HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC October 16, 1990
Department: Department of Natural Resources
.' "-
,~
Date: October 10, 1990
To: Tom Hovey
Area Hydrologist, Metro Region
Division of Waters
From: Justin Blum, Hydrologist ~
THRU: Brian Rongitsch8~~
Supervisor, Technical AriaJ.ysis Unit
Division of Waters
I;:;;
rc.
1,-,"..
'r<:f
\..:.-..
Phone: 297-4605
Subject: Work Plan for Round Lake Seepage Investigation, Anoka Co.
Introduction:
At your request, I am submitting a work plan for the study of the impact that Mr. Slyzuk's
pumping (Appropriations permit #88-6014) has had on water levels in Round Lake. As we
have discussed, I have started on this investigation already. However, I do believe that
writing down these types of things can be very helpful to keep the goals of the project firmly
in sight.
The original work on this problem done by Eric Mohring was quite a good start. I believe
that additional study will provide some quantitative estimates of the regional gradient and
flow volumes. In addition, comparison of ground water flow volumes under pumping and
non-pumping conditions can be made. Hopefully, this type of analysis can show the impact
of pumping and a then rational determination made with respect to Mr. Slyzuk's permit
application.
Wark Plan:
Water Level Data:
o Obtain most recent observation well and lake level data for Anoka County.
/
o For those lakes in the sand plain, show lake level declines from 86' to present. In
particular look at rate of decline. Compare rates of decline for lake levels and ground
water levels. If possible, compare rates of decline in lake levels between times of
pumping and non-pumping.
'\
,
>
Precipitation Records:
o Obtain precipitation records for stations in the sand plain area. Tie precipitation to
lake levels.
Pumping Rates:
o Obtain electrical power records from Appropriator and make estimates of flow
volumes.
Ground Water Modeling:
o Investigate computer flow models available to simulate pumping and non pumping
conditions. If possible, simulate impacts of pumping both regionally and locally.
Use flow model to provide quantitative esimates of ditch effects on lake levels.
Field Work:
o Determine if peizometers installed earlier are still intact and usable. Take water level
readings.
o Survey current elevation of ditch water surface. Install level gauge in ditch.
o Use a metal detector to find culvert under Co. Rd. 9 that is reported to exist.
Conclusion:
The field work portion of this plan has almost been completed. The level gauge in the ditch
is yet to be installed. The piezometers are usable. Unfortunately, the metal detector survey
was not successful. I believe that the work outlined above will put to rest any further
questions as to the Appropriator's impact on lake levels. If you should have any questions
or suggestions please do not hesitate to call me.
I .
I
I
I
I
~ ~. c lojIb/10
u
CO U N TY
OF
ANOKA
'. ./
Office of the County Board of Commissioners
COURTHOUSE ANOKA. MINNESOTA 55303 612-421.4760
Rr~~~It}~lD
990 . .j
,.,"-
CITY OF ANDOVER
, ')
October 12,
Tom Feeney, Area Manager
Department of Housing & Urban Development
220 South 2nd Street
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Dear Mr. Feeney:
For your information and file, please be advised that the Anoka County Board at the most recent
meeting of Tuesday, October 9,1990, adopted the attached resolution:
Resolution #90-101, Resolution Recommending Designating City and Township
Governments as the Review Authority for Subdivision Approval in Anoka County
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
\~.\~.
Tim Yantos
Deputy County Administrator
----
1Y:pd
Enclosure
cc: Chief Elected Officials - All Anoka County Cities and Townships
Manager/Clerk - All Anoka County Cities and Townships
;'
/
.J
Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
.'$0>1
(I
CO.UNTY
OF
ANOKA
"-
I
Office of the County Board of Commissioners
'-~
COURTHOUSE ANOKA. MINNESOTA 55303 612-421.4760
October 12, 1990
l~ E~-f:-'~'1-~J f; u~--
t":. .... ~ U ~ .'l vr ~.__;-J
:,td!. - ~~:
b.\\-'~ " -1 f
] tl ;,J[; i 1 5 1990 ,: ....
. ,
,-
CITY OF ANDOVER
Jack Kemp, Secretary
Department of Housing & Urban Development
H.U.D. Building
451 - 7th Street, Room 3158
Washington, D.C. 20410-5500
Dear Secretary Kemp:
. For your information and file, please be advised that the Anoka County Board at the most recent
meeting of Tuesday, October 9, 1990, adopted the attached resolution:
Resolution #90-101, Resolution Recommending Designating City and Township
Governments as the Review Authority for Subdivision Approval in Anoka County
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
. ~--
1--\ .
Tim Yantos
Deputy County Administrator
1Y:pd
Enclosure
cc: Chief Elected Officials - All Anoka County Cities and Townships
Manager/Clerk - All Anoka Coufty Cities and Townships
\
J
Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
'$p,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Anoka County, Minnesota
'\
)
DATE: October 9, 1990
OFFERED BY COMMISSIONER: Haa. Stetten
RESOLUTION #90-101
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DESIGNATING CITY AND TOWNSHIP GOVERNMENTS
AS THE REVIEW AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL IN ANOKA COUNTY
WHEREAS, Anoka County, along with its communities, has recognized and fully encouraged
Anoka County's diversity, including everything from fully developed to commercial/agricultural areas;
and,
.
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council monitors and restricts growth in the seven county
metropolitan area through its Rural Density Policy enacted in the mid.1970's to preserve agricultural
land from subdivision and developmenl and to prevent the premature expansion of urban services:
and,
WHEREAS, history has shown that Metropolitan Council policies contribute to the high cost
of land in the developed area, pricing it out of the market for many buyers, and history has also
shown that people will not 'in.fill" if lots and housing ara unaffordable; and,
WHEREAS, it has been documented that much of the County's rural land, because of its
sandy nature, is best suited for housing development rather than farming, but which is restricted from
home-building land use under current Metropolitan Council policies which classify these areas as
rural and which are, therefore, subject to Metropolitan Council guidelines delineating not more than
4 houses in a 4O-acre area; and,
WHEREAS, 48% of the land In said area is classified as wetland and unsuitable for
development but is not credited as open space when determining overall density; and,
WHEREAS, lending Institutions will not finance areas of 10 acres or more, and the Federal
Housing Authority (FHA) has refused granting government.backed mortgages for individual new
home buyers in communities that are not in compliance with said Metropolitan Council's 4.40 policy,
dictating city dwelling. even when housing is not available, affordable. or the choice of the buyer;
and. .
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council policy restricts business development that would greatly
enhance the tax base and provide necessary services for residents in rural areas; and,
WHEREAS, transportation services and schools are in place. advances in technology for on.
site sewage systems exist, -and we now recognize that environmental standards and regulations,
. rather than lot size. must be the determining factor, and that services are more economically
provided to 1 to 2.1/2 acre lots than to 10 acres; and.
WHEREAS. there has been no evidence of premature expansion of urban services; and,
WHEREAS. city and township governmental units are in a better position to respond to the
housing needs of their. individual constituencies:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anoka County Board of Commissioners urges
the FHA to immediately designate city and township governments in Anoka County as the review
authority for subdivision approval which is in compliance with these local units of government.
/
,.J
RESOLUTION #90-101
Page 2
'\
DistriC1 #1 - Haas Steffen
DistriC1 #2 . Burman
DistriC1 #3 - Langfeld
DistriC1 #4 . Kordiak
DistriC1 #5 . Cenaiko
DistriC1 #6 . McCarron
DistriC1 #7 . Erhart
YES
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/'
NO
Haas Steffen
Burman
Langfeld
Kordiak
Cenaiko
McCarron
Erhart
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) S5
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
1, John' Jay' McUnden. County Administrator. Anoka County, Minnesota, hereby certify that
I have compared the foregoing copy of the resolution of the County Board of said County with the
original record thereof on file in the Administration Office. Anoka County. Minnesota. as stated in the
minutes of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting duly held on OC1ober 9. 1990, and that the
same is a true 'and correC1 copy of said original record and of the whole thereof. and that said
resolution was duly passed by said Board at said meeting.
Witness my hand and seal this 9th day of OC1ober. 1990.
/
/
)
,
DATE: october 2, 1990
"
'-./
ITEMS GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL
"What's Happening"
Regular City Council Minutes - October 2, 1990
Coon Creek Watershed Board - October 8, 1990
Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization (10/17/90)
Letter from John Davidson, TKDA - October 3, 1990
Memo from Dave Almgren, September Monthly Building Report(10/3/90)
Comprehensive plan Task Force Minutes - September 27, 1990
Regular Planning and zoning Commission Minutes - (9/25/90)
Ordinance 93
Ordinance 23B
Letter from Ed Treska, County of Anoka - September 28, 1990
I
/
PLEASE ADDRESS THESE ITEMS AT THIS MEETING OR PUT THEM ON THE NEXT
AGENDA.
THANK YOU.
- )
\
.J
)
****************************************************************
~~************************************************************~*
~ **
~~ **
~~ **
~~ **
~~ **
~~ **
:: _WHAJ'S_._..HAPPENING 1_ ::
~~ **
.~ **
.~ **
.~ **
.~ **
.~ **
.~ **
~~ **
~~ October 16, 1990 **
~~ **
~~ **
~~ **
~~ **
~~ **
:: - The Boundary Commission will be having their ::
.~ first meeting on October 23, 1990 at **
.... 4 **
...... :00 p.m. **
.... **
...... **
~... - A late item came in and Jim Elling asked that **
:: this be included in the agenda. Please see the ::
~... attached Council Item regarding the Joint Powers **
~... **
.... Agreement for representation on fiscal **
.... dispari ty. **
~... **
...... **
.... **
...... **
...... **
...... **
...... **
~... **
~... **
~... **
~~ **
.... **
.... **
...... **
.... **
...... **
~... **
~... **
~~ **
~... **
~... **
~~ **
.~ **
.... **
.... **
...... **
...... **
...~ **
~... **
~... **
~... **
.... **
.... **
.~ t' **
.~ **
.... / **
~... .J **
.... . **
...... **
~... **
~... **
~... **
.... **
~... **
~... **
.... **
.... **
...... **
...... **
...... *
.~***************************************************************
................................................................
'\
)
'\
.~)
AI,E:-<DA
coo~ CREEK \v,\TERSHED DISTRICT
BOAHD OF' ~fANAGERS
[)ct.;)ht~r' K, l~J!JI)
; : .~ 4) !). m .
1.
Call to Order
2 .
Approval of Agenda
3.
Open Hike
4.
Approval of Minutes
5 .
Reports
:1. Finane i:11
b. Bil.ls
6.
Policy Agenda
l\. Pub 1 i c H e ~l r i :10,:( : 1 0:H 1311<1 ~ e t
b. Adoption of 19~1 :'~:Id~f:'t
e. Certific:'d;ion of 19~1 lt~,,'iE'~;
7.
Permit Agenda
a. fie 1 Ii s: D i t c: II 11 C 1 e a nl n g
b. Private Ditch Cleaning 41-7 ~ 4l-~
c. P r i v I'l t. E' [I i U. h C 1 e ani 11 g 4 1 ,y .11 - :1
.<1. ~osqllit() Conti'!)l District .\drhtio1l
~. Water Appropriation
.......~
8.
Informational Agenda_
a. QuarterLy oh,iecth'ps
9.
Staff Report
10.
New Business
11. Adjourn
/
/
RG~E:I:-1D
" '-
CITY OF I\l'1nl"\"~n
t:("WD Hinut.." S..pt..mber 2~.1990
,)
COON CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
BOARD OF MANAGERS' MEETING
September 24, 1990
The Board oC MBnRgers of the Coon Creek Watershed District held
their regulRr me..ting on September 24, 1990 at the Bunker Hills
Activities Center.
Present: Bob Boyum, Reggie Hemmes, Eldon Hentges, LuEllen
Richmond, Paul Williams.
StaCC:
Tim Kelly, Ed Mathiesen, Harold ScheCf
1. The meeting was called to order at 7:33 P.M.
2. Approval of the Agenda:
Moved by Williams, seconded by Hentges. Motion carried with four
yeas (Boyum, Hemmes, Hentges, and Williams) and no nays.
3. Open Hike: No one asked to speRk
4. Approval of Minutes:
Hoved by Williams, seconded by Boyum. Hotion carried with four
yeas (Boyum, Hemmes, Hentges, and Williams) and no nays.
5. Policy Agenda
5a Legislative plan: Kelly presented the proposed legislative
plan for seeking authority to establish a water maintenance and
repair fund. The recommendation to the Board included the
following: $30,000 annual levy: adoption of a resolution
requesting support and seeking authority for the $30,000 Water
Haintenance and Repair Fund; review of the proposal by both the
Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) on the proposal's merits, and the scope of the
fund's use (i.e. size of projects, etc.): seek support from the
'" following during the Courth quarter of 1990: City of Andover,
-_~ity of Blaine, City of Coon Rapids, City of Ham Lake, Columbus
Township, Anoka County, Anoka Soil and Water Conservation
District, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, League of
Women Voters; direct staff to update legislative language; and
discuss lobbying strategies and options. Both Boyum and Hentges
asked for a list of projects or examples to which the fund would
apply. Hentges suggested that resolution may be a lot to ask and
that letters of support could meet the need. The following
resolution was offered:
COON CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
BOARD OF MANAGERS
RESOLUTION 90-04
WHEREAS, The coo~ Creek Wate~shed District was established in
1959 to "olve local water p~oblems associated with flooding and
damage of agricultural and/residential lands: and,
WHEREAS, The prevention of those problems involves the
maintenance of the ditch system administered by the Watershed
District: and,
WHEREAS, Financing maintenance and repair work on the ditch
system requires a viewing and special assessment process outlined
in The Minnesota Ditch Law, Hinnesota Statutes 106A: and,
\
...J
Page 1
CCWD Hinutes September 24,1990
\
.J
WHEREAS, The rate of urban development within the watershed would
make the redetermination of benef1ts an annual task to ensure
fairness; and.
WHEREAS, The Board of Hanagers of the Coon Creek Watershed
District has a concern About the cost and fairness of the viewing
processr as well as, the ability of small public works type
projects to show the required increase in the market value of the
properties within the project area; and,
WHEREAS, The State legislature has authorized three other
watershed districts to levy for any maintenance, repair,
restoration, upkeep and rehabilitation oC any public ditch,
drain, dams, sewer, river, stream, watercourse, or waterbody;
and,
WHEREAS, The value oC the original $15,000 authorization has
eroded with inflation and with inClation presently equals
approximately $30,000; and,
WHEREAS, On July 23, 1990 The Coon Creek Watershed District
Board of Managers is resolved as the District's mission to manage
the ground water and surCace water drainage system to prevent
property damage, maintain hydrologic balance and to protect water
quality Cor the safety and enjoyment oC citizens and t~e
preservation and enhancement of wildliCe habitat; and, .
WHEREAS, The Coon Creek Watershed District Board oC Managers is
committed to pursuing this mission in the most cost efCective
manner, which involves reducing the administrative costs
associated with maintenance:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Coon Creek Watershed
District Board of Managers is in support of establishing a water
maintenance and repair Cund Cor the Coon Creek Watershed District
as a way oC eCficiently Cinancing ongoing maintenance and repair
oC the water conveyance system within the Watershed.
." BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Coon Creek Watershed District
seeks the authority to levy $30,000 annually over the entire
watershed for this purpose.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the District Board oC Managers
requests the legislative delegation to support legislation
granting this authority to the District.
Hoved by Richmond, seconded by Williams. Hotion carried with
Cive yeas (Boyum, Hemmes, Hentges, Richmond. and Williams) and no
nays.
Permit Agenda
6a Kvamme garage addition: Mathiesen reviewed the permit
application and noting that the addition is parallel to the
district's easement. Mathiesen recommended approval. Hoved by
Boyum, seconded by Hentges!. Motion carried with Cive yeas
(Boyum, Hemmes, Hentges, Richmond, and Williams) and no nays.
6b. Blaine project 90-12, 121st Ave.: Mathiesen presented the
project and recommended approval with no stipulations. Hoved by
Richmond, seconded by Boyum. Motion carried with five yeas
(Boyum, Hemmes. Hentges, Richmond. and Williams) and no nays.
.)
Page 2
'\
)
-J
CCWD Hinutes September 24,1990
Information ^~enda
7a. Ditch 41: Kelly reviewed the followin~ issues and concerns
on Ditch 41; (11 Hi~h Water for Agriculture, (2) Changes in
hydrology of the watershed, (3) Regional ponding. Kelly noted
that he received a permit application for a private cleaning of
ditch 41 and 41-3 between Highway 65 and Raddison Road. Kelly
also noted that Hr. Loren Hent~es was present and would like to
address the Board on this subject. Chairman Hemmes asked Hr. L.
Hentges if he would like to address the Board. Hr. Hentges asked
if he could give some history that pertains to his concern. With
no objections from the Board Hr. Hentges reviewed his concerns
about repair and maintenance of the ditch starting in 1983 with a
petition to the watershed District and the subsequent request by
the city of Blaine to perform the engineering and maintenance
work for that portion of the Ditch from Highway 65 to 117th
street. Hr. Hentges contended that the work the city was to
perform was never done. Hr. Hentges then expressed concern about
the 1989 cleaning of Ditch 41 between Highway 65 and
approximately Abel street where the banks of the Ditch were to be
shaped to a 2:1 slope to enhance the efficiency of the Ditch.
Hr. Hentges then asked to go on record requesting a cleaning
and/or repair of Ditch 41 so that farm land in the vicinity of
Raddison road realizes the drainage that originally intended when
the ditch was constructed.
Kelly then reviewed for the Board the actions he committed to at
the September 11 meeting with Hentges, Knoll, and the Frickes.
Those actions were as follows; (1) review the current hydrology
of the watershed, (21 look at the 1983 and any subsequent plans
developed for ditch 41, (3) talk to Anoka county regarding
replacement of the culvert under Raddison Road. Kelly also
recommended to the Board that this issue be addressed in a
comprehensive nature and recommended the following activities to
'-...',
address this issue comprehensively; shoot key elevations,
profiles and measure flows along the creek, inspect the site with
a drainage engineer to evaluate performance need and capability
of the system for agricultural drainage, discuss the need for
hydrologic balance in the area with city staff. Kelly stated
.that the result would be a report to the Board with recommend
actions for restoring balance to the system.
7b. Draft Comp Plan Chapters: Kelly distributed DRAFT finance
and program chapters to the Board for review. and asked for
comments
Budget Workshop
8a Kelly reviewed the comments of the Citizen Advisory Committee
and Technical Advisory Committee and noted the tollowing comments
and recommendations: (1) Fees & Charges: There was a general
comment that fees are such a small part of the budget and whether
we are charging enough. (2) Health Insurance: There was a
comment on whether $4,392 was sufficient tor health insurance.
Kelly noted that the county recommendation is to budget $6,500.
(3) SWCD: There was discussion on the nature of line item 37:
SWCD. The purpose is for ~ssistance in review and inspection for
erosion control and permit compliance. Both committees were
supportive of this initiative. Funding would be from
reallocations in professional services (30) and other program
costs (70 I. (41 ,Legislation: Everyone that has commented on the
budget has been supportive of the District pursuing the Water
Haintenance and Repair fund authority. (5) Haintenance: The
technical committee expressed general concern about all of the
projects being able to meet the two tests of: 1) Common Benefit
across the watershed, 2) Unanimous vote. Kelly then reviewed the
change level requests. The Board generally dIscussed the issue
Page 3
)
)
CCWD Hinutes September 24,1990
of fees and concluded that the issue would be addressed as part
of the policy manual revision that are underway. Williams
requested a time table for hiring the clerical person.
