Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC December 18, 1990 '~ CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 DATE AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR NO, @ AGENDA Public Works BY: b~' ITEM NO. computer Software Frank Stone ]:)rnnr",m BY: ~l1n<'!rintendent- The city Council is requested to consider the purchase of a software program which would enable us to maintain vehicle inventory.and fleet management. I have received information from Fleet Computing International regarding their "Fleet Controller III" program. It is a program that has an advanced level of capabilities but was designed to be adaptable for cities of all sizes. If we purchase this program we will be able to keep accurate and current records of maintenance of our vehicles. This system will interface with the system we have for the fuel pumps (GaSBoy). We contacted cities in the metro area that have this software program. All of them liked the program and had positive comments. They felt it was thorough, flexible and easy to use. Golden valley had the Logus System before and didn't like it because it was too cumbersome. Minnetonka has had the "Fleet Controller III" program for 5 years. They have a fleet of about 50 vehicles and they are pleased with this program. Burnsville likes the system because of its versatility. The cost of the program is $1350.00. I have included in your packet a copy of the proposal. The following is a breakdown of where the funds will come from to pay for this program. Park & Recreation Storm Sewers Snow & Ice Streets & Highways Water Distribution Sanitary Sewer - collection 45200-210 43150-210 43125-210 43100-220 49430-303 49450-303 $225.00 $225.00 $225.00 $225.00 $225.00 $225.00 $1350.00 / , , , '----' MOTION BY , TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY ~ Page Two December 18, 1990 Computer Software program We have to look at better control of our vehicle fleet and tracking each vehicle better as far as preventative maintenance cost, down time and the cost effectiveness of equipment replacement. I didn't get a chance to discuss this with the Fire Department but, if they want to get in on this purchase it would cut down the price for each department. There is room for thier records on this package. I thank you for adding this item to your agenda. Money is left in the above budget for the purchase if you approve. Our Administration/Public Works Secretary, Karen Tommerdah1, has placed many calls to other cities and general businesses checking out fleet maintenance software and feels, along with myself, that this is one of the best to suit our needs. (Also enclosed is a copy of the listing of reports on this program). () ,~ , , '1 , J / / fC~~ FLEET COMPUTING PROPOSAL INTERNATIONAL FLEET CONTROLLER VERSION III SOFTWARE PACKAGE FOR CITY OF ANDOVER, MN - Basic Fleet Set-up FEATURES - Transfers and Deletions - Fuel Entry - Vehicle & Mechanic Changes - Repair Order/Invoice Entry & correction - PM Interval Scheduling & Work Order Check List - Vehicle Notes Entry - Ro/Inv/Notes & Fuel Update - Fleet Reports - FastHist Retrieval Screen Approximate fleet size - 50) Database Size - Megabytes 1.2 PRICE$ 1350 Telephone Support, Software Up-Grades (90 Days) INCLUDED FLEET CONTROLLER User and Instruction Manual OPTIONS: Introduction & Orientation Training Tape ....... INCLUDED PRICE $ 85 Annual Service and Maintenance Plan (Begins on 91st day) ($350 minimum) ......... PRICE $ 350 NOTE: The customer dynamically controls the amount of data that is stored in FLEET CONTROLLER. The size database recommended is based on our best judgement from discussion with the customer on the intended use of the database. FLEET COMPUTING INTERNATIONAL, INC. BY: h-~J~~~/'") TERMS: Payment in full upon SHIPMENT DATE: /0 (, /7".:> THIS PROPOSAL IS VALID FOR 120 DAYS P.O. BOX 14698 ALBa.. NEW MEXICO 87191 505-275.0626 -~..~--- - ---.., l-_"C_-.-""........_,... _____"""-_ "",. ._. _.~____,_I_. 'J ALPHABETIC LISTING OF REPORTS Audit1 For Mileage Debugging U8 Audit2 For PM Debugging P5 Categorized Expenses by Veh-Type C3 Categorized Expenses by Vehicle C2 Category Code List U3 Change Printer Page Depth Zl Cost Center Total Sum C13 Cost Center Variable Sum C12 Cost Per Mile by Veh-Type C5 Cost Per Mile by Vehicle C4 Detailed Vehicle History V3 Driver/Vehicle Listing D1 Expanded Vehicle Inventory V6 Fleet Setup U1 Fuel Consumption by Veh-Type F2 Fuel Consumption by Vehicle F1 Fuel and Fluid Use Summary F4 Indirect Labor Code List U9 Lease Value/Personal Mileage D4 License Renewals US Mailing Labels/Mailmerge D5 Maint Exp Vs Purch Cost Analysis U10 Mechanic Class Seniority M3 Mechanic Labor Rates M5 Mechanic Listings M1 Mechanic Seniority M2 Mechanic Time Summary M4 Missing Expenses (Fuel) D2 PM Due Report / Service Lists P2 PM Overdue Report / Service Lists P3 PM Preview Report / Service Lists P4 PM Schedule P1 Personal Mileage Summary D3 Replacement projection U6 Rolling Monthly Fluid Use F3 Seq Monthly Total Expense Sum C9 Seq Monthly Variable Expense Sum C6 Sold Unit Analysis U7 Standard Service List Forms P6 Veh-Type Total Expense Sum C11 Veh-Type Variable Expense Sum C8 Vehicle Detail Lookup V2 Vehicle Inventory V1 Vehicle Total Expense Sum C10 Vehicle Variable Expense Sum C7 Vehicle-Type Code List U2 Vehicles Off Road - Not Sold V5 Vehicles On Order V4 Vendor Inventory U4 Vendor Purchasing Summary C1 Most Fleet Controller summary reports can be selected by vehicle. division. or vehicle type for month. year. or Iife-to-date. prior months or prior years, In addition you can add up any series of months you wish to make quarterly or semi-annual type reports that show all of the months' costs for each vehicle (or vehicle type for vehicle type reports) within the month range you selected, The exceptions to this are the CATEGORIZED EXPENSES BY VEHICLE and CATEGORIZED EXPENSES BY VEHICLE TYPE reports which omit monthly accumulation, (It really does not make any sense to see the monthly brake system cost for example, . , . but annual and life-to-date are useful and they are provided,) Non summary reports have options that are related to their specific functions, For instance, the inventory reports allow you to select by STATUS (ONROAD. OFFROAD. etc.) Most reports allow you a list of data items from which you can make exception reports. We offer equal to. equal to or greater than. equal to or less than. and range as selection control options. ~.J Usually. a variety of sort options are offered, Vehicle listings are typically offered in straight vehicle number order or in department/vehicle type and then vehicle number order within department/vehicle type, Many reports are between 80 and 132 characters wide and require either a wide (132 character) printer or that you enter your printer's compressed (small character that allows 132 character in a normal 80 character space) mode, ::J CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 ITEM NO. Roessler Lot Purchase DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ~ Planning ~ David L. Carlberg, City planner AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, ..., . APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: BY: REQUEST The Andover City Council is asked to review the request of Kent Roessler to purchase two lots in the Andover Commercial Park. BACKGROUND Mr. Roessler currently owns and operates Super wash, which is located on Lot 1, Block 2 of the Andover Commercial Park. Mr. Roessler is proposing to construct a 10,000 square foot building similar to the Riccar Heating and Plumbing building located on lot 1, Block 1. The building will be composed of an office/warehouse on the ground floor to be used for a construction business. The second floor will consist of office space for a real estate business. Ordinance 8, Section 7.01, allows an office/warehouse business as a permitted use in the General Business District. The two lots under consideration are Lots 3 and 4 of Block 1, Andover Commercial Park. See the enclosed map. The proposed purchase price is $.45/square foot or $46,000 for both parcels. The City's current price is $.65/square foot or $62,790. COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. The City Council may agree to sell the property to Mr. Roessler and direct legal staff to prepare the appropriate purchase documents. 2. The City Council may choose not to sell the property to Mr. Roessler for the construction of an office/warehouse building. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY "--' ~~ AN AREA DEDICA TED FOR ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES . .' Com.m.ercial Park . . ....... ~l J ----'" \ I BUNKER LAKE BLVD. (CO.RD.IIG) """-------------------------------------- \ I I I I I I I I ............,.....,.......-. ..-..................... ......................... ................ PROPOSED FRONTAGE RD. OJ o 0::: o U s\o~ ~~~ -c'f.. N ~ Future POND POND 3 1.8a 100' " / ..-- .) ,~) ) . -' ..rt\... 7:30 P.M. CITY of ANDOVER Regular city Council Meeting-December 18, 1990 Call to Order Resident Forum Agenda Approval Approval of Minutes Certificates of Appreciation Discussion Items 1. Public Hearing/90-25/Metropolitan Mosquito Control 2. Ordinance 29 Amendment/Diseased Trees 3. Ordinance 44 Amendment/Junkyards 4. Lot Split/J. Mengelkoch 5. Award Sale/Certificates of Indebtedness 6. Cedar Hills River Estates 3rd Sketch Plan 7. Approve 1991 Sheriff's Contract Staff, Committee, Commission 8. Recycling Update 9. License Approval/Speedy Market 10. Rescind Resolution/Hidden Creek East 2nd Final Payment 11. Award Bid/Sewer Cleaning Machine 12. Authorize Purchase/Meter Reading Equipment 13. Renew P&Z contract/Peach Associates 14. Authorize purchase of Radios/Fire Dept. Non-Discussion items 15. Timber Trails plat Extension 16. Receive November Financial statements Adjournment , @\\ " '\ "",, " V">t,'h, . r'~'.>>. CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE np ("'prnn", ,- ] e. ' 99Q " AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR NO, Approval of Minutes AGENDA Admin. ITEM V. Volk ~.~. BY: DO. NO. BY: The City Council is requested to approve the following minutes: December 4, 1990 Regular Meeting December 4, 1990 HRA Meeting December 6, 1990 Budget Meeting COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY SECOND BY TO '- ,',~ (FA',',.,.,': ,~r\ ~'~:,:,,~..,-- CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE December 18, 1990 AGENDA SECTION NO, ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR AGENDA Engineering {l BY: t.~' ITEM NO, ~ Public Hearing/90-25 BY: Todd J. Haas The City Council is requested to hold a public hearing, project 90-25 (Metropolitan Mosquito Control District) located at 1260 Bunker Lake Boulevard for the improvement of watermain. History of the Request * November 6, 1990 City Council Meeting - Metropolitan Mosquito Control District requested a feasibility report for improvement of watermain. The request was made by the District because the proposed expansion of the existing building which will require sprinkling. * November 20, 1990 City Council Meeting - The City Council received the feasibility report and requested the public hearing. The reason for the public hearing request is because the District leases the property from the County of Anoka. A resolution is included ordering the improvement and directing TKDA preparation of final plans and specs. Note: The Feasibility Report was in your November 20, 1990 packet. please bring the report to the meeting. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY '-- TO SECOND BY u ,~ CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT OF WATERMAIN PROJECT NO. 90-25 IN THE 1260 BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD (METROPOLITAN MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT) AREA AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. WHEREAS, Resolution No. the 20th day of November hearIng; and 165-90 of the City Council adopted on , 19~, fixed a date for a public such 1990 WHEREAS, pursuant to the hearing was held on the ; and required published and mailed notice, 18th day of December WHEREAS, all persons desiring to be heard were given such opportunity for same; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby order improvement project No. 90-25 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby designate TKDA as the Engineer for this improvement and they are directed to prepare plans and specifications for such improvements. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by day of the City Council at a meeting this , 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 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 DATE AGENDA SECTION NO, Discussion Items ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT'-n Planning ~~ David L. carlberg, City planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA 6 ~. BY: ITEM Ordinance #29 NO. Amendment .:<. BY: REQUEST The Andover City Council is asked to review and approve the attached amended Ordinance #29. BACKGROUND Over the past nine months the Planning and Zoning Commission has labored in an attempt to amend Ordinance No. 29. The primary goal was to create an enforceable Ordinance that can control the epidemic of disease on shade trees in Andover. During this process the need for a diseased shade tree program became evident. At the Public Hearing on November 27, 1990 a number of residents spoke out against the Ordinance and would prefer not to see any tree ordinance at all. Attached are the Planning & Zoning Commission reports and minutes from the meetings in October and November. Also attached is a resident petition opposing the use of municipal funds for diseased tree abatement. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY ~~J TO SECOND BY ~ CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 29C AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE CONTROL AND PREVENTION OF EPIDEMIC DISEASES IN SHADE TREES WITHIN THE CITY OF ANDOVER. SECTION 1. Declaration of policy. The City Council of the City of Andover has determined that the health of elm, pine and oak trees within the City are threatened by fatal 'diseases known as Dutch elm disease, oak wilt, and pine bark beetle (Ips pini). It has further determined that the loss of elm, oak and pine trees growing upon public and private property would substantially depreciate the value of property within the City, and impair the safety, good order, general welfare and convenience of the public. It is declared to be the intention of the City Council to control and prevent the spread of these diseases and other epidemic diseases of shade trees, and this Ordinance is enacted for that purpose. SECTION 2. Forester/Tree Inspector. A. Positions Created. The positions of Forester and Tree Inspector are hereby created within the City. B. Certification. The Tree Inspector shall be certified by the Minnesota Commissioner of Agriculture. Duties of Forester or Tree Insaector. It is the duty of the Forester/Tree Inspector to coor inate, under the direction and control of the City Council, all activities of the City relating to the control and prevention of Dutch elm disease and oak wilt and the spread of pine bark beetle (Ips pini), and other epidemic diseases of shade trees. The Forester/Tree Inspector shall recommend to the City Council the details of a program to be adopted by the City Council. SECTION 3. Tree Commission. C. Commission Created. A. :J The City Council of the City of Andover hereby authorizes the establishment of a City Tree Commission which shall consist of seven (7) members, citizens and residents of the City, who shall be appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council. Three (3) members shall serve a one (1) year term and four (4) members shall serve a two (2) year term. Each succeeding term shall be for two (2) years. Each member is eligible for reappointment at the end of their term. Members of the Commission shall serve without compensation. Duties of the Tree Commission. B. 2 ~) The Tree Commission will assist the Forester/Tree Inspector in establishing and prioritizing control areas, promulgate rules, regulations, standards and specifications, and advise the City Council of recommended actions. SECTION 4. Epidemic Disease Program. A. Intent. It is the intention of the City Council to conduct a program of plant pest control pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota statutes 1989, Section 18.023, as amended, directed at the control and elimination of Dutch elm disease, oak wilt, pine bark beetles, and elimination of other tree diseases, and is undertaken at the recommendation of the Commissioner of Agriculture and the City Council in the conduct of this program. SECTION 5~ Designation of Tree Disease Control Area(s). The City Council shall designate a Dutch wilt and/or pine bark beetle control area Andover in which these shade tree disease procedures shall be enacted. elm disease and/or oak within the City of ordinances and control SECTION 6. Nuisances Declared. A. The following are public nuisances wherever they maybe found within the City of Andover. ( 1 ) Any living or standing elm tree or to any degree with the Dutch Ceratocystis Ulmi (Busiman) Moreau of the elm bark beetles Scolytus or Hyplurgopinus rufipes (Marsch). (2) Any dead elm tree or part thereof with bark intact including logs, branches, stumps, or firewood which has not been disposed of proper~y, except that the stockpiling of bark bearing elm wood shall be permitted during the period from September 15th to April 1st of any year. part thereof infected elm disease fungus or which harbors any Multistriatus (Eichh) " ') </ (3) Any living or standing northern red oak, Quercus alba, northern pin oak, Quercus ellipsoidalis, black oak, Quercus velutina, and scarlet oak, Quercus coccinea, white oak, Quercus alba, bur oak, Quercus macrocarpa, and bicolor oak, Quercus bicolor that poses a threat of transmission of the oak wilt fungus to other trees of the same species through interconnected root systems. (4) Any material from the red oak group, northern red oak, Quercus alba, northern pin oak, Quercus ellipsoidalis, black oak, Quercus velutina, and scarlet oak, Quercus coccinea infected with the oak wilt fungus, Ceratocystis fagacearum and wilting in July and August of one year declared to be hazardous the following spring, from April 15th until July 1st. 3 '1 '--./ (5) Any pine bark beetle breeding material produced between February 1 and September 1. This includes recently dead or cut pine trees or pine logging slash created during this period that is not a part of a slash treatment for trapping Ips pini. B. Abatement. It is unlawful for any person to permit any public nuisance as defined in Subdivision A to remain on any premises owned or controlled by him/her within the City of Andover. Such nuisances may be abated in the manner prescribed by this Ordinance. SECTION 7. Inspection and Investigation. A. Annual Inspection. 1. Dutch elm disease: The Tree Inspector shall inspect all premises and places within the designated Dutch elm disease control area of the City of Andover at least three (3) times during the growing season, by June 15th, July 15th, and August 15th, to determine whether any condition described in Section 6, Subd. A(l) exists. 2. Elm wood: The Tree Inspector shall inspect all premises and places within the designated Dutch elm disease control area within the City of Andover by April 1st of each year for elm wood or logs/stumps that meet any of the conditions described in Section 6, Subd. A(l), and require by April 1st, removal or debarking of all wood logs, and stumps to be retained. 3. Oak wilt and pine bark beetle: The Tree Inspector shall inspect all premises and places within the designated oak wilt and/or pine bark beetle control areas within the City of Andover as many ti~es as practical or necessary to determine whether any conditions described in Section 6, Subd. A(3)(4)&(5) exists. B. Entry in Private Premises. The Forester/Tree Inspector or duly authorized agents may enter upon private premises at any reasonable time assigned to him under this Ordinance. Before making any inspection on private property within the City of Andover, the Tree Inspector shall give notice of said inspection to all affected residents and property owners either through an oral or written notice, or by publishing said notice in a local newspaper. Diagnosis. c. ,J The Forester/Tree Inspector shall whenever possible make diagnosis based upon accepted field symptoms and if deemed necessary, upon finding conditions indicating Dutch elm disease or oak wilt or pine bark beetle infestations or other epidemic disease of shade trees, immediately send appropriate 4 / '\ J specimens or samples to the Commissioner of Agriculture for laboratory analysis, or take such other steps for diagnosis as may be recommended by the Commissioner. Except as provided in Section 8, no action to remove infected trees or wood shall be taken until positive diagnosis of the disease has been made. SECTION 8. Abatement of Epidemic Tree Disease Nuisances. In abating the nuisance defined in Section 6 within the respective disease control areas in the City of Andover, the Forester/Tree Inspector shall cause the infected tree or wood to be sprayed, removed, burned or otherwise effectively treated in accordance with current technology and plans as may be designated by the Commissioner of Agriculture so as to destroy and prevent as fully as possible the spread of epidemic diseases of shade trees, including, but not limited to, the Dutch elm disease and the associated elm bark beetles, the oak wilt fungus, or pine bark beetles. To prevent root graft transmission of oak wilt within the designated oak wilt control area of the City of Andover, a barrier shall be created between diseased and healthy trees where deemed necessary by the Forester/Tree Inspector, either by treating the soil surrounding the trees with a fumigant, SMDC, or by digging a trench at least fifty-two (52") inches deep in the soil to isolate the diseased trees as recommended by the University of Minnesota. Such abatement procedures shall be carried out in accordance with current technical and expert opinions and plans as may be designated by the Commissioner of Agriculture. SECTION 9. Procedures for Removal of Infected Trees and Wood. C) A. If the diseased tree nuisance as described in Section 6, Subd. A(1-5) is located on private property the Forester/Tree Inspector shall send a written notific~tion and prescription to the owner of said property. It shall be the obligation of the property owner to carry out the prescribed abatement procedure(s) within twenty (20) days from the date of receipt of the notification unless a written variance is granted by the Forester/Tree Inspector because of unforseen hardships as determined by the Forester/Tree Inspector. B. If the owner fails to follow the prescription within the designated time period, the Forester/Tree Inspector shall notify the property owner by mail that the Forester/Tree Inspector will contract for the abatement of the nuisance. C. The Forester/Tree Inspector shall then proceed to contract for the prescribed abatement procedure as soon as possible and shall report to the City Clerk all charges resulting from the abatement procedures carried out on all such private property. The City Clerk shall list all such charges along with a City Administrative cost against each separate lot or parcel by September 1st of each year as special assessments to be collected commencing with the following year's taxes. 5 ~ Administrative costs as set by City Council Resolution for each lot or parcel shall be added to each assessment. D. If the Forester/Tree Inspector finds that danger of infestation of epidemic diseases in shade trees is imminent, he/she shall notify the abutting property owners by-certified mail that the nuisance will be abated within a specified time, not less than seven (7) days from the time of mailing of such notice. The Forester/Tree Inspector shall immediately report such action to the City Council and after the expiration of the time limited by the notice she/she may abate the nuisance. E. In the case of boulevard trees, notices will be mailed to the owner of the abutting property as previously described in Section 9, Subd. A, B & C. The owner of said property may choose to abate the nuisance herself/himself. However, should the owner desire City abatement of any boulevard tree, only fifty (50%) percent of the actually incurred costs of treatment and/or removal shall be assessed the property owner, and the other fifty (50%) percent shall be borne by the City. F. Stumps from infected trees on boulevards shall be removed by a machine, grinding up stump to six (6") inches below ground level, or digging up the, total stump. Said stump removal to be completed within six (6) months from the date of the cutting of said trees. G. All assessments levied for the repayment of tree disease abatement costs may be repaid over a five (5) year period. Such assessments shall be levied under authority granted by Minnesota Statutes 429.101. The maximum amount a resident shall be assessed in a tax year shall not exceed five hundred ($500.00) dollars. SECTION 10. Spraying Trees. Whenever the Forester/Tree Inspector determines that any tree or wood within the City of Andover is infested with disease, he/she may spray all nearby high value trees with an effective disease destroying concentrate. Spraying shall be conducted in accordance with technical and expert opinions and plans of the Commissioner of Agriculture and under the supervision of the Commissioner and agents thereof whenever possible. SECTION 11. Transporting Wood). Wood Prohibited (Epidemic Diseased () It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to transport within the City of Andover any diseased wood that is determined to be hazardous as described in Section 6, Nuisances Declared, without having obtained a permit from the Forester/Tree Inspector. The Forester/Tree Inspector shall grant such permits only when the purpose of this Ordinance will be served thereby. SECTION 12. License Requirements. 6 , ~ ~ It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to conduct as a business the cutting, trimming, pruning, removing, spraying or otherwise treating of trees, shrubs or vines in the city of Andover without first having secured a license from the City to conduct such a business. A. Application. Application for a license under this Section shall be made at the office of the City Clerk of the City of Andover. B. Application Form. The application for a license shall be made on a form approved by the City which shows, among other things, the name and address of the applicant, the number and names of the employees of the applicant, the number of vehicles of the applicant, together with a description and license number of each, and the type of equipment proposed to be used. C. Liability Insurance. No license or renewal of a license shall be granted, nor shall the same be effective, until the applicant has filed with the City Clerk proof of a public liability insurance policy covering: ( 1 ) All operations of such applicant under this for the sum of at least one hundred thousand dollars against liability for bodily injuries for each person. For the sum of at least three hundred ($300,000) dollars againpt liability for bodily or death to more than one (1) person from accident. Ordinance ($100,000) or death ( 2 ) thousand injuries one (1) (3) For the sum of at least fifty thou~and ($50,000) dollars against liability for damage or destruction to property. (4) The City shall be named and the insurance provided shall include the City as an additional party insured. Said policy shall provide that it may not be cancelled by the insurer except after ten (10) days written notice to the City, and if such insurance is so cancelled and licensee shall fail to replace the same with another policy conforming to the provisions of this Ordinance, said license shall be automatically suspended until such insurance shall have been replaced. ~) D. Worker's Compensation Insurance. Each license applicant shall file with the City a Certificate of Insurance of Worker's Compensation when such insurance is required by state statute. E. Chemical Treatment Requirements. 7 ~ Applicants who propose to use chemical substances in any activity related to treatment or disease control of trees, shrubs or vines shall file with the City Clerk proof that the applicant or an employee of the applicant administering such treatment has been certified by the Agronomy Division of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture as a "commercial pesticide applicator". Such certifications shall include knowledge of tree disease chemical treatment. SECTION 13. Interference Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to prevent, delay, or interfere with the Forester or his/her designated agents while they are engaged in the performance of duties imposed by this Ordinance. SECTION 14. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation who violates any section of this Ordinance shall be guilty .of a misdemeanor and shall be punished as defined by applicable State Law. SECTION 15. Repeal. Ordinance No. 29, 29A and 29B are hereby repealed in their entirety. SECTION 16. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day of , 199 . CITY OF ANDOVER James E. Elling, Mayor ATTEST: Victoria Volk, City Clerk o ", " ~ December 1, 1990 RESIDENT PETITION To be submitted to the Andover City Council STATEMENT: As the Andover City Council is considering amending Ordinance No. 29, Control and Prevention of Shade Tree Disease, we the undersigned submit the following for Council attention. As residents of the City of Andover, We oppose the use of public funds generated by municipal taxation for disease abatement procedures on private property as specified by the proposed amendment. r ~ I :~) . 1/, tf/. n. (;J , /33'/'1 Ij:&-~~.JJI(W I)"? 3 ') t//~ed. $L- ,.vJ ',33ZI U;:JICUf.cter' &- IUtu /:f-< 2-<:Y TL.. -'"'- ~ st;. g I.;. J'.4 ~ , . 22? 7 - (35 ':::L?-,{) -1/W dd0 <: I <,<; ~ LV] AJW, )307 13"5 rd /.17 IV tA./ r\ <! ~ 8> /h, u ~ 5t Ad/11M V " ' I '3...j 9 0 ~ -0 ~ ( s t.. ..J V I ;:3M - f'3:)7JJ ;4L1. J W ~3"3~(~>tlf 4v AJtr) .:2..1'6'3 /3" sA ~t-<f'. ,vV 13 tf5 fI !