within the district affected, without regard to cash
valuation, as provided by law, and she shall file a copy of such
proposed assessment in her office for public inspection
4. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment,
notify the Council thereof.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19
with Councilmen
voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
..~
ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
o MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION FOR PROJECT NO. 90-2 163RD
LANE/164TH AVE./JONQUIL STREET
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council on September 4 ,
19 90 , the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the
cost of improvements for Project No. 90-2 ; and
WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed
assessment has been completed and filed in her office for public
inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover, MN:
1. A hearing shall be held the 2nd day of October, 1990, in the
City Hall at 7:30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at
such time and place all persons owning property affected by such
improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to
such assessment.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing
on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper
at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice
the total cost of improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be
given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less
than two weeks prior to the hearings. '
,
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment
to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the
assessment. He may at any time thereafter pay to the City Treasurer the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must
be made before October 15 or interest will be charged through December 31
of the succeeding year.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
Meeting thi s
day of
, 19
with Councilmen
voting
in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
~) ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
()
PROJECT NO.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Andover,
Anoka County, Minnesota will meet at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard N.W., in the City of Andover, on Tuesday,
October 2, 1990 at 7:30 P.M. to pass upon the proposed assessment for
the improvement of Street and Storm Drainage Construction
in the following described area:
163rd Lane/164th Avenue/Jonquil Street
The amount to be specially assessed against your particular lot,
or parcel of land is $ 4,385.00. You may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment to the City Treasurer. No interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
assessment. You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City
Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is
made. Such payment must be made before October 15 or interest will
be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide
not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the
assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years and shall bear interest at the rate of
8.5 percent per year. The right to partially prepay the assessment
is not available.
The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at
the City Clerk's Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment
is $ 70,160.00 . Written or oral objections will be considered
at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount unless a
signed, written objection is filed with the Clerk prior to the
hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The
Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of
a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such
further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable.
An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal
upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption
of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court
within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
"
. -./
victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. . NO.
C_)
MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT
ROLL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION,
FOR PROJECT NO. 90-14, CEDAR CREST ESTATES 3RD ADDITION/CEDAR HILLS
RIVER ESTATES AREA.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY RESOLVES:
WHEREAS, a contract has been entered into for the construction of
the improvements and the contract price for such improvement is
$ 50,193.00, and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making
of such improvement amount to $ 11,156.00 and work previously done
amount to $ -0- so that the total cost of the improvement will
be $ 61,375.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Andover, MN:
1. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the City
is hereby declared to be $ -0- and the amount of the cost
to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to
be $ 61,375.00
2. Assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years. The first of the installments to be
payable on or before the first Monday in January 1991, and shall
bear interest at the rate of 8.5 percent per annum from the
date of the adoption of the assessment resolution.
3. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall
forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of
land within the district affected, without regard to cash
valuation, as provided by law, and she shall file a copy of such
proposed assessment in her office for public inspection
4. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment,
notify the Council thereof.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
meeting this
day of
, 19
with Councilmen
voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
/'j
'-J ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
?~
,
,_/ MOTION by Councilman
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION FOR PROJECT NO. 90-14 , CEDAR
CREST ESTATES 3RD ADDITION/CEDAR HILLS RIVER ESTATES .
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council on September 4 ,
19 90 , the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the
cost of improvements for Project No. 90-14 ; and
WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed
assessment has been completed and filed in her office for public
inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover, MN:
1. A hearing shall be held the 2nd day of October, 1990, in the
City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at
such time and place all persons owning property affected by such
improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to
such assessment.
. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing
on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper
at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice
the total cost of improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be
given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less
than two weeks prior to the hearings.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment
to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the
assessment. He may at any time thereafter pay to the City Treasurer the
entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must
be made before October 15 or interest will be charged through December 31
of the succeeding year.
MOTION seconded by Councilman
and adopted by the City
Council at a
Meeting this
day of
, 19_
voting
wi th Councilmen
in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
.,,,
'-.../' ATTEST:
James E.Elling - Mayor
Victoria volk - City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANORA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
, "
PROJECT NO.
',_/'
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Andover,
Anoka County, Minnesota will meet at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard N.W., in the City of Andover, on Tuesday,
October 2, 1990 at 8:00 P.M. to pass upon the proposed assessment for
the improvement of Street and Storm Drainage Construction in the
following described area:
Cedar Crest Estates 3rd Addition/Cedar Hills River Estates
The amount to be specially assessed against your particular lot,
or parcel of land is $ 4,910.00. You may at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire
assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment to the City Treasurer~ No interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
assessment. You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City
Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in .which such payment is
made. Such payment must be made before October 15 or interest will
be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide
not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the
assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years and shall bear interest at the rate of
8.5 percent per year. The right to partially prepay the assessment
is not available.
The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at
the City Clerk's Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment
is $ 61,375.00 . Written or oral objections will be considered
at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount unless a
signed, written objection is filed with the Clerk prior to the
hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The
Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of
a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such
further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable.
An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal
upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption
of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court
within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
./~,
..~
Victoria Volk - City Clerk