9. New Business:
9a. News letter: Williams raised the issue of a news letter
9b. Logo and letterhead: Hemmes asked for an update on the logo
and letter head. Kelly distributed draft mock-upa of a new logo
and letterhead. The reviewed and commented on their likes and
dislikes. So goes art by committee.
9c. Signing of 1989 minutes: Hemmes raised the issue of signing
of the last six months, 1989 minutes, and requested of the Board
if there was any objection to having the Secretary at the time,
Paul Williams, sign those minutes. Hemmes pointed out that it
would be easier to have Hr. Williams sign them then to track down
Hel Schulte, 1989 Chairman. Hoved by Richmond, seconded by
Boyum. Hotion carried with five yeas (Boyum, Hemmes, Hentges,
Richmond, and Williams) and no nays.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.H. on a motion by Boyum,
seconded by Williams. Motion carried with five yeas (Boyum,
Hemmes, Hentges, Richmond, and Williams) and no nays.
.
,
Reggie Hemmes, Chairman
'-,
/
I
/
Page 4
,
\'
,,'
2015 1ST AVE., ANOKA MN 55303
~:J
LOWER RUM RIVER WATERSHED MM~AGEMENT
l-JIDOVER - ANOKA - COON RAPIDS - RAMSEY
MEETING NOTICE
Wednesday, October 17; 1990, - 8:30 a.m. - Committee Room, Anoka City Hall
AGENDA
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Minutes of Previous Meetings
D. Treasurer's Report
E. Payment of Bills
F. Report of Officers
G. Consideration of Communications
~
H.Old Business
1. Alternative Permitting Procedure and Permit Fee
Collection.
I. New Business
1. Coon Rapids Shopping Center Detention Ponds
2. Update of the LRRWMO Joint Powers Agreement
J.
Adjournment
/
/
ATTENDANCE:
WMO Members
C. Pearson (8:30 a.m.)
D. Skallman (9:00 a.m.)
\
-...J
~)
LOWER RUM RIVER WATERSHED M~~AGEMENT ORGANIZATION
SEPTEMBER 19, 1990
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Jim Schrantz called the meeting to order at 8:37
a.m. in the Committee Room of ~~oka City Hall.
ROLL CALL
Members present were Jim Schrantz, Tom Mathisen,
Raatikka, and John Weaver.
Pete
Also present were alternates scott Erickson, Steve Jankowski,
and Ray Schul tz. ..
Guest in attendance was Bruce Bomier.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES
Raatikka requested a change in the August 22, 1990, meeting
minutes, page 4, reflecting the initial permitting fee charge
should be $500, not $200, as printed in the minutes.
Motion was made by Weaver, seconded by Raatikka, to APPROVE
. THE AUGUST 22, 1990, MEETING MINUTES AS A~ffiNDED.
............
3 ayes - 0 nayes - 1 present (Mathisen). Motion carried.
TREASURER'S REPORT
The Treasurer's Report was postponed pending the arrival of
Scott Erickson.
PAYMENT OF BILLS
The consideration of bills were also postponed pending
Erickson's arrival.
1. Rum River Dock/Island
NEW BUSINESS
Weaver requested this item be brought forward in order to
accommodate Bruce Bamier. Members agreed.
. \
..J
Weaver presented background information on Mr. Bomier's
proposal to provide access to the Rum River for several
adjacent neighbors by extending their current lot lines
through the adjacent island to the river. This proposal has
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes
September 19, 1990
Page 2
C)
been presented to the Anoka City Council for its approval,
and was tabled, per Department of Natural Resource (DNR)
request, to allow further DNR investigation. Because of its
proximity to the river, Weaver had recommended this proposal
be reviewed by the LRRWMO.
Bruce Bomier, 3430 Rum River Boulevard, provided a map
area in question, including the island separating
mainland property from the Rum River. Their proposal
involve eight neighbors.
of the
their
would
Mr. Bomier indicated the island has, over time, filled in on
the north end, creating a peninsula. It is their proposal
that Hr. Bomier will purchase the peninsula and will. sub-
divide it to his neighbors. Everyone will then simply extend
their existing property lines out through the peninsula.
Covenants will be created decreeing the peninsula remain in
its current wild and natural state. The neighbors presently
. have one dock constructed on Mr. Bernier's property allowing
them access to the river. However, it is conceivable each
neighboring resident could put in his own dock. The existing
portable, aluminum dock is reportedly of standare
construction, built in five sixteen foot sections. Mr.
Bomier plans to try to leave the dock in this winter.
In answer to Schultz's query about the spring 1990 water
level in their area, Mr. Bomier stated while there was water
in the area this spring, it has turned from an island to a
swamp. He felt no water could ever flow in or out of this
area by way of a continuous flow. In fact, there are at
least ten year old trees growing in the northern end of the
island/mainland waterway area which used to be free flowing
water years ago.
\
)
Mr. Bomier reported an Environmental Control Committee has
been established consisting of four neighbors. Should any
peninsula property owner want to change anything, it will
have to be presented for discussion. However, with or
without the covenant, Mr. Bomier indicated no one has any
intention of Changing the natural state of the peninsula.
Because of the nature of the island, they do not need another
dock on the river side. /
/
Mathisen stated attorney cult Pearson's September 17, 1990,
letter indicates the LRRWMO has nothing to do with this
situation. It is a concern of the City of Anoka. Schrantz
concurred the ownership issue is none of our concern, but
what happens to the river, the peninsula, and dock
construction is. Mr. Bernier assured the board nothing will
happen to the river due to their proposal. Their only
"
"
'LRRWMO Meeting Minutes
September 19, 1990
Page 3
:J
addition
river.
current
there.
to
The
wild
the area will be that of
neighbors prefer to keep
state, and would prohibit
a dock to reach the
the peninsula in its
future development
Schultz concurred it is a private matter. However, he
some day the lot #15 property owner will have no
frontage at all. Schultz stated normally lot lines
ninety degrees to the center line of the river. Mr.
stated this potential situation has been discussed,
lot #15 property owner is comfortable with the
proposal.
noted
rive r
extend
Bomier
and the
current
Mr. Bomier noted the DNR has been out a couple of times
looking at the area.
Motion was made by Raatikka, seconded by Weaver, INDICATING
THIS MATTER BE SENT BACK TO THE CITY OF ANOKA, URGING THEY
FOLLOW THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE REGULATIONS AND
CURRENT ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ANOKA IN ADDRESSING THIS
ISSUE. IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THE LOWER RUM RIVER WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION HAS NO JURISDICTION RELATIVE TO THE
OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY. HOWEVER, ANY FUTURE CONCERNS
RELATIVE TO CLEAR CUTTING OR CONSTRUCTION ON THE
ISLAND/PENINSULA MAY WELL BE OF CONCERN TO THIS BOARD.
4 ayes - 0 nayes. Motion carried.
TREASURER'S REPORT (Cont.)
.'---...
Erickson, soon to replace Mathisen as the Coon Rapids repre-
sentative to the LRRWMO, presented the Treasurer's Report for
the period ending August 31, 1990, showing an ending balance
of $11,793.97.
Upon noting the $7.26 service charge, Weaver indicated he
discussed this matter with Deputy Treasurer Jim Knutson who
informed him the LRRWMO is responsible for the payment of
this service charge because this is a separate non-City of
Anoka account. Alternate ways of banking in order to avoid
paying a service charge and yet collecting interest on the
account were discussed. Raatikka suggested this board check
further into other available banking methods. Weaver agreed
to. pursue this further with Mr. Knutson, and will ask him
what he would recommend this body do in order to maximize its
return on residual funds.
Mathisen indicated the member cities have been billed for
1990 dues. Checks have been received from the cities of
Andover and Coon Rapids.
)
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes
September 19, 1990
Page 4
Cj
Motion was made by Raatikka, seconded by Weaver, to APPROVE
THE TREASURER'S REPORT AS PRESENTED.
':'!.!.;'"4,>'ayes:,..,..'.O 'nayes. :';...Motion carried.
..
." '"
. ....
"="':
"'c PAYMENT OF BILLS (Cont.)
None.
None.
.... ." ..
. '." ..... .... . ..
..., . ..
..... -..,.- . - ....'.~.__.....~ .
-- ,'-' " - .
".--.- .-...-..
,~"'-'o~f' CONSIDERATION -OF. . COMMUNI CATIONS
. . -' . . ... ".-' . . ." '. . ....... . ....-..- ..-. . ~-'
._:;~~ -~ '~:'.~~-:':-::-:-:: ':':__:;::'::::.;-~:':'~:;::~~::':-~='::"":'::'~.':':::.."7;::~'-::'~":' .:: .
..... .': -.: : ~ ." :.":"'.- .' .
Members acknowledged an August 31, 1990, memorandum from Jim
Birkholz, Executive Director of the Minnesota Board of Water
.'::"; .':;.,,::,;..;:'_:and::."~Soil ::._:Resources,.. . regarding the ..._ environmental:..: rev iew.,.._ ...:..:-,' :.:.~:.~
,::.':.: :-f..'7~~i;'QC,gllp,:"LE~W.~:f.Ol;:m..a,nd guidel ines. . ~_":.::':=:~_ ....:...:.._.;~..:..,~:~~.;~..:::,_:-:::.:::-o....:.=-::::...~~.~:~:.-:-:,. .
=<
_. _.._..__ _ r__'
'~-'~~~-.~~-_:-..-.... _.
. ..... _. . h_ __ . _ __.
. . .
~;i~~~~t~~~f~}t~~:~~:~~~s /~~~:~ ~~~n P::~~~~~f:~~~;~{~ti~.~~~~~~E:Z:~'I;~;:;~':~':'.
.:'c~~,~'i.~b~JWI10~ use+:. :,:incHca ting a serv iceable~R.91q.~De.X:j,.tY.P~~:~o.f.:.'f il~.~,.=,.:..-":;,,,,"..
"'.:-:'=::-: ~.~as-:'f ouna-a: [ c'AiioK,l , s 'Northern Sta t ionerS"To:t-"'$14:'~5';'-:"'A~';- City--"=-""'= ~_:.:-,-"
. . - .._- -of Anoka aCcountant informed her the -purchas~' of this "file'-<::~:'"''''-'''
would qualify for the city's 15 per cent discount.
The board agreed to allow the secretary up to $20.00 on the
purchase of this office supply.
OLD BUSINESS
Alternative Permitting Procedure and Permit Fee Collection
:"-:'- ~--Weaver rep'orted' tne" city of Anoka Ci ty . Coundl' ha"ii' rev iewed
and approved the LRRWMO alternative permitting procedure.
Schultz added Council further suggested the LRRWMO allow
written reports from the cities on a quarterly basis, rather
than monthly.
Jankowski noted Curt Pearson, in his September 17, 1990,
letter commenting on this permitting procedure, indicated the
generally accepted standard size for WMO review of all
industrial and commercial development is areas of greater
than five, not two, acres. " (See permitting procedure
II.A.3.) I
/
Weaver felt the City of Anoka would have no problem changing
this portion from two to five acres.
Raatikka stated the City of Ramsey has not yet responded to
this alternative permitting procedure.
- \
"~)
. LRRWMO Meeting Minutes
September 19, 1990
Page 5
:,)
Erickson stated Coon Rapids
permitting procedure appears
their approval.
engineering staff indicated this
to be adequate, and expressed
Schrantz reported the majority of Andover's City Council was
willing to go along with this procedure. However, they felt
a $500 initial permitting fee was perhaps a lot.
Schultz reported the Anoka City Manager has requested to see
the entire process package when everything is put together.
Extensive discussion ensued on how the permitting procedure
would work and how the financing end of it, both received
from the applicant and payment to consulting engineers, would
be handled. The majority of those present concurred the
entire process could be placed in the hands of the cities.
However, Mathisen feared letting the cities handle everything
may create a bookkeeping nightmare, and the LRRWMO will lose
its identity.
Schrantz stated
for the review of
responsibility of
this board will not absorb
these developments. All
the developer.
any of the costs
costs will be the
Raatikka queried how it will work when the cities incur
inspection costs, therefore, creating a situation whereby two
entities will be billing against one escrow. Mathisen felt
in order to retain responsibili ty for this money, this board
may have to also approve a bill for city inspection of these
d~velopments. Schultz stated inspections should be separate
and-tne responsibility of the cities. The watershed should
not get involved in those expenses. Weaver concurred, adding
the inspection charges should be indicated separately on the
application.
Weaver suggested, and the board concurred, that Mr. Knutson
attend the October meeting to explain how these financial
procedures would work. He could also, at that time, present
further information on the LRRWMO checking account.
Weaver requested a copy of the Coon Creek Watershed applica-
tion. Schrantz agreed to provide same.
NEW BUSINESS (Cont.)
2. Information on the Coon Rapids Shopping Center Detention
Ponds
Erickson reported the staff person handling the Coon Rapids
Shopping Center development was gone last week, and Erickson
.J
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes
September 19, 1990
Page 6
~) has had a hard time getting information on this
He agreed to provide it for the October meeting.
development.
Schrantz noted the LRRWMO has never reviewed this project and
recommended this board ask the DNR for information.
Weaver indicated there is a great concern that Coon Rapids
provide the LRRw~O with specific information in order to
review this project, which will affect both the adjacent
wetlands and, eventually, the Rum River. This project should
have already been reviewed at an appropriate time, given its
potential for polluting the wetland resources. That
application should be reviewed and approved by this board
before the project is completed.
Motion was made by Weaver, seconded by Raatikka, to REQUEST
COON RAPIDS REPRESENI'ATIVES SCOTT ERICKSON AND TOM MATHISEN
INDICATE TO THEIR SUPERVISORS THAT THE LOWER RUM RIVER
WATERSHED MANAGEMENI' ORGANIZATION CONSIDERS THIS SHOPPING
CENTER AND THIS BOARD I S REVIEW OF IT TO BE A MATTER OF
URGENCY, AND WE EXPECT TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPROVE THE-
CONTROL SYSTEM WITHIN THAT PROJECT PRIOR TO THE TIME THE
PROJECT IS OPENED.
4 ayes - 0 nayes. Motion carried.
3. Updating the LRRWMO Joint Powers Agreement
Curt Pearson feels this board, through the
Joint Powers Agreement, is not in compli-
Formal board approval will be necessary
Powers Agreement.
Schrantz indicated
existing outdated
ance with the law.
to update the Joint
Motion was made by
CURTIS PEARSON TO
RIVER WATERSHED
AGREEMENT.
Mathisen, seconded by Weaver, AUTHORIZING
MAKE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE LOWER RUM
MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION'S JOINT POWERS
4 ayes - 0 nayes.
Motion carried.
MI SCELLANEOUS
/
is his ~st official meeting as a Coon
to theLRRWMO. Scott Erickson will be
Mathisen stated this
Rapids representative
taking his place.
Other members unanimously concurred charter member Mathisen
has been a valued asset to this board.
'\
/
--"
'.
',-
~)
)
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes
September 19, 1990
Page 7
ADJOURNMENT
Motion was made by Raatikka, seconded by Weaver, to ADJOURN
THE MEETING.
4 ayes - 0 nayes. Motion carried.
Time of adjournment: 10:10 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
1 ~.. ,
l"(~ j " V.-(-4'"7J
l-1ava Hikkonen
Recording Secretary
"-.
/
/
~J
CITY of ANDOVER
...",
MEMORANDUM
~ i
.',
TO: Mayor & City Council
COPIES TO: n"'partment Heads
FROM: David Almqren
DATE: October 3. 1990
REFERENCE: SEPTEMBER 1990 Monthly Building Report
I hereby submit the following report of the Building Department for the Month
of September 1990:
BUILDING PERMITS
18 Residential
2 Additions
6 Garages
1 Commercial
2 Pole Bldgs./Sheds
2 Structural Changes
11 Porches/Decks
1 Repair Fire Damage
43
APPROXIMATE VALUATION
$ 1,700,000.00
14,800.00
41,780.00
8,000.00
12,420.00
800.00
61,399.00
6,300.00
$ 1,845,499.00
FEES COLLECTED
11,147.79
48.75
28.25
25.00
455.00
350.00
1,344.00
70.00
122.50
150.00
700.00
76.00
350.00
210.00
84.00
,
.,
PERMITS
43 Building Permits
1 Demolition Permit
1 Renewal Permit
1 Moving Permit
22 Heating Permits
14 Hook Up (Sewer)
23 Plumbing Permits
5 Plumbing Repair
49 Pumping Permits
6 Septic Repair
14 Water Meter Permits
18 Certificates of Occupancy
14 Contractor's Licenses
14 Administrative Fees (Sewer)
14 SAC Retainage Fee
Total Building Department Income--September 1990
Total Building Department Income--YTD 1990
Total Valuation--September 1990
Total Valuation--YTD 1990
$ 15,161.29
180,517.23
1,845,499.00
21,964,643.00
'\
)
,
!,
~J
'\
)
September 1990 Monthly Report
October 3, 1990
Page Two
Total Number of Houses YTD (1990) - 218
Total Number of Houses YTD (1989) - 269
Total Number of Houses 1989 - 341
Total Number of Houses 1988 - 356
DA/jp
C.r:. C-It-y ~"u.Vl~11
rSH
(I
CO U N TY
OF
ANOKA
, ')
'-
COURTHOUSE
Office of the County Board of Commissioners
~ W\3'1 f~,
... """.. --1
-'-
r:~ 1 19~O _, .
'L:---
~.... ,. ..~!"_ i" .-,
G,-\f .
. -1-990"--
,
ANO
1-4760
Sep
Mr. James E. Schrantz
Administrator, City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd. N.W.
Andover, MN 55304
Dear Mr. Schrantz:
Paul Leegard, the Anoka County GIS Coordinator, has asked me to circulate the enclosed notice
of a seminar about the Anoka County Geographic Information System.
I would encourage you and/or members of your staff, elected officials and any other interested
parties to attend the seminar. This informational session is an opportunity to ask questions and
get an update on the progress of the project.
If you have any questions prior to the seminar, I would encourage you to contact Paul at 422-
7508. Please note that Paul is asking you to make reservations prior to attendance so that
adequate space is available to accommodate the presentation.
Sincerely.
tJ~tL-
/
Ed Treska
Assistant to the
County Administrator
ET:lp
Enclosure
,)
Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
~.;$tPl
.
. "\
, )
ANOKA COUNTY CARTOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
ACCIS
is sponsoring a seminar
Monday, October 22nd
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE
ANOKA COUNTY
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
There will be three 2 hour sessions:
10:00am -12:00noon
1 :30pm - 3:30pm
4:00pm - 6:00pm
Elected Officials, department heads, potential users, and any other interested parties are welcome.
Activities include an overview of GIS,a hands on demonstration, how to budget for hardware and
software, and a question and answer period.
All sessions will be held in the GIS office located at 500 West Main Street.
"
)
Call 422-750a for more information.
Please make a reservation to attend one of the sessions.
o
/ '\
'...J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
Administration
ITEM
NO.
Joint Powers Agreement
BY:
BY:
.1;\mp!': F. ~,.hr;\nt-",
The City Council is requested to consider the attached agreement
for contracting work with Charlie Weaver to represent the cities
on the fiscal disparity issue similar to the agreement entered
into two years ago.