{~~d.Yt "5+ IV uJ 13 L/ 4 0 Up fA vrhv 8l- fl/lA./ ;~~:5 ~S;;N~ .address ~~~~ r11~nt~::! . 1J~ 1YJ~ G : ') , "'- ~'" . ~,ro /f)'<< A7'~ #?r) /3'Tlf'GJ ~ 41 "'~(' ,.2f: .1./ cv ~ 13,1~ 0 5:.u.rJ./ ~~ s-I- _ ~ \ '3 <..(-l( "S' ~..., A-f (6 CD ~-t. ~ 'w > · ,1'":l.,44-"X 2>c..uC\\b(D'"'> -"'E:s-\- !.J.G.)_ 1.~'3 Ii Y' 5&Jo/loc<J ,5/- AftJ (~::),~4 ,,-~I, \(JJtrD ,Sf. /VW I"?J ~ t:)Z-- ~II rd!JAF S1 . (\.J v..J /33;;)-7 ~c.JZJ~ SJ-. N.kJ. .~~~\ ~~,,~~ ~,~, 1;;;3&0 !(LU IIJN S-r II! aJ. '/337D QUiNA) 5,. AJtJ, ;2./5:,7 /34"'" ~~/.t/JJ ;) 1:!5 ~ ) ~....p1--f ~.AI W 212.( 134:tb ;tv-€.. IV c) ;). ( d- -; r ::3 f/.1.2i ./'9---v-E /'VL....J / ")? Ii ;2J .fJti~;~ot!! >Y 4. ur-/-, ~4-'b /3S1!i Av e-.f\J UJ '" I ,;L3~ /J'~ ~ ;t/V ~ ~ /$/I-..Jfw .4U. J J Cd'c( - I -; S"/1 JlV1 f'/ w. " /3tj~c( /WU9J:1. 7;.aJ. ; J3L/ (pi.( T ~ '" vS h. S+ H 4J I;~~;<C~:J-(~; ~ VV " . .' '\ ""J -name d~jj~ ,~~\0~~ o ~~f2' ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~I-a g~~~ (k-~-:;;!;ol f7r . " . . , .address :-} ,~ ~t7.f2i ~~QuX~ !~~ i i llLAl\aIl1 'rt. QAWOYl "A &~ ~,Y vz Jt~lll~~~ /33S' -rnrv.sA sJ. J,/{J./ . 13~~1 cJfrloJ 5{. N .l.AJ 1.)1-2-7 U;)~,y )(1;;;- h 151- -r 7j17fA-V' JJtJ ;Yt6- I~Y~ ae ptu 2.Lt:"lC'(-(3Lf-f:b ~ ~uJ J...'I?'f '/JLfI.J.. A-ve. ;v.w. ?-S-s1.. /3Y.zJ, ~ ItlW ;;>''S~I.:. \~~. {LG::) /336'0 ;tjJel1 Crefl: !Jr, /~ 3t () 7Lu..~~. f!A.~J.J( ~ aSif1-j??,&e/~ l1.w ZSY7 /33 ...p7~<"""O _ ,() h. . CJ..5o:i? 1~5rd (fLIf ,? 507 - /3.> "::!:- J....", N tJ , 2507 / s s rf'" [,fL€ IV <<J . o?ftf17 /33rd.' NY Nw. :2 '-I S-b ,),"> ~ ~ L~. ^-/. 0,/ Z'4 44 /3-=-) t-A LjJ. tfJ/;\J ~k'\.LL tlf'l ~ l :, 3 7 ~ rAplJpy c;;l , /13,'7 ~ (1 aJrl/i1~M J ~'7??0 cQ~QOle:/ ~ l33ZZ ~~O)LJ xW ,>>;.'). vO/l\-",d('/ 5+ ,v(,.../ I Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 5 (Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 44, Junkyards) \ ,J MOTION by Vistad, Seconded by Jovanovich, that we send Council with approval of the Andover Planning and Zon g Commission the Ordinance 44 ordinance regulating and licensing utomotive recycling yards and/or Junkyards and dealers and r. pealing Ordinance No.9 with the appropriate changes that we mave de at tonight's meeting. Public hearing was held and there we comments made; six people spoke, all six were In objection to t ordinance. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ferris had a problem with al the changes. The Council aksed them to look at the height of the ence so the ordinances agree, not to control the stacking or to rewr' e It. He had a hard time with the fact that the City wi)1 not sit wn and work with the yards to come up with some methodology to w ch everyone can agree. He said he didn't like continually making or Inances that increase costs of running a business hoping to ev tually run them out of business. The only other constructive chang was on Section 4.7. Putting up the fence wil I not hide the Junk one bit. He did not see this as a venture to get the City an the owners to work any closer together; in fact he felt it is Just e opposite. Mr. Lund - appreciate Commissioner Ferris's honesty. He asked what they can do about i . The ordinance does keep changing and eventually it wil I be change to something they cannot afford to do. More than anything he'd Ii to sit down and find out what they all have to do. Chairperson Pe e suggested talking to the Councilmembers individually eetlng to see If something could be worked out. There will be cha es with progress. but everyone has to learn to live There has been input from those in the recycling community, s as an opportunity to solve some of the problems. 5-Yes, l-No (Ferris), l-Absent <Coleman) This will to' go the CI ty Counci"I on December 18. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 29 DISEASED SHADE TREES Mr. Carlberg reviewed the changes made to Ordinance 29 since it was before the Commission on November 13. One concern is the authority given the Tree Board in the ordinance. Staff thinks it should be more of a citizens' group to set up programs and activities and citizen participation, etc., not be in control of establishing control areas or enforcing the details of the ordinance itself. After some .: discussion;--the Commission generallyagreed;' ..-..... --..- ~-cCommissioner-Ferris expressed his concern of implementing an.ordinance that has the potential of imposing large financial hardships upon the ,- residents. The ordinance Is ineffective if neither the residents ~) nor.the City can afford to do it. He also wanted to see the control areas recommended. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 :.J Page 6 (Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 26, Diseased Shade Trees) Commissioner Ferris felt enforcing this ordinance could cost a property owner more than the value of the property. There is a need for it, but there is no funding for It. But the City cannot get funding without the ordinance. (The Commission recessed at this time to have more copies of the proposed ordinance made for those present. 8:50; reconvened at 9:00 p.m. ) David Stephenson. Plant Health Special ist. Minnesota Department of Aqrlculture - agreed that a Tree Commission should be an advisory group, not one that enforces the ordinance. The Diseased Tree Ordinance has been in effect since the mid-1970s. This proposal has only a few minor changes and is one of the criteria for cost-sharing of dollars and other programs for the control of diseased trees. They are in the process of drafting a Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County for the use of the vibrating plow being purchased. That plow wil I be made available at no cost to the cities who have an ordinance in place. Mr. Stephenson explained the control areas are to begin the management of the problem and could be either a highly-diseased area to stop the danger of spreading onto other properties or to keep an area which is already disease-free from being infected. If the ordinance was not in place, the cost could be even higher because the number of diseased trees will increase. They are looking at control areas that will cover the entire community within three years or as agreed to. The Intent is to control the disease and prevent it from spreading off the property. Ann Sikora - stated her oaks are dying from Chestnut Bore, not oak wilt. Mr. Stephenson acknowledged that the Chestnut Bore is a problem because the,trees have been .weakened by the drought. This ordinance does not deal with that, only with the spread of the Identifiable problem of oak wilt disease and what Is required to be done about it. Ms. Sikora - has been planting trees for 40 years. The oaks are dying, but other trees are taking their place. She couldn't see why an ordinance Is needed. She has over 100 acres of woods, stating she has had..more exper lence _wi th those woods than any CI ty Forester. Mr. - Stephenson rev i ewed the aerl a I surveyma.p-of where - oak w il t appears in the City, showing there is a significant problem in --Andover. He felt is is controllable. The Commission also explained the ordinance has been in place for many years, and this has been an :~ attempt to get funding for Andover from outside sources. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 " Page 7 ,,~ (Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 26, Diseased Shade Trees) ~ - Ms. Sikora - argued the State has no money either, again feeling new trees should be planted. Chairperson Pease said the Idea was to be able to get help for the Individual property owners and to try to control the problem. Art Jaworski. 3230 173rd Lane NW - stated in 1973 when the ordinance was adopted he the tree Inspector. He wondered why this is being done allover again, asking when the City stopped having a tree inspector. He asked for a little historical background on the matter. Mr. Stephenson gave some background on the proposals and funding on the State level since the mid-1970s. Mr. Jaworski - stated this was all done before. He thought educating the poeple is the most important thing to do, feeling that is where Andover dropped the bal I. Many of the people moving out here didn't know how to take care of their trees. Mr. Stephenson explained in 1981 the shade tree program in the State was cut because of a budget crunch. The funds were restored in 1985, and programs were started again on a smaller scale. Now Federal dollars are becoming available for suppression of forest disease and insect programs, referencing the cost-sharing done by Anoka County to purchase a vibrating plow. The cost share will be with communities only on a one-to-one basis. Someone asked how effective the vibrating plow is. Mr. Stephenson stated about 85 percent by those who know what they are doing. Ron? . 170th and Ivywood - disagreed and explained the problem in his area, the things they did to stop the disease, with the result being that most of his and one neighbor's trees are gone and all of those on another neighbor's lot. Mr. Jaworski - disagreed with the gentleman, explaining the precautions taken In his area which resulted In no further spread _______of oak wilt. He~,thought the key is going deep enough to get the roots. Mr. Stephenson thought it sounded lik~ the gentleman had~ Chestnut Bore, not oak wilt. CJ Mr. Jaworski - wondered what the cost will be to the residents for enforcing the ordinance with the addition of a full-time forester, etc. He again stated his belief that a good educational program is more_important.. The Commission noted there have been educational programs in place-for- y-ears but morels needed.tosolvethe problem.-' O~~. of the problems the Commission has tried to address has been cost, but it is J~st not possible to make that determination. It will depend on what the City decides to do for control areas, budget allocations, etc. One change in the ordinance Is to expedite enforcement in a timely manner. There are some people who Just do not care if the disease spreads to surrounding properties, and this should help in that respect. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 ,::) Page 8 <Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 26, Diseased Shade Trees) Rav Sowada. Cltv Tree Inspector - has been the tree Inspector since 1978. The problem with the existing ordInance Is having to notify the Council of a problem. People are Interested In this Issue, and this is an attempt to update the ordinance and begin a program to save people's trees. However, he only spends 4 to 6 percent of his time on the tree program; and most of that Is In educating people. Ms. Sikora - didn't see how the disease could be stopped on her 100 acres. She can't keep up with it, though she recognized it is the Chestnut Bore, not oak wilt. Mr. Sowada talked about several methods of stopping the spread of oak wilt, including covering the cut wood during early sp~ing and summer months. Leon KozlowskI. 1021 Crosstown Boulevard - asked for a definition of shade trees. Mr. Sowada stated they are deciduous trees such as oak, elm, ash. Mr. Kozlowski felt shade tree is one which provides shade for his lawn and building areas, not those on large parcels of land of 10, 40, or 100 acres. As he reads the ordinance, it is a far reaching approach to the entire city. . It gives ~ore power to the tree inspector than the police department has. He also felt it is very restrictive, referring to the last portion on licensing and bonding to remove trees. That adds to the expense, plus having to remove the diseased wood and the stump and having to obtain a permit. He also felt it Is contradictory to require the removal of the diseased wood, yet it is illegal to transport the wood within the City. He -asked where that wood can be taken. 'Discussion noted one reason for the ordinance Is because people were bringing diseased wood Into Andover and dumping it. The Tree Inspector can permit the wood to be transported.out of the City. The tree disposal site in Bunker Hills has been closed, so now It must be taken to Ramsey or East Bethel. There Is an obligation to obtain a permit from the City so it knows what activity Is taking place; however, there wll I be no cost for that permit. A property owner may take down his own trees. The licensing and bonding Is required only of those companies being hired to take down trees and Is for the - protection of the property owner. The wood can also be used for firewood as long as it Is covered during the appropriate time of year to prevent the spread of the disease. Mr. Kozlowski - still felt a definition of shade tree Is needed and thaL.thearea being considered needs to be.defined.. He didn't feel the intent of the ordinance was to apply to those areas of ~he-house on 100 acres, but to the higher density areas. The Commission explained the intent Is to control the spread of the disease. 'At this time, no control area has been defined. They also felt the ordinance :~ clearly states what trees are included. ~) o Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - Novembe. 27, 1990 Page 9 <Public Hea.ing Continued: O.dinance No. 26, Diseased Shade T.ees) Sophie Kozlowski - felt Andove. should have a t.ee restoration program. She has been planting trees for 40 years, Mr. Kozlowski - summarized what Is being said Is the City is planning to spend a lot of money eradicating diseased trees. He felt it would be wiser to spend the money on replanting trees that will live in this area. He didn/t feel the oak was indigenous to the area because of the solis. M.. Stephenson strongly disagreed, that the oak is native to the area. The p.oblem is when people start moving into an area. The.e a.e ways to protect the oak that needs to be followed by p.ope.ty owners, builde.s, etc. He then .eviewed some of the p.ecautions to take .ega.ding sto.age of diseased oak wood, the t.imming of oak t.ees, and .emoval of diseased t.ees. Nancy Erickson - thought Section 9 was too .est.ictive, that it may be un.ealistic to .emove al I t.ees within 20 days. She has been wo.king on he. p.oblem fo. th.ee yea.s. M.. Stephenson stated the 20 days .efe.s to abatement, that is determining a cou.se of action, not to the actual .emoval itself. The.e is a va.iance p.ovision fo. ha.dship, and the .emoval of 50 t.ees, as an example, would be conside.ed a ha.dship. Garv Lensman. 153rd and Nlohtenoale - asked who pays the expenses fo. t.ee .emoval in the cont.ol a.ea, the City o. the p.ope.ty owne.. If it is the City, then everyone ends of paying for It. If It Is the p.ope.ty owne., conceivably it could cost mo.e than the house and p.ope.ty a.e worth. He hoped the money wouldn/t come f.om his pocket, but he didn/t see much funding coming from eithe. the State of Fede.al gove.nments, at least not enough to make any difference. For the past 20 yea.s the City has had an o.dlnance but hasn/t. been enfo.clng it. He asked fo. an explanation of how the county is pu.chaslng the vib.ating plow and what othe. cities have this o.dlnance. Commissione. Fe..is stated financing is his conce.n also. He felt it is a good o.dinance, but he doesn/t know whe.e the money will come . f.om to enfo.ce it. M.. Stephenson b.iefly outlined the funding and p.oposed plan fo. use of the vlb.ating plow that will be available to cities in the county. Ove. 100 othe. cities have this o.dinance including Anoka, Ramsey, Llno Lakes and Blaine. The Commission again noted that the o.dinance was updated so that the City could pa.tlcipate in using the vlb.ating plow and be eligible fo. ..outside funding~~ They also st.essed that ve.y few changes have been made to the o.dlnance that has been In effect. Ms. E.ickson - also enacted and funded. homeowne.. Has the felt She City a t.ee .eplacement p.og.am should be said Andove. has done nothing fo. the looked at appropriating any funding fo. this? Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 10 ~ <Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 26, Diseased Shade Trees) The Commission stated this Is only the process of updating tbe ordinance. No funding has been allocated yet, but they noted the Eden Prairie budget for Forestry of $139,000 for 1989. Right now Andover does not have the funding nor the staff, which makes it difficult. Mr. Lensman ~ stated the City does not have a good tax base to generate taxes. His fears were as the City continues to grow, more needs are generated. Given that and the bond issues already passed, he was concerned about becoming the highest taxed city in the metropolitan area. Ms. Kozlowski - stated the taxes were low. then everyone started moving out here, and more fire stations, schools, etc., were needed. She predicted people will just be leaving their homes when the taxes get too high. The Commission felt many people move to Andover because they like the vicinity, the open spaces, and the trees. There was continued discussion with those present about their fears of higher costs and higher taxes, aggravated by the predicted recession. Mr. Kozlowski - asked if Section 13 is new and about the current City budget for this. Mr. Sowada said no, just the word "Forester" was added. This means that the property owner cannot lnterfer with the Forester performing his duties. The current budget has very little in It for this. Mr. Sowada also reviewed the process he uses to notify property owners and working with them to correct the problem. Mr. Lensman - said according to Section 7, B, he has to give notice of said inspection through oral or written notice. He felt It should be written so there is documentation. The Commission also explained the legal notice when put In the Anoka Union, the City/s official newsspaper. Harold Sullivan. 15300 Prairie Road - asked the cost to establish the program and how much funding will come from the State. The Commission noted those figures are not known exactly, but a staff of six or seven people would be needed to enforce the ordinance city-wide. Without knowing the control areas, the cost factor cannot be determined. The amount that can be done will ultimately determine by the dollars that will be budgeted by the Council. :~J Mr. Sullivan - felt that staff already exists on the county and state level, plus at the University of Minnesota, to help with education, answer questions, etc. He felt it may be possible to get a lIttle funding-from the State, but he-thought this Is just a futi Ie attempt to solve the problem. He wanted to know how much money it will cost to get the ordinance and people In place in order to get some outside funding. The Commission did not know for sure. again referring to the budgeted items in Eden Prairle/s 1989 budget for Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 11 , \J <Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 26, DIseased Shade Trees) Forestry. Several resIdents didn't feel Andover had to do what other cIties are doing. The Commission explaIned they gather ordinances from other citIes for Ideas and reference and then draft an ordinance that wIll work for Andover. Ms. Sikora - felt the City is not consIderIng the "old timers" who cannot contInue paying higher and hIgher taxes. Mr. Jaworski - asked when this ordinance wIll be In place. Chairperson Pease hoped it would be passed onto the City Council tonIght for theIr consIderatIon on December 18. Funding Is a defInIte factor, and she felt that other sources such as sharing with other communitIes, wil I need to be explored. Mr. Kozlowski - noted the ordinance is vague in the specific requirements for abatement. Mr. Jaworski - stated the natural solution to the problem is the burn that used to go through these areas periodically. It would kill some trees, new ones would take its place. That's not possible now. He commended the CommIssion for making the effort on thIs issue. MOTION by Ferris, Seconded by Vistad, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. The CommissIon continued discussion on the ordinance itself, the main concern of Commissioners Ferris and Vistad beIng the overwhelmIng cost that could be encountered by the property owner. They felt a cap should be set on the total cost to a property owner wIthIn a tax year. That amount could be adjusted each year just as other fees are. CommIssioner Peek was not In favor of a cap. There was also concern about enacting an ordInance that cannot be enforced because of the lack of fundIng. The fear was for hugh costs to the resIdents both In terms of taxes to fInance enforcement and to the Individual property owner who has many trees to be removed. Discussion noted the size of the control area wIll In part be determIned by the sIze of the budget allocated by the CouncIl to thIs item. The Commission also agreed the authority of the Tree Board should only be a recommending body to the CouncIl. The CommIssIon noted those In attendance this evening generally opposed a tree ordinance. Mr. Carlberg noted he receIved a call from someone In favor of the ordInance who saId they would have a petItIon of 7 to 20 names supportIng It. Ms. SIkora stated she could bring lh a petitIon wIth many signatures opposed to It. 'J \._-~~. MOTION by Vlstad, Seconded by Peek, recommend to the City CouncIl apprpval of the new Diseased Shade Tree OrdInance No. 29C with the approprIate changes: Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 12 , ,-.J <Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 26, Diseased Shade Trees) Section 3, B - The Tree Board will assist the Forest/Tree-Inspector in establishing and prioritizing control areas, promulgate rules, regulations, standards and specifications, and advise the City Council of recommended actions. Section 9. G - add the wording that a cap of what a resident could be assessed for be the maximum of $500 in a tax year. For the rest of the ordinance to go as written. There was a public hearing and there were a number of people that preferred not to see any tree ordinance at all. Change ail references of Tree Board to Tree Commission. There were a number of residents that were going to be on a petition that were in favor of the ordinance, and there was favorable response received over the phone that we were working on a tree ordinance. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Ferris, Jonak, Pease, Vistad; NO-Jovanovich. Peek, ABSENT-Coleman. Motion carried. Chairperson Pease - voted yes but is not certain a cap is needed or what the appropriate dollar amount would be; however, I do feel something Is needed to get started on the problem. Commissioner Vlstad - feels that we definitely do need a cap to protect our residents because the people with even one acre of heavily wooded land. If we don/t have a cap, depending upon political changes that take place or who makes the decisions on what can and should be done, can receive an extreme financial hardship on that particular resident. I do not feel that we should do that. . We have an obligation to the people In our community to try to work with our people to the best of those people/s ability without causing extreme financial problems with those residents. Chairperson Pease - agreed, but didn/t know how that could be'put in an ordinance and dldn/t know what dollar amount It should be Commissioner Ferris - agreed with Commissioner Vistad emphatically, but reminds the Council that our objective here was to seek alternative funds for solving our problem, that we must be careful that those alternative funds are not from the coffers of our residents; I think the cap is most essential; I would never have voted yes for this unless that cap was there. Knowing from Mr. Stephenson that it does allow us to seek those alternative funds, I feel this Is a way to meet the objective without assuring that the City or its residents are overburdened by the cost of it. , '\ \_ _",J The recommendation will to go the City Council on December 18. 11:08 p.m. , '\ ......~ \~) CITY OF ANDOVER. REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION November 27, 1990 DATE AGENDA ITEM 5. Public Hearing Continued Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ~ Planning David L. Carlberg, City planner BY: APPROVED FOR _~GENDA BY: At the November 13, 1990 Planning & zoning Commission meeting, the Commission requested that the public hearing be re-opened and Ordinance No. 19 be brought back to the Commission with the following changes. 1. Add a section to the Ordinance establishing a Tree Board. ~ ...-.....:.-. ~- ~) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting MInutes - Novembe~ 13, 1990 Page 5 ( - FHA Financing/O~dinance No. 44, Fencing/Junkya~ds, Cont) Jonak a~~lved at this tIme. 8:42 p.m.) M~. Ca~1 e~g stated the indicatIon was any FHA financIng would be only fo~ those ~eas that a~e two to th~ee city lots f~om the junkya~ds, that the~e uld need to be a buffe~ between the junkya~ds and FHA financed hou "ng. The Commission discussIon then ~ecognized the~e is not much else e City can do wIth the fencIng .equI.ements as It pe~talns to FHA inancing of p~ope.ties adjacent to the junkya~d a~eas. The~e was ome f.ust~ation ove. lack of p.og.ess in cleaning up that TIF a.ea, t lack of an agg.essive p.og~am to clean up o. eliminate the junkya s, and that the location fo. Comme.cial Bouleva~d has not been ete~mined so development plans can p~oceed. They felt the Council sH uld be making a pol'Icy statement .ega.dlng that a~ea as to what the "ty wants to accomplish within the TIF zone. The CommIssion noted the ini "al directive f~om the Council was to look at conflicting ~equi~emen between o.dinances of the fencing he i gh t ve.sus the stack I ng he I gH of ca~s and pa~ts beh I nd thef ences. . """ The ~ed-Ilning by HUD was a side sue.Afte~ some dIscussIon, It was gene.ally felt that the fence heIgh should be six feet. No specific decision was made ~egardlng the heig of stackIng of ca~s and of salvage auto parts, though the~e was s culatlon that the last d~aft had stacking the same height as the fenc M.. Ca.lbergstated he would collate the Co mate~ials on this matte~ fo~ the public_hear the public hearIng and contact the affected p~ . cII Minutes and P & Z .... He _w 11 I ~eadve~ t I se e~ty owne~s. . .'~ --------- ----~-----""''--_..... .-.------- DISCUSSION - COST FACTORS AND'CONTROL AREAS RELATING TO ORDINANCE NO. . :.29. DISEASED SHADE TREES.~:.:,:.:.:...;..:~:;.:'~.~::_-_=-:--.~_-:-:.-:--:-~-=-=-'.'--;'-:.:'., '__.;..~:,:.:;=::. -- --.. ----:-':".:-".--.-::--.:--:-.--.--.-.--. '--:'=:---=-:-.7.:" -" '--:-:---~.~-~:'.~.-:-:-_-=::---::'-::-~-_-.--_-_:-__-_-:::- --_____.__, :._. () ____-=-_Mr_. ...Car I berg ,~efe~~ed _to. the --~epo~t.-i n-the -Agenda--mate~ 1 a I ~e I.at 1 ng'-to. __.__ . cost,facto~s fo~ the diseased shade-tree pr:'og~am In deslgnated"cont~ol ~a~eas. He ~ecommendedfl~st adoptlng-an'app~op~late'o~dinanceand"'- then establishIng a Tree Board. Once those are done, funding can be- add~essed, possibly even meeting with the CouncIl to dIscuss funding. PlannIng and ZonIng CommIssion MeetIng Minutes - November 13, 1990 Page 6 ~J <Discussion - Cost Factors and Control Areas/Ordinance 29, ContInued) DIscussion was on the responsIbIlItIes of a Tree Board. It was felt that body would recommend the control areas and determine the bUdget needs, with Staff advIsing them. Mr. Carlberg felt that two addItional Staff people would be needed to carry out the Intent of the ordinance. He also noted a developer's agreement also needs to be establIshed to protect trees durIng constructIon and for some type of reforestation program, though he did not think that agreement should be a par~ of Ordinance 29. The Commission generally agreed the draft ordinance reviewed at the October 23 meeting should stand with the exception o~ adding a section to establish a Tree Board. Also, add that the cont~ol areas will be established from time to time as. required by the CIty Councilor at the direction of the Tree Board. The Commission agreed the Council should determine who makes up the Tree Board and how many members it should have. i The Public Hearing is to continue at the November 27 Planning Commission meeting..., I I BUSINE S ChaIr erson Pease reported on the Council's action to rescind the denial f the Scardlgli varIance request and their subsequent approval of that quest. There was a ngthy dIscussion on the varIance and SpecIal Use Permit process. A con rn was raIsed that some petltione~s want to wIthdraw ~theIr request if he CommIssIon denIes It. Ther~ maybe some mIsunderstanding a they may not know that the 'Commlsslon Is only an. advIsory board, that the CouncIl has the fInal authorIty. One suggestIon was to have prInted sheet outlIning the process so everyone has the same I ormation. Another .recommendatIon was to have ' . '.- -- .the Chairperson, br Ief I Y'.O II ne ..the procedure.:pr lor:.. ~9.;...b.~~n.!lg_,?,~~:~.-.:~~~ ~. _.'-"~specnTc--fequ'e-st~.n-'~~Mr-:---Caili"g~sfated'ne-wouTci"dr-aft a memo for the ,. CommissIon to consIder outlln g the varIance and Special Use PermIt procedure that could be staple 0 the applIcation and/or gIven out at the CommIssIon meetings. I, DIscussIon was then on Commissioner ris's recommendation to ask the .- -. -new.-Counc i I .tak I ngoff I ce .1 n January. to orma II y.reconf I rm-th~---"'='-:,:=,:::,: ::-:-.-. . .PI ann I'ng-Commtss I on~-and-Comprehensi ve: Pia-Task- F6fce'- appcifntmenfS:. . _ n . . It gIves the new Counci L a chance to re-eva ate the members and would . -.-:- ""-~stand . asa-v_o~e-::of 'conf i dence 'from-them': .'.So -debated..:that:. has."l1ot-:-.:_::-:::::. been done In the past, that the stagIng of teL allows for' new appoIntments every year, and It could mean some issIoners would become "Yes men/women" for the CouncIl. .:) I I. I CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST F.ORPLANNING COMMISSION ACTION November 13, 1990 DATE ~) AGENDA ITEM 5. Discussion - Cost Factor & Control Areas - Ord #2 Diseased Shade Trees ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Planning ~ David L. Carlberg, BY: Ci ty Planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: At the October 23, 1990 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting the Commission requested Staff to research cost factors relating to the diseased shade tree program and apply them to the designated control areas. The following is a list of questions from the Commission. 