Enclosed: Letter from City of Blaine
Joint Powers Agreement
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
;)
~.'<\."._'~
/~r:.~~
_...-",: .:,.,
';,",:,'~,:~. - \
--. ..... i
,..-'
___I
.. -.-..- ;
1.,-,..,.;jIL'
,~~~:~\.
\.~.;
- ~::'_-:}f.f""-'-'"
"':-....
([ (j
/
/
/
City of Blaine
9150 Central Avenue N.E., Blaine, Minnesota 55434
September 17, 1990
(612) 784.6700
FAX (612) 784.3844
Mayor Jim Elling
Ci ty of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd. N.W.
Andover, Minnesota 55304
Dear Jim:
Enclosed please find a proposed Joint Powers Agreement for
representation on the fiscal disparity issue from September 1,
1990, until the end of the 1991 legislative session. It is
almost exactly the same agreement entered into two years ago,
but the numbers on page two being based roughly on population
distribution.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact
Charlie Weaver or me; and, obviously, Mr. Weaver would be
very happy to appear before your city council to explain the
current status of the proposed changes in the bill and the
effect on your city. This will be a very important issue for
us this session, and our combined effort will be necessary if
we are to keep fiscal disparities from being eroded.
I will be looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest
convenience, and hope that you will join with us in the effort.
Sinc::!t.: ·
Elwyn Tinklenberg .
Mayor, City of Blaine/
ET:jmn
\
'. )
F )
'.
DRAFf 9/11190
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
This Agreement, is made and entered into this _ day of , 1990, by and
between the COUNTY OF ANOKA and the cities of COON RAPIDS, BLAINE, ANOKA,
CHAMPLIN, BROOKLYN PARK, ANDOVER, RAMSEY and HAM LAKE, hereinafter referred
to as the "Agencies", and Charles R. (Chuck) Weaver, hereinafter referred to as the "Legislative
Counsel".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Agencies desire to have their interests represented in the Legislature; and,
WHEREAS, the Legislative Counsel has the necessary expertise to provide such services; and,
WHEREAS, the Agencies agree that it is in their best interest that the cost of retaining said
professional services be shared; and,
WHEREAS, this Agreement is made in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Stat. ~471.59,
authorizing two or more governmental units to enter into an agreement for the joint and cooperative
exercise of any power common to the contracting parties:
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed and stipulated:
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for cooperation among the Agencies to retain the
services of a designated person of the Legislative Counsel, and other persons as they deem
appropriate and acceptable to the Agencies, as a lobbyist to represent the interests of the Agencies
in the Legislature, regarding the fiscal disparities affecting the Agencies.
2. SERVICES
The Legislative Counsel shall implement a plan to represent the interests of the Agencies
before various committees and members of. the Legislature, and other such services as required by
the Agencies. /
3. TERM
The term of this Agreement shall commence on September 15, 1990, and shall continue
through two weeks after the end of the regular 1991 legislative session, unless terminated as provided
') herein.
/
.' "\
'J
DRAFf 9/11/90
4.
COMPENSATION AND BILLING
The Agencies shall compensate the Legislative Counsel in an amount not to exceed the total
sum of $41,750.00, based upon the hourly rate of the Legislative Counsel. In addition to the charges
based upon hourly rates, the Legislative Counsel will be reimbursed for all expenses incurred in
connection with performing legislative services under this Agreement as approved by the Agencies.
The Legislative Counsel shall submit a monthly statement to the Agencies for services provided
under this Agreement and shall be paid the by the Agencies within 45 days from receipt of said
statement.
5. REPORTS
At the request of the Agencies, the Legislative Counsel shall report to the Agencies, either
orally, or in writing, the services that have been provided pursuant to this Agreement. The
designated representative shall keep all Agencies informed of the activities of the legislative Counsel.
6. NOTICES
AIl notices or communication between the parties required under this Agreement shall be given
to the designated representatives as follows:
For the Agencies:
John "Jay" McLinden
Anoka County Administrator
Courthouse
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
For the Legislative Counsel:
Charles R. Weaver
Suite 250
8990 Spring Brook Drive
Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433
7. ALLOCATION OF COSTS
/
The maximum payments made to the Legislative Counsel shall be allocated among the
participating Agencies as follows:
~
~-)
County of Anoka:
City of Coon Rapids:
City of Brooklyn Park:
City of Blaine:
City of Anoka:
City of Andover:
City of Ramsey:
City of Champlin:
City of Ham Lake:
8. DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS
DRAFT 9/11190
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$6,500.00
$2,500.00
$1,750.00
$1,750.00
$1,750.00
$ 500.00
$41,750.00 maximum total
All funds disbursed by the parties pursuant to this Agreement shall be disbursed by each entity
pursuant to the method provided by law.
9. CONTRACfS AND PURCHASES
All contracts let and purchases made pursuant to this Agreement shall be made by the
Agencies in conformance to the State Laws.
10. STRICf ACCOUNTABILITY
A strict accounting shall be made of all funds and report of all receipts and disbursements shall
be made upon request by either party.
11. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated without cause by either party at anytime by providing
written notification to the other party, provided that the Legislative Counsel shall be entitled to
payment for services rendered prior to the date of termination.
12. ADDmONAL PARTIES
Other cities or townships may join the Agencies by executing a counterpart to this Agreement
by filing the same with the designated representative of the Agencies.
I
13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and
that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and all negotiations between the parties relating
.", to the subject matter thereof, as well as any previous agreement presently in effect between the
oJ parties relating to the subject matter thereof. Any alterations, variations, or modifications of the
C_)
DRAFT 9/11/90
provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing and duly
signed by the parties herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
written below.
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CHARLES R. WEAVER
By:
By:
Dan Erhart, Chairman
Anoka County Board of
Commissioners
Charles R. Weaver
Date:
Date:
CITY OF COON RAPIDS CITY OF BLAINE
By: By:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
CITY OF ANOKA CITY OF ANDOVER
By: By:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
CITY OF RAMSEY CITY OF HAM LAKE
By: By:
Its: Its:
~.J Date: Date:
',-J
CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK
By:
Its:
Date:
/
/
, MKD\CONTRACI\WEAVER.C0N\9.11.90
)
DRAFT 9/11/90
CITY OF CHAMPLIN
By:
Its:
Date:
/' ':
'-..../
/ ')
J'
.'7rJ~/~;;C:'.";'Ch":-':>~....
j'\
{ )
I j
\ .I.. :'
.\},
:"\- -
-'''-'t?~::=;;;::i'>)Y
7:30 P.M.
CITY of ANDOVER
Regular City Council Meeting - October 16, 1990
Call to Order
Resident Forum
Agenda Approval
Approval of Minutes
Discussion Items
1. Scardigli Variance
2. Ordinance 79 Amendment
3. padula Sign Discussion
4. South Coon Creek Drive Sidewalk to Park
staff, Committee, Commission
5. Appoint Accounting Firm
6. Schedule Meeting/Canvass Election Results
7. Close 1978 Bond Fund
Non-Discussion Items
8. Approve Bond Sale
9. Woodland Development Escrow Refunds
10. Kirby Estates Escrow Refund
Approval of Claims
Adjournment
,"
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE
October 16, 1990
II
I
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Approval of Minutes
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
ITEM
NO.
Administration
BY: " "n1~'
APPRO. V~D
AGEq,Ai
. I
i \'
BY: I
,j
FOR
The City Council is requested to approve the following minutes:
October 2, 1990
Regular Meeting
/ "
MOTION BY
TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
\...J
:J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
DATE
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Discussion Items
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:\)
Planning ~
David L. Carlberg,
City Planner
ITEM I Scardigli Variance
NO. . 444 NW 177th Ave.
BY:
REQUEST
The Planning & zoning Commission at its regular meeting on
September 25, 1990, reviewed the request for a variance by
Ceserina Scardigli to construct a 26' x 48' accessory building
(garage and screened porch) encroaching twenty-one (21') feet into
the front yard setback along 177th Ave NW (Co. Rd. #58).
BACKGROUND
Ordinance No.8, Section 4.05 (F) establishes that on a
residential lot with an area of one (1 a.) acre or more, a
detached garage or accessory structure may be constructed closer
to the front lot line than the principle structure. Based on this
section of the Ordinance, the minimum distance the acce$sory
structure may be from the front lot line is sixty (60') feet.
Ordinance No.8, Sections 4.15 and 6.02 establishes setback
requirements along County roads. In the Scardigli's case, a 120
foot planned right-of-way is required on County Road #58. The 60
foot right-of-way plus the additional 60 foot setback required for
an accessory structure closer to the front lot line then the
principle structure locates the setback line at 120 feet from
centerline of County Road #58. The accessory structure is
proposed to be located 99 feet from centerline, thus encroaching
21 feet into the required front yard setback.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission that
the request for the variance be denied. The Commission finds no
hardship exists due to the unique shape or topography of the
parcel and that the land owner would not be precluded reasonable
use of the property as established in Ordinance No.8, Section
5.04.
COUNCIL ACTION
. "
'-.J
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
Page Two
Scardigli Variance
16 October 1990
" '.
,_~J Attached are the Planning and Zoning Commission packet materials,
the minutes from the September 25, 1990 meeting and a Resolution
for your adoption.
,
'-~
,)
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. R -90
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE VARIANCE REQUEST OF CESERINA SCARDIGLI
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ENCROACHING TWENTY-
ONE (21') FEET INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 444 NW 177TH AVENUE (CO. RD. 58) (PIN 1-32-24-31-003).
WHEREAS, Ceserina Scardig1i has requested a variance to
allow for the construction of an accessory structure encroaching
twenty-one (21') feet into the front yard setback; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & zoning Commission has reviewed the
request and has determined that said request does not meet the
criteria of Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04 in that no hardship
exists due to the unique shape or topography of the property which
would preclude the property owner reasonable use of her property;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the
request does not meet the established setback requirements
specified in Ordinance No.8, Sections 4.05, 4.15 and 6.02; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and zoning Commission recommends to
the City Council denial of the variance request as it
does not meet the criteria of Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the
Planning & zoning Commission and hereby denies the request of
Ceserina Scardigli to construct a accessory structure encroaching
twenty-one (21) feet into the front yard setback.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this
16th day of October, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
/
/
James E. Elling, Mayor
Victoria Volk, City Clerk
~)
II
(
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
September 25, 1990
Page -3-
" )
The inspectors told her their property would not be approved
for FHA financing based on the. condition of the fence of Andover
Auto Parts. They told her the fence itself is worse than
what it is trying to hide. She passed photos of portions
of that fence to the members of the Commission. She stated
she does not mind being neighbors with the auto yards, but
she is afraid if she needed to sell her property, there could
be a problem with the financing. She commented on the attractive
fence that Anoka Auto Parts has. FHA would not give her or
her neighbors any other guidelines to obtain FHA financing,
so they do not know if the fencing is the only problem.
Carlberg will try to work with FHA and pin them down as far
as fencing guidelines.
Hurst stated that part of the fencing of Andover Auto Parts
is good, and she appreciates that. Coleman stated she has
a right to expect a fencing along the back of her property
that meets the guidelines as set forth in the Ordinance.
Staff expects to start their inspections of the fences in
November.
DON BOELKE, 13414 Jav St., stated that he has talked to FHA
and feels the City will really have to "get on their backs"
to get any kind of'.a!.lswers or guidelines from them.
MOTION by Coleman and seconded by Vis tad to continue this
agenda item until the meeting on October 9, 1990. Motion
carried .unanimous~y.
Staff will set this item up for .a Public Hearing on that date
and make the changes to the draft of this Ordinance.
444 - 177TH AVENUE N.W. (SCARDIGLI) VARIANCE FRONT YARD SETBACK
FOR ACCESSORY BUILDING
. This is a request from Anthony and Cesarina Scardigli to allow::'
for the ~onstruction of a 26 ft. x 48 ft. accessory building
:O-~~_~. .("garage' wi th .. a' screened -porch) ..".,-_:_.,c:_,~:.,c,."c.,_:, ,_ _.: -c,-..'-=~_~.... :'.' ".-..-.~.'.. ,~...,-_c., .c_-.__. ..-'.'
Carlberg reviewed this item with the Commission and stated
that the proposed assessory,bbilding is proposed to be located
nearer the front property line than the principal structure
and that the house fronts on County Road No. 58 (177th Ave.).
As it is proposed; the accessory structure would be located
-",99 feet-from the centerline of County Road No.u58.0n a county-----
road, the planned right-of-way is 120 feet, although at this
--:-._~.:.:-t~~~c a ...:.~~~:_~.~ot '.r_~_ght=-:of-:wc:y _..E!_:lCi~_:s .'. _:_" __ - _U::"_:,,,-:.:__- - - on_ -.
)
':
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
September 25, 1990
Page -4-
. \.
~./ Staff and Commission reviewed the guidelines of Ordinance
No. 8 for granting a variance. They also reviewed sketch
plans submitted by the owner and their builder, Kimlinger
Construction. Pete Kimlinger had shown a sketch to Building
Inspector Don Olson who stated to Kimlinger it appeared
to meet requirements. However, the streets were not labeled
and Olson did not know a County Road was involved. No building
permits were issued. Based on information from Kinlinger
the owners removed trees. Now, in order to meet setback
requirements, more trees will have to be removed, and the
accessory structure cannot be located where the owners first
desired.
The Commission stated they were sorry that the trees had been
removed, but it is proper procedure to obtain a building permit
before you start any alterations. If this had been done,
the trees could have been saved.
Staff reviewed an alternative sketch plan for the accessory
building that would meet the setback requirements.
MOTION by Coleman and seconded by Peek that the Andover Planning
and Zoning Commission recommend denial of the variance requested
by Anthony and Cesarina Scardigli to allow for the construction
of an accessory building encroaching into the front yard setback
along County Road No. 58. The Planning Commission finds that
the proposal does not meet the requirements as set forth in
the City's Zoning Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04. The Commission
finds that a hardship due to the unique shape or topography
of the parcel does not exist and that the landowner would
not be precluded reasonable use of the property.
Discussion
Vistad requested Coleman to attach that portion of Ordinance
No.8, Section 4.05 and Section 6.02 as part of the motion,
as well as the Staff's reyiew for the criteria as far as
number 1 and the information contained therein, number 2 and
..="c,-:.the. information ucontained therein, numb.er.Ju,and._.the.information
contained therein, and number 4 and the information contained
therein with the rewording "The denial of the variance will..."
I
, :
I ' .
Coleman stated he did not ttiink all of those things needed
to be in....the motion since thi=y are in the staff reports that
the Council gets and are part of the resolution prepared by
Staff.
.-:=: :..--..~;_-:-::---:-. ~:-;
_'__d._ Motion carried unanimously with comment from Vistad that the
. __. ,'. 'cri terias for denial. as mentioned aboveishould - be':-iriclU:aea.'~~':'c-'':'''::-=- _u__-:-
_ _in the motion, and comment. from Jovanovich that she agreed. ... ..
:__) with VJ.stad. . ...... .-. h'_' - .-.
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
September 25, 1990
AGENDA ITEM
4. Variance, Scardigli
444 177th Avenue
front yard setback
for accessory building
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Planning
David L. Carlberg "0
BY: Ci ty Planner ...vc...,
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA
BY:
REQUEST
The Andover Planning and zoning Commission is asked to review the
request of Cesarina Scardigli to allow for the construction of a
26' x 48' accessory building (garage and screened porch).
Location and Zoning
The proposed construction will occur at 444 177th Avenue NW herein
referred to as County Road #58.
The site is zoned R-1 Single Family Rural
Review
The proposed accessory structure would be located 99 feet from the
centerline of County Road #58. On a county road, the planned
right-of-way is 120 feet, although at this time a 66 foot right-
of-way exists.
APPLICABLE ORDINANCES
Ordinance 8, Section 4.05 (F) establishes that no attached garages
or other accessory buildings shall be located nearer the front lot
line than the principle structure except as herein provided.
(1) On residential parcels with a lot area of one (1 a.)
acre or more, a detached garage or accessory building may be
constructed closer to the front lot line than the principle
structure, however, the minimum distance it may be from the
front lot line is sixty (6~') feet.
(2) All detached garage~or accessory buildings constructed
nearer the front lot line than the principal structure shall
be similar in design and exterior finish material so as to be
compatible to the principle structure.
Ordinance #8, Sections 4.15 and 6.02, establishes setback
requirements along County roads. Along County roads without total
) right-of-way taken, the setback is 110 feet for the principle
structure in R-1 districts. Along County roads where total right-
of-way has been taken, a 50 foot setback is required.
Page Two
\ Scardigli Variance
.) September 25, 1990
It should be noted that a setback of a 120 feet is required when
an accessory structure is located nearer to the property line then
the principal structure. The need for the 120 foot right-of-way is
supported in the attached letters dated December 16, 1981 and
March 6, 1990 to James Schrantz, City Administrator from Paul K.
Ruud, Anoka County Engineer. However, the attached letter dated
September 19, 1990 to Peter Kimlinger, Kimlinger Construction &
Remodeling from Paul Ruud gives relief to the property owner in
this particular situation. Although approval by the County is
indicated, the City still has jurisdiction as to the required
front yard setback as interpreted in Ordinance #8.
Ordinance #8 allows the City to grant a variance to the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance if the strict interpretation
of the Ordinance will cause undue hardship to the property owner.
The Planning and Zoning Commission should review the request using
the following criteria:
1. Does the strict interpretation of the Ordinance cause
practical difficulties and/or unnecessary hardships to the
property owners?
Upon inspection of the parcel and proposed construction site the
Planning Staff found different dimensions than the two conflicting
plans submitted by the property owner. The inspection also
presented an alternative to the proposal that would allow for the
construction of the same size of accessory building in a location
that would not encroach on the right-of-way of County Road #58.
(This alternative will be examined in greater detail later in the
report.)
The size of the parcel is considered to be substandard according
to Ordinance #8. The parcel's dimensions are 200' x 220' where
Ordinance #8 requires a parcel size of 300 ft x 150 ft. The City
has, in the past, denied variance requests concerning accessory
buildings built closer to the front yard setback than the
principle structure on parcels that meet Ordinance #8 standards.
Gerry Gau was denied a variance request, while meeting setback
requirements.
.:-J
2. Is the hardship caused by the unique physical features of the
land, including shape or condition of the parcel?
/
The parcel consists of roughly 1.0 acre and has no topographical
limitations imposed upon it. However, there was confusion
concerning the interpretation of the setback requirements
according to the initial site plan presented to Staff. The end
result was the builder, prior to securing a building permit,
removed 22 trees from the location of the proposed construction
site. Staff does not consider this to be a hardship, because the
majority of the trees must be removed to locate the accessory
structure in the alternative site proposed by Staff.
~)
Page Three
Scardigli Variance
September 25, 1990
3. will the variance be detrimental to the public welfare?
The request does not appear to have any detrimental effects.
4. Is the variance necessary to allow the property owner the
reasonable use of the property?
The variance will not deny the property owner the reasonable use
of the property, because a reasonable alternative exists.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE
The Staff recommends that the proposed accessory structure be
located parallel to County Road #58 and in line with the principle
structure. The proposed accessory structure would not be required
to change the desired dimensions and the new location would meet
all setbacks as specified in Ordinance #8, Sections 4.05, 4.15 and
6.2.
COMMISSION OPTIONS
A. The Andover Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend
approval of the variance requested by Cesarina Scardigli to
allow for the construction of an accessory building
encroaching into the front yard setback along County Road #58.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposal meets the
minimum criteria established in'Ordinance #8, Sections 5.04
including: the strict interpretation of the ordinance causes
the hardship, the hardship stems from the unique shape,
topography or physical features of the land, the variance will
not be detrimental to the public welfare and the variance is
necessary for the reasonable use of the property.