1. High-low cost range for trenching, tree and stump removal near buildings and in open woods. 2. Administrative costs for inspections, talking with residents, coordinating trenching and tree removal. 3. Cost of providing brush removal and locations brush can be hauled for disposal. 4. Cost of a chipping program. 5. Unit costs as applied to the proposed control areas. Upon researching reliable sources to answer the above stated questions, staff realizes that the ability to quantify a certain amount or cost is very difficult. The questions will now be discussed in greater detail. Question #1 The question as to the high-low costs of trenching, tree and stump removal can be viewed in two ways: on a per tree basis or perhaps the most desirable, on a man hour basis. o . -~. .----- -'The trenching costs can be directly related to the City's ability to secure the use of the vibrating plow from Anoka County. The cost of trenching would then be the man hour time needed to operate the plow ($10-20/hr). To be considered for the vibrating plow, the City must meet the criteria established by Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Committee (MSATC) Oak Wilt Task Force's Cost- Share Program. The criteria were viewed by the Commission at the last meeting;q-Otherwise,~-.'a plow rented-from a contractor can cost from $75-$125/hr and the majority set a minumum price of around $350, w~ic:h_.~a_r_ies depen_ding. upon_,the contractor. ~ . The cost for tree removal on a per tree basis can range anywhere from $1,200 for a tree removed near a building to free if the tree is removed from a wooded lot for use as a fuel or recreational fire. The cost on a per hour basis can range from $50-$75/hr in the winter and fall . <J Page Two Discussion Diseased Trees November 13, 1990 Question #2 The administrative costs for inspections, talking with residents and coordinating trenching and tree removal can be based on an hourly rate of $10-$20. The amount of time staff (includes Forester, Tree Inspector, and Part-time Inspectors) spends doing administrative duties is hard to quantify. When a program is being started more time is spent talking with residents and doing inspections. As the program progresses more time will be 'spent coordinating tree removal and trenching. A strong educational program for Andover residents should be a major component of the diseased. tree program. The Anoka County Extension Office would play an integral part in the resident education phase of the program. Consult the attached budget information from the City of Eden Prairie for personnel service costs. . Question #3 The cost for providing brush removal depends on the role the City chooses to take when establishing a program. The City of Eden prairie requested $7,000 for hauling trees for disposal in their---'- 1990 budget. (see attached budget, contractual services) The cost of disposal at a wood waste site can range from $2-12 per cubic yard for brush and trees, and $10 or more depending on size for stump disposal. Coon Rapids charges a resident $25 for pickup at curbside with no restrictions on the amount removed. This will probably change with the closing of the Anoka County Diseased Wood Site. A list of wood waste disposal sites will be available at the ,meeting for your review. Question *4 The cost of a chipping program is again hard to quantify. With an approved Ordinance #29 and the ability of the City's program to meet the criteria for cost-share programs and grants, a chipper can be secured on a 50/50 match program through, for example, the Minnesota Office of Waste Management (OWM). The City of Ramsey currently has a chipping program and another option would be to enter into an agreement with Ramsey to use their chipper. CJ Question #5 The ability to apply unit costs to the proposed control areas at . this- time .is .impossible-. . The wide "range of cost factors for administration, tree removal, waste disposal, etc. make it difficult to set a certain dollar figure on anydefinedcontrol-- area. The problem of how to establish control areas needs to be discussed before any cost factors can be applied. Questions raised include: How do we define control areas? What areas should be considered high priority? What criteria do we use to " '-...../ 'J Page Three Discussion - Diseased Trees November 13, 1990 distinguish these areas? Should areas with high residential density, areas slated for new development and parks be considered as high priority areas? These are just a few questions that need to be answered. The best way to answer these questions is to establish a tree board who will in conjunction with staff, define the control areas in the City of Andover. REVIEW Upon doing the research to the above questions, time and time again the need to develop a diseased tree program was evident. The acceptance of Ordinance #29 appears to be the first step in the direction of developing the program. Upon passage of the Ordinance, the funding can then be evaluated, appropriate staff can be hired, a tree board can be established and the necessary steps can be taken to remedy our epidemic diseased tree problem. ~--_.._..- -"-" -.- @). a:xJr-\e.J:): C\1?ci~ve Ef\I/\r&'\(Y\t'rrt:S J 00(\ .!. ret\ce, l.{q7~.::sY~8 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 4334 MILAGE 1500 1500 4350 PUBLIC INFORMATION 2500 2500 42 3 5 REFORES T A TI ON i'~':'::'...,."..",,,;.u:.':~;'L:':':':\4 0 0 0 ::;-2;:::-"':...~:;;;...:::...:~.:': 6 0 0 O. .:j 4393 'RENTALS.:.::(.COUNTY:: CHIPPERJ.:;:~;:D2 10 0 OL::-::"':::~''o:-;:':'i''';;Si'':' 1.9_<;>.00.:,:::" 4341 EMPLOYMENT ADS . . '100 . .' '-... 100 4419 AERIAL PHOTOS 200 200 4230 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 3000 3000 4375 WASTE"' DISPOSAL <(HAULING) .::;;:.~:.o-;.1000.c".;'''';::::J.,~'..;;:i:-';:':,'o,:,C:'7 000;' SUB TOTAL $ 33300 $ 30300 COMMODITIES 4220 SUPPLIES 4551.0FFICE SUPPLIES 4226 CHEMICALS 6200 700 400 6200 700 400 SUB TOTALS $ 7300 'PROGRAM TOTALS $ 7300 $135100 '$124100 --------_.~- _.- ------- --- - - --- --- -- " "\ , , '.--' Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1990 Page 2 ,~ (P Hearing: Ordinance No. 44, Continued) ner Vlstad said the lenders are already aware of the problem, feeling t' would give additional information as to the effect of the businesses a the type of screening lending institutions might prefer. Chai rson Pease wondered if that is within their scope. The objective was 0 determine the FHA standards. After further discussi the Commission agreed to table the item on the questIonnaIre for loc appraisers untIl the informatIon Is received from the FHA. The Iso asked Mr. Carlberg to send FHA a written request regarding thel fenCing and bermlng standards and the reasons residents around the jun not receiVing FHA fin an c i n g . Mr. Carlberg suggested the placement of ercial Boulevard be also discussed with the proposed amendment to Or nance 44, as that location wil I have a direct impact on the fen' g of some of the junkyards. Chairperson Pease asked for a motio to table this until the information is received from the FHA. Then, i ther information is desired, the Commission can proceed with the quest naire. MOTION by Ferris, Seconded by Coleman, to so move. unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 29 DISEASED SHADE TREES David Stephenson, Plant Health Specialist of the Department of Agriculture, pointed out the criteria for participation in cost-share programs in the Agenda packet. In updating the CIty's Diseased Shade Tree Ordinance, he did so with three things in mind: 1) the biOlogy of the tree diseases and problems; 2) how this o.r:dinance-relates to State Statute; and 3) how this ordinance relates to the cost-share program criterIa. The proposed ordinance wil I meet all those crIterIa. Mr. Stephenson noted the State of Minnesota is actively pursuing "cost-share 'mon 1 es" from the . Un ited-States' For-est Servi te-'as'well"-as:~the~:='=-" State of MInnesota to use for oak wilt suppression. This year they -. received $50,000 of the $150,060 they requested. All $50,000 Is initIally earmarked for Anoka/County. The DNR has contributed another $25,000. The Anoka County Board has also agreed to add additional funds and has put together requests for proposals to purchase a vIbrating plow. Hopefully the plow will be available by next summer -----to.,communlt-ies-that- meet-this Ocr n'er la-.--He-sa'l d-they-wi--!-}-again-be ,... 'seek i ng -addi t-i ana I--fundl ng th i s year from the' US-Forest See-vi c.e-:------ ..- [. I I --Mr. Stephenson then reviewed the proposed changes made to thedraft--- ordinance. The key to the feasibility of controlling diseased trees " is to. have the Council set up control areas within the City, that '-...../ , . --._ _ .U __ Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1990 Page 3 [~ (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) would be priority areas, in which the ordinance would appl~~ so the entire City would not have to be done initially. The criteria specifies they would like to see the entire City covered within three years. All species of oak in Minnesota are a problem and have been included in the ordinance, though it is only the red oak that are the spore producers. A good point is the ordinance is not confined to oak wilt, pine bark beetle and dutch elm disease. The City may want to do what the State does, and that is to put together the rules and regulations separate from the ordinance that spell out in more detail the procedures that need to be followed. The new Section 6, Inspection and Investigation, has been revised to meet State Statutes. I I, Mr. Stephenson continued tha~ Section 6, Subsection 3, allows the Tree Inspector to make a diagnosis based upon accepted field symptoms or to send in samples for laboratory analysis only i"f he deems it necessary. They teach and certify those making the inspections on how to diagnose tree diseases. In the new Section 7, the abating of the nuisance is within the control area and wil I be treated in accordance with current teChnology and plans as designated by the Commissioner of Agriculture. That treatment changes from time to time and doesn't need to be.'i ncorpora ted' into the ordi nances. - To. preven t root 'graf t transmission of oak wilt, they will be requiring cities to require a barrier to be created between diseased and healthy trees. The depth of the trench has been changed to 52 inches. He also guessed the greatest cause of oak wilt spread in Andover now is not by root graft but by overland spread caused by new development. Mr. Stephenson noted under Section 8, Subsection 3, he set the administrative cost at S100, thinking it provides more of a deterrent for the resident just allOWing the City to do the work and being ,assessed for It. This Is a recommendation, but that cost can be set -at any thing the City feels is appropriate. There are some costs Involved on the part of the City, the greatest one being the time spent with the resident explaining what needs to be done and the coordinating of the control efforts. I .. Discussion'wason some of the .costsinvolved in .thisprogram.Mr. _.._ Stephenson said the policy has.not yet been established as to whether the vibrating plow will be operated by someone from the county or by City Staff. The Individual r~sldent would not be allowed to operate it. He also explained that ~ot all trees will have to be removed Immediately. The only red oaks that will need to be removed immediately are those that are In danger of producing spores. - -- ~ .::~=-.:However,-they-.'are-::onl'y-spore-produc i ng..-w Lth I n-_ the._spr:i ng .fr:om_when_ ___. they first become infected. A tree that has been dead for two to ,:.::...:n: ~hree :years-wou I dnot: ne~d. to._be,.. cemoved Immed1..~tel y, though_at some _...._ pointit"will come' down, either naturally or taken down. He 'estImated that in any given year, only about 20 to 50 percent of the trees need to be removed. i ,.'\ ,-,/ DATE: December 18, 1990 "\ '-.J' ITEMS GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL Regular City Council Minutes - December 4, 1990 Special City Council Minutes - December 6, 1990 Regular Planning & zoning Minutes - December 11, 1990 Regular Park and Recreation Minutes - December 6, 1990 Andover Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes - 12/4/90 Financial Health Profile; MN State Auditor Building Department Report, November, 1990 Regular planning & Zoning Minutes - November 27, 1990 Comprehensive Plan Task Force Minutes - November 29, 1990 Letter from Woodland Development Co. PLEASE ADDRESS THESE ITEMS AT THIS MEETING OR PUT THEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA. / '\ "~J THANK YOU. T:~'~~ /";/1 ~'/'-Jc ~TKDA TOLTZ. KING, DUVALL. ANDERSON ~,ND ASSOCIATES. INCORPORATED ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 2500 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK BUILDING SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA55101.1SQ3 812/202.440<) FAX Sl21292-0083 December 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council ~dover, 11lllllesota Re: ~dover, Minnesota Commission No, 9140-000 Dear Mayor and Council: The following is confmnation of engineering matters discussed at the regular Council Meeting of December 4, 1990: 1. 90-23 Feasibility Report - Clemens Comer, Conunission No. 9862 Mr. Davidson did present the feasibility report dated December 4, 1990. The report was prepared to outline utility costs for Phase I development of Lot I for Neighborhood Business use. The developer (Wagner Corporation) has requested a deferred assessment to Lot 2 (East 1/2 of Frontage along Bunker Lake Boulevard). Future watermain along Hanson Boulevard and future lateral sewer along the easterly side of the Clemens property will be constructed and assessed with future phases of development. TIle development contract must include acknowledgement of these future costs and agreement to future assessment against Lot I for watermain loop systems, Stonn drainage must include mitigation of ftlling present low areas (ponding) which occur naturally on the site, Approximately four acre-feet of storage must be retained on the Clemens property. Hanson Boulevard and Bunker Lake Boulevard drainage presently tributary to the site must be retained upon or through the fill areas. Traffic patterns must be defmed within the site plan review process. Anoka County Road 78 (Hanson Boulevard) and County Road 16 (Bunker Lake Boulevard) will be upgraded to four lane divided and channelization of their intersection. Access to the proposed site will be restricted. Council Action , '--J The Council received the feasibility report and directed staff to provide the information to the Owner/Developer. No authorization for preparation of pl:ms and specifications will be given until the development plan reviews are complete, Honorable Mayor and City Council Andover, Mllmesota December 5, 1990 Page Two .~ 2. Water System - US EPA Regulations Mr. Davidson presented an article published in a recent American Water Works Association Newsletter "Update" related to Radium 226 and 228 Standards (See Article attached). TIle radium concentrations in the Andover water supply would fall well below the 20 pCi/L proposed standard for each isotope. Water quality improvements that related to iron and manganese concentrations can be removed by simple fJ.lter processes. Mr. Davidson suggested that the next two water system improvements to consider should be the addition of Well and Pumphouse No.4 and the 16" watermain connection from Elevated Tank No.2 to Andover Boulevard along Crosstown Boulevard (CR 18). It is expected that CR 18 would be improved by Anoka County Highway department within the near future from Andover Boulevard to Hanson Boulevard. The Engineer was excused at approxinlately 10:00 PM. '--- JLD:j '\ '--_/ A7~U7,4 ..~ WJ])cQL~l~ ~1?~~/7eA!::.- 'I I I New understanding of such mechanisms, write Bruce N. Ames and Lois Swirsky Gold of Berkeley, "undermines many assumptions of current regulatory policy toward rodent carcinogens and necessitates rethinking the utility and meaning of routine animal cancer tests." They conclude that without cancer- mechanism data, determining that a chemical is carcinogenic in' test animals "provides no information about low-dose risk to humans." In their study of the role of cell proliferation in carcinogenesis, Samuel M. Cohen and Leon B. Ellwein of Nebraska concluded that a more thorough understanding of cancer mechanisms will allow regulatory agencies to take "a more rational approach" for extrapolating high-dose data from animal tests to low-dose exposures faced by humans. USEr! solicits additional public comment on lead rule. Facing a court order to promulgate a final lead rule by December, USEPA has asked for additional public comment on three aspects of the rule. In a Federal Register notice that was to have been published early this month, USEPA solicted comments on a time frame for implementing corrosion control requirements, whether to require large systems to optimize corrosion control even if they meet the lead standard, and whether the agency should be authorized to revise state corrosipn control plans for water utilities. The notice also lists additional documents used to support the agency's lead control strategy; they include an AWWA survey on replacing lead service lines and an AWWA Research Foundation. manual on lead control strategies. U~KPA to proposed radon standard of 300 pCi/L. USEPA has taken a conservative approach to regulating radon in drinking water, opting to propose a radon standard of 300 pCi/L. The agency, which in September revealed its intentions regarding regulating radionuclides, had considered proposing a radon standard somewhere between 200 and 2,000 pCi/L. In regulating radium 226. radium 228. and uranium, the agency will propose standards that reflect a stronge~ i_nf1uence of cost-effectiveness: the proposed standard for eR~h ~ be 20 pCi/L. USEPA, however, will solicit comment on a standard of 5 pCi/L -K2r the two radium isotopes and uranium the lowest feasible regulatory level. The agency is under court order to propose the radionuclides rule by Jan. 25, 1991. AWWA offers comments on wetlands protection. Drinking water development projects can be consistent with a national policy preventing further loss of wetlands, AWWA told the US Domestic Policy Council's Task Force on Wetlands. Speaking at a recent public hearing on "no net loss" strategies, Fred Pontius, AWWA associate director for regulatory affairs, said each water supply project and.wetland area must be evaluated on its own merits. Pontius iterated AWWA's support of a no net loss policy that is applied on a regional basis and that assesses wetlands according to their functional values. He also expressed association support for mitigation banking, consideration of compensatory mitigation early in the Clean Water Act section 404 permitting process, and refining wetlands delineation criteria so that they better identify true wetlands resources. ~~l ~%~,j>:" ,'YIj;..~~'$ ~: '4 +1S58'!' .." .-....:.:...~--~.. () n ~ () oJ... fb.cw .~ STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE December 11, 1990 To: Fr: You are no doubt wondering about the implications of the recently announced state fiscal forecast for your own situation and for state aids to local governments. At this point, nobody has any definite answers, but I want to share with you what I do know and to offer some comments from my perspective prior to the end of my term as Commissioner of Revenue. I hope they will be useful to you. I believe that these are the key points: 1. The December 15 aid payments will be made in full and on time. 2. The Department of Revenue will shortly certify the amounts of HACA currently scheduled to be paid in calendar 1991 (fiscal 1992). However, these amounts may well be changed by the 1991 legislature. 3. The legislature could require you to repay a portion of the December aid payment if it determines that drastic measures are necessary to improve the state's 1991 fiscal situation. 4. The legislature could choose to reduce the calendar 1991 aids, which would affect the state's fiscal position in 1992, but not 1991. 5. If the legislature acts in January, it could authorize an additional 1991 levy to make up for aid reductions. 6. County auditors may want to delay beginning 1991 tax rate calculations until the likelihood of legislative action becomes clearer, if they can conveniently do so without jeopardizing the timeliness of the 1991 property tax statements. o AN EOUAL OPPORTur"ITY EMPLOYER .2 7. I urge you to do all you call to conserve resources. The immediate future is likely to involve either less state aid, or at best very slow growth in state aid. 8. Given the stresses that have already been placed on our property tax system and the potential for more in the near future, I urge you not to raise property taxes any more than absolutely necessary. 9. Finally I urge you to remain open to the possibility of state/local fiscal system reform, and to work with the Carlson administration and the legislature to find a balanced solution to our fiscal problems that does not increase our problems with the property tax. What follows is part explanation and part commentary on the foregoing, from my perspective: December aid payments. We at Revenue are scheduled to disburse $433 million in aid to local units of government on December 15. This is the second and final installment on calendar 1990/state fiscal 1991 aids, the first installment having been paid on July 20. These payments are required by law, and they will be made on time. Fiscal 1991 shortfall. One of the first concerns of Governor-elect Carlson and the 1991 legislature will be to deal with the projected fiscal 1991 shortfall of $197 million. They are highly likely to consider actions to reduce state agency spending in the current year. The only way for them to improve the state's fiscal 1991 situation through aid reductions would be to require repayment of a portion of the December 15 aid payment. Because the $550 million budget reserve appears to be adequate to get the state through fiscal 1991, and because the same practical impact on local governments could be had by simply reducing the calendar 1991 aids (which will be paid in state fiscal year 1992), I think it is unlikely that you will be required to repay a portion of your 1991 aids. However, if, for example, a determination were made that the state's credit rating would be better served through a repayment, it certainly could happen. You are no doubt well aware that the 1991 legislature could decide to reduce the aids payable to local governments in calendar 1991. This is just what happened in 1990, when the legislature reduced the level of aid that had been set in 1989--after you had already made plans and adopted your budgets. And it is comparable to what will happen to state agencies if their fiscal year 1991 funding is reduced early in the 1991 legislative session. If the legislature chooses to require repayment of a portion of the calendar 1990 local aids and/or to reduce the calendar 1991 local aids, it could, if it acted early enough, allow local governments to levy property taxes in 1991 to make up the difference. As a practical matter, such action would have to come in 3 ~ January if local governments are to avoid a delay in their 1991 property tax statements. HACA not guaranteed. We at Revenue have experienced some delays in our effort to determine exactly how much HACA aid is scheduled to be distributed in 1991. We are very close to having that determination made, and will shortly be certifying it to you. However, because the legislature might act in 1991 to reduce the amounts we are about to certify, all local governments should realize that the amounts are less certain than would ordinarily be the case, and auditors probably should not rush to begin the process of issuing property tax statements for 1991. Need for restraint. The clearest message out of this entire situation is the need for immediate fiscal restraint at both the state and local levels. All of us need to immediately commence conserving fiscal rE'sources. Such conservation at the local level will not technically do anything to improve the state's fiscal position, but it would better position local governments to face an immediate future of either less' state aid or;' at best; very' slow growth in state aid. Pressures on the property tax system. I am very concerned that, in the difficult circumstances we face, the legislature might put additional pressure on the property tax without substantially reforming our property tax system. We aU know that a large state spending reduction undertaken for the laudable purpose of balancing the state budget can, if achieved through reduced payments to local governments, quickly translate into large property tax increases. We went down that path in the early 80s, when the property tax was at considerably lower levels than it is today. . I believe it would be a big mistake to do so again on an across-the-board basis, because several classes of property already are being taxed at uncomfortably high rates, and the property tax itself has grown uncomfortably large in the total mix of state and local taxes. On the other hand, property taxes on the first $68,000 of value of every owner-occupied home in the state and on the first $110,000 of homestead farm land value are tremendous bargains because the rates are so low. The owners of such property are in effect subsidized by aU other taxpayers. In the past three years, we have made substantial progress on property tax and local aids reform. However, there remains quite a way to go. I suspect that completing the job will require major reform of the state/local fiscal system. In any case, jt is clear that we have alternatives for solving our current fiscal problems that do not require substantial across-the-board increases in the burdens placed on a property tax system that is ill-equipped to shoulder them. :.~ 4 Those possibilities include spending -and service-reductions at the state and local levels, broadening the sales tax base, and property tax increases for the classes of property that now pay so very little in relation to others. If tax changes are necessary, these two could be made without hurting Minnesota's competitive position. They could also be made in ways that protect low income people. Choosing among these and other options is the challenge for Governor-elect Carlson and the legislature. I believe that almost anything would be better than large across-the-board property tax increases, if we are serious about having our revenue system be fair, efficient, reliable, competitive, and understandable. These are the criteria we at Revenue use to evaluate our revenue system. Your participation with the Carlson administration and the legislature is likely to be important if we are to solve our current fiscal problems without worsening our property tax problems. It certainlYdwill be important if there is an effort to improve our state/local fiscal system. / '\ o Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1990 Page 4 (Public Hearing: Ordihance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) Mr. Sowada thought It would take about three to four People-to do the whole City. Right now he Is the only Staff member to do tree Inspections, and that amounts to about 10 percent of his time. A lengthy discussion ensued on various aspects of the ordinance. The Commission was concerned about the funding for the enforcement of the ordinance. There Is the question of costs involved for operating the Vibrating plow In terms of staff time, plus the ISsue of total cost to the homeowner for total abatement, which can be astronomical. The sentiment of some on the Commission at this time was that the City should partiCipate in some of those costs. One suggestion was to set a base figure up to which the homeowner would pay within a certain time period, one year or 18 months, and the City either fUnd the remaining costs or those remaining costs shared with the homeowner on a 50-50 basis. Other sUggestions were to prOVide assistance by remOVing the brush or haVing a Chipping program available to residents. The Tree Inspector can also coordinate logging sales. The.Commissioner _also hoped that when the agreement is final ized between the county and Department of AgriCUlture for the Communities to Use the vibrating plow, the City would be able to Use it as needed in any part of the City, even outside of the control area. Mr. Stephenson noted that agreement has not yet been worked out. Another criteria for cost-sharing is to have developer/bUilder reqUirements to control the amount of construction damage to trees, recommending that those be taken care of in the platting or permitting process, not in this ordinance. All developments should be within the control area. and the developer should be required to do the Work for diseased tree control. oak wilt speCifically. A concern was raised about a.diseased tree area. Posing a threat to healthy trees. Mr. Stephenson suggested that can be handled by adding a phrase to Section 7, second paragraph. "...oak wilt within the deSignated oak wilt control area of the City of Andover. or on property where the threat of oak wilt mOVing Into the control area Is . . -.-.--a -concern. ;.. ."-. --... ._..... 0._ __'=-~.,..,,_ _ . _'__ _.____. __ __ _,____ _. ___ ______---_.-,.,... _.____..,... The Commission studied the map/from the DNR done in 1988 shOWing the oak wi I t in the City. Mr. St~phenson stated the map Is about 80 percent accurate. It shows 9,400 trees with oak wilt, over 460 acres of dead trees. He estimated that number has Increased by 3,000 to 5,000 trees since then. He also suggested the City contract a plane to - ---~~~f 1 r-over-- the--Ci ty-annua J.l y for -aerl a l--photos-of-the-prob I em-. Another concern raised was on the effect_on. water,--sources__of_=the h,.--,C.':_ ~.,."._ chemi ca I s used for di seased trees .hMr. Stepherison-exp I al ned . the chemicals sterilize the ground and are completely gone 1n 10 to .14 days~ outlining the process of chemical Use. He felt that process would only be used where the Vibrating plow cannot go. )~ Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 23, 1990. Page 5 ':.J <Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) One suggestion was that the ordinance reference control zones to be established annually by the City Council and that any administrative costs be referenced to a Resolution so It can more easily be adjusted when necessary. Discussion returned to the costs Involved to both the residents and to the CIty in uphOlding the ordinance. No specific numbers were known at this time, with the Commission asking that the .fol lowIng be researched before any decIsIons are made on the proposed ordinance: the high-low cost range for trenching, tree removal and stump removal for trees both near bUildings and those in open woods; the administrative costs for inspections, talking with residents, coordinating trenching, logging or tree-removal efforts, etc.; costs for providing brush removal and locations to which the brush can be hauled; and costs for providing a chipping program in the City. The Commission also felt that unit costs need to be applied to proposed control areas on the map. Alternative funding sources were discussed, with Mr. Stephenson suggesting lobbying to the US Forest Service that Minnesota receive a larger share of those forest suppression funds and lObby local representatives that the State would also allocate funds for diseased tree control. The Commission felt this points out that it is a community problem and that the City should get involved in requesting those funds and establiShing programs. I. ~)- Joan Spence, Creative Environments, Albertville, MN, a Forester/Tree Inspector - addressed the Commlss1on noting her letter to the City was wrItten In December, 1989; and she reviewed her experiences In Ramsey and Eden Prairie. Control zones were set up In Eden PraIrie. The . homeowner was responsible for taking down the tree, but the City paid for the removal of the tree, the poInt being there are many alternatIves that can be consIdered. She said cost-SharIng Is when the money becomes available, also streSSing that cIties need to encourage theIr legislators to'work to fund this program. Commissioner FerrIs asked that ratio of costs between homeowner and city In Eden Prairie. i / Ms. Spence did not know, noting it is too variable, but she did agree to get the amount of their budget for the Commission. Eden Prairie Is using general fund monies for their program at this time. She commended the Ci ty for taking care.of 1 tstrees. She helped Ramsey ~get.their second-year fundIng for their brush Chipping program, thinking possibly Andover could work a joint powers agreement with them. She felt there are many creative possibilities of solvIng the problem, workIng with other cities, establIshing pilot projects, lookIng for grant monies, etc., hoping she might be able to p.rovide a ser~i~e to Andover when it is needed. She was also opposed to burning the diseased trees, as it is a valuable resource that should be utIlized. i ,. I" , ,~ Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 23, '1990 Page 6 <J (Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Shade Trees, Continued) Discussion continued on the various funding sources, types of programs that may be set up, establishing a Community Tree Board, on educating the public of programs and abatement procedures, the number of trees that could have to be removed each year, and costs. Once some proposals and costs are determined by Staff, the Commission felt it is Important to meet with the City Council jOintly to discuss the different options available and their costs and to determine the level of funding the Council Is Willing to commit for the diseased tree control program. . Staff was asked to bring their recommendations to the November 13 Planning Commission meeting for' further' conslder'atlon. MOTION by Coleman, Seconded by Fer'ris, to continue the public hear'ing until further infor'mation is available. Motion carried unanimously, ----"---., -~ - .... ---.- .~-~-.-'--~-,._-_._,-'" ----. Chair'p son Pease reported the Council upheld the Commission's recommen tions on the amendment to the Transient Ordinance and the Scardigli riance request. ther business, Chairperson Pease declared the 10:50 p.m. There being no meeting adjourned Respectfully submitted, \\~~~U~~.. Mar'cella A. Peach Recording Secr'etary / / '. )- CITY OF ANDOVER o REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION October 23, 1990 DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ~\) Planning ~ David L. Carlberg, BY: Ci ty Planner AGENDA ITEM 4. Ordinance No. 29 Public Hearing - Diseased Shade Trees APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: REQUEST Staff requests the Planning and Zoning Commission review the draft of Ordinance *29, relating to the control and prevention of epidemic diseases in shade trees within the City of Andover. Staff met with Janette Monear, Anoka County Extension Service and David Stephenson, Plant Health Specialist, Department of Agriculture on October 12, 1990. Ms. Monear and Mr. Stephenson suggested changes to the draft Ordinance of July 10, 1990. These - changes are reflected in the attached draft of Ordinance *29 dated ... Octob~r 23, 1990.. The City Council at their October 2, 1990 meeting suggested some considerations for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The considerations include: 1. Limiting cutting of trees to certain times of the year. 2. The stripping of the bark of firewood if it is not to be wrapped in plastic. 3. Requiring builders,. upon applying for a building permit, to submit plans indicating the minimal disturbance of the trees on the sight to control the amount of construction damage. Ray Sowada; Tr~e Inspector~wi11 be attending the me~ting to - .answer questions you may have concerning Ordinance *29 and its _ enforcement. Staff has also asked Ms. Monear and Mr. Stephenson to attend the meeting as well, to discuss the progress on the purchasing of a vibrating plow by the County and the criteria for the participation in the cost-share program. - The specific changes-to the Ordinance wi11 be outlined-by staff at the meeting. :_~ ~ CRITERIA FOR PARTICIPATION IN COST-SHARE PROGRAM As established by the MSA TC Oak Wilt Task Force CON1ROL PROGRAM - COMPONENTS * Develop an approved minimum three year oak wilt control plan to include: - a budget for program (actual for fIrst year, proposed for subsequent years) - an itemized estimate of oak wilt expenditures (for cost-share purposes) - designation of a control area in which control efforts will take place - the control area_must be expanded to cover entire community within 3 years or as approved - methods by which the community will work with developers to prevent springtime injury to oaks during construction - methods for cooperating with neighboring communities on oak wilt control along common borders - Have a designated shade tree professional (on staff or contract) to coordinate and run the program - must have MDA Tree Inspector Certification - Necessary control work will be required on all property within control area. * _ Annual survey and detection to include: - Inspection of control area twice per year (by July 31 and August 31) to identify/mark newly wilting oaks. - Evaluate spore producing potential of oaks wilting in previous year and identify and treat hazardous (oak wilt) oaks by April 1. - Removal and treatment of trees within control area by April 1 that are liable to produce spores during the months of May and June. - Community-wide general survey once per year for oak wilt. (Preferably aerial survey) * Adopt control ordinances in compliance with state statutes (Chapter 18.023) * All control work done in accordance with current control recommendations * Controlled infection centers shall be evaluated annually and their ~uccess recorded for 3 years Developer/Builder requirements: * As a condition of plat approval, all developments within the community are required to have g disease inspection (by community tree inspector) and an approved work plan for oak wilt control and prevention fonnulated and followed. .. __ * Prior to new construction, all building sites within the comrilUnity are required to have a disease inspection and oak wilt control work plan approved (by community tree inspector) as a condition of __ the building pennit (preliminary plan). * Work with the community to prevent springtime injury to oaks during all phases of construction Optional Criteria * Adoption an official tree board to oversee program and give recommendations to council * Development of a community reforest:ltion plan. -__n -- -.- -- <'J March 22, 1990 ~J The Department of Natural Resources has received a limited amount of money from the United States Forest Service to be used for Oak Wilt Suppression in Minnesota. The primary requirements attached to this money is that it be used for effective oak wilt control, and that the money be matched within the state. We anticipate that these funds will continue for up to five years. The Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Committee Oak Wilt Task Force (MSTAC-OWTF), a committee involving the MN Department of Natural Resources, MN Department of Agriculture, University of Minnesota, and representatives from counties and communities, has been meeting to determine the most effective way to use these funds. '- The primary decision of the committee is that the cost matching monies will be community based. Communities currently involved in oak wilt control activities or communities starting up oak wilt control programs may be eligible for the matching dollars. The match will be, for the most part, 1:1. Depending upon the number of requests recieved, their may be an upper limit to the amount available to each community. The committee has developed criteria which will be required for communities to be eligible for the funds. The Departments of Agriculture and Natural Resources will meet with communities to discuss these criteria in more detail at their request. What follows is a summary of the minimum community oak wilt program components: Development of a three year oak wilt control plan. Because oak wilt control is an ongoing effort, communities should look ahead and plan out a program for three years. The program may be revised as budgets change and work is completed. Each year of the program an updated three year plan should be developed. The plan should include: A program budget - The budget should be actual for the current year, and estimated for the subsequent years. Items that are matchable are: salaries or consulting fees for people when involved with oak wilt control activities (inspection/detection of oak wilt, barrier layout, homeowner consultation, sporulating oak identification, follow-up work); equipment purchased or rented that is used for oak wilt control work; removal of spore producing oak trees; root graft barrier placement (vibratory plow work). Control area designation - It is not expected that communities will be able to cover the entire community right away. A control area should be designated by the community within which diseased oaks will be identified and marked, and necessary control work started. Within 3 years, this control area should include the entire community. This does not mean that all oak wilt pockets must be controlled in three years. We expect control work to continue far longer than that in many communities, especially where the problem is severe. Rather, this means that identification of diseased trees and removal of hazardous (sporulating) oaks will be extended throughout the community, and control work will be prioritized and completed as time and budget allows. Control and elimination of all oak wilt pockets in the community is the goal, and realistically, this may take many years to accomplish. The community must have a shade tree professional (with MDA tree inspector certification) either on staff or contract to coordinate and run the program. Oak wilt control ordinances must be adopted. These ordinances should comply with State Statute Chapter 18.023. Additionally, statutes should require necessary control work on all property within the control area on a priority basis. Additionally, developers and builders should be required to complete necessary oak wilt control work as a condition of plat _ approval or a building permit. They should also be required to work with the community to prevent injury to oaks during land clearing and construction to prevent oak wilt from spreading into that area. If you would like assistance in developing an oak wilt control plan, please contact David Stephenson, oak wilt program coordinator, MN Department of Agriculture at 396-0592. Questions concerning the cost share monies should be directed to Tom Eiber, Insect and Disease Specialist, Department of Natural Resources at (218) 828-2616. :~ . r '~'. _ - _._'*:'".. ," .... .;". ._. ."_ _. '...... > .' _. '.'~ " _." . . ,~ . -_'_~'.~'J""__"_""".,__ --."....---.- _.____~_,..._..,_._ ____.._...,.".~,___ .-'--.....___ .._.___..... __.._____u .._..._._._.__.__.__, ___....~._.. . __. ...~... _ . . _.~--...,:::eITY;(j F--ANDOVER ~._-~-~~--_._._-- _...,-,--.~..- --- ~::, "./-/: :i''';>:'~ '.:-.'. ~~ ~':'" :_~-~. ..:;.: / _ :,_,':~ . .:'- '. :~ REQUEST F.OR :PL.ANNING COMMISSION ACTION October 9, 1990 AGENDA ITEM 6. Ordinance No. 29 Public Hearing - Diseased Shade Trees DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT "'D Planning ~ David L. Carlberg, City Planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: BY: REQUEST Due to the fact that Staff is waiting for further information on diseased tree ordinances from Janette Monear, Program Coordinator of the Oak Wilt/Diseased Tree Hotline and David Stephenson, Plant Health Specialist, Department of Agriculture, this item will be continued to the October 2J, 1990 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Staff will be meeting with Ms. Monear and Mr. Stephenson the second week in October to discuss funding sources, enforcement and additional changes needed to provide a sound and enforceable - --diseased'shade.,treeordinance. '-"'Staffwill have the--information ---_____ from the"'abovementionedmeeting along with suggestions from the City Council on their October 2, 1990 meeting available at the next meeting. Ray Sowada, Tree Inspector, will be attending the meeting to answer questions you may have concerning the ordinance and its enforcement. Staff will also be asking Ms. Monear and Mr. Stephenson to attend the meeting as well. --.--- . ----... .-- - '-" .--- - -' ':',,' _:. .-_. _ _ a. ._..' J' ~ . ~ , .. _ .u_____. _._n___ ._____ .......-~._.-. ..--....---...-.---..--...- .--.. - . -'--- . -"., __ _".' u_____ ._..~-------_._...---- -'~._- .. -- ~-~- -- "_'_',c~.,.,,---,-_____ 'j._''''._ . ; - .. - ------.-~. '''''-:'''--'~'---. --~'_"_" -.t. ..~-- - ~~. -. -' - '.-~-_.- -. -..'.-..-.._.... -,'~ c-___. __'__'_~ ..._.____.__."'-.___.."._...., _____ __ _ ~ -----.------------- -. ---- -_.. -.-- ----.-. . '.':---:-~';- --.~.~~.-~:--:.~--:-:-~:--.:-_._~. :--;-~- .-; -:-~_..~.-_. -'''- "--''-_'-- _'.__.4.'__-",'..~_ _.__-.-,____. -.::;..".;.- .:.~-,.........~..--:-_.-.....:.-~=.::-~..:..~.;.:.:.-:.:.-:..._._r. :.'__~~.~ .::...._-.. . :_-. :'.: :;-- ...-'--... . ..~-.,--.-~.~,_. .-.".,~.. ... ..-.-_........ . ......~~_.._.__......r____n_._._4__ " CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ~ AGENDA :ffHIf~ Committee, . NO. Commission DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMEN~ Planning ~ David L. Carlberg BY: Ci ty Planner October 2, 1990 APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM 11. Funding Sources/ NO. Diseased Trees BY: The City. Council requested at the September 18th meeting that Staff research the funding sources available for the removal and control of the diseased tree epidemic the City is presently experiencing. The primary purpose of securing such funding is to alleviate some of the costs incurred by property owners for tree removal and disease control. Staff. contacted Janette Monear, Program Coordinator of the Oak 'Wilt/Diseased Tree Hotline. We discussed the possibility of Anoka County purchasing a vibrating plow for $75,000. She has proposed to the County Board that the plow be maintained and housed by the County and lent to the cities in the County on a free of charge basis. If the proposal fails and the plow is not purchased, the $75,000 will be used for a community cost-share program. In order for Andover to take part in the cost-share program, criteria established by the Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Committee (MSTAC) Oak Wilt Task Force have to be met. The possible funding sources available to the City for the diseased tree problem include: 1. Met Council - Abatement (landfill removal) 2. U.S. Forest Service 3. America the Beautiful I These sources of funding are primarily for future considerations and it is recommended by Ms. Monear that we prepare for this funding by establishing an ordinance and criteria that encompasses such funding. I have presented draft copies of Ordinance *29 to Ms. Monear and also David Stephenson, Plant Health Specialist, - Department of Agriculture, for their review. I indicated to them that the City would welcome any suggestions they would have to improve Ordinance #29. . COUNCIL ACTION_ MOT-lONBY . TO -- - - - -'SECOND BY . .. .~J . . .'~'.7'-' "'- --,~ . . --'-,' . :-...... ..~ -., -.......: "":".......... 'l\.-''':'''~''"''''-. -:'. "_'~ ._~. ~ ~"'.__.'.". . .' _. __"..," .,....... .'_.' ". . _'___'"._ ._ _..... . . '.. '__'n _._ _," '"'" ....,.. . - . . -.- -. "'-..- ..." . '" <;. ~.J . Page Two In Re: Funding Sources Diseased Shade Trees 2 October 1990 .~ -:; , I have asked Ms. Monear and Mr. Stephenson to attend the meeting to answer any questions you may have concerning funding sources and the diseased tree epidemic in general. I regret .to inform the Council that both have prior commitments and will not be able to attend. Staff will be contacting Ms. Monear and Mr. Stephenson the second week in October to schedule a meeting to review Ordinance #29 and discuss funding sources further. '\ ,_J ....-- - --. .. ... --.- '---'r- .". ....- ';_ '.. .. "..._~.._,.... .;-......,.....-~_.-._.- --. .',.-. .......- '-'--'.".~. ,,-., ...~r...,........ .~. .~-_ .._.u_...", '_'.. _h .._... ___ __.__.___.... _ __~'''''. .... - -" -"..."'~. '."" ..---- --- -.' _.... ....u . \ ,J CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 DATE AGENDA SECTION NO. Discussion Items ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT n Planning l:C.. David L. Carlberg, City Planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM Ordinance #44 NO. Amendment -.3. \ ~. D BY: BY: REQUEST The Andover City Council is asked to review and approve the attached amendment to Ordinance #44. BACKGROUND At the June 5, 1990 meeting the City Council referred Ordinance No. 44 to the Planning and Zoning Commission for clarification regarding the fence requirements. In particular, the height requirement, thinking there is a discrepancy by requiring eight (8') foot fences but allowing ten (10') foot piles of junk vehicles. In the process of examining the ordinace, the Planning and Zoning Commission discovered other areas of the ordinance that needed to be revised and updated. These changes are reflected in the attached amendment to Ordinance No. 44. In an attempt to give the Council a chronological history of how at what changes have been implemented, the Planning & Zoning Commission reports and minutes are attached for your review. MOTION BY TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY ,~ ./ j' CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ,~ ORDINANCE NO. 44G AN ORDINANCE REGULATING AND LICENSING AUTOMOTIVE RECYCLING YARDS AND/OR JUNKYARDS AND DEALERS and REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 9. The City Council of Andover does hereby ordain: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. Except where otherwise indicated by the context, the following definitions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this Ordinance: 1.1 "Person" shall mean any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company, or organization of any kind. 1.2 "Automotive Recyclables" and/or "Junk" shall mean motor vehicles, no longer used as such, to be used for scrap metal or stripping of parts; old iron, steel, brass, copper, tin, lead, or other base metals; old cordage, ropes, rags, fibers, or fabrics; old rubber; old bottles or other glass, bones; wastepaper and other waste or discarded material which might be prepared to be used again in some form; and any or all of the foregoing; but "junk" shall not include materials or objects accumulated by a person as by-products, waste, or scraps from the operation of hls business or materials or objects held and used by a manufacturer as an integral part of his own manufacturing processes. 1.3 "Automotive Recycling Yard" and/or "Junkyard" fA~te-Ree~et~eA-~are+ shall mean a yard, lot or place, covered or uncovered, outdoors or in an enclosed building, containing automotive recyclables and/or junk as defined above, upon which occurs one or more acts of buying, keeping, dismantling, processing, selling, or offering for sale any such automotive recrclables and/or junk, in whole units or by parts, for a bus~ness or commercial purpose, whether or not the proceeds from such act or acts are to be used for charity. 1.4 "Automotive Recycling Dealer and/or Junk Dealer" shall mean a person who operates an automotive recycling yard and/or junkyard, as defined above, within the city. 1.5 "Natural Screening" shall mean densely planted vegetation, berminfi or topography which, at all times, prevents visual contact wit stored materials from Ae~~aBer~A~ adjacent businesses, residences, public roadways or public lands. (44A, 12-04-79) :j 1.6 "Security fence" shall mean an unclimbable fence with a minimum height of six (6') feet, the purpose of which is to discourage theft and uncontrolled entry. (44A, 12-04-79) SECTION 2. LICENSE REQUIRED. 2.1 No person, firm or corporation shall engage in the occupation of an automotive recycling ~ard and/or junkyard or automotive recycling dealer and/or jun yard dealer, as defined above, without first having secured a Special Use Permit and a License in a manner hereinafter set forth. ~ SECTION 3. APPLICATION. 3.1 All applicants desiring to secure a License, shall make a written application to the city Clerk, upon forms supplied by the City, accompanied with a fee set by tae City Council resolution. 3.2 In addition to the above requirement, the applicant shall file with the City Clerk policies of public liability and property damage insurance which shall remain in force and effect during the entire term of said License and which shall contain a provision that they shall not be cancelled without ten (10) days written notice to the City. Public liability insurance shall not be less than one hundred thousand ($100,000) dollars for injuries including accidental death to anyone (1) person and subject to the same limit for each person in the amount of not less than three hundred thousand ($300,000) dollars on account of anyone (1) accident and property damage insurance in the amount of not less than fifty thousand ($50,000) dollars for each accident and not less than one hundred thousand ($100,000) dollars aggregated. No License shall be granted until said insurance policies have been filed and approved by the City. 3.3 No License shall be issued until the applicant has executed under the City of Andover and deposited with the City Clerk a corporate surety bond approved by the Clerk in the sum of two thousand ($2,000) dollars guaranteeing the compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. Such bond shall remain in force and must be executed for a period of one (1) year except that on such expiration it shall remain in force as to all penalties, claims, and demands that may have occurred thereunder prior to such expiration. 3.4 junkyard reviewed the City Applications for a an automotive reCYClin~ yard and/or License shall be filed with the City Cler and shall be and subject to approval or denial by the majority vote of Council within sixty (60) days of the application date. SECTION 4. GENERAL OPERATING REQUIREMENTS. The following general operating requirements shall apply to all automotive recycling yard and/or junkyard dealers licensed in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance: 4.1 The automotive recficling yard and/or junkyard, together with things kept therein, s all at all times be maintained in a sanitary condition. 4.2 No space not covered by the License shall be used in the licensed business. 4.3 No garbage or other waste liable to give off a foul odor or attract vermin shall be kept on the premises. ~ 4.4 No automotive recyclables and/or junk shall be placed or piled within forty (40') feet of the traveled portion of any public street, walkway, or curb, or allowed to be blown off the business premises. Page 2 ~~ 4.5 Automotive recyclables and/or junk shall not exceed ~ea- f~GL+-~ee~-ia-Rei~R~ the height of the fence, except for snow accumulation and shall be arranged to permit easy access to all automotive recyclables and/or junk for fire fighting purposes. 4.6 No combustible material of any kind not necessary or beneficial to the licensed business shall be kept on the premises or be allowed to become a fire hazard. 4.7 Gaseliae-aaa-eil All fluids and gasses shall be removed and disposed of in an approved manner from any scrapped engines or scrapped vehicles on the premises. 4.8 No processing of automotive recaclables and/or junk or any other noisy activity shall be carrie on in connection with the licensed business on Sunday, any legal holiday, or at any time between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. 4.9 The licensee shall at all times retain on file and shall permit inspection, by a member of the Andover city Councilor it's authorized representative, of the following: a. A copy of the Bill of Sale or Title Card or Dealer's Purchase Receipt as prescribed by Minnesota Department of Public Safety pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 168.11, Subd. 2, and or Chapter 168.013, Subd. 6, with motor vehicle serial number contained thereon, for each motor vehicle purchased by the licensee within the previous thirty-six (36) months. (44B, 2-05-80) ... b. A Dealer's Junk Report, which shall be filed with the State each month. B c. The name, address and telephone number of each person who has sold a motor vehicle to the licensee within the previous thirty-six (36) months and attached thereto or filed therewith shall be the license number of the motor vehicle the seller rode in when he/she sold the motor vehicle to be junked and, in addition to the foregoing, information shall be filed containing the description, license numb~r and serial number of the vehicle that was sold to the licensee. 4.10 No automotive recycling yard and/or junkyard shall be allowed to become a nuisance ae-j~a*yara or shall be operated in such manner so as to become injurious to tEe health, safety, or welfare of tEe community or of any residents close by. SECTION 5. INITIAL LICENSE FEES AND REQUIREMENTS. The initial annual fee to be paid for any automotive recycling yard and/or junkyard license application shall be set by Council resolution. (44E, 1-05-82) In addition, the following requirements shall be met: ~~ Page 3 \J ht e Said fence shall be erected according to the following schedule: a. Thirty (30) days following the approval of a Special Use Permit for such purpose but prior to the issuance of the Automotive Recyclint Yard and/or Junkyard License, the property owner shal fence the entire premises pursuant to the requirements of this Ordinance. During the period said License is in effect, the fence shall be kept in adequate repair so as to comply with the intent of the Ordinance. b. In addition to the fencing requirements, the licensee shall be required to plant a living fence of evergreen trees or other suitable species of plant approved by the City Council. Such living fence shall require trees of at least four (4') feet in height at time of planting and spaced not more than ten (10') feet apart. Such living fence shall be planted by May 1, 1982. Such living fence shall be maintained in tOOd health and any plant which dies or is destroyed shal be replaced by May 1st of the following year. A living fence fteee-eft~y shall be planted on the portion of the property abutting a public street or adjacent property which is zoned R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, M 1, M 2 or develo ed un er a P anne Un~t Deve opment PUD. F, e.... 5.2 Variances 1T a. The Council may grant a variance from the fencing provisions of this Ordinance for one of the following reasons: aT1. The portion of the property wR~eR abuts another automotive recycling yard and/or junkyard. BT2. The portion of the property which has sufficient natural screening. A variance for natural screening would require a security fence for the purpose of safety. Fencing shall be a nonclimbable fence with a minimum height of six (6')-feet. ,J b. Revocation of Variance: If screening changes in such a manner that stored materials come into view of ftei~RBe~ift~ adjacent residences, businesses, public roads or public lands, ~peft-S~eR-eRaft~e the variance will be revoked immediately and aft the applicant has thirty (30) days from date of notice to provide screening as in compliance with this Ordinance. (44A, 12-04-79) Page 4 SECTION 6. RENEWAL OF LICENSE AND REQUIREMENTS. o 6.1 The annual fee for any renewal license application shall be set by Council resolution. (44E, 1-05-82) 6.2 Before renewal, the requirements of this Ordinance shall have been completed. 6.3 The ~eRewa~-~~eeR5e license renewal period shall be from January 1 through December 31 of each year. No fees shall be pro- rated. In 1980, the applicant shall on or before July 1, include a fee of $112.50 for h~s-~eRewa~-!