B. The Andover Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend
denial of the variance requested by Cesarina Scardigli to
allow for the construction of an accessory building
encroaching into the front yard setback along County Road #58.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposal does not meet
the requirements set forthl.in the City's Zoning Ordinance #8,
Section 5.04. The Commiss on finds that a hardship due to
the unique shape or topography of the parcel does not exist
and that the land owner would not be precluded reasonable use
of the property.
C. The Andover Planning and Zoning Commission may table the item.
~) STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Option B.
..~-----......- ,...---
AGE-ir::A nr::.::,;.; --
. ~_.-..__..
&..G.O U N TY
O'F
ANOKA
D~partmt'nt of High".a....'
"_ Paul K. Ruud. Hi!:hll'a)" Engin~C"T
COURT HOUSE ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 612.421-4760
December 16, 198
1 IT f];@~OW[gl"'!l
Uh DEe / 8 /981 ~'
James Schrantz
Andover City Engineer
Andover City Hall
1685 Crosstown Blvd. N.W.
Anoka, !tinnesota 55303
. .
Regarding: Planned Right-of-Way and Setback Requiranents
Dear Jim:
Your interest in coordinating the Anoka County Highway DepartJnent I s Thoroughfare
Plan with your street systan plan is greatly appreciated. The right-of-way now
being acquired for rrost county highways is 120 feet. The tv.o exceptions to this
policy in Andover are the extenSion of Hanson Boulevard North of Bunker Lake
Boulevard (rn #116) and the realignment of Bunker Lake Boulevard between CSAH #9
and CSAH #7. On these tv.o routes, we are planning for 4-lane facilities and
recarrrend that a 150 foot wide corridor be planned for and protected.
The general alignment of the relocation of Bunker Lake Boulevard between CSAH #9
and CSAH #7 bas been sketched out previously. Generally, it starts on the
existing alignment at CSAH #9 then curves Northwesterly into the open space North
of the developed portion of the City of Anoka and continues Westerly to a connectic
with CSAH #7 North of the new Anoka Ice Arena and the proposed Rum River Crossing.
The alignment of Hanson Boulevard extended is proposed to follow the power
transnission lines fran Bunker Lake Boulevard (CR #116) to Constance Boulevard
(CR #20). Fran that point, the route will follow a buildable route North and
West to terminate on the North limits of Andover (rn #58) at approximately the
center of Section 3. We expect the actual alginment to evolve as developnent
plans are made.
We trust that this information will assist you in developing your ordinances
regarding setbacks, and invite you to contact us should you need any further
information.
&~~
County Engineer
. PKR:dnh
o
Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
('-,
'I' )
~
.,
/...<;iJ.
~ofd1 To: J7.... S. - c. tI "":J"
S'oa 5. - Pla~"eY
dH~ - ?..nl;'~
Oo.vcz.A- &u"dl~
COUNTY OF ANOKA
Depanment of Highways
Paul K. Ruud. Highway Engineer
1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD NW, ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 612-754-3520
March 6, 1990
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW
Andover,~. 55304
Attention: Jim Schrantz
City Administrator/City Engineer
o ffn='j ii~f1
8 !G~ ~ ]9;0 III
CITY OF ANDOVE~ .
Subject:
County Rights-of-Way
Dear Mr. Schrantz:
Several years ago, we delivered to you, a letter outlining the county's desires
for rights-of-way for segments of the county highway system, that are located within
your city. Several weeks ago, you asked for an update of that letter in light of
current conditions and what we foresee commg in the way of roadway
improvements.
It is our recommendation that as development occurs along segments of the
county road system in the City of Andover, that a right-of-way width of at least 60
feet from the centerline of the roadway, be provided as a part of any plattin~ or lot
splits. In the past, we had talked of 150 foot right-of-way and it is our belIef that
nght-of-way acquisition has been achieved on Hanson Boulevard and that the other
county roads within the city will be served adequately by 120 feet of right-of-way.
The cooperation that the county has received over the years from the cities
and townships within the county has been a real asset to the implementation of
projects by the county and we trust that we will be able to continue that cooperative
effort with your city in seeing that the adequate ri~hts-of-ways are provided at the
time of development, so that the cost of acquisitIon at some future date can be
eliminated. .
Very truly yours,
~ k ~efJ//
Paul K. Ruud, PE
County. Engineer
','-)
dmh/CITYAND
Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer
~
.
COUNTY OF ANOKA
Department of Highways
Paul K. Ruud, Highway Engineer
1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD NW, ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 612-754-3520
September 19, 1990
Mr. Pete Kimlinger
Kimlinger Construction & Remodeling
6956 Brooklyn. Blvd.
Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
I have reviewed the accompanying plat plan relative to the above-referenced
property, regarding the construction of a new garage. The placement you have
mdlcated shows the garage to be built 97' from our County Road #58 centerline.
This is well beyond our present 33' right-of-way and also beyond our concern for an
additional 27' (60' total) for planned right-of-way road expansion. Therefore, the
Anoka County Highway Department would have no jurisdiction in this project.
Should the county ever acquire the additional 27', the proposed garage would
apparently be deficient in its zoning set-back requirements. The owner should avail
hmlSelf of the City of Andover's expertise in this area of non-conformance before
construction the garage to make sure he is aware of any risks he may be assuming.
If the City of Andover is willing to issue a building permit for this project, the county
certainly has no objections.
rou for being :~r;;jrned and checking with us prior to construction.
S' ely, //i::---..e
~A-'~
Paul K. Ruud
County Engineer
dar
Enc!. 1
/
, )
Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer
~~
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
VARIANCE REQUEST FORM
Prope rty Addre ss ).JHH - 17'7 cA.. fl.~. IJ, w.. 4"""-O'~. MA-<-v. -;;- s.3 0'1
Legal Description of Property:
(Fill in whichever is apporpriate):
Lot
Block
Addition
Plat Parcel PIN /-ft2-ZA--31- co3
(If metes and bounds, attach the comp ete 1egal)
*********************************************************************
~( \ d. ulU't\-huJu..cL ~)... M1.d
+0 ~d..?-t\o"'- s.lt'.^.o ~ rv\ CQ.t'\-1-u
l::> D.
Sc..r e.JU\.
\ 1'(\<-
Description of Request
of
Specific Hardship Su cJ-+-ac..l-u.C ~~+.
Section of Ordinance 5'. Q4-~ {D' 02.. Current Zoning
f-I
*********************************************************************
Name of Applicant ~ ..r:de_r:l/t~C
Address 1141./ - l'7'1 D^ 4~. AI. w. IL,........::h.o ~. S:5"'~ 0 4
Home Phone H ~i-I- S 7/ 0
Business Phone
Signature ~ ~~
Date
Q-IfS.-/9</o
*********************************************************************
i
/
Property Owner (Fee Owner)
(If different from above)
Address
Home Phone
)
Business Phone
Signature
Date
*********************************************************************
VARIANCE
PAGE 2
-',
~~) The following information shall be submitted prior to review by the
City of Andover:
1. A scaled drawing of the property and structures affected
showing: scale and north arrow; dimensions of the property and
structures; front, side and rear yard building setbacks;
adjacent streets; and location and use of existing structures
within 100 feet.
2. Application ,Fee:
Single Family - ~
Other Requests - $75.00
Date Paid
q/tB/q()
.
Receipt it
3S"93~
CRITERIA FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE
In granting a variance, the City Council ~hall consider the advice and
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and:
1. If the City Council finds that the request if it will be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance.
2. If it finds that strict enforcement of this Ordinance will
cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the
individual property under consideration.
,3. If it finds that denying the request does not deny reasonable
use of the property.
4. Economic considerations shall not constitute an undue hardship
if reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of
the Ordinance.
/
~J
" o....'l&"'.
, )
-,.,..".~~::,~~t;'jSj1~i~J:~::~.;~;;:'t~:><:; __.~ ____~_~~~ tt.\~: ._.
~~~~tt{~:;..
- __._n_. _._____._ _________..___, _ _..____ _ _.__.______..
'~Y'.'
.--- --~A4 .~(,;-.j~-~.f.td~-_~~:~ ..---
-_~rs__C\~'\d._.s: ~.~.-a.rU\ ~y-__hc)_~~~___
__n__ 0",\ t ~ r 1CIU:.. 00- _1.o1-:.n -+I~.c\ t_ -tb l' 5
__uS \yu,c..,lur.e...- .1,0 _I: l-L~_t,.__ mu._.__ .. _..__.__.__
-----. O~ n~-h."::t--bJ.~~t--_.C10d.___! .,.
~ 'f4.hi. I"'.
--~ . (U-r30'v'\.. ... _. ... __.;\ftJW'\"\ -~.I.tLA..'ti _.!,::;.::;:.
..d~'fC\.v'"~-ro ~d. .It';.__ tl.2,.,__("~t"\d. __ _._. F
n_~T._~~ ..33J~-t-___fl~~_IcQ__J~t___; .'
h__ -- . - --.~~..6t-~+.-'ot:tC::~,.--...
'n. . JUL., _ ~J~-t- __uk.__.~~ .4___~4n:\..__._. ,\,,-_...
-----.-.--J~+=1-.S0___UO_<.. .c!M+ Ccw(\ u. tr~ I:".
ufo ~dJ.
"
....... ~...~~:.:..::,...~-:" ...~'.- -.;-...-....
-,".'" _.t..._.. "w'.' ;...:~:~..l:.;.:,.~
'~"'; -_;, h. ..~..._~.;.,:-.:. ..:..:>,'.:~,.. .'. ".__-~.-'."
:.....". -? ;\'-;':' - - -- -- -
.--.--.--------.---
-.....--- ._~ ..,Je.c.~~~..---.
+.~.~~Lr,~,?~i .:
.....- - .-----.--------- -------------.------
---.------.----- -- --_.__._.._._---------------~--------_.
----- -----~. ----..---.-- .....-
. - -'---------....- .-- .----------.- .. ------- --~._-
/
.---.._.h._'n __..._ .. __j.__ m.__. ...n._n. .____..__.__...._.._..,__.
I. j~::'.';:r:;;~i;~t1J~~~~~~;~t:,::i~.:;12~i:~~:.:x:~:~;.=:;~;;:~1:~;::)r~L;{\~~::,;:t~:l,0.:~:.;:~:;';]:i~~::~#,;~~;::>1;':>~~:;:;'7~'~;:'l~ ''::"''';':''i:~ffi:ti;~.;:k;;, .
I
)
,."'<.
....,
'')
-'-~-)
II ,-o'ftJ
". r~ ~tt
." .-
I
1
, ')
'~ ./
'21, I
~
~ J
r ~
"" ~
~J
<"'> '-
~81
Qb.
.e .-['
.. -1I
-0 G?;.
OJ ~<::
..... / ~
. K I'M L, ~-t(L (!.f'P~'"
$bo-I ?2-3
frc)?OJE7) 6~ 9r-~Cr.f:..4.t~)?m.
bw)~
I .
, AfJ ~(q ~CA-f2.iJ{ GL::r
Wt/-/77Ht ~I Q. /wi I W I
v1-" Da1Ja
n YL '-13 tf-57 / IJ
'-"--
E-/(crl
~ 6 A'I~
fl)
E}cCSTI'1J ~V-
'2016 ~
I
I
I
I
,
I
i
,
I
i
I
I
,
IS'
)
I
I
: (EK lsr~
~: 1)r,v;(
I .
I 'u,
L;
(
(
-..
~
N
-
"'-/
tt tt
,
I)
-
CD.
10'
I ' 3:
cD' Z
z'
I
I __-
!
! 1/1
11
'I
I,
I
I
10'9,Z
j
I
o
N
.
UJ
>
<t
i
o
<t
~~
~ I
(j) i
u..
o
:1
:I
~ !!' IO'9Z
W
Z
u..
o
w
Z
..J
Z
I. .....--
,
,
I.
. ,
I
I .
.:I:
I~
~.......
,.. ........
,..:
I
,J
---
tt
I
z
OZZ
SS.tSI
-
QO
CJ7'i='r~
C.e--J.t-L\~
66't61
_--- 'OS II
OZZ
~
.
OZZ
---
\\
\ \
1 \
I
o
o
N
I
I
J
I
I..
, .
'0
I..
J
J
I
I
I
I
J
1 ....
r-
~
Q..
] IJ
~j
~ ~
~lt
\D~
~~
J~
~ Vl
~
-5-
(j)
O-::r-
UJ
'2 ..-I-
0- ....9
eo
0-
''.
t:
to/IMS .:l0 M3N .:l0 3NI1 'M~
---- \
0\
,
I
i
I
I
: 0
,..
i en
10.
',..
~.
j
J
II
1/
1/
--
I " .
~ ..J: ~
" : ~
o "
0...J: ..
-;~
c "
c ..
~ 0
.z 5
c -
"'0 '0
..8 ~
.. ..
u ..
.. Q.
c: ~ 1.1
o >0.':
- - u
c .. ..
..J: X. ..
:. 0 0
_ a. u
~ I) 0
....J: ..
U - .-
~~]
~ ~ e-
" > "
..J: .. >
- ; ~
_ c
"-
g:
....
o
:z:
\ci
, w
\J c:
-
, ;..
\
-,l
...
,,\
~~ c:
.- 0
>-
...
~'~
" V>
,J 0
)l IS
..
t.Proposed Construction
'/z.ojqc
'\
-\ -
'-/
..
~
.. -
~
~,
('00 _
""
r "
('>~
i _
~
..
l
'\
,-j
l'
;1!
I
Co. Rd 5"8
I
~/'3
,
"'0 "3',3
\>3
"
..
1(,,8
/
/
'2.00'
z:s
:;: Zl.!"
1.'$ I
...
,
~
-l:ll
:'">,
..
..
Z(.,'
- ~..-
C>
I\l
N
o
..
18 '
Staff's Prop.o$alol~
-\/2.014,0
, "-
'- j
t!o. "Rd. 56
...
we. (
, "-
'....J
l'
IV
I
~,
I~""'l I
I" ..
I
I
I
I
I
...
Cl <-I
"l1~
--
,II
01
I
..
/ --'.
J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
16 October 1990
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
Discussion
Planning/Zoning
f'
BY:
ITEM
NO. cJ. .
Ordinance No. 79
Amendment
BY: d'Arc Bosell
At the direction of the City Council at their meeting d~ugust
7, 1990, the Planning & Zoning Commission was requested to review
Ordinance No.8, Section 7.03 Special Uses for Outdoor Display
and Sales and Ordinance No. 79 to determine if a conflict exists
between these two ordinances.
Beginning with the meeting on August 28, 1990, and on, the
Commission reviewed the two ordinances and recommendations of the
staff.
It is the recommendation of the Commission that Ordinance No. 79
be amended as proposed by Staff. A copy of that proposed
amendment is attached for your consideration and adoption.
Also attached are the Planning & Zoning Commission packet
materials and minutes of the meetings. Also attached i~ a
Zoning Issue Folow-Up form which details my conversation with
Anoka County Health & Environmental Services as it pertains to
licensing at the County level. You will note that said
"temporary retail food establishments" are required to be
licensed by the County.
I will be at the meeting to answer any questions you may have.
It was my determination in doing the background work for this
amendment that Ordinance No. 8 did not need to be amended and
that the conflict which might have been in existence prior to
this amendment has been resolved by the adoption of Ordinance No.
79A.
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
MOTION BY
:) TO
, .,
'--)
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 79A
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 79 DEFINING TRANSIENT
MERCHANT, PEDDLER, CANVASSER, AND SOLICITOR AND REQUIRING SAID
INDIVIDUALS OR ORGANIZATIONS TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN PROCEDURES
WHILE DOING BUSINESS WITHIN THE CITY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE
PUBLIC WELFARE, AND PROVIDING FOR FEES AND PROHIBITING THE USE OF
PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY OR PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR CERTAIN ACTIVITIES.
The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains as
follows:
Section 1. Definitions:
1) A "canvasser" or "solicitor" is any person traveling from
place to place and/or house to house who takes orders for the
future delivery of merchandise or for services to be performed in
the future, whether or not such person exposes a sample or
collects advance payments on such sales; provided, however, that
such definition shall also include any person who occupies any
temporary structure, vehicle or other place for the primary
purpose of exhibiting samples and taking orders for future
delivery.
2) A "peddler" is any person traveling from place to place
and/or house to house who carries his merchandise with him,
offering and exposing the same for sale, and making deliveries to
purchasers, or any person who, without traveling from place to
place, shall sell or offer merchandise for sale from a vehicle or
conveyance.
~-J
4) A "transient merchant" is any person whose business in the
City is temporary or seasonal and consists of selling and
delivering merchandise within the City, and who in furtherance of
such purpose uses or occupies any structure, vehicle, or other
place for the exhibition and sale of such merchandise, either
privately or at public auction; provided, however, that a
transient merchant shall not be construed to mean any person who
while occupying such temporary location, exhibits only samples
for the purpose of securing orders for future delivery only. The
person so engagedshal1...not be relieved from complying with the
provisions of this Ordinance merely by reason of temporarily
associating with or conducting such transient business in
connection with a local businessman.
-~
'- )
Section 2. License Required:
1) A license shall be required for any canvasser, peddler,
tern orar retail food establishment, transient merchant or
so 1c1tor to operate 1n t e C1ty.
"
2) The license
o temporary out
six (6) months, with the exce tion
everage romotions and sales.
Section 3. Outdoor Food & Beverage Promotions & Sales:
1) An a~plication for a license shall be applied for and granted
by the C1ty of Andover.
2) The duration of the outdoor food and beverage promotion shall
be no longer than ten (10) days.
3 )
an
1n
.;
5) Said outdoor food and beverage promotion shall occur no more
frequently than twice in any calendar year.
6) A new license be a
su ]ect to ees as set
lied for and received for each event,
y C1ty Council Reso ution.
7) The hours of operation be included as a part of the license
application.
Section 5. Religious & Charitable Organizations:
Any organization, society, association or corporation desiring to
solicit or have solicited in its name money, donations of money
or property or financial assistance of any kind or desiring to
sell or distribute any item of literature or merchandise for .
which a fee is charged or solicited from persons other than
members of such organizations upon the streets, in office or
business buildings, by house to house canvass or in public places
for a charitable, religious, patriotic, philanthropic or
otherwise non-profit purpose shall be exempt from Section ;6 of
this Ordinance, provided a sworn application in writing on a form
furnished by the City is filed which shall include the following
information:
I
/
-1) Name and purpose of the cause for which the license is
sought.
2) Names and addresses of the officers and/or directors of the
organization.
3) The period during which the solicitation is to be carried on.
\
)
4) Whether or not any commission, fee, wages or emoluments are
to be expended in connection with such solicitation.
Upon the foregoing being satisfied, such organization,
association or corporation shall furnish all its members, agents
or representatives conducting the solicitation credentials in
writing stating the name of the organization, name of the agent,
and the purpose of the solicitation. Such credentials shall be
kept on the person of the members, agents or representatives
during the actual solicitation and be presented to anyone
requesting to see same.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day
of October, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
James E. Elling, Mayor
Victoria Volk, City Clerk
)
/
\
,-.J
CITY OF ANDOVER
ZONING ISSUE FOLLOW-UP
Date:
9 October 1990
In Re:
Ordinance No. 79 Amendment
"Temporary Retail Food Establishments"
I called Anoka County Health & Environmental Services today in
regard to license requirements for the operation of a "coke
wagon" .
I was informed that a license is required ...
There is an application and information sheet. The application
requires such things as when, where, hours or operation, method
by which food is kept either hot or cold, what is being served,
etc.
The license application process takes about three (3) days and a
new license is required for each event.
There are fees applicable also:
Non-profit organization
Other organizations:
$ 11. 00
46.00 (1-3 days)
51.00 (4-5 days)
90.00 (6-14 days)
d'Arcy Bosell
Zoning Administrator
-J
'. _-"'--"~""__'F'" .-~~_ ...""'....:..''"'0". _,' ~.-..,......._.,.._...O' .-....~-._....._.~..,.~__.... .....~.-___._.w___. '."".
;;
. .
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
September 25~ 1990
Page -5-
~J
ORDINANCE NO. 79 DISCUSSION CONTINUED--TRANSIENT MERCHANT'S
LICENSE AND ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 7.03
4Z
:j
This item was continued from the September 11, 1990 meeting.
.: ~.
Bosell reviewed the draft of the proposed amendments. She
reviewed a copy of the Special Use Permit that was granted
to the Downtown Center.
The Commission and Staff reviewed the intent of the Ordinance
as it might apply to various situations. The Commission suggested
that in lieu of a Public Hearing, which is not required, that-
Staff send a letter to the merchants in the City advising
them that the change in the Ordinance will make it easier
for them to have a one or two day event as covered under the
-Ordinance.
MOTION by Vistad and seconded by Coleman that the Andover
Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the
Ordinance No. 79 with the changes of Section 2, subsection
(1) and (2), Section 3, subsection (1) thru (7), and the
renumbering of the other Sections.
Motion carried unanimously.
I
1:- . ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 4.06 DISCUSSION CONTINUED--PERMITTED
ENCROACHMENTS
This item was continued from the September 11, 1990 meeting.
Bosell stated it was difficult to research the issue of encroachments
in other cities since they are called different things, are
not consistent, and often times just do not exist.
In reviewing the draft, it takes into consideration that
the window wells in ramblers are 36", which is greater than
the 30" now used.
It was decided to pull fencing, hedgesand walls from 4.06
and move it to 4.21. .
Staff will set this item up tor a Public Hearing.
.;
OTHER BUSINESS
Staff will set a Public Hearing for the same date as the
agenda item previously for the purpose of changing Section 7.04
. . -- as it pertains to _the .removal of political signs. This needs.
to be changed from seven days to ten days to be in compliance
witn State law.
:)
., ,,",,;t-.c..,,--,,-, 'r-.""'. .~..,. '.-"" _".' '~"_'.
."" ~'",,,,-,. ..,..... : .. ,;--.
.... ;","_ .-,.~ C"-.. _-;''''_'-''._' ~..-.. '. ~ ....~, ._"....: .~-:... ,<.. ..
",,- '.-0 ... .., ~_.
,...
.',;-~'"
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
,J
:'<
AGENDA ITEM
5. Ordinance No. 79 Discus-
sion continued ... Transient
Merchant Ordinance
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
25 September 1990
Planning/Zoning
~~
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA
BY: d'Arcy Bosell
BY:
The Planning & Zoning Commission continued this matter from the
September 11, 1990, meeting due to the lateness of the hour.
Please bring with you your previous packet materials in this
regard, including the definition of a "temporary retail food
establishment" which I provided for discussion purposes.
The Commission did ask about the Special Use Permit (SUP) which
was granted to the Downtown Center and attached hereto are copies
of the Resolution adopted by the City Council, the minutes which
reflect their discussion and the Planning & Zoning Commission
packet materials and minutes.
As I pointed out during our brief discussion, the City has not
had complaints in regard to the outdoor sales which have
occurred to date. Mr. Peek's point is well taken, however, that
such items as car sales and flea markets may not be included as
they are not permitted uses within that district per se. Are
they included under the broader title "retail trade and
services", however?
The minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission (September 27,
1988) reflect several questions and on page three thereof it is
clarified by Sandra Peterson, the Center manager, that "any
outside groups coming in, other than the tenants of the mall,
need to obtain a special [use] permit". The minutes also briefly
refer to a kiddie carnival and it was determined that a permit
was not required for that activity. In discussions regarding the
City Celebration hosted by Downtown Center each summer, it was
agreed that a carnival could be included as a part of that
celebration. I will be writing a letter to the mall management
reminding them that any outdoor sale or display must be conducted
by a tenant and that any other request would need to be referred <
to the City to obtain a SUP.
Just to remind you, the City Council is asking if there is a
conflict between Ordinance No. 79 (Transient Merchant's
Ordinance) and Ordinance No.8 (Zoning Ordinance), Section 7.03,
Special Uses. I have proposed that Ordinance No. 79 be amended
and that Ordinance No. 8 stay as written. I do not have any
additional recommendations at this time and will respond to your
direction.
.
:.J
~_..~..;.,. -'-- -.- .,.. -". ,- ....~_.-.. .-..__._-~. -, ....
',' '.'-~ .-,'!, .'" ".-.-.. ...... .........-.. ",' ..._......"~-:c'"..--,,,_~._......._,, -..,.~.....,."--,.._.,,-..._...o "__c, _~_,..__ .
, '\
,...J
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 18. 1988
MINUTES
The Regulat"
to ot"det" by
the Andovet"
Minnesota.
BI-Monthly Meeting of the Andovet" City Council was called
Mayot" Jet"t"y Windschitl on Octobet" 18, 1988, 8:01 p.m., at
City Hall, 1685 Ct"osstown Boulevaid NW, Andovet",
Councilmen pt"esent:
Councilman absent:
Also pt"esent:
Apel, Elling. Knight, Ot"ttel
None
City Attot"ney, William G. Hawkins; TKDA Engineet",
John Rodebet"g; Assistant City Engineet", Todd
Haas; City PJannet", Jay Blake: City
Administt"atot", James Scht"antz: and othet"s
RESIDENT FORUM
ALt Raudlo - stated the Planning Commission is looking fot" a
clat"ification of the1t"ezoning on Red Oaks 6th Addition, aSking if that
can be added to the Agenda. Council agt"eed.
AGENDA APPROVAL
The fol lowing additions to the Agenda wet"e suggested: Item 5g, Lund's
Evet"gt"een 5th Addition: 5h, Sidewalk and Signals at Ct"ooked Lake
School: 5i,Hawk Ridge Hockey Rink Expenditut"es: 5J, Red Oaks 6th
Addition.
MOTION by Ot"ttel, Seconded by Elling, appLoval of the Agenda as.
amended. Motion cat"t"ied unanimously.
ANDOVER LIMITED PARTNERS SPECIAL USE PERMIT
~
MOTION by Ot"ttel, Seconded by Elling, a Resolution appt"oving a
Special Use Pet"mit as t"equested by Andovet" Limited Pat"tnet"ship, Lots
1-3, Block 1, Andovet" Downtown Centet", as pt"epat"ed. <See Resolution
R254-88) Motion cat"t"ied unanimously.
NORTH LEXINGTON LANDSCAPING SIGN VARIANCE
:.)
MLs. Kuiken - stated they have taken down the sign, as they didn't
know i texceededthe ot"di nance t"equ i t"emen ts wheni t .was put up.- The
sfgn Is 64 squat"e feet. It is an open at"ea, and she Is t"equesting one
sign fOt" the 1 1/4 mile of het" ft"ontage pt"opet"ty. She felt that would
be pt"efet"able than haVing 24";'foot sIgns evet"y 40 act"es, whIch Is what
the ot"dInance allows.
.. . -.
._....-..~~.......... ~.....--~._----.......-..
" ..~_. ....._ ..-._.'-.:, .. ,,;. ~.. .1
'.. ....'....
. .~. .-.....
. . .---- -....., '....
r-.
(
CITY OF ANDOVER
, '\
'-.J
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 18, 1988
~_:~:1
AGENDA SECTION
NQ Discussion Items
Sa.
ITEM Andover Limited partne s
NQ Special Use Permit
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Planning
Jay Blake, PlannrQ(
BY: L~
APPROVED FOR
::,E)
The Andover City Council is requested to review and approve the
Special Use Permit as requested by the Andover Limited Partnership
to allow outdoor displays, sales and storage during posted mall
operating hours on lots 1, 2 and 3 of the Andover Downtown Center.
The proposal is allowed by special use permit per Ordinance 8,
section 7.03.
-The Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposal and
has recommended approval with the following conditions:
1. Outdoor displays, sales and storage shall be conducted
during posted mall operating hours only.
2. the location of the sales are to be restricted to the
front locations of the mall parking lot, excluding the back
receiving and loading areas.
3. If the outdoor displays, sales and storage are kept
overnight and if the area is not well lit, reflective materialis
must be placed on the displays so as to help illustrate the
display areas for safety purposes.
4. The special use permit shall be subject to an annual
review by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City
Council.
Please review the enclosed Planning and Zoning Commission minutes.
.
'.
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
:_)
..." . " ... "~c. ~.. .,- ,'- .~. ,_. _.," - _.. - __ ;,"' _....
r'
-.
. '\
,--I
;"
;":
'..
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. R254-88
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AS REQUESTED BY
ANDOVER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 1, ANDOVER DOWNTOWN
CENTER, ALLOWING OUTDOOR DISPLAYS, SALES AND STORAGE DURING MALL
OPERATING HOURS~
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice, the
Planning and zoning Commission has reviewed the special use permit
request of the Andover Limited Partnership for outdoor displays,
sales and storage during mall operating hours; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has received
no negative comments during public discussion; and
I.
I
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has found that
the request will not be detrimental to the health, safety or
general welfare of the community.
WHEREAS, the City Council has. reviewed the request and
heard testimony from the general public.
>']
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Andover to hereby approve the special use permit requested
by the Andover Limited partnership, on lots 1, 2 and 3 of Block 1
of the Downtown Center, for outdoor displays, sales and storage
during mall operating hours, with the following Conditions:
1. Outdoor displays, sales and storage shall be conducted
during posted mall operating hours only.
2. The location of the sales are to be restricted to the
front locations of the mall parking lot, excluding the
back receiving and loading areas.
3. If the outdoor displays or sales are kept over <night
and if display areas are not well lit, that
reflective materials be placed on the displays so as
to help illustrate the displays for safety purposes.
<J
"'-"~'.;'"'" '~"."-.,,,,_.,_,. ;... -__., '___.__h...._.._ ',-' , _. ._ :' ..... ". , ~ . . .
-~-, . -- ' ,..., ."------ '.- ,~- .., -.-.'
---.. ~-_.. -~ ~.. ,". -- ._~. .
. . .. . -.. "0'-'_" ---.....".., .-.". ,.~ --,._ - ,.. F--' _~,. .'_.. ~'. _ "_...:.... _,_q __, ,__ _. __-.-_,_ "'_'" ,__ ..,'_.-...._.-...,.. ~'__' _. _ __. . '.
',r /.,.
.
'.
, "
" /
\,
J
4. The special use permit shall be subject to an annual
review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the
City Council.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 18th day
of October , 19~.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
~ ., ,
P- It. / p? .L~/
Jr r~~dsc~itl - Mayor
~w
Victoria Volk - City
Clerk
'. '.,,~,_."...~~,..,----_..'.'.'-.... ..- -,---_.,-~._'. ~' ~ --'..,-~., -'-'-','"
.-. -, ~ --" '-'-" ..-.... ',',.., . -.
r--
{ ~
(
~J
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
September 27, 1988
Page Two
Motion was made by Commissioner Vistad, seconded by
Commissioner Bosell to approve the September 13, 1988 minutes.
Two present votes - Don Jacobson, Becky Pease. All others voted
yes. Motion carried.
VARIANCE (HOFFMAN). CONTINUED
Todd Haas recommended that this item be tabled at the
request of the applicant.
There was some discussion by Chairman Perry who asked
Commissioner Bosell for how long this item could be tabled.
Commissioner Bosell stated the variance did not have a time
frame.
It was agreed by all of the commissioners to table this item
until further notice.
ANDOVER LIMITED PARTNER SPECIAL USE PERMIT DOWNTOWN CENTER. LOTS ~
1-3. BLOCK 1
Todd Haas stated that the applicant is requesting a Special
Use Permit to allow outdoor sales during operating hours as
required by Ordinance 8 (Zoning Ordinance), Section 7.03.
Sandra Peterson is requesting the special use permit for any
tenant in the mall who wanted to hold sales outside of their
stores.
Wayne Vistad asked if there would be tents for these outdoor
sales. Ms. Peterson stated there might be for sales such as
furniture. Mr. Vistad asked also what types of displays would
the mall have. Ms. Peterson stated there might be outdoor sales
for snowblowers and lawn mowers. Also he asked how many feet on
the sidewalk portion would the sale be held. Sandy Peterson
stated it would probably be about three feet out.
Mr. Vistad asked if the outdoor sales would be for the
clients of the center to display their merchandise or would they
be anticipating tables of craft sales. Ms. Peterson stated there
were no plans for craft sales outside. Mike Steinhauser, General
Manager of the Mall, stated that, except for city celebrations,
they do have churches come in for one weekend to display crafts.
Mike Steinhauser stated that the permit they are requesting would
be for special occasions such as city celebrations, and perhaps
1-2 other celebrations in the summer.
\
)
/'
_.,'':,-.;:..--,.-'--..!"r':_.'-..'._.-.~.... ...._..,...' "'. _....'...."..,'_. ',,">._',__...,
',.:,..----,."~~-.,.,..-',~...,':..-..-"..' .-..
,----,
(i
~
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
September 27, 1988 Meeting Minutes
Page Three
Commissioner Bosell made the following clarification stating
that it was the intent of the Downtown Center that the bulk of
the sales would be held in the interior of the mall, and the
crafts would be held in the interior of the mall also. Ms.
Peterson stated that any outside groups coming in, other than the
tenants of the mall, need to obtain a special permit.
Don Jacobson asked why the applicant needed outdoor sales.
Ms. Peterson stated the sales would be for special events that
would require a permit. The tenants are not pressing for outdoor
sales, but the mall wanted to encourage outside sales during the
special events. Mr. Jacobson wondered if it was only a couple
times during the year that they wanted the permit, why don't they
get a permit for those couple of times during the year. Ms.
Bosell stated that that the cost would be $160 for each permit.
Mr. Jacobson had a concern about sales being out on the blacktop,
where there are parking spaces. Ms. Peterson they had more
parking spaces than are required by law. He also had a concern
about the traffic and protecting the outside sales tents from
wild drivers. Ms. Bosell stated that the tents would be placed
out of the traffic flow. Mr. Jacobson also asked what the
"operating hours" would be. Mr. Steinhauser stated the sales
would be according to the mall operating hours. He also stated
the sales would only be held in the front of the mall.
Mr. Jacobson had another concern regarding the traffic
hazard that might occur if the mall had a kiddie carnival. Ms.
Bosell stated that carnivals are not regulated by permits.
Mr. Vistad stated that the one permit per year is a good
idea, as long as it is stated that outdoor sales and displays
would be restricted to the front areas of the shopping center and
the sales would take place during mall operating hours.
Mr. Jacobson also asked if outdoor sales items were brought
in for the night, or are they left outside all night. Ms.
Peterson stated that when the outside furniture sale was held,
the sale items were left outside overnight but there was someone
there to guard the items. Chairman Perry stated that it might be
wise to put in any recommendation made by the Planning Commission
a requirement that some type of reflective material be placed
around the outdoor sales area, to prevent any traffic/safety
problems. Mr. Vistad stated there would be enough lighting.
\
,...J
. '''-.''-'''-:~'''''~'.'''';''''':'- '-",'~ ~"'"~ri: -, ,.-,,~ .....!;.'T'" ',", .,-. .--~ ,-' ':__-" ~':'"' o'
'~-,:'-. ,." _,'7..' " _
'. ".- ..-- , .-......-:...-.----..-.. -_.._,----~--_., ,".' -'-'
r
'"
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
September 27. 1988 Meeting Minutes
Page Four
/ '\
V
Chairman Perry opened and closed the public meeting.
Ms. Bosell stated that this is one of the reasons why the
City of Andover staff should develop some type of system to bring
the special permit up for a review, Ms. Bosell asked if Chairman
Perry could bring this item up to to the City Council.
Motion was made by Commissioner Vistad, seconded by
Commissicner Bernard that the Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the Special
use Permit requested by Andover Limited Partners, 13735 Round
Lake Boulevard, for Lots 1, 2, 3, Bloc~ I, Addition, Downtown
Center to allow outside displays, sales or storage during mall
operating hours, The location of sales are to be within the
front locations of the parking lot, to exclude the back area of
the building, of the Downtown Center, A Special Use Permit is
required under Ordinance 8, Section 7.03 Shopping Centers,
stating outdoor sales and storage during operating hours. A
public hearing was held, and ~here was no opposition. The
proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community, This special use permit shall
also require, if outdoor displays or storage areas are to be kept
overnight and if the areas are not well lit, that the parties who
have those displays put reflective material to help illustrate
those displays at night for safe~y purposes. This special use
permit will be subject to annual review by the Planning
Commission and the City Council.
Mr, Jacobson again, in regard to the phrase "normal
operating mall hours,~ asked if the food store was part of the
mall. Ms, Peterson stated yes it is, Ms, Bosell stated that the
sign on the doors state the mall operating hours, Mr. Jacobson
was concerned as the food store was open for 24 hours. Hr.
Vistad stated the motion could be restated to read, "during
normal operating mall hours, with the exclusion of Festival
Foods," Chairman Perry stated that by stating operating mall
hours would be sufficient and would not include Festival's
operation. Ms. Sandy Peterson stated that the posted mall hours
refers to the interior mall tenants, Ms. Vistad stated that it
would be clarified if the wording mall interior operating hours
was used. He personally felt mall operating hours was
sufficient, as did Ms. Bosell,
Roll call:
reluctant yes.
All voted yes, with Hr. Jacobson voting a
Motion carried.
'\
'J
;-.
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
September 27, 1988 ~eeting Minutes
Page Five
'\
V
This item will be heard by the City Council on October 18th.
,'.~.
"
ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE/SNOWMOBILE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
Todd Haas stated the purpose of the amendment to the
existing ordinance was to enable a handicapped child to use an
ATV,
Mr. Vis~ad stated tha~ the main reason for passing the
ordinance was because of the destruc~ion they create. He did not
feel that because a person was handicapped that they should have
this right to destroy proper~y,
Ms. Bosell stepped down on ~n1S item and stated that the
request was brought to the Planning Commission on behalf of a 10-
year old boy l.ho has muscular dystrophy but ;,hat. ~J1ere 'Yould be
other handicapped people that could benefit from the change to
t.his ordinance. She stated from ~Iinnesota Statute 169, O-l,i;.
provides that in the case of a handicapped, ~ha~ an ATV or a golf
cart can be construed to be a wheelchair. This family has
purchased an ATV for their son because it would allow him to have
the mobility that he would have as a normal ten-year old able to
ride a bicycle. It is expected that his use would be less than a
year and he may be immobile within a year, and in a whe~ichair.
Ordinances from other communities such as St. Charles, Champlin,
Bloomington and Barnesville were reviewed by Ms, Bosell. ~s.
Bosell found that the four cities designated specific roadways
where the ATV's could be operated, the vehicles were not allowea
to operate except between sunrise and sunset and they were not
allowed to opera~e in inclement weather that would restrict their
visibili~y, The person using this vehicle has to meet the
criteria set out in Minnesota Statute 169.0~5, subdivision 2
which defines the handicapped person. ConSistently, ~he
communities are requesting a certificate of insurance as this
applies to the liability circums~ances. Also in three of the
four communities, if the section of the ordinance pertaining to
the handicapped person is violated, the permit can be revoked.