~eeRse license renewal. This 1.5 times the fee required in Section 6.1 shall be for a period of July 1, 1980 through December 31, 1981; at which time the fee pursuant to Section 6.1 shall then and thereafter be paid on or before December 31 of each year to cover the operations for the following year. (44C, 6-03-80) SECTION 7. INSPECTIONS. 7.1 The City Councilor it's duly authorized representatives, shall inspect the automotive recycling yard and/or junkyard of all j~R* dealers licensed under this Ordinance at least once a year to determine whether such yards are being operated in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance and other applicable provisions of law. One such inspection must have been made within two (2) months prior to renewal of any automotive recycling and/or junkyard license. 7.2 premises any time The licensee shall permit inspection of the business by any member or representative of the City Council at during regular business hours. 7.3 Each automotive recycling and/or junk dealer shall display its License in a conspicuous place on the business premises~ SECTION 8. TRANSFERABILITY. 8.1 No license issued under this ordinance shall be transferred or used by any person other than the one to whom it was issued, except upon approval of the City Council. As a prerequisite to said approval, the transferee must meet all qualifications required by this Ordinance of the original licensee. No automotive recycling and/or junk dealer License shall be used at any location other than the one described in the application and for which it was issued. ~~ " Page 5 SECTION 9. HEARING ON GRANTING, DENIAL, RENEWAL, OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE \ J 9.1 Request for Hearing. a. Any person aggrieved by an Order of the City Council granting, denying, renewing, suspending, or revoking a License for a proposed or existing business or activity subject to the provisions of this Ordinance, may file a written request for a hearing before the City Council within ten (10) days after issuance of such order. The City Council shall give notice of a public hearing upon this request to be held in not less than five (5) days after service of the notice on the person requesting the hearing. The City Council may also give notice of the hearing to other persons directly interested in the Order in question. At such hearing, the City Council shall determine whether the granting, denial, renewal, suspension, or revocation or the license was in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance and shall issue a written Findi~~s of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order to carry out it's ~ndings and conclusions. Those Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order shall be filed with the City Clerk and shall be mailed to all interested parties appearing or represented at said hearing. b. The City Attorney shall furnish such assistance and advice to the City Council as said Council shall request. 9.2 Revocation of License. When the City Council determines that the public interest so requires, it may revoke or suspend the License of any automotive recycling and/or junk dealer when it finds, after due investigation and a public hearing, that: a. The licensee or any of his employees or agents have concealed the receipt of stolen property or have knowingly received stolen property. b. The licensee has failed to comply with the provisions of law applicable to the, premises, equipment or operation of the licensed business. c. The licensee has obtained his License through fraud or misstatement. d. The licensed business or activity is being conducted in a manner found to be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public or is a nuisance, or is being operated or carried on in any unlawful manner. e. The licensed business or activity has not been operated or carried on for a period of six (6) months. SECTION 10. COMPLIANCE. ,'-) 10.1 Any person acting as a automotive recyclina and/or junk dealer within the City of Andover on the effective ate of this Ordinance shall have a period of ninety (90) days after such effective date to comply with provisions of this Ordinance. Page 6 10.2 The required fencing shall be installed as of July 1, 1991. o Adopted by the Andover City Council on the 18th day of December 1990. CITY OF ANDOVER- James E. Elling, Mayor ATTEST: Victoria volk, City Clerk I , ') '-' Page 7 .' Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - Novembe~ 27, 1990 Page 2 . ") '-.J PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 44 FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR JUNKYARDS M~. Ca~lbe~g ~evlewed the backg~ound Info~mation on this Item ~ega~dlng the City Council's dl~ectlve, the fencing of the ya~ds and Its impact of FHA financing on su~~oundlng ~esldences, and the p~oposed changes to O~dinance 44. The Commission reviewed several areas of concern in the ordinance and ~ecommended several changes and clarifications, including the addition of a date by which ~II automotive recycling and/or Junkyards must come into complaince with these new ~egulations. June 1, 1991, was suggested. The hearing was then opened for public testimony. Ha~old Sullivan. 15300 P~airie Road - noted the junkyards have been there for a long time, aSking If the Intent is to try to screen them from view from the ~oad or from other residences. Because of the terraine, he felt some of them could not be fenced off so they are not visible. It would also take many, many more acres if they are not allowed to stack the cars. He Is not in the junkyard business, but he felt they are trying to make a living and_it is not all that bad having to look at junk cars. The Commission explained the original intent was to correct some conflicting ~equirements in the ordinances. They then looked into what type of fencing would be acceptable to FHA so they would once again finance housing In the area; however, the City was unable to get anywhe~e with them. So they are now updating and correcting the discrepancies in the ordinance. The owners of the yards have told the Commission that they could meet the fencing and stacking requi~ements beIng recommended. Also, this area has been designated by the City as a blighted area, and the City would like to see minimal visibility of the blight from outside of tne junkyards. . Ann Sikora - stated the junkyards were there long before the developers came In, and everyone lived with them. Once the developers came in, the trouble started. She felt it Is unfair that after being he~e-fo~40'yea~s, the jUnkyardsa~e having all these p~oblems, that they a~e Just t~ylng to make a living too. Mike Lund. ATV Salvaoe - thought a deadline to meet these new requirements would be better set at July 1. Because of the weather, there would be very little time available to work on the fencing if June 1 was the deadline. He was also concerned about the possibility of-the-Ci tycoming back in--the. future-and wanting a dl fferenLhelght_ or type of fencing. He wondered why FHA couldn't give an answe~ now. The Commission agreed with the July 1 deadline. They also explained the frustration of dealing with the FHA and the noncommittal answers received from them. Apparently screening is not the Issue with FHA. '~J .' Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 3 ~ <Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 44, Junkyards) Mr. Lund - stated all this started since the housing has been put up; and it is now infringing on his business, expressing his frustration and confusion over the entire situation. JoAnn Wilber. Jay Street - asked about the fencing between yards. Mr. Carlson stated outside fencing Is a minimum of six feet high. and between the yards will be the concern of the property owners to do what they want to do. Ms. Wilber - asked if the licenses will be changed to Automotive Recycling Yards. Mr. Carlberg stated he wil I talk to the City Clerk about that tomorrow. Ms. Wilber - asked about the outside storage. One yard out there has very nice racks which go higher than six feet high, and they look very neat. Will that be allowed? She felt that should be looked at as to how high the racks can go. There is a difference between crushed cars and racks. There are some things that need to be stored outside. The Commission noted the proposal is the storage would not exceed the height of the fence; however, the variance section. 5.03, could possibly be used to allow racks to go higher. Also, the ordinance has the flexibility to build a portion of the fence at a greater height against which the racks could be placed, then dropping down to six feet. MOTION by'Vistad, Seconded by Ferris, to close the Public Hearing. Motion car~led unanimously. The Commission suggested further changes and clarifications in the ordinance. In Section 4.9, Ms. Wilber explained they must fill out a Dealer Junkyard Report each month, send a copy to the State and retain one. The title cards are also forwarded to the'State. Leon Kozlowski. 1021 Crosstown Boulevard - referenced Section 4.7, asking about the disposal of the antifreeze, Freon, and other substances that are found In cars. He felt all the other substances should be addressed as well, not Just gasoline and oil. Ms. Wi Iber - explained the procedure of handling those substances from the cars according to State and Federal guidelines. Minnesota has an ordinance which will be enacted In 1991 regarding the removal and disposal of Freon. Her point was they do handle those items __~ _proper 1 y '_nn _'__~nn_'n__n_ ____ Rick Heidelberqer. Mom/s Auto Salvaqe - explained the process he uses for storing antifreeze and oil and using the gas after It has been filtered. He is also looking into Freon recycling pumps, though he didn/t expect that to be operational until June or July. ,:j .' Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 4 ~ (Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 44, Junkyards) Mr. Kozlowski - asked whether the City gets a report on what-happens to hazardous waste streams within Andover, as al I businesses in the State are requIred to report that to the cIties. Ms. Wilber stated they are sent to the State and they keep a copy. They do not send It to the City or to the Fire Department. CommIssioner Ferris also noted that the CIty controls hazardous waste through the Issuance of SpecIal Use Permits which are then monItored. The fol lowing changes to the proposed ordinance were agreed to by the CommissIon: Section 4, 4.5 - "Automotive recyclables and/or junk shall not exceed the height of the fence, except for snow accumulation, and shail be arranged to permit easy access to al I automotive recyclables and/or junk for fire f i gh t i ng purposes." Section 4, 4.7 - "All fluids and gasses shall be removed and disposed of in an approved manner from any scrapped engines or scrapped vehicles on the premises." Section 4, 4.9 - Add a clause having to do with the Dealer's Junk Report that the dealers are required to fill out and file with the State each month. The dealers retain a copy of that report on file. Section 5, 5.1 - "Exterior Storage. Where automotive recyclables and/or junk is kept outdoors, the area shai I be enclosed by a solid vertical wal I or fence of uniform material and color which is at least six (6/) feet high and a maximum height of twelve (12') feet, said height to be consistent over any residential or business properties, public roads or pUblic lands as measured from the.street level. Where automotive recyclables and/or junk Is piled, stacked or externally stored, the height of the pile, stack or storage cannot exceed the height of the fence." Section 5, 5.2 - It was felt this provision is virtually the same -thlri-g--as Section 5.1. It was proposed that this section be-deleted~ and Incorporated In Section 5.1. Section 5, 5.3 b - "Revocation of Variance: If screening changes in such a manner that stored materials come Into view of adjacent residential or business propertfes, public roads or public lands, the varIance wll I be revoked Immediately and the applicant has thirty (30) days from date of notice to-provIde screening IncomplIance wIththi-s Ordi nance . " .~ Section 10 - Add Section 10.2: "The required fencing is to be installed as of July 1, 1991." Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 27, 1990 Page 5 :~ <Public Hearing Continued: Ordinance No. 44, Junkyards) MOTION by Vistad, Seconded by Jovanovich, that we send to the-City Counci I with approval of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission the Ordinance 44 ordinance regulating and licensing automotive recycling yards and/or junkyards and dealers and repealing Ordinance No.9 with the appropriate changes that we mave made at tonight's meeting. Publ Ie hearing was held and there were comments made; six people spoke, al I six were in objection to the ordinance. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Ferris had a problem with all the changes. The Council aksed them to look at the height of the fence so the ordinances agree, not to control the stacking or to rewrite It. He had a hard time with the fact that the City wil I not sit down and work with the yards to come up with some methodology to which everyone can agree. He said he didn't like continually making ordinances that increase costs of running a business hoping to eventually run them out of business. The only other constructive change was on Section 4.7. Putting up the fence wi I I not hide the junk one bit. He did not see this as a venture to get the City and the owners to work any closer together; in fact he felt it is just the opposite. Mr. Lund - appreciated Commissioner Ferris's honesty. He asked what they can do about it. The ordinance does keep changing and eventually it will be changed to something they cannot afford to do. More than anything he'd like to sit down and find out what they al I have to do. Chairperson Pease suggested talking to the Councilmembers Individually and at their meeting to see if something could be worked out. There will be changes with progress, but everyone has to learn to live together. There has been Input from those in the recycling community, seeing this as an opportunity to solve some of the problems. VOTE ON MOTION: Motion carried. 8:40 p.m. 5-Yes, i-No <Ferris), i-Absent <Coleman) This will to go the City Council on December 18. Mr. Carlberg reviewed the changes made to Ordinance before the Commission on November 13. One concer s the authority given the Tree Board in the ordinance. Staff inks It should be more of a citizens' g.oup to set up programs an ctivities and citizen participation, etc., not be in control establishing control areas or enforcing the details of the ord nce Itself. After some di scuss i on ,the' Commi ss i on-genec-- yagreed .'~:- ~J Commissioner Ferris expre d his concern of implementing an ordinance that has the potentia Imposing large financial hardships upon the residents. The or . ance Is Ineffective if neither the residents nor the City to do it. He also wanted to see the control areas reco CITY OF ANDOVER 8 REQUEST FOR 'PLMlj-,]]j\JG COMM1SSlON ACTION November 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM 4. Ordinance #44 Cont. Public Hearing - Junkyard Fencing Req. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Planning ~ David L. Carlberg ~ APPROVED FOR _~GENDA BY: City Planner BY: The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review the latest draft of Ordinance No. 44 relating to the fencing requirements of junkyards. This item has been continued from the September 25, 1990 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. To refresh the Commission, the comments received at the meeting were as follows: 1. There is a new definition for "junkyard" and the term "automotive recyclables" has been inserted where appropriate. NOTE: If the title is changed as proposed to include "automotive recycling Yards", Ordinance No.8., Section 7.04 would also have to be amended as an excluded use. (accomplished 11-06-90) 2. In Section 1.5 "densely pla6ted vegetation, berming" was added to the definition. . 3. Section 1.7 has been reworded to give a better definition to the term "screening fence". The part of the sentence "and densely planted vegetation," has been deleted. 4. Section 5.1 has been changed to read "consistent over any area as measured from the street level". 5.A new Section 5.2-has been inserted and includes the "screening fence" requirement. The previous Section 5.2 has been renumbered as 5.3. 6. Part of Section 5.3(b) has been changed to "come into view of adjacent residences,". H'.'---' '--..--'-.- 7. In Section 6.3, the word "his" has been removed and renewal license has been reversed to "license renewal". The above stated comments or changes to Ordinance No. 44 have been implemented for your review. Attached please find a draft of Ordinance NO. 44 dated minutes from the June 5, 1990 City Council meeting and from the July 10, 1990 Planning and Zoning meeting. 11-27-90, mi6utes ... ~) ~) PlannIng and ZonIng CommIssIon MeetIng Minutes - Novembe~ 13, 1990 Page 4 ,./ ,"" ;,;,/ 'ontlnued) 'T' ~. .' (Va~lance - Andover/Sldeyard Setback from a Major ArterIal, (MOTION Continued) That the City has the responsIbility to act developer in a particular case such as this and to foIl ordinances which are applicable. In this partIcular o~dInance deems that there Is no way but to deny due hardship. DISCUSSION FOR THE RECORD: or as a "'all the ~:re the 6 a lack of a CommissIoner- Fer~is - Quoting f~om the Minutes ;i'the Planning and 20nlng Commission of Apr-il 12, 1988, In a quot ,from Mr-. Jacobson, "that when you are dealIng with a var-lance, .er-e has to be a hardship. The State law says you have to m .et thr-ee crlter-la In order to meet a variance. And we Just ~on't haG ~~ny of them." The 'Iaw has not changed, our or-dinances remain the's I think the then-Commissioner who Is now a Council mber has a good point. / Commissioner Peek - The graphic exh it presented actually demonstrates that a setback is not ,necessary. It leads him to believe that the building may be able to e placed on the site without the requirement of a variance. Mr. ,Carlberg stated as proposed, the ,..bulldIng does_encroach..,-_ Co!ssioner"Peek noted-_the graphics may be- wrong, but It demonstrates ~t there is a potential solutIon not requiring a setback varla~~. 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Jonak) vote VOTE ON MOTION: I. JOn the document - dated Apri I 12, 1988, when the hardship Is self-c ated, the Supr-eme Court has r-uled It does not mean valid unduehards Ip. Also, ~easonable_use of__the property can be made wIthout th /~arlance. If the size of the lot they purchased Is too sma I I to f ,t the 1 r needs, they can a I ways pu.rchase a I arge~ one. This Is - _ -. __~"_ .h_ placed on the December- 4 Council. Agenda. recessed at 8:30; reconvened at 8:37 p.m. __ . .-.. .- -,_.-..- . --._--- "-'-'-' -... '.-' :;D'fSCUSSJ(jN?Z~:':. FHA:'FtNANCf~REEATErtOl)RDINANCE"NO;':';4:f-::sPFENCINh ._ _ _n.". ____ ~---~R.EqUTREMENTS.::;FOR"'.JUNKYARDS c=-_,__=-__ ----==---~. --~- -. ______ ___:- ".-- . -- - -- -. - . :-_.:.~:_':;..:Mr~:.=Cacl berg :repor-tec:t'-hl s::-f I ndIngs :c:in~~FHA_":f tnancl ilg:;-,fof::-_thCise~::-:-'o-c-'--",,-~o...::::=--::,- - cpropert I esadj acent to-the-Jtirikyar-ds/automotl ve-r-ecycllngyar-ds. The" - -~~--=-:I e t ter rece 1 ved"':fr-om Thomas 'Feeny ~_. Manager of - HUD on -Api--l r:-2"-1 s: ver:y .:-:-:- 'J. -gener-aI._ In talking to Angle Ditty, Appr-aiser- for-BUD,-on October-. 24, , It appears the problem is not primarily with the fencing but with the Junkyar-ds themselves. ~ Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - Novembe~ 13, 1990 Page 5 (Discussion - FHA Financlng/O~dinance No. 44, Fencing/Junkya~ds, Cont) <Commlsslone~ Jonak a~~lved at this time. 8:42 p.m.) M~. Ca~lbe~g stated the indication was any FHA financing Would be only fo~ those a~eas that a~e two to th.ee city lots f.om the junkya.ds, that the.e would need to be a buffe~ between the junkya~ds and FHA financed housing. The Commission discussion then ~ecognlzed the.e is not much else the City can do with the fencing .equi.ements as it pe.tains to FHA finanCing of p.ope.ties adjacent to the junkya.d a~eas. The~e was some f.ust~ation ove~ lack of p.og~ess in Cleaning up that TIF a.ea, the lack of an agg.essive p.og~am to clean up o. eliminate the junkya.ds, and that the location fo. Comme.cial Bouleva.d has not been dete.mined so development plans can p.oceed. They felt the Counci I should be making a po.licy statement .ega.ding that a.ea as to what the City wants to accomplish within the TIF zone. The Commission noted the initial directive from the Council was to look at conflicting ~equi~ements between o~dlnances of the fencing height versus the stacking height of ca~s and pa~ts beh 1 nd. the fences . ... The .ed-Ilning by HUD was a side Issue. - Afte~ some discussion, it was gene.ally felt that the fence height should be six feet. No specific decision was made ~ega~dlng the height of stacking of ca~s and of salvage auto pa~ts, though there was speculation that the last d.aft had stacking the same height as the fence. H.. Ca.lbe.gstated he would collate the Council Minutes and P & Z mate~ials on this matte~ fo. the public_hea~lng. __.He .wlll .eadve.tlse the public hea~lng and contact the affected prope~ty owne.s. Commissione. Fe~~ls suggested the ~esea.ch on.FHA.flnanclng be forwa~ded totheC6"uncll when O~dlnance 44 Is ~oinpleted. He ai"so felt the issue of zoning p~ope~tles abutting the Junkya~ds should be add~essed by the Comp~ehensive Task Fo.ce. -. . HOTION by Peek'hSeconded by-Jovanovich,-that we. table the dlscusslon_-:.:~~-.:::< .-'.' --~--'.::on_O~d i nance;44~o~the;ri ext~mee fin g"-anct-=f o~th'at -:mee~l' n g '..;e=-f n vtte .__.-:--.--:--0. -- the auto pa~ts peb~l~-bac~ to the meeting, fo~ the pUblic hea~lng to be completed at the next meeting. Motion carried unanimously. .. .-. ~~;".'-'":"':!?"-~'~=.:-:'::'-=-~~?'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:2!:.<::~~':.;,~':--':~::;.':;7"~:':t;;-':::::r:',;",,,'.:... -.--=-.--D~USSI.ON:~::cOST~A.CTORS AN~CONTROL AREAS FiEtA:frNG=roORDIm-NcE. NO .' --,.~-- ". . .. ... :.29. DISEASED SHADE TREES~.:' :~""':'=:;~~::::'~':::::':7-__-'~~=~~':-~'" -'_,:"'~_':':':~'.:.. .- -._...'~-:M~-::~c~';I-~~~~~;'~~~;"~_t~".-th~~-r~~'~~~~~~h~ ~~:~~:~: ~'m~~~t;! ;~t' ~~~;.~;~ ... f,\ cost.factors for the "dtse.as.ed shade t~e.~~rogram In c:1eslgnatEt8~contr.?I '__/ -- areas. He recommended first adopting an"'app.op~iate o~dinance"~and .. . then establishing a Tree Board. Once those~~~~ done, funding can~))~~ addressed, posslbl y even meeting wi th the Counchl to discuss funding;:;';. ......,-<.1~'Q', ""k>". ~:;.~ The Commission recessed at 9:25: reconvened at 9:37 p.m. CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION November 13, 1990 DATE '0 AGENDA ITEM 5. Discussion - FHA Financing relating to Ord. #44 Fencing Requirements ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Planning ~ David L. Carlberg City Planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: BY: The Planning & Zoning Commission at the October 23, 1990 meeting requested staff to contact the Department of Housing and Urban Development concerning Federal Housing Authority (FHA) financing for those properties adjacent to the junkyards/automotive recycling yards. In particular the Susan Hurst property to the south of Andover Auto (13440 Jay st.). I talked with Angie Ditty, Appraiser for HUD, on October 24, 1990 and sent her a letter on October 25, 1990 addressing the City's concerns regarding FHA financing in relation to Ordinance No. 44. I requested answers to the following questions from Ms. Ditty and asked that I receive a written response. 1. Why are properties adjacent to the Junkyards not receiving FHA financing? 2. Is the fencing the problem or is it the adjacent junkyards themselves that are the problem? 3. Does the lack of a buffer zone effect the ability of residents to secure FHA financing? 4. Do the health hazards and environmental problems associated with jurikyards limit the ability of adjacent residents to receive FHA financing? In response to the above questions, I received from Ms. Ditty a copy of a letter that was sent to Mayor Jim Elling from Thomas Feeny, Manager of HUD on April 2, 1990 and is attached for your review. It is apparent that there are many factors HUD considers when reviewing sites for residential development and determining FHA financing. However, the lack of a buffer zone between the the junkyards and the residential properties appears to be the limiting factor. Fencing and landscaping may be required to reduce the adverse visual effects, but are not the single most important determining factor in denying FHA financing. , " ,j <) CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 October 25, 1990 Ms. Angie Ditty, Appraiser Department of Housing & Urban Development 220 South Second Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 Dear Angie: I am writing to you concerning Ordinance 144, Fencing Requirements for Junkyards. Planning Commission member, Wayne Vistad and myself visited the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on Wednesday, October 17, 1990 to discuss Federal Housing Authority (FHA) financing for the residential areas adjacent to the junkyards/automotive recycling yards. The primary purpose for this visit was to address the fencing requirements needed by HUD that will enable residents to the south to secure FHA financing. We met with Jerry Thompson who was familiar with the problem. The photos taken by Susan Hurst (13440 Jay st.) were presented at the meeting. We asked Mr. Thompson if the reason for the residential area not receiving FHA financing is due to the condition of the fencing that .encloses the junkyards or is it the junkyards themselves that are the problem. We were informed that the fencing appears to be the primary problem, but the lack of a buffer zone between the residential properties and the junkyards could also be a factor. There were two other factors stated by Mr. Thompson that could effect FHA financing - the health hazard and environmental problems imposed by the nearby junkyards. Mr. Thompson indi~ated that HUD will again be inspecting the area and that we will have answers to our questions by the end of this week. Dan Waloga, Environmental Officer for HUD, was also to be involved in the inspection process. ____ Based on our second phone conversation on October 24, 1990, I realize that an inspection was completed in December of 1989 on the Hurst property. The City of Andover would be most grateful if you could submit to the City in writing your findings addressing the above mentioned questions and concerns presented at the meeting on October 17th. We would appreciate receiving this information prior to November 13, 1990. -, , . If you should have questions, please feel free to contact me at Phi 755-5100. The City thanks you for your time and effort. :~J ,'Sincerely, ])~ I. ~/~ David L. Carlberg City Planner .~....., . /. . ,;~ r~ ,. ~ I ~~) I " ., April 2, 1990 Honorable James E. Ell.i.ng llayor, Ci. ty of Andover 1685 Crosstown Doulevard NH lmdover, 1m 55304 Dear Hayor Elling: Your February 12, 1990 lettor to HUD requests further inforr.lation ,.llout HUD policy rcgllrcl~ ng residential development adjacent to auto salvage y.lT.cls. 7h1s l" in response to site and neighborhoou standards concerns expro53c,: :,'.' HUD staff in reviewing subdivisions in the southern Andover area, Hhere aeveral salvage yards, hazardous. tJaBte sites, a tire dur~p, and landfill currently exist or are proposed. Hhen determining the acceptability of a site for residential development, HUD must consider not only the conditions existing on-site ;;hich may affect development, but also tho adjacent area. In many instances a site itnelf r,lay have few physical or structural limitationo to development, but .it l,lay L(! located in an area that ls unsuitable for housing. Often communi.tJ.8S ut5.1ize planning and zoning functions as a means to separate incompatiblc lond . UGes from residential areas. However, conceivably a situation cculd ar ~.I1" where .Leolated pockets of non-confoming land use may be located near a proposed residential development. Or, as is occurring in Andover. a gr~llng community experiences a surge in rosidential development which approaches areas fon~erly zoned for industrial or commercial uses. In these instullces HUD r.1Ust assess the affect that the adjacent land-uses have on the proPQ:;~(! residential development. Of pnramount concern to HUD is that residents of nUD/FIlA-insured hOllsin] not be exposed to environments l~hich Inay present a danger to their health [U~(~ safety. In addition to these baaic considerations. liUD also must evaluate residual nuisance factors which may adversely impact not only the desiri:1bilLty and liveability of an area. but may reduce property value--sometimes to t!.,c extent that the home is rendered unmarketable. In the specific instance of reGidential development proposed adjacent to exiating salvage yards, Hun \/tluhl investigate the potentlal for toxic chel!lical exposure (froI:l contaminate,; 50i.15 or stormwater/groundwater drainage off-site), air pollution (fro~l fires or fugitive dust), case of aCCOSD to rnnterials (to protect neighborhood children an,1 other trcspilssers from an "attractive nuisance"), Visual/aesthetic inpacta (which depreciate land values and diminish a proper aense of neighborhoou), potential traffic concerns (transportation and access conflicts with neighborhood cirCUlation), and other issues which may pose a potential threat or irritation to residents. . -.-:'*"'" '" '~.o<'!: ~ 4 -""" -.... ~. ." 1":'... ''l'~'" :rt. ~.J:1../-';~~.".~} _..~. " u Correspondence Code " '--./.me Date "if ~)- -.. .': ;,:~:~{' . -~ .~. _...-'" -...... ~..,'li1 ......~~. -~ ....i.