Mr. Vis tad stated that ATV's were dangerous on hard-
surfaced roads and that golf carts are not designed for hard-
surfaced roads. ~s, Bosell s~ated it was a four-wheeled ATV that
the lO-year old was planning to use. ~r. Vistad did not feel
that made a difference on a hard-surfaced road,
'\
'J
.~. '~." . " - ..'... -,-' ~"-. '-, . '.',.'
. ,.,-_..._-~ '--'.~~-'..',.,..,-.,_..- -..~._'._---- ,. ",'-"' -,-
"
v
-~
, ,
.,J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE Seotember 27. 1988
AGENDA ITEM
4 .
Andover Limited Partner
Special'Use Permit,
Downtown Center,
Lots 1-3 B1
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Planning
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA ~
BY:/
-r'S~
~ridd J. Haas
The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to review and
approve the request of a Special Use Permit by Andover Limited
partnership to allow the outdoor sales during operating hours as
required by Ordinance 8 (Zoning Ordinance) Section 7.03, Special
Uses in a Shopping Center District.
.. .,' ---..--,- ."-, .- -.'...-- '.
.. ..
_.~"'~ ....--.... -.._---.._.,,--'.-._~-'..,.. ..,~--' -~-' '.
.. ""'."_' .___ 'n, ."'~_"~''''~'."!,'_''':_''~'.':' ."
'" ,.,. -~-......--.,-." ~ '--, '----'__H_'-".. ' '," ~ - .-'-, ~ _..-..,.." :'...,._._,_...~__' '____.._. _"__~__' ., -,J
@
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BLVD. N.W.
ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304
SUP i
~_) SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FORM
Property Address 13735 Round Lake Boulevard, Andover, MN 55304
Legal Description of Property:
(Fill in whichever is appropriate)
Lots 1, 2, & 3 Block
ONE
Addi tion DOWNTOWN CENTER
Plat
Parcel
PIN
(If metes a~d bounds, attach the complete legal)
(JJu-J-door d/~,o/a.y y _ ~t7/~c
J;'tJurs, '/Cf1,4-ho/y c-f" S'f:L)..ps
Reason for Request Special (Conditional) Uses General Statement - -r,;; ,4/1, I,)
i ~rl7!t';1i
ftLr k.~;.. '7" I/)-I-
<,r- _'\'!nra'lf>~ rk..tr/'n
~ to +tJ k I (;ttf.. -~,
n re.o..-
e s,Ecr/CN
Section of Ordinance ~
,
7,03 Csc:::..) - SHOPPIW&,. ~NTlue.
Current Zoning Retail Shopping
(Retail Trade & Services)
**********************************************************************
Name of Applicant Andover Limited Partnership
Address
13735 Round Lake Boulevard. Andover. MN 55034
Home Phone -------- ~ Busine.ss Phone 612 - 421-4426
Signature ~~~f//'--,--WX;/d}~f ~~q.?pate 9-/:<-Yr?
**********************************************************************
Property Owner (Fee Owner)
(If different from above)
Same as above,
Address
,Home Phone
Business Phone
Signature
Date
**********************************************************************
Attach a scaled drawing of the property and .structures affected
showing: scale and north arrow; dimensions - of the property and
structures; front, side and rear yard building setbacks; adjacent
-st~eets; and location and use of existing structures within 100 feet..
)
The names and addresses of all property owners within 350 feet of
subject property must also be provided.
Application Fee: $150.00
the
Filing Fee: $10.00
Date Paid '/, /,,;;-t'i" Receipt i d g 7 U
,..___-..~_._.____'.~..,..,__,_,~.~..,.._'c-.,,...----"',____,"r_.~' <-'~_~_."...._' . ......_..___,_..___,. ,_ ~,. .._ _ __ _,_
."
'---,/
[]
--s [J
~ &
<:l
~
\J
-
S [J
~
Ql ~
..
'" [J
~
'"
-s
~
s []
~
r
[J.
... ~ 4
- . ~
h~
...
~ ~- 3-
~. ~ ~.: .
t2 '-- Q
~(\ ~-
.... .. .1
· " 30'
..... ~ ~ ~
'\
./
..~ ..s::
,j~ ,'{!
...~
~... "
..
r::(." r>
':\'~ ~' /
... ..
.. .
~ ,
~~ ...
~':<. ..
~,j ~
-"'i ..
J \..
UI....._1tW
'....D...Ie._..
......u" .....__
"
.
't~
~ s
~ '"
......, ...:0...
~ ~
... ~
~ I'\~
((....
......'"
-~ ~
~~
o
..
~
\" ~
,oJ .r
to ~
.., ,~
~J(l'"
,,/
I
,
/
~./
~ = r
-
- - c:::;
'-- __I
i - "'"'-0.. _! 1&'-"""1
~ --. -,
i ~ =t 1
,--
: -
- =
i =t -
..-
...
,...... 'w.
".
..'l!:'~;.'.'
~liiiiiijli;!;1
,..:.....
. 0
..---
o~..,. .1
~
.,
~
i.'
'.
-.-...--
---
'\
'rw
. -
,ltlll
~=
~
f
)..,""'8 O;.;,(J
"'.""""
"N~f-I "''''3
::~)..,...,-' ''1f'''l ~,......, !J4vM:;7
,-'"
0"';-
, ~h
y....~ ,,0
,0 ~,~
'/ q4h1
gL},. .
...
&1.,...1..111.., .s..
0-
-.-
=
:m: =
..
=
;p::
;;:::
........d..
.llltllullilllllt
=
_ St. "'thon, ~I
= \ '~:';~;~~~f"';\'
~ 1!MIII"., ;S:.J.....".t/
S '''teen '~"''''/)
S hIT!' '
.....--:
.-- "... ._...4 c-1' .... ,.
I'-J~~"tl .......~I : """"'Il EXHIBIT A-l ,
"j,(V<'I>t 0.8),,< SIT! PUJI
l)eu.bu 1. 1987
. ~ Ie ~".'J$/
1:>>' ='1
m"p""'1
- '",---,- _...-,-...._-,...~-
II
l
(
'\
'- )
: 1
'.
\
/
CITY of ANDOVER
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Andover Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a
public hearing at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, September 27, 1988 at the
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W.,' Andover, MN
at which time they will consider the request of Andover Limited
partnership for a Special Use Permit to conduct outdoor sales
at the property known as the Downtown Center (13735 Round Lake
Boulevard N. W. ).
All persons desiring to be heard will be given the opportunity
at the above time and location.
r~, {{;#
~.u~ 0
V~cton.a VA - City Clerk
,.' .' - '-'-_'~.""" ......,'.4_'...
-'
'\
./
.
! I! I
t.P
: I r I
-.,1-
i i i I i
I l~!:
. j] i=
i Ii' !
I~ ~ ~I!~
H ~ .I!J~
.~ .-:1-;0!
- . ": ! 11
, , Ii! !
..
.. .,1
i " !, i
! ! ~.;
., iJ ~
i J i= t!
i Ii I;
. I -J!!
~ }:'d
r il::
. i,pi
I .! -\
~!' ;
~ iiI i I
!
I :flq
- I,
~ Ii:'l
i I; i j I
I ii i~,
i f1: Il
; ! i, ,
ji I!Ii!
rl I-I';
H Iii it
1.-0'
i: I '
jjis~
_.J I
i ~. J I
. "I-!
~l !,
iF'!
rdg
iiiF
1,...1
!!:p,
.~: ,H
"lid!
'-1
'I j
. -
!
i
PI
Ii
II
,i
H
r,
i~
1:
~l
:,
Ii
1 : ~
< j'
j i i .
r i, 1 I
I p' .
: 1" ·
! I ~ I
. - I I
... i, i
I ~ I, ~
I~
~i
"
~I
!
I
I
.
, ;
II
I-
i!
I-
n
l'
-I
I-
.:
iJ.
nl!!
,," fj ~
~i ,~j
OJ I . I
I' i i
if ; : !~
!ji ~ i i
I!. I
'Ii if:_
~ ~ I JI '''']
. J. r 1 J
m! ~i n
I!J a P:i
-,' .. I! q
JlI !! !t I:
l~; j; it iI
"II .1 11 !1
; I I' ?-,
lif ~ Ii j:
;ir ~J :. :. i
'h ~ II i~ i
hi 11 ,; ,i e
II: .' - J I: ., i
~IIh,i!l-
In .!<ti
,<
J
;
1
II
!!
!'
rl
H
1
, .
ii'
I' J
i !
, l
I 1
I '
i
"
"
=l !
i -
I r
:. t
at 1.
I,
1-
J"
I;
~i
L
"
I'
:!
-I J!
. .1
t-
I i!
.
~
i
~ I
II
= I
a I
i!
,
'I
i
r
I
j
}
i
.
- i
!J
i. h
!I Ii
;. t,
~c ~I
sA ,:
~
,
~
~
~ ~
zo
~~
u~
~
z
~
8
Zci
~ ~
O~
~ 0(
to.
Z,o
~ g
o
Cl
!
,
'" I
I ...:
,---'-----_.!:-_---)
1 J.31Mlll
2
.c
I -
,
It ~
I
I
I
,;,
i~
"
1 II
, II
i I.
I ,I
: !I
i, :f
ij
, ,-
: !!
~ .~
i!~
~
"
"
...
'. I :
I!: --I,;
I~ I I ~
II "',!,:
I' I ~
h il: .. I ~
ie'l:b' J-
".1. -----,..
a~ll \ ." ~_.._: . ,-- .
~ <'I h_, U r .. .. -....... ___'n ,~----- h ...- -""
&.g ~ __~__.~.J__~~~I~--....:.'1~--~~~--~.L~;):..-~~~~U ])l.~ QNI'o)M
!~ --------, _ In
)
~ ~~,..~ -.,' "".'~.--,~ ,',' "
'-":'y..
":-,..' "'"'~','''',',' '-'
---~....':'_____....__.._::r_,_.
... '...-...~....."' .....,..--.-........,~..," ....-., ""--, ~
, ' .- -.........-. -......,.....--
,,'
" .
, "
, I
'--/
Regular PlannIng and ZonIng CommIssIon
MInutes - September 11, 1990
Page 10
ORDINNACE NO. 79 DISCUSSION - TRANSIENT MERCHANT'S LICENSE AND
ORDINANCE NO.8. SECTION 7.03
~
Due to the late hour, Ms. Bosell recommended contInuIng the Item to
the next meetIng. She also noted the proposed defInItIon of Temporary
Retail Food and EstablIshment whIch was presented to the Commissioners
thIs evening.
There was a short dIscussIon on a permIttIng process versus the
requIrement of a Special Use Permit, the advantages and dIsadvantages
of each. Ms. Bosell also revIewed the Intent of the SpecIal Use
PermIt Issued to the Downtown Center and the actIvItIes whIch are
conducted there because of that permIt. The CommIssIoners questioned
whether outdoor car sales are alllowed under that permIt or any other
actIvIty that takes up a third of the parkIng lot. Ms. Bosell agreed
to provIde copIes of that SUP for the CommIssIoners to revIew. It
was also noted, however, that there have been no complaInts about the
Downtown Center SUP; and any complaInts can be taken care of durIng
the annual revIew.
MOTION by Coleman. Seconded by Jonah, to table Items 5 and 6 to the
next meetIng. Motion carrIed unanimously.
Ms. Bosell Informed the Commissioners that the next meetIng Is
September 25, and a Comprehensive Plan Task Force meetIng will be held
on September 27.
MOTION by Coleman to adjourn. Chairperson Pease declared the
meeting adjourned at 11:35 p.m.
Respectfully submItted,
~:::~:.~~UL
RecordIng Secretary
'\
j
'1
, '\
o
'1
:~
'.-
r
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
II September 1990
AGENDA ITEM
5. Ordinance No. 79 Tran-
sient Merchant Discussio
continued ... Ord. No.8,
Section 7.03 Conflict ...
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA
MV\
~'1
BY:
Planning/Zoning
BY: d'Arcy Bosell
The Planning & Zoning Commission continued this matter from your
regular meeting on August 28, 1990, due to the lateness of the
hour. Please bring with you your packet materials for that
meeting so that we can review the same documents.
If you have any questions in the interim, please call me prior to
the meeting.
H' . ','_, - '. . ,_, "'__~.'.-_"~" ... ..... ' _, ' ..' ," ~.~ ,... ',.
I
o
In Re: Ordinance No. 79
...~
Temporary Retail Food Establishment - A retail food establishment
that operates at a fixed location for a temporary period of time
in connection with a fair, carnival, circus, public exhibition or
similar transitory gathering, including church suppers, picnics
or similar organizational meetings, mobile food establishments,
and agricultural markets.
Comment: Temporary retail food establishments are probably best
handled as conditional uses and accessory to the principal
permitted use; fair, carnival, etc. Some of the more troublesome
temporary retail food establishments are those in mobile van
units which park alongside main roads near recreation areas. The
permanent food establishments, or those inside the recreation
areas, resent the "intruders." If allowed in the Ordinance as a
conditional use, the temporary establishments could be required
to provide off-street parking, keeping of the right-of-way, and
maintain certain minimun sanitary facilities.
: )
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 28, 1990
o Page -4-
.
PUBLIC HEARING
At this time the Public Hearing portion of the meeting was
opened. There were no comments.
MOTION by Coleman and seconded by Ferris to close the Public
Hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Sowada stated there may be some funding available in the future
from the State for cities that have a good ordinance in place.
MOTION by Ferris and seconded by Coleman that the Planning .and
Zoning Commission pass on to the Andover City Council a request
for assistance in creating Ordinance No. 29 Diseased Trees, that
the Planning and Zoning Commission has been debating this
Ordinance for a number of months and have come to the conclusion
that the Ordinance itself is not the problem, but rather the
problem is the ability to enforce the Ordinance.
Specifically stated, the Planning and Zoning Commission is
requesting that the City Council set aside reasonable funds to be
used by the Tree Department to control the spread of disease
amongst the tree population within the City,
Furthermore, we consider it unreasonable to consider the control
of diseased trees to be a resident problem, when in fact it is a
city-wide problem, More specifically, the cost of removal in
many cases may exceed the land value of the property. including
house and property. It is not unusual for the removal of one
mature oak tree to be $500-$1,200 and for trenching one tree to
be $200. It is impossible to put that kind of cost on a
homeowner.
Therefore, we are asking the City Council for financial relief or
a financial statement as to what the City's position is in trying
to acquire a budget for the Tree Department which can be used to
control diseased trees. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Vis tad and seconded by Coleman that the Andover
Planning and Zoning Commission pass on to the City Council the
current draft of the proposed Amendment to Ordinance No. 29,
Motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
MOTTON -:by Coleman aiidseconded by~Yistad to continue . the
remainder of the Agenda to the next regular meeting of the
:.) Planning and Zoning Commission. - Motion carried unanimously,
.,: .,~ '-,'-'~' .,-.':,... ""', - - ,~~....,.., --<'" ,,. -..." " ','- -'--' ..". .'.;' " ",....., ~ ',.,
. . .' ~ "";-"','.',--'," _...,...~,~:;...-,.,~, ;"', '.' r .-. : ~',,,-~, ....'s.."" ...-.'....-'.c.-u,' c"'", _ -. ,"', ,', ...- -, .~_>,.,
(
- (
~-
CITY OF ANDOVER
CJ
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
28 Auqust 1990
AGENDA ITEM
6. Ordinance No. 79
Discussion - Transient
Merchant License
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
BY: d'Arcy Bosell
~j..\
'.I
~
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA
Planning/Zoning
BY:
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to consider whether
or not there is a conflict between Ordinance No. 79, the
Transient Merchant (Peddler's) Ordinance and Ordinance No.8,
Section 7.03 as it pertains to outdoor sales such as the Coke and
Hot Dog wagon that was operated at the Speedy Market during the
Andover City Celebration weekend.
The history of this situation is hearsay because I was in school
the week this request was made at City Hall but I will attempt to
convey the circumstances as accurately as possible.
Bob Schroeder, director of advertising for Speedy Market came to
City Hall to request a permit to operate a "pop and hot dog
stand" at the Speedy Market. He was advised by City Staff that a
Special Use Permit was required and that it was too late for the
date he had chosen. Jim Schrantz and Dave Almgren spoke to this
gentleman and suggested that he come before the City Council in
an attempt to receive some sort of waiver so that he could
proceed. The "stand" was arriving on wednesday and the brats,
hot dogs and buns were arriving on Thursday and it was too late
to cancel the promotion. On Tuesday, July 17, 1990, Mr.
Schroeder appeared before the City Council (see minutes
attached). While the City Council awaited the arrival of the
City Attorney, I was requested to research whether or not some
sort of waiver could be granted by the City Council because of
the time constraints. Attached is a copy of my conclusions.
Mr. Hawkins, the City Attorney, reiterated to the City Council
what Ordinance No. 8 said and agreed with my conclusions. And
then a light went off, and I reported to the City Council that
perhaps the request could be considered under the Transient
Merchant Ordinance. . I also advised the City Council that I would
be in school the following day and the City Staff would have to
work with Mr. Schroeder.
Mr. Schroeder contacted Vicki Volk, City Clerk, the following
day. She, in turn, contacted Bill Hawkins and they reviewed the
Transient Merchant Ordinance. Their conclusion was that if Coca
Cola applied for the Transient Merchant (Peddler's) License, the
use would be allowed for up to six (6) months. Accordingly, Ms.
Volk issued a Peddler's License and the "stand" operated over_the
weekend as planned. -- - _ . __ - . - . - .--
, '\
,,-j
Don Jacobson, City Councilman, stopped at the Speedy Market and
informed them that they were operating illegally. They advised
him that they had a License and proceeded for the weekend.
-",' .., - '-,'-'0-' --'''',-_',...,..'.,_,'~ _"-...'..'~r '.'__'.___'_~,,' ...
. " --- _n- '-'~ _ "'-, _ '...~ _, "_._'__'_'- ,~~,"'_ _ .,., ,_ ,__ >, ',.' ., . _ .'_ __"'_ ;,.,',' __. r~__.,., ~ .-,.T..-____ ,"'" ".....,.._.._ ">__~._"'."
\
)
Page Two
In Re: Ordinance No. 79 Discussion
28 August 1990
Mr. Jacobson then requested the matter be placed on the City
Council agenda for August 7, 1990 as a discussion item. (See
City Council minutes attached.) Given this brief history, the
matter of conflict between the Zoning Ordinance and the Transient
Merchant Ordinance has been referred to the Planning & Zoning
Commission for review and recommendation.
The property in question is zoned Neighborhood Business. Also
attached is a breakdown of Section 7 of Ordinance No. 8 which
lists the permitted, accessory and special uses for all business
and industrial districts.
Only in the General Business District and then only by SUP is
outdoor display and sales allowed, during operating hours only.
At the time Festival Foods had their "hot dog stand and coke
wagon", it was determined by Staff that to conduct such sales
required a Special Use Permit. That permit was granted to the
Downtown Center so that all tenants could utilize this
promotional tool.
Additionally, Bill's Superette was granted a Special Use Permit
to conduct their spring and fall "hot dog sale". In both
instances, the applicant was the property owner or building
management.