- Pa')e 2 llany of these assessment factor's may be difficult to qua~tify. others Inay be mitigated to some -extent by"acceptable separatiOn distancos fro"l the salvage yard (there are no hard-and-fast rules) or on-site containment of materialo in buildings. Landscaping and fencing to reduce adverse vioual impacts may also be a requirement. It may conceivably be possible to design a salvage yard that is 501f- contained in a building with security sufficient to prevent trespass Hhich also r,lin.l.f.Iizes the potential for off-site environmental contamination. ! l: is irlportant to note h0\1ever, that IIUD would not necessarily consider a resiuential development located adjacent to such a salva(]e yard to be crn~pletcly unaffected by this type of land-use. There may still be a potential for adverse environmental impacts (e.g., fire). In addition, the value of residences located adjacent to non-conforming land uses considered to be relatively benign from an environr.tental perspective (such as cOl;uncrc;.al office parks) are affected to the extent that the adjacent use is non- residential and thus influences the value of the neighborhood. In conclusion, there are lnany variables ",hich IlUD nust evaluate \;!lell rev imllng the acceptabili ti' of residential development proposed f01: arc,,,"; cOlltaining non-conforming land-use. HUD recognizes that the City of l\nc~over is investiyating methods to mitigate the adverse effects of existing lan~-ucC3 which are incompatible with residential development. I'1a wish you much Cllcce:.;c ~n your endeilvor to ensure the creation of safe and. desireable neighborhoolh; ill the lleveloping sections of the City. For further information rC'Jard' nlJ ;.ruD emrirolll.1ent;;l.l and housing policies, please contact HUD Enviromnental Of::iccr Dan Malaya (370-3037) or Rousing Director John Buenger (370-3053). Sincerely, -' ~\ "\ Thomas T. !lanager cc: ~55 5.95 File Copy Chron '90 Concurrence Previous edition is obsolete HUD-713 (4.8( HUD-2221 .".~. r,pn: 1 'lRA_:" 1 1_'1', '\ '-./ CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANOOVER. MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - OCTOBER 23, 1990 MINUTES The Regular BI-Monthly MeetIng of the Andover Planning and ZonIng CommIssion was called to order by ChaIrperson Becky Pease on October 23, 1990; 7:30 p.m., at the Andover CIty Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MInnesota. CommissIoners present: BIll Coleman, Ron FerrIs, Bev JovanovIch, Randal Peek, Wayne Vlstad Steve Jonak City Planner, DavId Carlberg; CIty Tree Inspector, Ray Sowada; and others CommIssIoner absent: Also present: - APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION by Coleman, Seconded by FerrIs, the approval of the October 9 Hlnutes. Hotlon carrIed on a 4-Yes, 2-Present (Peek, Vlstad) vote. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 44. FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR JUNKYARDS Mr. Carlberg recommended the Item be tabled pendIng further Information from the FHA. The FHA will be doing further Inspections this week. Mr. Carlberg stated he wil I call FHA tomorrow and ask for a written position statement on financing residentIal housIng In the areas around the junkyard businesses. He expected to have that information by the next P & Z meeting. In discussIng the fencing and berming recommendatIons of HUD, Mr. Carlberg noted TIF funds are not available for ~t because all those funds are beIng used to pay back the bonds. CommIssioner Vistad reviewed a proposed questionnaire to be given to four appraisers to fInd out If other methods of resIdential mortgage financing restrict theIr financIng or devalue the property If corrugated metal fencing surrounds--adjolnlng commercialproperty.--He-feltit does nogood.to. allow metal fencIng If It adversely affects neighboring resIdentIal areas, and he thought that Information should be available before amendIng the ordInance. / CommIssioner Ferris was opposed to alerting conventional financIng InstItutIons of the problem at this tIme. He thought the orlglnai ---------1 ntent-wasto -look-at the-probl em_because --FHA wants -to -red--II ne-that ----- particular corridor and-to determine what standards they will accept to once again Issue residential mortgages In that area._ He felt thIs questionnaire strays from that objective. ,--.J \,J Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1990 Page 2 <Public Hearing: Ordinance No. 44, Continued) Commissioner Vistad said the lenders are already aware of the problem, feeling this would give additional Information as to the effect of the businesses and the type of screening lending institutions might prefer. Chairperson Pease wondered if that is within their scope. The objective was to determine the FHA standards. After further discussion, the Commission agreed to table the item on the questionnaire for local appraisers until the Information is received from the FHA. They also asked Mr. Carlberg to send FHA a written request regarding their fencing and berming standards and the reasons residents around the junkyards are not receiving FHA financing. Mr. Carlberg suggested the placement of Commercial Boulevard be also discussed with the proposed amendment to Ordinance 44, as that location wil I have a direct impact on the fencing of some of the junkyards. Chairperson Pease asked for a motion to table this until the information is received from the FHA. Then, if other information is desired, the Commission can proceed with the questionnaire. MOTION by Ferris, Seconded by Coleman, to so move. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: ORDINANCE NO. 29 DISEASED SHADE TREES David Stephenson, Plant Health Specialist of the Department of Agriculture, pointed out the criteria for participation in cost-share programs in the Agenda packet. In updating the City's Diseased Shade Tree Ordinance, he did so with three things in mind: 1) the biology of the tree diseases and prob.1ems; 2) how this or-dlnance relates to State Statute; and 3) how this ordinance relates to the cost-share program criteria. The proposed ordinance will meet all those criteria. Mr. Stephenson noted the State of Minnesota is actively pursuing cost-share - mon 1 es' from the United-States ForestServ 1 ce-as-we 11 C.-as-the---'" .",-c._ State of Minnesota to use for oak wilt suppression. This year they received $50,000 of the $150,Odo they requested. All $50,000 Is initially earmarked for Anoka/County. The DNR has contributed another $25,000. The Anoka County Board has also agreed to add additional funds and has put together requests for proposals to purchase a vibrating plow. Hopefully the plow will be available by next summer - -----t ocommun lti es-tha t- meet-this -cr n-er I a -.---He-sa-l d-they-w i]-l--agaln-be-----. - seeking additional funding this year from the US ForestSetvlce. ~~ Mr. Stephenson then reviewed the proposed changes made to the draft ordinance. The key to the feasibility of controlling diseased trees is to have the Council set up control areas within the City, that ~'"':" .~ CITY of ANDOVER SPECIAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING August 30, 1990 MINUTES The Special Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Rebecca Pease on August 30, 1990, at 7:01 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard, N.W., Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: Steve Jonak, Randal Peek, .and Wayne Vistad Commissioners Absent: Bill Coleman, Ron Ferris and Bev Jovanovich Others Present: d'Arcy Bosell, City Zoning Administrator David Carlberg, City Planner ORDINANCE NO. 44 AMENDMENT FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR JUNKYARDS DISCUSSION, CONTINUED Bosell summarized briefly that the City Council has referred this matter to the Planning and Zoning Commission because it appeared that there might be a conflict between Ordinance No.8 and Ordinance No. 44 as it pertains to fencing~~ The Commission reviewed the draft of the proposed amendment to Ordinance No. 44. The proposed changes were reviewed with the interested parties in attendance. Pease stated that one of the City's main concerns was the threat of losing FHA financing in areas adjacent to the junkyards. The following people expressed their comments on this topic. If) /:-1-/_ ;" ..-:.~: -'~ HARRY~ODSICK, Best Auto Parts, 1950 Bunker Lake Boulevard stated that the owners did this back in 1985 and 1986, and that the plantings they did at that time are now ten feet tall. He stated that unless the ditches were brought up to street level, it would take 12 to 18 foot fences to screen the yards on Bunker Lake Boulevard frontage. He also stated that they are trying to be "good neighbors" and recycle oil, old tires and old batteries for people of the community. He reminded the Commission that he understands the City's concerns, but that they have a right to be a part of the community. He stated that his fence is eight foot and that he does no stacking. ,-) .:"11 .- "\ V ,) Special Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 30, 1990 Page -2- His final concern is that they may be forced to change their fencing before they know where the Bunker Lake Boulevard _~xpansion is going to run. ROBERT PIERCE, Andover Auto Parts, 13526 Jay Street, stated that the EPA had bulldozed down his wood and tin fence and installed a six foot cyclone fence around the Andover Tire property. He stated any of the homes behind the fencing now have a clear view of the area. He stated that no one from the State has offered to pay the costs of re-installing appropriate fencing. Bosell stated she had the names and numbers of some people at the State he may wish to contact. JOANNE WILBER, Wilber Auto Parts, 13608 Jay Street, stated that many of the owners switched to six foot fencing after the storm that flattened many of the taller fences. She, as well as several of the other owners, asked about the possibility of using Tax Increment Financing to do some berming. MICHAEL DENUCCI, Anoka Auto Parts, 1775 Bunker Lake Boulevard, stated that they have a four foot berm and a six foot fence above that. The following changes were recommended to the July 24th draft of Ordinance No. 44: Improve the terminology "junkyard"; /Under Section 1, add a definition for Recyclables; ~Under Section 1, add a definition for Screening Fence; /Under Section 1.6,change minimum height back to six feet; Under Section 5.1, change wording to read "to be consistent over any area adjacent to residential as measured from street level." Under Section 5.1, clarify between piled, stacked or stored. Under Section 5.2, change minimum height back to six feet. Staff will research the possibility of Tax Increment Financing. Special Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 30,.1990 Page -3- C) MOTION by Vistad and seconded by Peek to continue this item until the Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting to be held on September 25, 1990 and that a Public Hearing be scheduled for that date. Motion carried unanimoUSly. Bosell will mail copies of the new information to all of the owners prior to the meeting. -16-Q-6-G-NH CnOCCTOHlJ DOULEVARD AMENDED 3~PERM-I-T-FC- CONSTANCE EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH DISCUSSION, CONTINUED This item was continued from the August 28, 1990 meeti order for the Andover Review Committee (ARC) to revi request and make their recommendations. Bosell stated the ARC has reviewed this request nd presented a list of nine changes to be made at the re~o endation of the ARC. Bosell has spoken with Loren Devine at the Church, and they have no problem with complying wit all of the changes. Peek asked about the history in granting/~mits for temporary buildings. Bosell stated the portable alassrooms at Crooked Lake Elementary School were the only o~s she is aware of in the past. -~ MOTION by Vistad and seconded by ~k that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend/{o the City Council approval of the Amended Special Use Per~it requested by Constance Evangelical Free Church, located at 16060/NW Crosstown Boulevard,'~to_construct two 24x30 foot buildings similar to garages but built to meet occupany standards as set oUt in the Uniform Building Codes. .. /. It LS the Lntent of the~hurch that when the structures are no longer needed a~m~porary classroom space they would be sold or removed fr~n :e site. Siding is proposed to be plywood with grooves, not a metal pole-type buildi g. se will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general elfare of the community. It will not cause serious traffic co gestion or hazards. Caution should be exercised to make rtain that pedestrian traffic from the classrooms to the 9 urch and cars is well-marked to avoid near misses. It wi t not seriously depreciate surrounding property values. It i in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zon'ng ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. ~-) / ~j --) CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST F,ORPLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 30 August 1990 DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR AGENDA AGENDA ITEM 2. Ordinance No. 44 Amend. Fencing'Requirements for Junkyards Discussion Continued '" Planning/Zoning '\'6'Y\ ~ BY: d'Arcy Bosell BY: The Planning & Zoning Commission continued this item to this special meeting date due to the lateness of the hour of the meeting on August 14, 1990. There are no new agenda packet materials. Please bring with you the packet materials for the 14th meeting. I have received no input from the junkyard operators to date, either verbal or written. Because this request is in regard to Ordinance No. 44, the Junkyard ordinance, a public hearing is not required. The Commission can, however, recommend to hold a public hearing in addition to this meeting if it is felt the changes made would warrant additional input from the community. If desired to hold such a hearing, the hearing would be scheduled for September 25, 1990. ./' .::J Regular Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes--July 10, 1990 Page -4- In reviewing the proposed amendment it was noted that minimum depth should be 160 feet, not 157 feet. This allow the property owner to do a lot split at some date if sewer and water become available and if t situated on the lot to meet setback requirements at that time. e ou1d ture home is n effect MOTION by Vistad and seconded by Coleman the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend the Andover City Council approval of the change to Ordina ce No. 10 governing cul-de-sacs as written except for the ange from 157 feet to 160 feet. Motion carried unanimo y. 8.08, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, OTHER BUSINESS--ORDINANCE CONTINUED Staff reviewed the latest aft of this proposed amendment. The Commission discussed anging Section E, 3(e) to 10 feet, changing the proposed c rt to reflect 10 feet for Side Yard Setback, and the possi llity of developing a chart to reflect Setback Area guideli s described in Section H, 5. th Jim Schrantz regarding surfacing requirements that the City uses at the present time. Staff will check for storage are MOTION by Vi ad Hearing on his unanimou y. and seconded by Coleman to hold a Public matter on July 24, 1990. Motion carried .Pease equested staff to notify the two businesses the City rking with at this time'in the Commercial Park about Public Hearing. AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 44 REGARDING FENCING; ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 4.21 AND ORDINANCE NO. 78, SECTION 2(B), ET AL I' Bosel1 stated the City Council has requested the Planning and Zoning Commission review Ordinance No. 44 and Ordinance No. 8 to determine whether there is a discrepancy between the two and make a recommendation to the City Council. She has also included Ordinance No. 78 for the Commission to review which regulates the construction of commercial buildings ~ithin the City.. :'J After much discussion, the Commission concluded that there is a discrepancy between Ordinance No. 44 and Ordinance No.8, with the consensus at this time that the consistent height should be-~ minimum of six feet height for 'fencing in junkyards with a maximum of twelve feet height. Also, the stacks of junk should not exceed the height of the fence. / Regular City Council Meeting Minutes - June 5, 1990 Page 4 . \ '-./ ORDINANCE 44 DISCUSSION Chairperson Pease asked for dire~tion from the Council regarding the Junkyard Ordinance, specifically on screening and indoor storage. Council noted the discrepancy between the fencing requirement of eight feet but al lowing junk vehicles to be stacked up to ten feet high. Mayor Elling also noted the FHA has stated that if the businesses were conducted inside, they would have no problem financing housing in that area. Sue Hurst. 13450 Jav Street - explained the FHA stated they would not finance homes on th~ir property because of the lack of an exIstIng barrier, leading them to believe the existing fence to the north of their property is more of a blight than the junk itself. They would lIke to see the City enforce the existlng ordinance so the fence along Andover Auto Parts would comply with the standard of a fence of solId unIform material and color. She showed pictures of the exIstIng fence. They would lIke this done now in the event they ever need FHA financIng on theIr house. Council requested Staff to inspect Andover Auto Parts for compliance wIth the ordinance. They also felt the P & Z should address the fencing provIsIon whIch now only applies to property abuttIng publIc streets. The Intent would be that the screenIng should gIve at least as much protection to abutting residents as it does to the street. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Perry, that we direct Staff to look into this situation and see that enforcement is complied with. whatever that may be for each given situation; have them report back to the Council. Motion carried on a 3-Yes, 2-Absent (Jacobson, Orttel) vote. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Perry, that we refe~ this back to the P & Z for clarification regarding the fence and in regard to height, thInking there is a discrepancy by requiring 8-foot fences but allowing ten-foot piles of junk vehIcles. MotIon carried on a 3-Yes, 2-Absent (Jacobson, Grttel) vote. ~~~LIML U~~ r~K~11/~MI ~IR!~l A~TO BEAL!~3 ~Ia[1 Chairperson Pease explained the request is to replace an at 13678 Jay Street. The sIgn meets al I the City requi the prOblem is it intensifies a non-conforming ss. Both the Staff and Mr. Hawkins thought the requ uld be denied on that basis. ~J a picture of the existing sign. They can redo felt the new one would be an asset to that area. a sign permit granted to her by the City in 1981 to CITY OF ANDOVER ,~ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 DATE AGENDA SECTION NO. Discussion Items ITEM NO:.; 26 Constance Blvd. NW Lot Split Request ORIGINATING DEPARTMEN.~ Planning '""'tt..., David L. Darlberg, City Planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA r 0, U' BY: BY: REQUEST The Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on November 27, 1990, reviewed the request for a lot split by John Mengelkoch located at 26 Constance Boulevard. The 7.41 acre parcel will be split into two separate lots of 3.84 acres and 3.57 acres. The purpose of the lot split is to allow the applicant to construct a single family residence. BACKGROUND Ordinance No. 40 regulates the division of lots. Ordinance No.8, Section 6.02 establishes the provisions for minimum lot width, lot depth and lot area in an R-1 zoned district. Ordinance No. 10, Section 9.07.10 establishes the minimum area of land dedicated to park and open space, and the amount to be paid in lieu of the park dedication requirement. The applicant is required to pay a park dedication fee of Four Hundred ($400.00) Dollars. RECOMMENDATION The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of the lot split of the property legally described as: that part of the east 660 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying southerly of the southerly right-of-way line of County Road No. 60 (Old Constance Boulevard NW) except the south 660 feet thereof, also except roads subject to easements of record; that this be subject to the applicant to pay a total park dedication fee of <:t1on 00 1mOn f'i t-~T- COUNCIL ACTION ,. MOTION BY ,." TO 'J SECOND BY Page Two In Re: 26 Constance Boulebard NW John Mengelkoch Lot Split Request ~J Council approval of the proposed lot split; that the request is in compliance with Ordinance No. 40 and Ordinance No. 8~ Section 6.02 in terms of lot width, the front setback, lot depth, and lot area per dwelling, and with Ordinance No. 10, Section 9.07.10, minimum land area. Attached are the Planning and Zoning packet materials, the minutes from the November 27, 1990 meeting and a resolution for your adoption. ~J . \ o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANORA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R -90 A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE LOT SPLIT REQUEST OF JOHN MENGELROCH TO CREATE TWO (2) PARCELS PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 40. WHEREAS, John Mengelkoch has requested a lot split to construct a single family residence on the property located at 26 Constance Boulevard NW, legally described as: THAT PART OF THE EAST 660 FEET OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 32, RANGE 24, ANORA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 60 (OLD CONSTANCE BOULEVARD NW) EXCEPT THE SOUTH 660 FEET THEREOF, ALSO EXCEPT ROADS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS OF RECORD; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined that said request meets the criteria of Ordinance No. 40, Ordinance No. 10, Section 9.07.10 and Ordinance 8, Section 6.02; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and there was no opposition to said request; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the lot split as 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 the lot split on said property with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant pay a park dedication fee of $400.00 pursuant to Ordinance No. 40, Section 9.07. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 18th day of December, 1990 CITY OF ANDOVER James E. Elling, Mayor ATTEST Victoria Volk, City Clerk ~--) o ,/~_.>~~~';-~'>.,\... I -, .1\ \.L ) ~~~ CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.w. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEETING - NOVEMBER 27, 1990 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and 20nlng Commission was called to order by Chairperson Becky Pease on November 27, 1990: 7:30 p.m., at the Andover CIty Hal I, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MInnesota. CommissIoners present: Ron FerrIs, Steve Jonak, Bev JovanovIch Randal Peek, Wayne Vlstad BII I Coleman CIty Planner, David Carlberg; and others Commissioner absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 13, 1990: Correct as wrItten. MOTION by Ferris, Seconded by Jovanovich, approval. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: LOT SPLIT - JOHN MENGELKOCH. 26 CONSTANCE BLVD NW Mr. Carlberg reviewed the request to split a 7.41-acre lot into two separate lots of 3.84 and 3.57 acres. Staff is recommending approval contingent upon the payment of a park dedIcation fee of $400. The fee is for one newly created lot. Both lots meet all setback and dImensIon requirements. John Menoelkoch - stated they want to build a single-family residence on the vacant parcel, Parcel B. It is In compliance wIth all setbacks. MOTION by FerrIs, Seconded by Vlstad, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by FerrIs, Seconded by Vistad, that the Planning and 20nlng recommend approval of the Lot SpIlt legally described as that part of the east 660 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, TownshIp 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, lYing southerly of the southerly rIght-of-way lIne of County Road No. 60 (Old Constance Boulevard NW) except the south 660 feet thereof, also except roads subject to easements of record; that this be subject to the applicant to pay a total park dedication fee of $400 upon City CouncIl approval of the proposed lot spIlt: that the request Is In compliance with Ordinance 40 and Ordinance 8, SectIon 6.02 In terms of lot width, the front setback, lot depth, and lot area per dwelling, and with Ordinance 10, SectIon 9.07.10, minImum land area. Motion carrIed on a 6-Yes, I-Absent (Coleman) vote. ~-) This Item wIll go to the CIty CouncIl on December 18, 1990. HearIng closed at 7:38 p.m. o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST F,ORPLANNING COMMISSION ACTION November 27, 1990 DATE AGENDA ITEM 3. Public Hearing: Lot Split -John Mengelkoch 26 Constance Boulevard NW ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Planning ~1r) David L. carlber~ City Planner APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: BY: Applicant John Mengelkoch - 26 Constance Boulevard NW (PIN 13-32-24-14-0007) Request The applicant has requested to split a 7.41 acre lot into two separate lots of 3.84 acres and 3.57 acres. Applicable Ordinances Ordinance No. 40 regulates the division of lots. A lot split is defined as any division of a lot parcel or tract of land into not more than two (2) parcels when both divided parcels meet or exceed the minimum requirements for platted lots in the applicable zoning district. Ordinance No.8, Section 6.02 establishes the provisions for minimum lot width, lot depth and lot area in an R-l zoned district. The minimum requirements in an R-l district are as follows: Lot Width at Front Setback Lot Depth Lot Area Per Dwelling 300 feet. 150 feet 2.5 acres Review The purpose of the lot split is to allow the applicant to construct a single family residence. staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the lot split requested by John Mengelkoch located at 26 Constance Boulevard NW with the following conditions: ~J 1. The applicant pay a park dedication fee of $400 upon City Council approval of the proposed lot split. (j CAINE 8 ASSOCIATES LAND SURVEYORS, INC. 17720 Highway 65 N.c. - Ham Lake, Minnesota 55304 PROPOSED LOT SPLIT FOR, John H.ngelkoch 434 - 7646 PARCEL AI That part of the west 300.00 teet of the east 660.00 teet of the Southeast Ouarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 32, Range 24, ADaka County, Minnesota, lyIng southerly of the center line of Old Constance Boulevard and lying north of the south 660.00 teet of said Southeast O\1arter at the Northeast Quarter. Subject to Old Constance Boulevard along the north line thereof. Subject to other easelents, it any. PARCEL 8. That part ot the east 360.00 teet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka COWlty, Klnnesota. lying southerly ot the center line of Old Constance Boulevard and lying' north of the south 660.00 teet of said Southeast Ouart.er of the Northeast OUarter. EXCEPT Parcels 7 and 8. ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. 37. according to the recorded plat thereot. Anoka County. HiMesota. Subject to Old Constance Boulevard along the north line thereot. Subject to other easements, it any. I r I I ---~~~1~~~~~~-----7 SE. Cor. of th. SE1/4 of th. NEI/4 of s.c. 13. T. 32. R. 24 __ i-LN. ~o~ S[1/4~~<~~~~J.:..::~__-:d~ JJ L~ ~RU.- in -- ':\ 79'''7'01''( 85UL ::2'.g1 r- 619.75 ))2.\ ___ ':;:v,! __--;;;" ; L,lJ '!. .r<'J_~:n . ~::! "!ffi -~.!J! . , "- ~'{J ~ ...J CO ~ : , "'.>-' --I--~ C/) '~01 : a:- r-- 'ao ~UJ .. ~~ ",> ,I ;~~Z v~1 / 1I11--'? <]0:: tie. ~o 1:-=-==1~, / " 0t' ~1V a"~~~~?~())r~ , ~~1t~~.'b' i p~ -~~~~-*~ <Q\J 1~~"tY I ~ /: G~ ~O;f I: t>..~ ~-\ ",...l ? 0"\r-'::0~ '~~ I ~ / Cp~~~Y Ii ~ /~ t! [} PARCEL A (3.57 AC.) :;: ....'" ~N tt). a'" ..... gtt) PARCEL B (3.84 AC.) :;: ........ ~... tt). 0'" . <Xl g... z z 481.09 N 89.31 '12"W H!l101 ------ J_.4D_______ 300.02 I I I I r I I I I 8 ci ~ ~ , I {- ~J SCALe: I INCH=~ FeeT. o DeNOTeS 1/2 INCH IRON PIPe SeT. .DeNOTeS AN IRON MONUMeNT FOUND. BeARINGS SHOWN ARe FROM ASSUMeD DATUM. , NEllE.,. caT"" THA., 1'N1$ $Ullrc", Jlt.AM, 011 <<"""' MCf ""C~E. " _ 011 I/IIIDCII /II' DIIfC~r $'''''''''1$101/1 A., rWAf', AM A OK' "'''$TCIIC/1 L.UO SlJltrE",," UMlC" "HC I.An "" TWC srArr tv _IItIIWStJTA. ~~97.{~', DAr, ....~.,... ~I ''1,1:......,. .r:> !..{"! . ~6v- a7C/J . '7-90 ~/.h '--") o CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 7S5-5100 LOT SPLIT # LOT SPLIT REQUEST FORM /property Address:)6 r()J1s-ta.'1(P, 611/(1 JJw. Legal Description of Property: (Fill in whichever is appropriate): .L;'S3c/f Lot . Block Addition Plat Parcel PIN ,/ /:!1-:...-GY -~-/-I-C)O~1 7 (If metes and bounds, attach the complete legal) --------------------------------------------------------------------- ./ Reason for Request Ld-f 1fl-k, -hl.- ('~(1s..frl1c+;{)" (\.f S;,,~e; h-LI"n i 1\/ R(JSI~Me.. I Current Zoning (2-/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- j Name of Applicant :roL. f(-cr- ~hi)Mlo--Tf1~,n~e./Kocl Address ~t, lnnS{-(I", (P. 8/u(1 f./W. Home Phone "7 g,;; - /00 fc Signature Date ~d~i/;I)7~ -------------------------------------------- /property Owner (Fee Owner) (If different from above) <;1/ ME Address Home Phone Business Phone .~J Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------- ,J . ,~ .; ! ~. ,-J LOT SPLIT PAGE 2 Attach a scaled drawing of the proposed split of the property showing: scale and North arrow; dimensions of the property and structures; front, side and rear yard building setbacks; adjacent street names; location and use of existing structures within 100 feet /11,,)" 3/ /f".f9 1"7 The date the property became a lot of record,~the names and addresses of all property owners within 350 feet of the property proposed to be split, and the complete legal description of the subject property must also be provided. I hereby certify that this property has not been subdivided within the last three years. Lot Split Fee: $50.00 Filing Fee: $10.00 Park Dedication: -~do.-- Date Paid //-ac:f'---JO Receipt # ....::3'b-1"-// Date Paid Receipt # ~ ,,) . LOT SPLIT REQUEST CHECKLIST A lot split may not be required if the request is: 1. A single parcel of land at least 5 acres in size and 300 feet in width, and 2. All divided lots are at least 5 acres in size and 300 feet in width, and 3. All existing or newly created lots have frontage on an approved right-of-way. Moving interior lot lines for residential or commercial property may be approved by the Zoning Administrator if the request: 1. Does not create any additional buildable lots. 2. Does not create any lot which is below the standards for the applicable zoning district in which it lies. 3. Does not have an adverse effect on the surrounding property. All lot split requests must meet the following: 1. All resultant lots must have at least the mlnlmum width, depth and square footage as required for any parcel of land in the zoning district wherei~ the lot is located. 2. No owner may utilize this method of land division on any parcel more than one time in any 3 year period. -)iff<' 3. Pay a park dedication fee of ~ per newly created lot. '\ V 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 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Andover will hold a public hearing at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as can be heard, on Tuesday, November 27, 1990 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW, Andover, MN to review the lot split request of John Mengelkoch located on the following legally described property: Legal Description: That part of the east 660 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying southerly of the southerly right-of-way line of County Road No. 60 (Old Constance Blvd NW) except the south 660 feet thereof. Also except roads subject to easements of record. (Generally located at: 26 Constance Boulevard NW - PIN 13-32- 24-14-0007 ) All written and verbal comments will be received at that time and location. A copy of the application and proposed lot split will be available at Andover City Hall for review prior to said meeting. ~I#, . Vlctorla Vo , City Clerk Publication dates: November 16, 1990 November 23, 1990 ') \.~-~) , _ ..",_ ~."t", i' ._.__~..;.J.......u_~=_~"_h,"""_. .;:. ., Peter & Lynda Berg \: I 104 NW Constance Boulevard i i Andover, MN 55304 I I. i ,-J Allard F. Reddington ~58l0 Sycamore Street NW Andover, MN 55304 James & Deborah Berry 43 NW Constance Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 Neil & Gwen Erickson 31 Constance Boulevard NW Andover, MN 55304 ~ -.......... ~~:';J :~./" .}.7 !'.w-~~ (;;-:"":;1 ~>I - ~!.J--:.,' V.;; .:-" -. ..,'. .:::> . -=..': ,~\. ~ ~.i/ ~~ .._-~ '~.:;;:/" / ". , ) ..J -- ~~~ /'" ,f'/,c.~. V"""loi",", " , , ,:.. ..j;! ~ ,~ ,_"" -... 'l'_, ---~,~~ -- . 1 ~ (/~}~ !" "~.~ '-<\J l~ !~ ~~. ,. I . ~ il:J )) I.:S liff) ~ ~~ 1 'J:';J~ '-<.::~ ~ (0~ :os &~'72'!.)" .., .......; J ..-.' f ...-..:. ~.., ..r:i ';:..._:'~:-~ .,:". .'; Lester & Valeria Peterson 315 Constance Boulevard Ham Lake, MN 55304 Craig Bonde & 312 Constance Ham Lake, MN Kim McKnight Boulevard 55304 Pat & Kathleen Dobrava 16120 NW University Ext Andover, MN 55304 Carl & Karen Jerdin 142 NW Constance Blvd. Andover, MN 55304 Robert & Sandra Rundle 198 Constance Boulevard NW Andover, MN 55304 Joanne Jessica Baber 94 NW Constance Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 ~""~ u;;~.;v.- -..~~ ..~ - ~ ., '.~~1r ~~,:'~ .. -. 'J" /i.Il/j~-;::" ~ .....,.... ~., "" t~~~.' .Y~, :.4'. " .1 ~,~) . -~,~ " \ ~ "' .~ _. t;'_ ,~.::...,...::. - 3l "4? I; i I [ 0~ ~>"":-r~- CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE December 18, 1990 AGENDA . SECTIO~ NQ D1scuss1on Items ORIGIN4TING DEPARTMENT F1nance APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. .5: Award SalejCert. of Indebtedness Howard D. Koolick ~ BY: Finance Director ,( .0, BY: U REQUEST The Andover City Council is requested to award the sale of the 1990 Certificates of Indebtedness. Mr. Hawkins will have the bids, resolution and any other required information at the meeting. COUNCil ACTION MOTION BY '---' TO SECOND BY \ {"'" v.~\A ~t..... ~-~..,_,.,., CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT December 18, 1990 Engineering APPROVED FOR AGENDA ~T5.M Cedar Hills 3rd ~. Sketch plan <7 BY: ~J BY: Todd J. Haas The City Council is requested to review the proposed sketch plan of Cedar Hills River Estates 3rd Addition as proposed by Woodland Development.. The Andover Review Committee (ARC) has reviewed the sketch plan and their comments are as follows: General Comments * The proposed sketch plan is located in an R-2 Zoning District, Single Family Estate. The minimum lot size requirement is 2.5 acres. Fourteen (14) lots are being proposed. * Lots 3 and 4 of Block 1, and Lots 5 and 6 of Block 2 are required to access the city streets. * The proposed development would be in conjunction with Phase II of Timber Trails on the south side of l78th Lane N.W. * 179th Avenue N.W. is currently incorrect and should be indicated as 178th Lane N.W. Also a portion of Xenia street N.W. from the west line of Lot 4 Block 2 to County Road No. 58 will be 180th Avenue N.W. * The developer will be required to meet city Ordinances 8 and 10 and all other applicable ordinances. Planning and Zoning Commission Comments There were no negative comments made by the Planning Commission. The only concern made was that the developer was to eliminate all variances that may arise when the preliminary plat is being designed. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY j TO SECOND BY . ~ ", J .~ . . COUNTY OF ANOKA Depanment of Highways Paul K. Ruud, Highway Engineer 1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD NW, ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 612-754-3520 November 29, 1990 Todd Haas Assistant City Engineer City of Andover . 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover, MN. 55304 Re: Cedar Hills River Estates Third Addition Woodland Development Dear Todd: We have reviewed the proposed plat for Cedar Hills River Estates Third Addition located in the City of Andover, and offer the following comments: Right-of-way depicted on the plat is acceptable as shown. (60 feet from - centerline of CR58)o-- Right-of-accessalong County Road 58 . (Tulip St.NW) should be dedicated to Anoka County. Lots #3 and #4 of Block 1, and Lots #5 and #6 of Block 2 should access the city streets. Calculations must be provided which show that any drainage to the County Highway Ditch along CR #58 does not exceed the pre-existing conditions. If drainage will exceed the current conditions, an alternate drainage plan should be sought. Contact me when construction of the proposed city streets take place, so that stop sign installations along CR 58 can be coordinated. -) Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, ....~ --,-. Jane Pemble. . Traffic Engineer dmhjCEDARHLS J Q Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer ..\@\\ v.,,,.__ i...~~.....~..... .,.... CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE .'De.G.e",h~,. If. /1fo . AGENDA SECTION. NQ D1Scusslon Items ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Admin. V. Volk ~ J APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM Approve 1991 NO. ~ Sheriff's Contract BY: BY: 66. The City Council is requested to approve the Law Enforcement Contract for 1991 in the amount of $394,378.00. Attached is a copy of said contract. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY "- '../ TO SECOND BY \ ,_J LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 19 , by and between the COUNTY OF ANOKA and the ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF, herein after referred to as the "COUNTY" and the CITY OF ANDOVER, hereinafter referred to as the "MUNICIPALITY", for the period of January 1, 1991 through December 31, 1991; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Municipality is desirous of entering into a contract with the County, through the Office of the County Sheriff, for the performance of the law enforcement functions hereinafter described within the corporate limits of said Municipality; and WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to and law enforcement functions on the hereinafter set forth; and rendering such services terms and conditions WHEREAS, such contracts are authorized and provided for by M.S. Sec. 471.59 and M.S. 436.05; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the terms of the aforesaid statutes, and in consideration of the mutual covenants expressed herein, it is agreed as follows: 1. PURPOSE The County, through its County Sheriff, agrees to provide police protection within the corporate limits of the Municipality to the extent and in the manner as hereinafter set forth. 2. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY COUNTY A. Except as otherwise hereinafter specifically set forth, such services shall encompass the duties and functions of the type normally coming within the jurisdiction of the Anoka County Sheriff pursuant to Minnesota Law, and in addition, the Sheriff and his duly assigned deputies shall, within the Municipality's corporate limits, exercise all the police powers and duties of city police officers as provided by M.S. 436.05. B. The rendition of services, the standard of performance, the discipline of the deputies, and other matters incident to the performance of such services and the control of personnel so employed, shall remain in and under the sole control of the Sheriff. -) 1 o C. Such services shall include Minnesota State Statutes, and of the City of Andover. the enforcement of the the municipal ordinances D. The County shall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, equipment, and communication facilities for dispatching, jail detention (including the cost of such detention), and daily patrol service as specified in Paragraph 2. E . of this Agreement, and shall be responsible for the direct payment of any salaries, wages, or other compensation to any County personnel performing services pursuant to this contract. E. The County agrees to provide law enforcement protection as follows: For the period of January 1, 1991 through December 31, 1991, the Sheriff's Office will provide thirty-two (32) hours per day of daily patrol service 365 days per year. Said daily patrol service shall be exercised through the employment of two patrol cars, to be supplied, equipped, and maintained by the County, and staffed by Sheriff I s deputies. Further, said daily patrol service will provide and fulfill those services and duties ordinarily provided and fulfilled by city police officers as provided by state law and municipal ordinances. The Sheriff, upon consultation with the Law Enforcement Committee created pursuant to Paragraph 6 herein, shall determine the time of the day during which the patrol service shall be provided. The Sheriff may periodically change the times of patrol service in order to enhance the effectiveness of the coverage. F. The County patrol cars used for providing the services pursuant to the CONTRACT, shall be stored on premises owned by the Municipality. In the event that a suitable and secure storage location is not provided, in the determination of the Sheriff, the patrol cars will be returned to the Sheriff's Office at the end of each shift. 3. DUTIES OF MUNICIPALITY A. It is agreed that the Sheriff shall have all reasonable and necessary cooperation and assistance from the Municipality, its officers, agents, and employees, so as to facilitate the performance of this agreement. B. This contract shall not alter the responsibility for prosecution of offenses occurring within the Municipality as is currently provided by law. Likewise, collection and distribution of fine monies shall be controlled in the manner provided by law. ~ 2 o 4. COMPENSATION/TERM The Municipality hereby agrees to pay to the County the sum of $394,378.00 for law enforcement protection as herein specified for the year 1991. Said contract sum is payable in four (4) equal installments with the first installment due on April 1, 1991, with remaining installments due on July 1, 1991, October 1, 1991, and December 31, 1991. 5 . RENEWAL This contract may be renewed for a successive period of one (1) year. Said renewal shall be accomplished in the following manner: A. Not later than one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the expiration of the current contract, the County, through its County Sheriff, shall notify the Municipality of its intention to renew. Said notification shall include notice of any increase in total contract cost. B. Not later than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the current contract, the Municipality shall notify the Sheriff of its intention to renew and its acceptance of increased costs. C. The renewal shall be officially approved by the parties' respective governing bodies prior to expiration of the current contract. 6. LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMITTEE The County, through its County Sheriff or his designees, agrees to meet, from time to time, with any duly designated law enforcement committee of the Municipality. The purpose of said meetings shall be to make suggestions for improvement in the implementation of this contract or for amendments thereto, provided, however, that no such suggestion or amendment shall be binding on either party until reduced to writing and duly signed by the parties hereto. The membership of said committee, and the time and place of said meetings, shall be determined by the Municipality with reasonable notice to the Sheriff. 7. DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS All funds disbursed by the County or the Municipality pursuant to this Agreement shall be disbursed by each entity pursuant to the method provided by law. .::J 3 '0 8. STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY A strict accounting shall be made of all funds, and reports of all receipts and disbursements shall be made upon request by either party. 9. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION In accordance with Anoka County's Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' policies against discrimination, no person shall illegally be excluded from full-time employment rights in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the program which is the subject of this Agreement on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, marital status, public assistance status, age, disability, or national origin. 10. TERMINATION This agreement may be terminated by either party at any time with or without cause upon not less than 120 days written notice delivered by mail or in person to the other party. Notices delivered by mail, shall be deemed to be received two (2) days after mailing. Such termination shall not be effective with respect to services rendered prior to such notice of termination. 11. NOTICE For purposes of delivering any notices hereunder, notice shall be effective delivered to the Anoka County Sheriff, 325 East Main Street, Anoka, MN. 55303, on behalf of the County; and the City Manager of the City of Andover, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N. W. , Anoka, MN. 55303, on behalf of the Municipality. 12. INDEMNIFICATION The City of Andover and the County mutually agree to indemnify and hold harmless each other from any claims, losses, costs, expenses, or damages, injuries or sickness resulting from the acts or omissions of the respective offices, agents, or employees, relating to the activities conducted by either party under this agreement. 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT REQUIREMENT OF A WRITING It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this agreement supersedes all oral and written agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subj ect matter hereof, as well as any previous agreement presently in effect between the parties relating to the .~ 4 :~ , \ '-~ subject matter thereof. Any modifications of the provisions of only when they have been reduced to parties herein. al terations, variations, or this Agreement shall be valid writing and duly signed by the IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Municipality, City of Andover, by resolution dUly adopted by its governing body, has caused this agreement to be signed by its Mayor and attested by its Clerk, and the COUNTY OF ANOKA, by resolution of the County Board of Commissioners, has caused this agreement to be signed by the Anoka County Sheriff, the Chairman of the Anoka County Board of Commissioners, and attested by the County Administrator, all on the day and year first above written. CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA Mayor Chairman, Anoka county Board of Commissioners ATTEST: ATTEST: City Clerk John "Jay" McLinden County Administrator Anoka County Sheriff Approval of form and execution: Assistant Anoka County Attorney 5 ,(0" ~ \~r\ '1"\.:-,..,.. CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 AGENDA SECTION . NO. Staff, Comml ttee, Commission ~T5.M Recycling Update f. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Recycling APPROVED FOR AGENDA -, ~\"- Cindy DeRuyter, ~v BY: Recycling Coordinator BY: D ~. REQUEST The Andover City Council is asked to review the recyling update. GOODWILL/EASTER SEAL Goodwill/Easter Seal has been picking up recyc1ables every Wednesday. On the whole, it is going pretty well. They are putting together a new contract for us. They need to add more gaylord boxes for cardboard and plastic bottles. It will be brought to City Council when it is prepared. The Goodwill Donation Truck will be at Andover Downtown Center the last weekend of December. OIL TANK The oil tank was delivered just before Thanksgiving. Loe Oil Co. from Mankato can pick the oil up on an on call basis until they know how often we will be needing it. They have the Hennepin County bid and are currently picking up from Anoka Co. Highway Dept., The City of Anoka, and Lino Lakes. They are paying 18 cents a gallon which is 16 cents more than others called. Some don't pay at all. CURBSIDE Ace Solid Waste And Peterson Bros. are now delivering recycling bins to customers that are putting out recyclables without a bin. A letter asking for payment from the customers is being including. We must be more aggressive in getting out the recycling bins. Our 1991 goal is 850 tons, up from 313 tons in 1990. MOTION BY .' ..." '-.j TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY ., \~ . , , -) page 2 RE: Recycling Update BUDGET On December 5th, the cities of Anoka County, including Andover, received the 1991 proposed budget from Anoka County. It is $37,129. This is $7,401 less than 1990, however it shall be noted that 3,000 recycling bins won't be bought as were in 1990. More will be spent on contractual services, maintenence, and education. A proposed budget is being prepared. Money is still available from the 1990 budget. It must be used before 1991. I recommend, after having talked with Frank and Dave on its possible uses, that we buy more recycing bins from Rehrig Pacific, the company that supplied our current bins. It has been proven that those who have bins are recycling much more, and our tonnage will go up. We will be far exceeding 1990's goal, but next year we have to do even better. CITY OF ANDOVER .0 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ",,..,,, ~.:?'":""~J~ DATE December 18. 1990 AGENDA SEG.TJON . . ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT NO. Statf, Comm. CommlSSlor Admin. APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NO'9. Approve Licensel Speedy Market BY: V. V01k~'~' BY: ~. ~ . The City Council is requested to approve the 1991 cigarette and off-sale non-intoxicating liquor license for the Speedy Market. MOTION BY , '\ '_/ TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY u ,-"- '-,--./ TO CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE nA,...:.mht31r 1 A . 100n AGENDA SECTION NO. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. II) . Rescind Resolution/ Hidden Creek East 2nd Final Pavm~nt Engineering BY: O. U . BY: rpnr'lr'l.T ~"''''C! ~~ The City Council is requested to rescind resolution 109-90 for project 89-17 Hidden Creek East 2nd Addition. Resolution 109-90 accepts the work and directs the final payment to the contractor which in this case is Arcon Construction. The City did not release the final payment because a small portion of Swallow Street near the intersection of 135th Avenue has settled. Repair of the area is going to complete in the spring of 1991. By rescinding the resolution this will allow the City to retain a portion of construction cost until the repair work has been completed. Note: This item is in the bills for this evening. MOTION BY COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY :~J .,-) CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman adopt the following: A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 109-90 APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR PROJECT NO. 89-17, HIDDEN CREEK EAST 2nd ADDITION FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER, STORM DRAIN, AND STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER to WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the recommendation from City Staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Andover rescinds Resolution No. R109-90. MOTION seconded by Councilman adopted by the City Council at a and , 19 meeting this , with Councilmen day of 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 u CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 AGENDA SECTION NO. staff, Committee, - . DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. 11. Award Bid/Sewer Cleanino M""h;n.. Public Works BY: Frank Stone . L _. @ \~, BY: \} At 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, December 11, 1990 at Andover City Council Chambers we received two bids for a new high velocity sewer cleaning machine with trade-in values for the old truck mounted jet unit and a 1965 International truck and sewer rotor. First Bid - Crysteel Truck Equipment 1 Aqua Tech Model SJ1500 KD TOTAL BID $38,478.00 3,500.00 $34,978.00 Less trade-in Second Bid - Flexible Pipe Tool Co. 1 SRECO-Flexible 1991 Model HV-2000TMS Less trade-in $31,525.00 4,550.00 $26,975.00 The city's estimated bid was $35,000.00. This unit will be mounted on our own 1975 International truck by City Staff. I will need $3,000.00 to prepare our truck for mounting and painting. I would recommend the purchase of the 1991 high velocity truck mount sewer cleaning machine from Flexible Pipe Tool Co. for the amount of $26,975.00 with the approval of $4,550.00 for the trade- in of our old equipment: and approval of the $3,000.00 to prepare our truck for mounting for a total of $29,975.00. If the Mayor or Council have any questions, please call me before the 12/18/90 meeting. Thank you. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY SECOND BY ,~ "----' TO PROPOSAL FORM By Flexible Pipe Tool Co. Date December 11. 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Andover, Anoka County, Minnesota Gentlemen: Pursuant to the Advertisement for Bids for One (1) New and Unused 1991 Truck Mount Model High Velocity Sewer Cleaning Machine, Less Truck, and in accordance with the specifications and special provisions attached herewith, we hereby submit the following proposal: SRECO-Flexible 1991 Model ...Total Bid $31,525.00 HV-2000TMS Accompanying this bid is a bidder's bond, certified check, or cash deposit in the amount of: $ 5% Bid Bond which is at least 5% of the amount of the bid, payable to the City of Andover, Minnesota. TRADE INS: 1. 1975 Aquatech Model 1260 MSR, as is, where is, less truck -$3,600.00 2. One Flexible Seweroder mounted on 1965 International Truck, as is, where is -950.00 TOTAL BID AFTER TRADE INS $26,975.00 (I) (We) hereby certify that (I) (We) (am) (are) the only person(s) interested in this proposal as principal(s); that this proposal is made and submitted without fraud or collusion with any other person, firm or corporation whatsoever pursuant to the attached Affidavit of Non-Collusion; that an examination has been made to the Specifications, Special Provisions and other circumstances pertaining thereto. (I) (We) understand that the equipment supplied is to be furnished at the prices shown on the attached schedule; and that, at the time of opening of bids, totals only will be read, but that comparison of bids will be based on the correct summation of item totals obtained from the prices bid. - 2 - ~ :_) (I) (We) propose to furnish all equipment specified, in the manner prescribed no later than 60 to 90 days following execution of the contract, in accordance with the advertisement, specifications and special provisions forming a part thereof. (I) (We) further propose to execute the form of Contract within ten (10) days of the acceptance of this proposal, as security for the delivery of materials in accordance with the advertisement specifications and special provisions. (I) (We) further propose to guarantee all equipment to be delivered to be in accordance with the specifications and special provisions; and to replace any equipment which may be rejected due to defective materials or workmanship, prior to final acceptance by the City of Andover. (I) (We) understand that bids may not be withdrawn for a period of thirty (30) days after the date and time set for the opening of bids; and that the deposits of the three lowest bidders will be retained until a contract has been awarded and executed, but no longer than sixty (60) days. Respectfully submitted: Flexible Pipe Tool Co. Signed by 1$1{J~-j;-;A- p'<l, Firm Address: Suite 126 3601 Park Center Blvd. Minneapolis, MN 55416 This Model bid meets or exceeds your specifications 100% Our warranty and detailed specifications attached Partial list of users attached Literature enclosed - 3 - ~J 'l "J 'lI.-__.~ i PROPOSAL FORM By Crysteel Truck Equipment Date 12/10/90 Honorable Mayor and city Council Andover, Anoka County, Minnesota Gentlemen: pursuant to the Advertisement for Bids for One (1) New and Unused 1991 Truck Mount Model High Velocity Sewer Cleaning Machine, Less Truck, and in accordance with the specifications and special provisions attached herewith, we hereby submit the following proposal: Aqua Tech Model SJl500 KD ...Total Bid $ 38,478.00 Accompanying this bid is a bidder's bond, certified check, or cash deposit in the amount of: $ 1,748.90 which is at least 5% of the amount of the bid, payable to the City of Andover, Minnesota. TRADE INS: 1. 1975 Aquatech Model 1260 MSR, as is, where is, less truck $2,500.00 2. One Flexible Seweroder mounted on 1965 International Truck, as is, where is $1,000.00 TOTAL BID AFTER TRADE INS $34,978.00 (X) (We) hereby certify that ()l) (We) (:IDfi) (are) the only person(s) interested in this proposal as principal(s); that this proposal is made and submitted without fraud or collusion with any other person, firm or corporation whatsoever pursuant to the attached Affidavit of Non-Collusion; that an examination has been made to the Specifications, Special provisions and other circumstances pertaining thereto. (X) (We) understand that the equipment supplied is to be furnished at the prices shown on the attached schedule; and that, at the time of opening of bids, totals only will be read, but that comparison of bids will be based on the correct summation of item totals obtained from the prices bid. - 2 - o \ J (I) (We) propose to furnish all equipment specified, in the manner prescribed no later than 60 days following execution of the contract, in accordance with the advertisement, specifications and special provisions forming a part thereof. (I) (We) further propose to execute the form of Contract within ten (10) days of the acceptance of this proposal, as security for the delivery of materials in accordance with the advertisement specifications and special provisions. (I) (We) further propose to guarantee all equipment to be delivered to be in accordance with the specifications and special provisions; and to replace any equipment which may be rejected due to defective materials or workmanship, prior to final acceptance by the City of Andover. (I) (We) understand that bids may not be withdrawn for a period of thirty (30) days after the date and time set for the opening of bids; and that the deposits of the three lowest bidders will be retained until a contract has been awarded and executed, but no longer than sixty (60) days. Respectfully submitted: Cr steel Signed by Firm Address: ll30 - 73rd Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 - 3 - - \J CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION December 18, 1990 AGENDA SECTION NQ staff, Committee, ro. IL<:<..!"~ ~~ DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NQ 12. Authorize Purchase ~A..n;nn i:'nl1;n Public Works ~ BY: ~. D . Frank Stone BY: !::l1nAr; nrAnnAnr I have received two quotes for automatic meter reading equipment from Davies Water Co. and Water Products Company. Both companies have served us well in the past 10 years. We buy Neptune meters from Davies and Rockwell meters from Water Products. The quotes from both companies are attached to this request for you to review. In the Water Administration Budget of 1990 we budgeted $10,000.00 for the purchase of this equipment. We have checked out and tested the different equipment from both companies. Howard Koolick told me he has heard more of the Rockwell system than the Neptune unit in the utilities billing field. These quotes are very close but I would have no problem going with the low bid from Water Products Company for the #2001 Solid State Interrogator package for a total of $8,760.00. I will be at the Council Meeting to answer your questions or, to save time, please call me ahead of time. COUNCIL ACTION ....... MOTION BY TO SECOND BY '--, /- '\ V \\^YA\T!EJR IPJROID\lJCT5 COro/1llPANY 15801 \VEST 78TH STREET, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344-1894 PHONE: (612) 937-9666 . \VATS: (800) 752-8112 . FAX: (612) 937-8065 Noverrber 15, 1990 ~.1r. Frank Sto:1e Andover Water DepartInent 1685 Crosstown Blvd. _:;ndo'ier, l1N 55303 Dear Mr. Stone: The :ollowL~g Electronic ~~ipment is used to automatically incerrogate your axist- ing ar.d fu-::ure encoded water meters. #2001 Solid State Interroq~tor Pacy-ace, includes: 1-#20Ci 55I 1-1'ic:3::~= downloading charging rack 1-2r:-;.:;..r-: GUJ."1 , -:;;;Le.:-:: Gun tC:\lch p<.d adapter l-Srn.=..l.-: Gun ..~ adapter l-[;.:.g.'S r.-.eter ma.nagE:rr'el;O;: system license (abcvc includes 2-day scarc-u;:l ?~d:age total with sor'::t'Jare @$8,760.00 #30001 Solid Stace Interrooator Pack~oe. ir.cludes: 1-#3001 ssr 1--.