Ordinance No. 79 in Section 1 defines a transient merchant as
"any person whose business in the City is temporary or seasonal
and consists of selling and delivering merchandise within the
Ci ty, .and who in furtherance of such purpose uses or occupies any
structure, vehicle, or other place for the exhibition and sale of
such merchandise, either privately or at public auction ...ft
Section 2 of the Ordinance requires that a License be sought and
issued and the duration thereof is six (6) months. Section 3
states what uses would be excluded from the license requirements
and Section 4 deals with religious and charitable organizations.
Section 5 gives the application details, Section 6 deals with
prohibited practices, Section 7 establishes the fees, Section 8
outlines the penalties for not complying with the Ordinance and
Section 9 gives the effective date.
It was the interpretation of the City Clerk and City Attorney
that Coca Cola fell under the definition of a "transient
merchant" and thus the P~ddler's License was issued.
)
Does there appear to be a conflict? Should additional provisions
be included in the Ordinance (79) which provides that it is a
one-time license and that if it is anticipated to be an annual
-function or more frequeritly; that a SUP be granted? It was my
understanding that Bob Schroeder was going to follow-up this sale
with an application for a Special Use Permit similar to the other
,circumstances cited above. To date he has not made that
application.
.-:...., -~.,'-'----...-,' --.-" -'-"-.'~~--""~-;""'-'-'''--,--, ..-.-_........-,' .-, ...-..'.',-',.
'. . "---.__- '.--_ .-...,"_ ._'. m - ""'''~~o;,r____.".._ "....~'.... . .'_ ..".... ...,..,.__~._ _,"
--)
'----
Page Three
In Re: Ordinance No. 79 Discussion
28 August 1990
Councilman Orttel raised the following questions: The Ordinance
(No. 8) does not deal with outdoor sales in the Neighborhood
District, but rather "outdoor display only during operating
hours". It was the feeling of those involved in the discussion
that the "coke wagon" was a display and thus fell under the
provisions of Section 7.03 of Ordinance No.8. Mr. Orttel did
not agree. Mr. Orttel also felt that there should be some
provision within the Ordinance that would allow issuance of a
license for this type of sale administratively so that the
applicant did not have to incur a $160.00 fee and five (5) weeks'
of time waiting for approval for a one-time event.
Ordinance No.8, Section 3.02 - Definitions, outlines what uses
constitute "Retail Trade & Services". Therein is found food and
restaurant. It also says that retail trade and services-are
conducted in stores and shops. It does not include stands,
wagons, tents, trucks, etc. This is the reason why it was
determined that because Ordinance No. 8 was silent on such items
as those just listed, a Special Use Permit was required for hot
dog sales, furniture sales, greenhouses, etc.
As I see it, one of the issues is the "who". If Speedy Market
made the application, they would need a SUP as outdoor sales is
not a permitted or accessory use under Ordinance No. 8 and pay a
fee of $160.00 and wait five (5) weeks for approval. If Coca
Cola or someone else like that makes the application, they can
fall under Ordinance No. 79 and be issued a license for six (6)
months and pay a fee of $25.00. In either case, the "sale" can
be conducted. Under the License, the duration is six (6) months
but the Ordinance does not restrict re-application. Under the
SUP it is continuous, based on an annual review.
\
'---j
I ;jfV
r;.J ~ t
, \~~ ~t
Section 2. License Requi red: ~\ J vff 'C
1. A-license -shall be required for any transient-merchant, -~(.t;f
peddler, canvasser, or solicitor to operate in the City. IV~~~J'
2. The license period will be six (6) months, with the exception \~~
of temporary outdoor food and beverage promotions and sales. V \
The other issue is the "how". If it is a one-time event, or even
twice a year, does the applicant need to apply for a SUP and
require Planning & Zoning Commission review and City Council
approval? Or can "it" be issued by Staff, based on some specific
criteria? If the sale can be conducted on the site and stay
within the setbacks required for the property, not interfere with
traffic and not create hazards to both pedestrians and vehicles,
the hours of operation are spelled out, the duration is
temporary, and the intent is not to circumvent Ordinance No.8,
would recommend amending Ordinance No. 79 to so reflect those
ideas. Perhaps Section 2 of Ordinance No. 79 could be broken
down as follows:
, -: . ,''0 '_" ~',""',""',~'.~'""r... _..~ '~,"'~ -.-- _., ''".,_:.-....~.. _,_..~" .,_"-:- ,,''''_ _:___..' ~_." ,,,.~,
.--,..' ,- ,..-'-." "~,,...~'-.~ ',.....~':or.'7"...,'.--.,__:~..'.,r~_......__....___.._.....-~.-_,. '
Section 3.
Outdoor Food
"Ii? ~
1~/i .~~. ~^o. 1>
~~" l\ .~ -d ~ J ~, 1''^'', iJ
"f' .f';j XJ,~ \~ ~ J \J ~'-
f. $.. ~ ,~ViU J' ~ J 0 ~
& Beve'."e ",omotions & Sale., I K 'Ii ,\
~\~ r
. ~
o
'~
Page Four
In Re: Ordinance No. 79 Discussion
28 August 1990
1. An application for a license shall be applied for and
granted.
/j}/&W>~
2. The duration of the outdoor food and beverage promotion shall
be no longer than ten (10) days.
3. That a sketch be provided which details where said outdoor
food and beverage promotion shall be located on the property,
indicating lot boundary lines, building location, setbacks and
traffic patterns for both pedestrians and vehicles. Additional
information may be required if sufficient documentation is not
provided.
4. That a License from Anoka County be granted to conduct said
outdoor food and beverage promotion (Note: only if this is
required already by the County. ^ Not intended to be a. :'new"_ /
restriction.) ........ om'!: hdt/C.., dd1/)/tG ~ b; fad60? 7"c..c."
5. That said outdoor food and beverage promotion shall occur no
more frequently than twice in any calendar year.
6. That a new License be applied for and received for each event
subject to fees as set by City Council Resolution.
7. That the hours of operation be included as a part of the
License application.
Obviously, the other sections of the Ordinance would have to be
re-numbered ...
I would think we would need to come up with a definition for
"outdoor food and beverage promotions" to add to Section 1.
Perhaps you have some additional suggestions which would be
incorporated into the amendment, also. And further, should it
include other types of sales than food and beverages? Or ...
perhaps there is no conflict.
If we amend Ordinance No. 79, a public hearing is not required.
If we amend Ordinance No.8, we do need to hold a public hearing.
Prior to preparing an amendment, we need to determine our
direction.
~-
. -.- ~..,._~,.,...u",.~"".- .'"_..""'-...-:"....,.....~,~,....-__;_.-".,'... _-;- .....,,_______'"'~...' _ _".. ,..........', ,,_ ,"".' _... ._ ",,_ ',_' .. ___ _ ...,'~__ _, .,'..' _,__. .. _._.,......_.. ,'......~',... ..._~.._,~, ___....._,.. _. ''"__., _ ..,.., ','__' ,~_,.,., <_ -,,'=-, __'_
"
~
In Re: Ordinance No. 79
Temporary Retail Food Establishment - A retail food establishment
that operates at a fixed location for a temporary period of time
in connection with a fair, carnival, circus, public exhibition or
similar transitory gathering, including church suppers, picnics
or similar organizational meetings, mobile food establishments,
and agricultural markets.
Comment: Temporary retail food establishments are probably best
handled as conditional uses and accessory to the principal
permitted use; fair, carnival, etc. Some of the more troublesome
temporary retail food establishments are those in mobile van
units which park alongside main roads near recreation areas. The
permanent food establishments, or those inside the recreation
areas, resent the "intruders." If allowed in the Ordinance as a
conditional use, the temporary establishments could be required
to provide off-street parking, keeping of the right-of-way, and
maintain certain minimun sanitary facilities.
"
'J
~J
. CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W, . ANDOl,,'ER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 17, 1990
MINUTES
The Regular.BI-Monthly MeetIng of the Andover CIty Councrl was called
to order by Mayor JIm EllIng on July 17, 1990; 8:01 p.m., at the
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
CouncIlmembers present:
Councilmembers absent:
Also present:
Jacobson, KnIght, Orttel, Perry
None
CIty Attorney, WillIam G. HawkIns;TKDA
EngIneer, John Davidson; Planning and.Zoning
CommissIon ChaIrperson, Rebecca Pease; City
ZonIng AdminIstrator, d'Arcy Bosell; Finance
DIrector, Howard KoolIck; City Assistant
EngIneer, Todd Haas; CIty Administrator/
Engineer, James Schrantz; and others
"
RESIDENT FORUM
Bob Schroeder, Director of Advertislnq. SpeedY Market - would like
to have a promotion thIs weekend, July 21 and 22, to coIncIde wIth the
activItIes at the Cowntown Center. The intent would be to have the
coke wagon there and to sell hot dogs. He.stated he has already
talked to the county and is going through their review process.
Unfortunately he found out he needs a Special Use Permit from the
City, whIch would take four .to six weeks to get. It was recommended he
come before the Council to see if there Is any possibIlIty of
obtaInIng a temporary permit for this weekend. He would also lIke to
make an applicatIon for a Special Use PermIt so this can be done on an
on-goIng basis each year.
2f
Ms. Bosell explained the provIsIon of the ordinance which requires a
Special Use Permit. Because the Attorney was not yet present, Council
agreed to add the Item to the Agenda.
Bob DIllon, 4995 159th Avenue NW - handed out a copy of his response
to Mr. HawkIns' letter dated July 12, 1990, and to the Aldrich Report
done for the FIre Department. He asked for a clarificatIon of Mr.
Hawkins' letter. CouncIl felt the Attorney should address his letter
and agreed to add the item to the Agenda.
~j
John AdkIns. 1502 140th Avenue NW - inquired at the office about
the Noise Ordinance and found out it allows noIse seven days a week
between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. almost Indiscriminately. Hewas
particulaily annoyed with the noise of the saws and boIsterous yellIng
of-the contractors in the area on Saturday and Sunday mornIngs.
CouncIl noted that Ordinance 8 also addresses noIse and directed the
BuIldIng Inspector to talk wIth the contractors. If there is no
change, Mr. Adkins was asked to let the Council know.
@.o
" '
~
Regula. City Council Meeting
Minutes - July 17, 1990
Page 12
(
..~:
"
UNION AGREEMENT DISCUSSION
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, that we app.ove the Union
Cont.act as it was p.esented some time ago by M.. Sch.antz without the
stipulation .ega.ding the county youth p.og.am. Motion ca..ied on a
4-Yes, 1-No (Elling) vote.
~PPROVE TEMPORARY FULL-TIME PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEE
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by O.ttei, that we app.ove the hi.ing of
a non-pe.manent full-time employee as .equested by F.ank Stone.
Motion ca..ied unanimouslY.
SET 1991 BUDGET CALENDAR
MOTION by O.ttel, Seconded by Knight, that the Council accept the
p.oposed budget calenda~ fo~ the 1991 budget as'set out by the Finance
DI~ecto~. Motionca~~ied unanimouslY. CouncIl noted the scheduling
of a specIal meetIng on the p~oposed_budget on July 31.
SPEEDY MARKET REQUEST/PERMIT
(
2f
Atto~ney Hawkins advised the o~dinance does not allow fo. the
issuance of tempo~a~y pe~mits, ~evIewing the p.ocedu~e fo~ applying
fo~ Special Use Pe.mits. Ms. Bosell handed out copies of the
o~dinance and backg~ound info.mation ~ega~ding the pe~mits acqui~ed by
the 'Downtown Cente~ to cove~ outdoo~ saies sImilia~ to what SpeedY
Ma~ket is ~equesting.
councilmembe~ O~ttel felt the~e may be an e~~O~ in the inte~p~etation
of the o~dinance, as Section 7.03 of O.dinance 8 gene~ally ~efe~s to
mo~e pe~manent type outdoo~ displays having to do with the p~ima~y
-uses, not the tempo.a~y selling of hotdogs and pop outdoo.s. He felt
It was absu~d to have to go th~ough the Special Use Pe~mit p~ocess
just to sell hot dogs outdoo~s fo. two days, that the~e should be some
in-house pe~mittIng p~bcess fo~ that.
'\
'- ..J
Bob Sch~oede~ - stated they a~e willing to apply-fo~ a pe~mit to be
able to do thIs annually, but they would lIke something to be able to
sell outdoo~s this coming weekend.
-Du~ingfu~the~ discussion the Council ~eg~etfullY told M". Sch.oede~
_ the o~dinances do not allow fo~dtempo~a~y pe~mIts. Ms. Bosell stated
she has not had an oppo~tunIty to study it, but it may be possible to
i~sue a pe~mIt-unde~ the T~ansit Me~chant O~dinance, which regulates l
any pe~son doing business In the City on a tempo~ary basis as the Coke'
wagon is. No action-was taken.
~. to
-.(:, :
,;,.
:,)
Regular City CouncIl Meeting
MInutes - July 17, 1990
Page 13
<Speedy Market Request/Permit, Continued)
Council suggested the PlannIng Commission look at the ordinance and
recommend clarifying it, possibly having something other than a
Special Use Permit for hot -dog stands and temporary outdoor sales.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to so move. MotIon carried
unanimously.
BOB DILLON REQUEST
Attorney HawkIns explaIned that Robert's Rules of Order applIes to the
par limen tary procedures of the Fire Departmen t, and the other
documents and regulations govern its activities and outlInes the
authority of the Fire Chief. When the rights of the chairman of the
deliberatIve body as outlined In Robert's Rules of Order conflicts
wIth the authorIty of the FIre ChIef as outlined in the ConstItutIon
and BY-Laws, the ConstItutIon and and By-Laws supersede over the
general provIsIons of Robert's Rules of Order.
Mr. Hawkins stated there is a specIal provIsIon In the ordInance or
constItutIon of the FIre Department that gIves the authorIty of the
membershIp to desIgnate a commIttee for the purposes of takIng certaIn
actIon, and he felt the Department can gIve those commIttees the
authorIty to make polley. He dId not know If the membershIp dId
transfer that authorIty to the BuIldIng CommIttee, but there Is a
provIsIon for It.
Mr. DIllon stated that determInation an"swers most of hIs questIons.
He also noted his handout regardIng hIs reponse to the AldrIch Report
whIch he felt demands some publIc consideration. CouncIl agreed to
revIew hIs comments. No further actIon was taken.
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECS/19-12/BENT CREEK SIDEWALKS
, ,
, ,
MOTION by KnIght, Seconded by Jacobson, to so move. <See ResolutIon
R095-90 approvIng fInal plans and specIfIcations and ordering
advertIsement for bIds, Project 90-12, Bent Creek Estates sIdewalk)
MotIon carrIed unanImously.
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECS/90-13/CREEKRIDGE SIDEWALKS
,-)
Mr. Haas stated the CIty Is In the process of obtaIning a permIt from
the Corps of Engineers to fill in a portion of a flood fringe area ~nd
a-wetland area for a park. The resIdents had suggested a sIdewalk be
buIlt along South Coon Creek DrIve, and the Staff determIned It should
be placed on the south sIde of the road. Several people are opposed
to the locatIon and the sIdewalk Itself.
~.7
17 July 1990
2f/.
, )
,~
In Re:
13725 NW Crosstown Boulevard
Speedy Market
In 1977 a Special Use Permit was granted (3-01-77, R30-7) to
operate a service station. This was required because
commencement of construction had not begun within 24 months of
the issuance of the SUP.
In 1978 a Special Use Permit was granted to allow development of
one 1-acre parcel of this neighborhood district property (R68-8,
6-20-78). '
Also in 1978 there was a Special Use Permit grant~d to allow for
the bulk storage of gasoline and a service station (R69-8, 6-20-
78) .
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 8, Section 5.03 (A), paragraph #2, "Any
change involving structural alteration, enlargement,
intensification of use, or similar change not specifically
permitted in the SUP. shall:
1. Require an amended special use permit,and
2. All procedures shall apply as if a new permit were being
issued."
Section 5.03 (C) (2) provides "That the clerk shall refer the
application to the Planning Commission. Property owners and
occupants within 350' shall be notified at least 10 days prior to
the Planning Commission meeting, although failure to receive such
notification shall not invalidate the proceedings. Notification
shall be by mail. The petitioner shall be required to submit a
list of the property owner and occupants within 350' as part of
the petition."
Section 5.03 (e) (7) provides that "An amended SUP application
shall be administered in a manner similar to that required for a
new special use permit except that the fee shall be as set by
City Council Resolution. Amended SUP's shall include re-
applications for permits that have been denied, re9uests for
changes in conditions, and as otherwise described ~n this
Ordinance."
Subsection (9) provides that "When a SUP may be of general
interest to the community or more than the adjoining owners, the
Planning Commission may hold a public hearing and the SUP shall
be reviewed, with notice of said hearing published at least 10
days prior to the hearing."
Based on the provisions of Ordinance No.8, Section 5.03, I do
not see-any latitude granted to the City ~ouncil to go outside
the procedures setout therein. We simply do not have an
) "emergency clause" available to use to allow the City Council the
/ flexibility requested.
~8
~. '..- :-',,~ -r, ,."......:~,... ~''':-:-.'' ,-~~ '. ""., '. ,- ~~ ~"-''"__1. ", '-, ',- -,', ',~'-',',...,.. t" "-. -~. _' ,.... ,
......"1",:..'--,-.,' ,,~, ,....,:, '.....,_-,_ .,,'. ...,...'_...,'..' "'-",":'.
'~-.":,, --C:.'" , __ .-.~. ~'~,~' ........,., ~~_~", ',.-_-, : :' -.....-.;,,""'_:..;:.., o-c;r:;.;, ~,-;.
"
Ordinance No.8, Section
~.J
5.03 Special (Conditional) Uses General Statement
(A) Special Use Permits may be granted or denied in any
district by action of the City Council.
The Andover City Clerk shall maintain a record of all Special
Use Permits issued including information on the use,
location, conditions imposed by the City Council, time
limits, review dates, and such other information as may be
appropriate. A copy of the Special Use Permit shall also be
filed with the Building Inspector.
x;.
!
Any change involving structural alteration, enlargement,
intensification of use, or similar change not specifically
permitted by the Special Use Permit shall require an amended
Special Use Permit and all procedures shall apply as if a new
permit were being issued.
All uses existing at the time of adoption of this Ordinance
and automatically granted a Special Use Permit, shall be
considered as having a Special Use Permit which contains
conditions which permits the land use and structures as they
existed on said date and any enlargements, structural
alteration, or intensification of use shall require an
amended Special Use Permit as provided for above.
Certain uses, while generally not suitable in a particular
zoning district, may, under some circumstances be suitable.
When such circumstances exist, a Special Use Permit may be
granted. Conditions may be applied to issuance of the permit
and a periodic review of the permit may be required. The
permit shall be granted for that particular use and not for a
particular person or firm. The cancellation of a Special Use
Permit shall be considered administratively equivalent to a
rezoning and the same requirements and procedures shall
apply.
(B) Criteria For Granting Special Use Permits:
In granting a Special Use Permit, the City Council shall
consider the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission and:
the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety,
morals and general welfare of occupants of surrounding
lands,
existing and anticipated traffic conditions including
parking facilities on adjacent streets and land,
the effect on values of property and scenic views in the
surrounding area, and
the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive
Plan.
"J
If it shall determine by Resolution that the proposed use:
will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals,
or general welfare of the community
Page 42
~.q
; Ordinance No~ 8, Section
nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards,
.~
nor will seriously depreciate surrounding property
values, and
that said use is in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan,
the City Council may grant such permits.