\1aster rack ,\/,charger l-Snure Gun l-Sffi;;rt Gun touch pad adapt:er l-Sr..al~ Gurl ARB J\dap"Cer 1-Rt--l:.1S Software (Above includes 2-day stare-up) Package to"Cal tiith sof~dare Please call if I cr"., !:.a of furth~r assistance. @$10,272.00 Sir~ce=ely, :) ~'_A li.lw' . ~~reL-r.:...,"rt. St.lvog "MUNICIPAL WATER & SEWER SUPPLIES" - I I II ~ I( atJ( I ~ ed UXalei 8yui/tmenl ~O. Q 4010 LAKE BREEZE AVE. NO. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55429 (612) 533-2581 FAX (612) 533-0073 November 26, 1990 City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW Andover, MN 55304 Attn: Mr. Frank Stone Dear Frank, We are happy to provide you with the following quotation on Neptune ARB Unigun reading system. 1 Un i gun Sys t em. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8775.00 The system includes one unigun software package, training, communications rack, and the adapter to read ECR meters. System warranty is also included. We appreciate the opportunity to quote you on this reading system. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Uery truly yours, :B~?~ DAUIES WATER EQUIPMENT COMPANY Bob Polston, Municipal Sales Manager BP/rp ,J "OUR REPUTA nON IS BUlL T ON SERVICE" Member of the National Utility Contractors Associatior ~) Takes just a touch to read The only automated reading system for meters in pits Reads meters via remote TouchPad. No more lockouts. ~) . Reduces meter reading costs . Assures accurate readings . Eliminates curb reads and estimated readings . Economically sensible. . . affordable now . Fully compatible with automatic meter reading technology . Easy to install and use . Can be used to read all remote systems (keyboard input compatability for visual reads) . Lightweight. compact reading equipment W-764 J_UCll''"I1I™ The new universal meter reading and billing sysiem. Helps you cut costs, improve efficiency and assure accuracy. Takes only seconds to produce customer bills . Uses an IBM PC-XT or IBM PC-AT computer . Totally automates your billing process . Eliminates calculation and transcription errors . Reduces billing costs . Improves cash flow . Compatible with your current billing practices Affordable today...ready for tomorrow '1' JII.ckwelllntermlti.nil @"'" -" ~0. . rA ~r\. ",,'1>:., .-> '.....~,.... CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE Decembe~ 18, 1990 AGENDA SECTION . NO. Staff, Comm1ttee, Comm. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Admin. ~~. V. Volk \ APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. Renew Contract/Peach t..3 . Assoc. BY: BY: ~.~. Attached is a contract from Peach Associates for services of Recording Secretary for the Planning Comission, Park & Recreation Commission, Comprehensive Plan Task Force and other committees as needed. This contract does not include City Council meetings, which is a separate contract. As noted in Ms. Peach's letter, the only change in the contract is an increase in the cost per page of minutes from $6.25 to $6.75. Council is requested to approve the contract. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY \..._ TO SECOND BY II Peach Associates, Inc. 15830 University Avenue Northwest, Andover, MN 55304 (612) 434-9358 ~~ December 11. 1990 ~layor Jim Ell ing Councllmembers Jacobson. Knight, Orttel, Perry CITY OF MlDOVER 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover. HN 55304 The Honorable Mayor and Council: Enclosed is the new contract between the City of Andover and Peach Associates for taking and transcribing the Minutes of the Planning Commission, the Park and Recreation Commission. the Comprehensive Plan Task Force, and any other committees that may need the services of a Recording Secretary. The only change in the contract Is an increase In the cost per typewritten page of Minutes from $6.25 per page to $6.75 per page-due to Increased cost of supplies. I look forward to continulng my service to the City of Andover and appreciate the support the Council has always given me In the past. Thank you. Sincerely yours, ~~ Secretarial Services ') '. / ~J CONTRACT AGREEMENT This contract agreement between PEACH ASSOCIATES. INC.. 15830 University Avenue NW, Andover, HN, and the CITY OF ANDOVER, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MN, shall be effective beginning Wednesday, January 2, 1991, and may be terminated by wrItten notice within 60 days by either party. The contract agreement includes the fol lowing: 1. Peach Associates, Inc., agrees to provide the City of Andover wIth one copy of Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, Park and Recreation Commission minutes, Andover ComprehensIve Plan Task Force Minutes, plus any other Committee Meetings the Council so directs, within seven workIng days after the date of the meeting. 2. The City of Andover shal I provide City letterhead for the first page of the Hinutes, tapes for recording the meetings, and supporting Agenda material for the meetings. All other supplies shall be furnished by Peach Associates, Inc. 3. The City of Andover agrees to pay Peach Associates, Inc.. an hourly rate of $16.00 per hour or fraction of for meeting attendance and one-half hour travel time ($8.00) per meeting. 4. The City of Andover agrees to pay Peach Associates, Inc.. a fee of $6.75 per typewritten page of Minutes. 5. Changes to the above stated fees must be by mutual agreement of both partIes. PEACH ASSOCIATES, INC. Marcella A. Peach CITY OF ANDOVER Jim Elling, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk ~) '--' DATE: tn.. ""'\'. o~~: "'<'h, '. ~.': CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE no~~~hnr lQ IQon AGENDA SE~TION . NO. Staff, Comml. ttee, Comm ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Fire Dept. v. Volk ~~l APPROVED FOR AGENDA N ITEM Authorize Purchase of o. __I. /#. Radios/Fire Dept. BY: BY: ~.D . Attached are proposal sheets for the purchase of radios for the Fire Department. In order to receive the bid contract pricing, this equipment needs to be order by 12/31/90. A representative of the Fire Department will be present at the meeting to discuss this with Council. COUNCIL ACTION / ..... MOTION BY TO SECOND BY -.----./ @ .~ Date: COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fi re Department 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 SUMMARY SHEET Item I~I Model No. & Descri ption D Ext. Price 2 3 4 5 6 :J Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: 2 L73JJB3190-M; MITREK Consolettes (Includes Desk Microphone & Antennas) 6,904.00 13 H03UMC1222-C; MINITOR II Pager Packages 7,064.85 2 H03ZVC1222-C; MINITOR II (SV) Pager Packages 1,094.90 2 H43GCU7100-N; MT -1000 Portable Packages 1,827.90 2 T99VB; SYNTOR X Mobile Packages (1) Pumper Truck (1) Ladder Truck 5,350.00 3 T99VB; SYNTOR X Mobile Packages (1) Tanker Truck (2,500 gal.) (1) Grass Rig (6x6 Truck) (1) Pick-up Truck (1-ton) 5,535.00 TOTAL ALL EQUIPMENT: $27,776.65 I Notes: 1) Installation IS NOT INCLUDED in the price shown above. 2) All equipment prices are taken from existing bids: State Fiire Consortium Contract # A5839-2 State of Minnesota Contract # M2456 3) All equipment must be ordered BEFORE 12/31/90 to receive the bid contract pricing. Will vary by equipment type F.O.B. Destination Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice @ o COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET Date: December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fire Dept. 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 Equipment: SYNTOR X Mobile Radio (VHF, 100 Watt) Pricing: 1990 Minnesota State Contract #M2456 Pricing (Prices Valid Until December 31, 1991) Model No. & Descri tion Unit Price Ext. Price 1 la 1 b lc ld le 1f I SYNTOR X Mobile - VHF, 100 Watts 3 T99VB; Basic SYNTOR X Mobile Radio 3 008W; 16-Channel, 100 Watts, VHF 3 W844; Plant Programming 3 Wll; Time-Out-Timer 3 W493; Systems 90 Housing (Single) 3 W423SP; 16-Channel Scan 2 W18AB; 12 Watt Weatherproof Speaker (Item 1f has a 12 week delivery) 3 W544; 3.0 dB Gain Antenna 60.00 1 ,300.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 340.00 175.00 19 3,900.00 0.00 75.00 0.00 0.00 1,020.00 350.00 180.00 SYNTOR X Mobile Total Unit Price: $5,525.00 I Note: Instaliation IS NOT INCLUDED In the price shown above. (*) These three (3) radios are for the new: Tan ker (2,500 gal.) truck Grass Rig (6x6) 2.5 ton truck Pick-up (l-ton) truck :J Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: 3 Weeks A.R.O. (After Receipt of Order) At Plant F.O.B. Destination Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice @ o Date: COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fi re Department 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 Equipment: MITREK Consolette Base (VHF, 100 Watt) Prlci ng: 1990 Minnesota State Contract #M2456 Pricing (Prices Valid Until December 31, 1991) MOdel No. & Descri tlon Unit Price Ext. Price 1a 1b 1c 1d 2 3 4 '-) Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: I MITREK Consolette Base Station 2 L73JJB3190-M; MITREK Consolette, 100 Watts (Includes Desk Microphone) 2 L114; VU Meter 2 L42; 4-Channel Scan (PL Only) 2 L11; 60-Second Time-Out-Timer 2 L63; PL Disable for Paging 2,198.00 0.00 263.00 62.00 103.00 4,396.00 0.00 526.00 124.00 206.00 MITREK Consolette-Total Price: I $2,626.00 $5,252.00 Note: Installation IS NOT INCLUDED in the price shown above. I ANTENNA & TRANSMISSION LINE 2 TDD6073; 5.25dB Gain Antenna, Omnidirectional with Fiberglass Housing 1 01-80306A61; 6' Line Jumper (1/4") 4 TDN6673; Grounding Kit For 1/2" Line Antenna & Line-Equipment Cost: Freight Charge: 726.00 88.00 25.00 839.00 6.00 1,452.00 88.00 100.00 1,640.00 12.00 Antenna & Transmission Line-Total Cost: $1,652.00 TOTAL BASE STATION COST: $6,904.00 4 Weeks A.R.O. (After Receipt of Order) At Plant F.O.B. Destination Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice @ COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET '\ V Date: December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fi re Dept. 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 Equipment: MINITOR II Pagers Pricing: 1990 Fire Consortium Contract #A5839-2 Pricing (Prices Valid Until December 31, 1990) Unit Price I Ext. Price l I Item I Qty Model No. & Description MINITOR II Pacer 13 H03UMC1222-C; MINITOR II Pager (VHF) . 428.00 5,564.00 Price Includes: Pager, Speaker/Earphone Jack, Automatic Low Battery Alert, Nicad Battery, Alert/Monitor Switch, LED Visual Alert. 1a 13 R14O; Red Housing 0.00 0.00 1 b 13 R239; Alert On 2nd Frequency 5.00 65.00 1d 13 R144; Audio Only Volume Control 0.00 0.00 1e 13 R130; 3-Cail Capability (See Note) 20.00 260.00 1f 13 R522; 5-Year Express Warranty 35.00 455.00 2 13 NLN3045; Charger w/Call Light & Antenna 50.00 650.00 3 13 NRN4974A; Extra Nicad Battery 3.45 44.85 MINITOR II Pager Price: 541.45 7,038.85 13 Freight Charge: 2.00 26.00 MINITOR II Pager - Total Cost: $543.45 $7 ,064.85 Notes: 1) The R130; 3-Call Capability will provide the following calls: 1st Call: Tone A=1 Second, Tone B=3 Seconds 2nd Call: Tone A=1 Second, Tone C=3 Seconds 3rd Call: Tone C=8 Seconds * To provide a 3rd Call, the Anoka Co. Dispatch Center must be able to generate a tone 8-seconds in duration to alert the pagers. 2) The standard charger does not provide an "Alert" LED, only lights (LEOs) for battery charge conditions. To get an "Alert" LED with-a reset switch you need the NLN3045 Charger. The NLN3045 charger is included In the quote (Item #2). . '\ \,.J Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: 3 Weeks After Receipt Of Order (ARO) F.O.B., Motorola Plant Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice @ COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET '\ V Date: December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fire Dept. 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 Equipment: MINITOR II (SV) Pagers - Stored Voice Pricing: 1990 Fire Consortium Contract #A5839-2 Pricing (Prices Valid Until December 31, 1990) Unit Price Ext. Price Model No. & Description MINITOR II (SV Pa er 2 H03ZVC1222-C; MINITOR II Pager (VHF) 471.00 942.00 Price Includes: Pager, Speaker/Earphone Jack, Automatic Low Battery Alert, Nicad Battery, Alert/Monitor Switch. LED Visual Alert. 1a 1b 1d 1e 1f 19 2 3 2 R140; Red Housing 2 R521; Delete 2nd Channel 2 R144; Audio Only Volume Control 2 R468; 4-Call Capability (See Note) 2 R592; (1) 32-Second Voice Store Message 2 R522; 5-Year Express Warranty 2 NLN3045; Charger w/Call Light & Antenna 2 NRN4974A; Extra Nicad Battery MINITOR II Pager Price: 2 Freight Charge: MINITOR II Pager - Total Cost: 0.00 -40.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 35.00 50.00 3.45 544.45 3.00 $547.45 I Notes: 1) The R468; 4-Call Capability will provide the following calls: 1st Call: Tone A=1 Second, Tone B=3 Seconds 2nd Call: Tone A=1 Second, Tone C=3 Seconds 3rd Call: Tone B=8 Seconds 4th Call: Tone C=8 Seconds ,.. To provide a 3rd & 4th Call, the Anoka Co. Dispatch Center must be able to generate a tone 8-seconds in duration to alert the pagers. 2) The standard charger does not provide an "Alert" LED, only lights (LEOs) for battery charge conditions. To get an "Alert" LED with a reset switch you need the NLN3045 Charger. The NLN3045 charger is Included in the quote (Item #2). \-) Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: 3 Weeks After Receipt Of Order (ARO) F.O.B., Motorola Plant Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice 0.00 -80.00 0.00 50.00 0.00 70.00 100.00 6.90 1,088.90 6.00 $1,094.90 I @ (J COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET Date: December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fire Dept. 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 Equipment: MT-10oo Portable Radio, 5 Watts, VHF Pricing: State Fire Consortium Contract #A5839-2 (Portable) (Prices Valid Until December 31, 1990) Model No. & Descri tion Unit Price Ext. Price I MT-10oo Portable Radio (VHF) 2 H43GCU7100-N; Portable, 5-Watt, 16-Channels 608.00 1,216.00 Price Includes: Radio, Heliflex Antenna, Dual Charge High Capacity NICAD Battery, 8-Channel Scan, Universal Connector for Speaker/Mic & Factory Programmed Channels & PL Tones la 2 H701; Selective Call (l-Pager Call) 0.00 0.00 lb 2 H944; Non-Priority Scan (8-Channel) 0.00 0.00 1c 2 H872; Extended Performance Warranty (2-Yrs) 55.00 110.00 2 2 NMN6156; Remote Speaker/Microphone 80.00 160.00 3 2 NTN5497; Button Back Cover 17.00 34.00 4 2 NLN4529; 2.5" Swivel Belt Loop for Item 2 9.00 18.00 5 2 NTN4633; Single Unit Charger (1-Hour) 114.00 228.00 6 1 NTN5447; High Capacity NICAD Battery (Spare) 45.90 45.90 MT-l000 Portable Radio Cost: 928.90 1,811.90 2 Freight Charge: 8.00 16.00 MT-1000 Portable - Total Cost: $936.90 I $1,827.90 Note: 1) The H701; Selective Call (Pager) option will provide (1) pager call: Tone "A"=l-Second, Tone "B"=3-Seconds You will have to decide which of your two (2) existing 'lager calls (189 or 186) that you want in these units. '\ -~ Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: 1 Week A.R.O. (After Receipt of Order) F.O.B., Motorola Plant (via UPS) Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice @ '\ V Date: COST & EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL SHEET December 10, 1990 From: Jim Sobey Motorola C&E, Inc. 6409 City West Parkway, Suite #205 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 To: Tom May Andover Fire Dept. 14034 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN. 55304 Equipment: SYNTOR X Mobile Radio (VHF, 100 Watt) Pricing: 1990 Minnesota State Contract #M2456 Pricing (Prices Valid Until December 31 1991) Model No. & Descri tlon Unit Price Ext. Price 1 la 1b 1c ld 1e 1f 19 1h ,- " ) --' Terms: Delivery: Freight: Payment: I SYNTOR X Mobile - VHF, 100 Watts 2 T99VB; Basic SYNTOR X Mobile Radio 2 008W; 16-Channel, 100 Watts, VHF 2 W844; Plant Programming 2 W11; Tlme-Out-Timer 2 W493; Systems 90 Housing (Single) 2 W423SP; 16-Channel Scan 2 W236SP; Extended Control Console (12-Channel) with 23' Cable 2 W18AB; 12 Watt Weatherproof Speaker for W236SP Option (Items 1f & 1 g have 12 Week Dell very) 2 W544; 3.0 dB Gain Antenna 1,300.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 340.00 775.00 175.00 60.00 2,600.00 0.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 680.00 1,550.00 350.00 120.00 SYNTOR X Mobile Total Unit Price: $5,350.00 I Note: Installation IS NOT INCLUDED in the price shown above. (*) These two (2) radios are for the new pumper & ladder truck. 12 Weeks A.R.O. (After Receipt of Order) At Plant F.O.B. Destination Net 30 Days, After Receipt of Invoice . ~-~' o~~ ~"'". CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering December 18, 1990 APPROVED FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. /S'. Tiraber Trails Plat Extension # t. ~ . BY: BY: Todd J. Haas The City Council is requested to grant an extension for a period of six months for Timber Trails. Attached is a letter from Byron Westlund of Woodland Development. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY ,_ TO SECOND BY ~) .1.."~'/,:j;:"""~~",,'\, " , l :j .1 . l .L ; ,. d ".", .1 ,~ _r ..~j~~ CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 December 4, 1990 Byron Westlund Woodland Development 830 West Main Street Anoka, MN. 55303 Re: Timber Trails Dear Byron: In reviewing Ordinance 10, Section 11.0la, the final plat should be filed within 6 months following approval of the preliminary plat. It is staff's recommendation that your office request an extension of the preliminary plat to the City. Phase II shall be subject to the right of the City to adopt new or revised platting and subdivision regulations. It would also require that Woodland Development follow the standard specifications for rural residential street construction revised in May of 1990 and any revisions thereafter. - If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 755-5100. Sincerely, -1~ -! ~ Todd J. Haas . Assistant City Engineer TJH: kmt ~) Q ,--- ~,. , '\ V ~--) SECTION 11. FINAL PLAT. 11.01 Procedure. Prior to Council approval of a final plat, the following procedures shall be followed: .->t a. Filing of Final Plat. Within six (6) months following approval of the preliminary plat, unless an extension of time is requested in writing by the subdivider and granted by the Council, the subdivider shall file seven (7) copies of the final plat with the Clerk and shall pay a filing fee therefor as set by Council resolution. The final plat shall incorporate all changes required by the Council, and in all other respects it shall conform to the preliminary plat as approved. If the final plat is not filed within six (6) months following approval of the preliminary plat, the approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void. The final plat may constitute only that portion of the preliminary plat which the subdivider proposes to record and develop at that time, provided that such portion shall conform to all requirements of this Ordinance, and provided further that the remaining portion or portions of the preliminary plat not submitted as a final plat shall be subject to the right of the City to adopt new or revised platting and subdivision regulations. (lOA, 9-10-74;10J, 2-18-86) b. Filing of Abstract. At the time of filing the final plat with the Clerk, the subdivider shall also file with said Clerk an abstract of title or registered property abstract, certified. to date, evidencing ownership of the premises involved in the plat. .' c. Reference. The Clerk shall refer copies of the final plat to the Engineer, and shall refer the abstract to the Attorney for their examination and report. d. Reports. The Engineer and Attorney shall submit their reports to the Council within fifteen (15) days after the filing of the final plat. The Engineer shall State whether the final plat and the improvements conform to the engineering and design standards and specifications of the City. The Attorney shall State his op~nion as to the title of the premises involved. e. Fees. The subdivider shall pay the fees of the Engineer and Attorney for their services and reports rendered in connection with the final plat. . f. Compliance with Law. The final plat shall be prepared in accordance with all applicable State laws and County Ordinances. 11.02 Council Action. The Council shall act on the final plat within sixty (60) days of the date on which it was filed with the Clerk. The final plat shall not be approved if it does not conform to the preliminary plat including all changes required by the Council, or does not meet the engineering and design standards and specifications of the City. 11.03 Recording. Following approval of the final plat by the Council, the Clerk shall promptly notify the subdivider of said .~pproval and within thirty (30) days thereafter, the .final plat @ Page 25 12"05"90 11: 19 '5'612 427 0192 :;:_'~JLAND DEVELOP [Zj 00::: ..,-0 c.,t:.. 12./6-110 '. i \,J -r,mbe, I,,,i{$ December 3, 1990 The Honorable James E. Ell lng, Mayor of Andover The Honorable Michael Knight, Council Member The Honorable Marjorie Perry, Council Member The Honorable Donald Jacobson, Council Member The Honorable Kenneth D. Orttel, Council Member Andover City Hall 1685 N.W. Crosstown 60ulevard Andover, Minnesota 55304 Dear Mayor Elling and Council Members, We are in the process of completing the Timber Trails subdivision. When we presented our concept plan of Timber Trails to the City, we presented a second addition. The second addition has been prepared to the preliminary plat stage and was approved by the City at one time. We are now ready for the final plat of Timber Trails second addition. According to the ordinance, it should have been completed within a six month time period or a request for an extension of time should have been presented to the City. It is with this letter that we are requesting an extension of the preliminary plat for Timber Trails second addition. Upon approval of the request of the extension, we will then present and request the approval of the final plat of Timber Trails second addition. As always, it has been a great pleasure working with the City and I app~eciate the attention you will give this matter. Sincerely, Byron D. Westlund Vice President BDW:jh . ' '.- "-J' 830 West Main Street Anoka, Minnesota ;)5303 (612) 427-7500 FAX: (612) 427.0192 ~~ @\.... -'''~ .'~,,! CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECDON . NO. Non-Dlscusslon Items DATE ORIGIN4TING DEPARTMENT Flnance December 18, 1990 APPROVED FOR AGENDA INTOEM Receive November . I. /~ . Financial Stmts. Howard D. Koolick ~ BY: Finance Director BY: ~,~ . REQUEST The Andover City Council is requested to receive the November financial statements for the General, Water and Sewer Funds. Should there be any questions about an item, please contact me prior to the meeting so that I may have adequate time to research the question. COUNCIL ACTION , MOTION BY TO SECOND BY C .c -r v ':~ ;::..\t.J 0 o:)\! ::: .-~_ C) y :: .t~~' -;' n ~} .~~.:- ~ ::: 1.! M, ;vi .:\ ':_: I::: ':; :: C) l~ GENE~AL. WATER AND SEWER FUNOS ,6..'3 0: .3 Oi\iOV ~~ C: ~0viS~(i V~2r to C)a~~ ~0~,~,~n~30~ SU0S~t Ac.tual R~m3inin? ..-------------- -------------- ---------- j~ E N ;~ ~. ,f!. , :: I. I rJ D " - G ,- 'I " !\ L C. I I >.J 0 " ,'. - " ,- \! :: rJ : I t: :3 I'. c - = = = = = = = = = = = - - - - = = = "- = = = = G :: N ::: :~: A :. ::' l~: () ~:' f l< TV T;.\ l. :: :3 8USINESS LICENSES ANO ~E~~ITS N()N-GUSINESS ~IC~NS~S & l'ERMIT:3 .--.--- .-- - ~:,-i~I-1 fd~. n,? R.e 1 '::-1-1:~' cl ()t h~t... TNTE~GOVERNMENTAL. R~VENUE CI~ARG:~S ::():~ S~RVIC~:3 ~:: -:: ,-. ,~, ~ i: 1_ i 9 h tin C1 Other' ------ -. .- C()!J :;:T FIN E~; SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 1\1 T :::;C:: L i_t,N EOU S :...: r::V::.N lJ t. - -- . - Inter',:;:;': ::.J".nec: R~':llr'cs ~nd R~imbLlrsemerl~s C)th:-? t... -- --.--~f.~:AN ~:-F:E ({- f:-~'C~M--O~.-:-~ [~~ - F LI ,\};) ':: r= r. 0 mAd rr,; n. r I' U s t ,= u n d Ft"'o:n TIF 1-1 Func1 ---_._---~-_._-- .--- --~----- -.----.------- .- ~t"orn TIF 1-2 :=U!i(1 TOTAL :<fOVi::NUE ,. \ - '~.J 8 'I 3. f.';:~,',? DO -: :::: . 3 ::. !~; . D (I 23.:.700.00 5.550.00 G1iJ..L9w.,QCI ,.1.000,00 ': <;. . 'e) I] . !.J 0 57.000.00 LdJ,DOLJ.OO 28.100.00 5.1,00.00 135.137.00 .-. - 6.000.00 2.119.183.00 -----------.--- ------------ 89'S~286.77 1?~37~,..OO 1e:l.:..8~.C.OS I 4 r.,...,..,. '"-+. 'v.:;, . ,'~ 3L.?:.86').4~) !.. I , l~ ~i ;~:: . ?: ;':': :20.?L..3.~'2 t.3.5~J4.7q h.4.7h..3? 17.274.83 :::.2~)2.S7 1 .577.861. J 9 _ ~. __ _ _ n _ h __ _ _ __ -. - - - - - -. - - - -- -. '~j -1 ~~ C (4 !..d.L ( ~ 'j ) ~ .-"\ , .:' 23 , ,"', ,~, . -"-' 38 39 100 ~oo 25 C '_C T Y ;.) F :'::', [\; -~, C; \/:: ~: o YEA~ TO OA~.~ Sl!~~4~I~S :- '.) ~~; Ci ;: N E: ~:;~ L. !'Il ATE~: ,4 rJ 0 S E ',,,/:: R ~ UNO ::: As OT 3 Cii\iov90 ;: ,.:~ 'of i ';'~?- r:! V~ar ~o C)ate P~~sentaa~ Budget Actual Remaining --------------- -------------- ---------- "~ t: N i: " A 1_ i= L ! rJ C- ., c :< , ::. N D ]: T I I R ,~ - ..:. ---------------...------- - - - _ _ __ _ _ ~_ '_ __ v_ ._ _ _ __ _ __ __ __ ~_ __ _ CITV' _cqU)~JC!L N EWSL t: ':-T': F: !\'lA Y O~: ELEC-rION:? ADMINI::;TR-ATION FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 29.058.00 h.O!39.00 4,200.00 8. t, 1 5 . 0,) 10;,219.00 104.042.00 12.'000.00 26.500.DI) ')~..3L~.Of) h9.931.IJO !J..,UD J. .;~I~.JG ,\S:3 t:3 SUJ>:: A TTC);':\I:: Y PLANNING AND ZONING --'-OAl;'~~\ . -~, r;,~ 0;: (~:-:3 IN G 19.080.00 29.'509.00 13.310.OC' i 1- - I, CITY HALL BUILDING rI~E: S7AT1:ON 8jJILOING ---- - .-- --- - PU3L-~C WO]~KS aUILOING SCN]-O~ CITIZEN'S CfNT~R EQUIPMENT BUILDING 9.779.00 4.889.00 69.391..-: 00 39'3.1.01.00 21.9.971.00 3 ~3 . 90S . 'J 0 ------~-~JC;INE:::RIN(;--- _n.___. - i'OLICE PROTECTION ~'IRc. ~'RC)TECTION :. --~---------_. -------~_._-------_.- ------ ~_._--- ---- .---. ------- .~ESCUE SERVICE PROTECTIVE INSPECTION C I V I L 0 E F i: ~J S I.: ---~rJIM,A;L- -;:6r-JTRIJT - -- ._~-..-- .n__ ---- STREETS AND HIGHWAYS ___ ___~_... SNq~~L_~~~J_C c_ R Et~~l~Y~_~___ STORf~ SE'v.'ERS SH:tET LIGHTING :3TREET SIGNS '- ---------------_. ------_._---------_._- TRAFFIC SIGNALS STREET LIGHTS-BILLED 38.240.00 _______eABJLA~,D _~...E_':;:F::: AT 191J___________L._______~~_e~_._5l'_ 6 ,_00 T:~EES AND vJE:::D C()I'JTROi_ 8 .l~61 .00 RECYCLING 44.630.00 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 17.462.00 . ------.----------~------ -------------. .. ------ UNALLOCATED 46.714.00 IMPROVEMEN7 :)~~OJECTS CnH::;;: Frr~M,(~)NGIJ:3ES_ __ ___ __ ____3_.? 1_0.. 0_0 36.378.00 12~.493.00 2.250.00 10.989.00 171.300.00 -_ ______________1J? .'..?L5~ 0 0 23.579.00 17.500.00 21.9/.1.9.00 :~) T () -,. ,t~ l.. ::: '..{ :> :::: N :) I -~. U ~' ::: ':: :. :='~ .1~:~:?.OCl . -- ._~ - .- - - - .- - .- - _w _ ._ _. _ _ _ _ _ ___ .,~ _ 22~OG9.5Ci ?23.S.Di 3.52~~.OO 4.3S:::.::J3 33.'122.81. 81.8~)7.S7 12.185.00 ;?:3 , 7 0 7 . IJ I] '):.752.0:3 h?1S9.7~ 17.983.80 ?i3 . h"? 1. ?:~' i - i j~ 3 17-' 14. 6.9'~. :.)i'~; 4.i3(j.21 ..... 160.31 ,)9.30u..7? 295.009.01 115.484.81 1S.7:2'2.56 98.047.3'j 488.'JO 9.-0'05.83 1".26.179.30 40.5/,9.79 ~ 5 . 053 .36 11.175.21 23.508.88 2.581.42 30.208.'20 197.992.83 8.802.9!3 34..805.21 11.3~30.19 8::..032.S(1 8:;:.594.83 1 . ~) 8 i:,1 . 6, :~: ::~) " ;3~' - - - -~ -- - - - ,- -~ -. -- -_ ._-__.~ _ _ d_ _-_'W ~._ ?4 34- ~ 6 , .."\ Woo 22 :2 1 2 , , :. .' 6 :) ~ ~o .~. ;:~ ') .~: '3 1 16 ~ ~1 '25 I..i./ 33 ~ c, 7 c '.' 18 '26 65 ~ , -' , 35 ( 7 ) :2 1 17 (4 ) 22 35 ( ::; 2) ('ns?) ? CI .~ I.. _ ________ I ,"" r--,-'/ i):- ;~JJ::':()\/',~ :~: V2AR ~wO DATE SU~~A~:IfS ~I);~' (~EN~~AL. WAT€~ ANQ SEWER ~U~JCjS i6.:307' :3tJt.Jov9C ''Ii A -:- '-, 1= I I r, ,- ': ,\ . ,-' ~, : 'Ii N I .I t .:. '" - ..' -.----..-------------- ------------.-----.-- \v~,T::~: :::.4L::S u._._ _____._ __ __ M:::T;::I~ :3,1.:.'::3 ~'E;':f\1IT Fti:::; MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES GEN:::~AI_ ~- 0 ;" .A i_ :~: f. V E N U c := U N L' ''t'J ,D., T :,: :< E X ~ ~ ~ ~ _ S := U ~J j~1 ------------.-..------ ------.-------.--.----- SOURCE. ~;TORAGE AND TREATMENT - -- DIS-tRIl3lJt-tC::~r--.---.---~u_----.-._- -~-'------"- - ADMINISTRATION ;:~:" v.; '3.sCl V ~~:! t. to D ,;J':? ~'>:- ('(:;:' r(,: .:~<l':.: GUd?~t Actual :~~fnaini!'g --------------- -------.------- ---------- 202.52S.00 :3.000.00 -:(;.DOO.OC 2.~,OC.OC: '13 :'::. 02S. 00 - - - - - - - .- - - - -- -----..------- 70.800.00 13 j .oT5 .00 36.190.00 -.--.----.-----------,--.----- - --~-_. .-.-....-.-------..-..-..- ------.-- :'-' ~O~'Al WATER rUNe) EX~'~N~:ES -----.-------------------.-------- -~.-. _._-.------~---- ". ------------- -~----- -_.._--..---------._- :-J ---_.-._---_._---------~ ------- --.-- 138.025.00 ------------ - - .~ - -. - -- '. - - - - '92.31,4.75 2t-t, ,_ 36:'3 _ 00 ~ C" ']0;:1.00 892.37 :~?~j.:1 (,.:;. , L ------------.- - .- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- -- -- -- 18.238.134 1 0 6 . 5 6 1 . '"' 20.248...73 148.04:3.99 .-----------.-- - -. - - - - - -- - - -. .- ') " ,.." .,) J i ".\ I. ;::; 134 72 18 id. 38 "\ V C I T V I~l >.; '~" 1\1 C) (:'1 \/::: ::: "/;: .., :~, ~i~ 0 0 r\ '-1' E ~:~ U 1\'1 !'\1 ,:\ I~: I ;: ':: -I.);'''' GE~;E~AL~ WATER ANC) SEWER ~UNOS :3 € VI E ,,,,:. ;- I I N 0 ,- - R ;:- V - "J I I ,-. - c:. ,:, ------------------- ------------------- ::;E~rlF~~ C:.1A~:13ES ------- - I NT.: i~ (: ;3 T l-RANSF"ER FROM SEWE~ CONN. ~UNC) -To..(.^.r~-.--S:::~:/-r::R REVeNUE :3EW~:., := U N D --+€ X::, EN::; 1:" ':. ----------------.-.---- ----.---------.-------- C()L L ECiIC){j ~eti~ooolitan Wast0 Con1:rol --"--- -- - - . -- ----,.. Oth,?(' I::XD;~nS'S':3 AOM 1 t-J I :::7 ~ A T ICj~.J -.-+----- ---------. - ---- -------- --.-.- ---.. _._------------~- '.OTAL SEW[R EX~'ENSES - -.--.. -_. -----------. -.-.._---. /\'3 of 3 O~'~")v.9 0 ;~,.:: vi :3,":,(1 V'~":' r t.:; D,:!"7~'::~ Gud?~t Actual ;~0fndif'if'G ;',? ec:~" n 1: .3':1'9 ---.------------ -------------- ---------- 2:37.857.00 1 .000.00 3Cr,SOO.OO 3HI.357.00 ---___.___.___u -.-----------.- 232.72[::.00 58.303.00 28.328.00 318.3'::'-1.00 .---.--------- - - .- .- - - - - -- - - - - ._~------- . -------~-_. -- .---- _.~-. -. ---~---~-._._- .-- ---.---..- ---.. .__.~---_.- -.- -- -----~--- -- -.- --"--' -- --- ---- -, "-) _._ .h______.______ __________.___.__._______.________ _~_._ .________..___ 28w.. L!.?5 I 70 284..4.25.70 - - .- - - - - - .- .. -- - - - - - -- -- - .- -.- - -- 23'2.725.36 '2 [] . 7 7 9 . :5 8 16.236.09 289.741.03 - - - - .- ... - ..- -- - - - -----.----.,---- . ;~; (I ~ :) 0 1(1 Cr Gh ,I,., ~~ .:. 1 ~,