(1) In-home beauty salons/barber shops shall be subject
to the following:
a. One (1) chair salon/barber only
b. The hours of operation shall be approved by the
Ci ty Council.
c. Parking requirements shall be as set out in
Ordinance No.8, Section 8.08.
d. The salon/shop must comply with the State
Cosmetology Board and the State Barbers Board
requirements.
e. In non-sewered areas, the septic system must be
in compliance with Ordinance No. 37, the On-Site
Septic System Ordinance. A beauty shop/barber shop
shall be considered the equivalent to one (1)
bedroom in terms of usage under Ordinance No. 37.
f. The Special Use Permit shall be subject to an
annual review.
g. The beauty shop/barber shop shall be owner
occupied.
h; Upon sale of the premises for which the Special
Use Permit is granted, such Permit shall terminate.
i. Drawings detailing the salon/shop shall be
submitted at the time of the request for the
Special Use Permit.
j. In non-sewered areas, a minimum of 39,000
square feet of lot size shall be required.
k. In non-sewered areas, the septic system shall
be inspected annually before the Special Use Permit
is reviewed. (8Q, 5-4-82)
(2) Retail Sho~Ping in Industrial Districts shall be
subject to the ollow1ng:
a. The Special Use Permit shall be subject to an
annual review.
,.J
b. Detailed drawings of the building to be used or
converted shall be submitted.
Page 43
6./0
Ordinance No.8, Section
c. The use that the Retail Shopping is to be put
shall be stated.
~
d. Parking requirements shall be as set out in
Ordinance No.8, Section 8.08.
e. A general inventory shall be provided along
with other items determined necessary by the City
Council. (8R, 7-6-82; 8YY, 11-03-88))
(C) Procedure:
(I) The person applying for a Special Use Permit shall
fill out and submit to the Clerk a "Request for Special
Use Permit form" together with a fee as set by City
Council resolution. An additional fee as set by Council
Resolution may be required for each meeting in excess of
two (2), which is necessary because of incomplete
information or changes in the petition.
(2) The Clerk shall refer the application to the
Planning Commission. Property owners and occupants
within three hundred fifty (350') feet of the property
in question shall be notified at least ten (10) days
prior to the Planning Commission meeting, although
failure of any property owners or occupants to receive
such notification shall not invalidate the proceedings.
Notification shall be by mail. The petitioner shall be
required to submit a list of the property owners and
occupants within three hundred fifty (350') feet as part
of the petition. (8A, 2-14-75; 8FFF, 12-06-88)
(3) The Planning Commission shall consider the petition
at its next regular meeting, but not earlier than seven
(7) days from date of submission to the Planning
Commission.
(4) The petitioner or his representative shall appear
before the Planning Commission in order to answer
questions concerning the proposed Special Use Permit.
(5) The report of the Planning Commission shall be
placed on the agenda of the City Council in the
following manner:
:-J
a. Recommendations from the Planning Commission
meeting held on the second Tuesday shall be placed
on the agenda of the City Council no later than
their first Tuesday meeting of the following month.
b. Recommendations from the Planning Commission
meeting held on the fourth Tuesday shall be placed
on the agenda of the City Council no later than
their third Tuesday meeting of the following month,
unless there are five (5) Tuesdays in the given_
month from which the recommendation of the Planning
Commission is made, in which case the
recommendation shall be placed on the agenda of the
,City Council no later than their first Tuesday
meeting of the following month. (8FFF, 12-06-88)
Page 44
&./1
Ordinance No. 8, S~ction
~
(6) The city Council must take action on the
application within sixty (60) days after receiving the
report of the Planning Commission. If it grants the
Special Use Permit, the city Council may impose
conditions (including time limits) it considers
necessary to protect the public health, safety and
welfare, and such conditions may include a time limit
for the use to exist or operate.
~':
(7) An Amended Special Use Permit application shall be
administered in a manner similar to that required for a
new special use permit except that the fee shall be as
set by City Council resolution. Amended Special Use
permits shall include re-applications for permits that
have been denied, requests for changes in conditions,
and as otherwise described in this Ordinance.
(8) No application for a Special Use Permit shall be
resubmitted for a period of one (1) year from the date
of said order of denial.
(9) When a Special Use Permit may be of general
interest to the Community or more than the adjoining
owners, the Planning Commission may hold a public
hearing and the Special Use Permit shall be reviewed
with notice of said hearing published at least ten (10)
days prior to the hearing.
(D) Special Use Permit Sunset Clause
If the City Council determines that no significant progress
has been made in the first twelve (12) months after the
approval of the Special Use Permit, the permit will be null
and void. (8LLL, 4-17-70)
:J
5.04 Variances and Appeals
Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in
any way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of
this Ordinance, an appeal may be made and a variance granted. The
hardships or difficulties must have to do with the characteristics
of the land and not the property owner.
The procedure for granting variances is as follows:
(A) A person desiring a variance shall fill out and submit
to the City Clerk a "Request for Variance form" together with
a fee as set by City Council resolution if the variance
request involves single-family residential. All other
requests shall have a fee as set by City Council resolution.
(B) The application shall be referred to the Planning
Commission which shall submit a report to be placed on the
agenda of the City Council in the following manner:
(1) Recommendations from the Planning Commission meeting
held on the second Tuesday shall be placed on the agenda
of the City Council no later than their first Tuesday
meeting of the following month.
Page 45
4./-='1
~
Regular CIty CouncIl MeetIng
'\ August 7, 1990 - MInutes
,_..J Page 9
(Accept ResignatIon/UtilIty BIlling Clerk, ContInued)
Mr. KoolIck recommended the CIty CouncIl hIre Charlene Wely as UtIlIty
BIllIng Clerk on a four-day a week basIs. Ms. Wely has been workIng
on a part-time basis; that posItIon would not be refilled.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Perry, that the Council authorIze the
promotIon of City employee Charlene Wely from permanent part-tIme
AccountIng Clerk to a four-day a week posItion as permanent UtilIty
BillIng Clerk wIth a probatIonary Increase to $8.75 per hour effectIve
1-1-91. MotIon carried unanImously.
ACCEPT RESIGNATION/RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that we accept tne
resIgnatIon from Helena Hoger effectIve August 24, 1990.
carrIed unanImously.
Motion
'-,
SPEEDY MARKET SPECIAL USE PERMIT DISCUSSION
zt
Councllmember Jacobson had understood the Attorney's opinIon was the
ordlnace dId not allow Speedy Market to sell coke and hotdogs outdoors
wIthout a SpecIal Use PermIt, yet they receIved a permIt from the CIty
Hall to do so. He recommended the P & Z look at the procedures and
requIrements of OrdInance 8 and the TransIent OrdInance. Attorney
HawkIns stated after reviewIng the Transient OrdInance, he felt the
permIt could be Issued to Coca Cola. At the meetIng, he dIdn't know
that Coca Cola would be the one doIng the outdoor sales.
Councilmember Jacobson noted the Transient OrdInance allows permIts
for up to sIx months. He had a problem wIth the requIrements of the
two ordInances, agaIn requestIng that they be looked at;
Councllmember Orttelfelt that such permIts for temporary outdoor
sales should be taken out of the SpecIal Use sectIon and be handled by
Staff .
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, that It be referred to the P
& Z to look at the two ordInances to have them make a recommendatIon.
MotIon carrIed unanImously.
APPROVE SPECS/RUBBISH CLEANUP/PUMKIN CITY
~-)
- Councilmember Orttel was concerned that the document states the City
of-Andover as the owner. The CIty Is the owner of the project, not
the property owner. Attorney HawkIns noted thIs Is the procedure
requIred under the NuIsance OrdInance. The owner had agreed to have
the property cleaned up by July 31; but It was not done. He saId the
wording of the specs can be changed so the CIty Is not lIsted as the
property owner.
/) ~
(3- i~
Section 7.01 - Permitted Uses
'- )
Business Districts
8
LB Limited Business
Urban agriculture
Medical and dental clinic
Business schools
General Offices
Mortuary or funeral home
Rest homes, nursing homes
Photo studio
Professional offices, clinics and hospitals
Churches
Radio-television studios
NB Neighborhood Business
Medical
Offices and studios
Retail shopping
Restaurant
gj
SC Shopping Center
All uses permitted in NB District
GB General Business District
Automobile agency
Research
Automobile service except service station (only by
Special Use)
Urban agriculture uses
Transportation terminal or motor freight terminal
Warehousing
Wholesale business
Medical
Offices
Manufacturing (limited)
Hotel, Motel .
Clubs, lodges, institutions
Mortuary and funeral homes
Farm equipment sales (outside operation by Special Use
only)
Veterinary clinic or hospital with no outside pens
A ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
)
8QQ Shopping Center
Add: Drop-in Child Care Center
8WW GB General Business District
Add:
&,/-1
. . --~'-','- ,-"-.q',,, --_.~' --,-, .'-'-: '--"~'--"---'-,'~-' -
'\
.;
Page Two
Section 7.01 - Permitted Uses
Business Districts
'~
Delete: A~~emeBi!e-a~eRey
Delete:
A~~emeB~!e-5efY~ee-e*ee~~-eefY~ee-e~a~~eR-teR!y
-By-S~ee~a!-gee
Add: Commercial recreation, not including massage
parlors
Day care centers
Delete:
-Fafm-eq~~~meR~-ea!e5-te~~e~ee-e~efa~~eR-BY-5~e
e~a!-l::l5e-eR!y+
Add: Financial institutions
Add: Hotels and Motels
Medical and dental clinics
Mini-storage
Mortuaries and funeral homes
New vehicle sales
Private clubs, lodges, ~Re~~~l::l~~eR5 and assembly
halls
Professional offices
Professional studios
Public owned and operated property
Rental businesses
Repair services
Research laboratories
Restaurants
Retail trade and services
Service stations
'\
'J
Theaters
&./s-
~j
Page Three
Section 7.01 - Permitted Uses
Business Districts
Delete: Transportation terminal
er-meter-€re~~At-term~fla~
greafl-a~r~e~~t~re-~ses
Add: Vehicle wash establishments
veterinary clinic or hospital with no outside pens
Add: Vocational trade, business and technical schools
Warehouses
Wholesale businesses
8ZZ LB Limited Business
Business schools
Churches
Add: Day care centers
Delete: 6eflera~-e€€~ees
Medical and dental clinics
Mortuaries and er funeral homes
Delete: PAete-st~a~e
Professional officesT-e~~fl~esT-Aes~~ta~s
Add: Professional rae~e-te~eY~S~efl studios
Rest homesT and nursing homes
Urban agricultural
NB Neighborhood Business
Add: Day care centers
Financial institutions
Medical and dental clinics
'\
./
Professional offices afle-5t~e~e5
Professional studios
(j,16
:J
Page Four
Section 7.01 - Permitted Uses
Business Districts
Restaurants
Retail 5Ae~~iA~ trade and services
, '\
V
&.17
',' ._.,'.-,...""..,._...-:....-..,.,,~ ~ . , :-. ,--,"'--'''- . -, ,.. --. "," # ...,...' .'~' ,.',"-'
. , '
Section 7.01 - Permitted Uses
~
8
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
LI Limited Industrial District
';
Urban and rural agriculture uses
Manufacturing (limited)
Medical
Offices
Research
Wholesale business
Warehousing
Public utility buildings and storage
veterinary clinic or hospital with no outside pens\
Miscellaneous industry
GI General Industry District
Urban and rural agriculture uses
Manufacturing (limited and general)
Medical
Offices
Research
Transportation terminal or motor freight terminal
Wholesale business
warehousing
Public utility buildings and storage
Veterinary clinic or hospital with no outside pens
Miscellaneous industry
8YY Delete: ~I ~~m~~ea Industrial District
Add: Building materials or lumber yard
Medical and dental clinics
Mini-storage
Delete: M~5ee~~aRee~5-~Ra~5~~Y
Add: Professional offices
Professional studios
Delete: p~e~~e-~~~~~~y-e~~~a~R~5-aRa-5~e~a~e
Add: Rental businesses
Repair services
Research laboratories
'\
'-)
Service stations
j. /!:
:)
Page Two
Section 7.01 - Permitted Uses
Industrial Districts
Transportation terminal or motor freight terminal
Delete: Y~BaR-aRe-~~~a~-a~~~e~~~~~a~-~eee
Add: Vehicle wash establishments
Warehouses
Wholesale businesses
Delete: 6~--6eR-~a~-~Re~e~~~a~-9~e~~~e~
Y~BaR-aRe-~~~a~-a~~~e~~~~~a~-~eee
MaR~iae~~~~R~-+~~m~~ee-aRe-~eRe~a~+
Mee~ea~
eii~ee
Reeea~eA
~~aRe~e~~a~~eR-~e~m~Ra~-e~~me~e~-i~e~~A~-~e~m~Ra~
WAe~eea~e-B~e~Reee
Wa~eAe~e~R~
p~B~~e-~~~~~~Y-B~~~e~R~e-aRe-e~e~a~e
Ve~e~~Ra~y-e~~R~e-e~-Aee~~~a~-W~~A-Re-e~~e~ee-~eRe
M~eee~~aRee~e-~Re~e~~y
~)
&./q
,j
~)
Section 7.02 - Permitted Accessory Uses
with the following districts, the listed uses shall be permitted
accessory uses:
8
In All Residential Districts
Keeping of domestic animals (3 or less except in R-1)
Open, off-street parking space (not more than 4 vehicles
per one and two family homes)
Gardening and other horticultural uses
Keeping of not more than two (2) boarders or roomers by
a resident family with no private cooking facilities
private garages
Home occupations meeting criteria
Recreation areas and swimming pools
In All Multiple Dwelling Districts
Swimming pools and recreation areas or structures
Garages and storage structures for trash or garbage
In All Business and Industrial Districts
Any incidental repair, processing, and storage necessary
to conduct a permitted principal use but not to exceed
thirty (30%) percent of the floor space of the
principal building.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
8BB In All Residential Districts
8MMM
Delete: Open, off-street parking space
fRet-me~e-taaR-4-veaie!es-pe~-eRe-aRe-twe-Eami!
y-aemes)
In All Residential Districts
Add: Home Occupations, not requiring the use of an
accessory structure and/or exterior storage.
:J
Ij. ,d10
~, --. ___~_." -','_~-T..~ .,........' ,~'_.-_ , ' ' ,..-. -,.- -,:-' ._ '-:..".. "~, ~-_ '. . :',.... ','~ ,_-, ,-. '.,';---_ .'..~.,_.,_r_~ ~"'-',' ,_ "_.'_'~' ..,..,..'--,-' -,--. ,_ _~ -, -"'
Section 7.03 - Special Uses
:-J
Business Districts
LB Limited Business
Multiple dwellingss with townhouses at an M-1 density
and others as an M-2 density
Two family dwellings
Clubs and lodges
Motel
NB Neighborhood Business
Service station after minimum 2,000 square feet of
retail floor space is constructed
Veterinary clinic or pet hospital with no outside pens
Outdoor display only during operating hours
SC Shopping Center
Service station after m1n1mum 25,000 square feet of
retail floor space is constructed
veterinary clinic or pet hospital with no outside pens
Outdoor display, sales or storage during operating hours
only
Liquor, dancing, tavern or live entertainment
Drive-in business
Car wash after a minimum 25,000 square feet of retail
floor space is constructed
GB General Business District
Drive-in businesses
ServIce station
Outdoor display, storage and sales
Used auto parts except when conducted with an auto
agency offering new and used cars and provided all
outside storage is completely screened from adjacent
streets and properties and in accordance with Section
8.03
Retail shopping
Auto reduction
Public utility structures
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
8D General Business District
Delete:
Used auto parts except when cconducted with an
auto agency offering new and used cars and
provided all outside storage is completely
screened from adjacent streets and properties
and in accordance with Section 8.03
~-J
Auto reduction
~..," . ~ ~~ ":' "'~""-:',--'-'~ ~ ,'_.-<'---";" ~......: -~'.-.,... ---'--~-, .~ - ,........-'.... .~.--,--,~. '. " '. ---,---"'-",~' ~-,,' --,. '-.--.... """" . - . ....,_. ",- -... _..,".' ~' ..-,--. --~,
d.c(
'---,-.~ '-.'---_.. ;~, ",' - - .-.,- -\-...~~"-,-.- .,..'-,-----'~_.. ._-----.
:J
Page Two
Section 7.03 - Special Uses
Business Districts
8L Limited Business District
Add: Liquor License
Shopping Center
Add: Liquor License
General Business District
Add: Liquor License
8WW GB General Business District
Add: Drive-in businesses or businesses with a drive-
thru window
Repair garage
Delete: Retail shopping
Service station
Add: Used vehicle sales
8ZZ LB Limited Business District
Delete: Multiple dwellings with townhouses at an M-1
density and others at an M-2 density
Two family dwellings
SC Shopping Center
Add: Drive-in businesses or businesses with a drive-
thur window
8JJJ
GB General Business District
Add: Advertising signs
)
(f.~
.-. ~--:,','." ',;" -'~':''''''''''--'_____-'_'_ '~" -""--;~ ._,' ....-_~F,_,_'_._'''.,"_ ~ .,.___, ,_~._ .""',
Section 7.03 - Special Uses
)
Industrial Districts
LI andGI Industrial Districts
8 Auto truck wash
Building materials or lumber yard
Service stations
Repair garages
Railroad storage or switching yards
Sale or storage of used auto parts in GI only
Motor freight terminal in GI only
Junk yard or auto reduction in GI only provided all
outside storage is completely screened from adjacent
streets and properties in accordance with Section 8.03
Refuse, trash or garbage disposal in GI only
Open storage
Public utility structures
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
8F LI and GI Districts
Delete: Sale or storage of used auto parts in GI only
8L LI and GI Districts
Add: Liquor License
80 LI and GI Districts
Delete: Junk yard or auto reduction in GI only provided
all outside storage is completely screened from
adjacent streets and properties in accordance
with Section 8.03
8R Limited Industrial
Add: Retail shopping
8Y General Industrial and Limited Industrial
Add: Sale and storage of new and used auto parts within
a building only
8YY Industrial 9~s~~~e~s
Delete: =~-aRe-GI Industrial Districts
Auto and truck wash
'\
)
- -/
Building materials or lumber yard
Motor freight terminal in GI only
G~eR Outdoor display, storage and sales
(j.~
>.. '-,-. -.--,,:" -'-...-\,.,....."-:';:=~'t'>..,-...',-.~~ -':..'.:-.,~~' ".','-... :"'_'~~, ,. :"-'. "..'__..
~-. ~', -"" ~-""'-"" r...,,~_,..,......--.' - ,_....",,-C"", ~,_'...,.......,..,.._-,' .~....'.,'_~._. ,.-..-..... _'__~___,__.__._ _~'"_"'_~'. .._.~._ ,~. _ ,_ '.
!
~
Page Two
Section 7.03 - Special Uses
Industrial Districts
\"1
Railroad storage or switching yards
Refuse, trash or garbage disposal in GI only
Retail 5Ae~~~R~ trade and services
Service stations
8JJJ
I Industrial Districts
8NNN
Add: Advertising signs
I Industrial Districts
Add: Adult Use Businesses as defined in Ordinance #92
and as amended.
,)
,:..~.,.",.. ~'~":~'~"1~"'-'-"~-J' "'-",~,-"'-""~ r,,'. "--~-'~"~-~:--: ~'1,_,-- ,..-- '"'"l.-;--: :-T-, .".c,~.' ". ~ ~....'.""'-;' '..,~,.:,~,.._'7", -,",'- ,_..".~~ _ .-"'_,--"," '". 7."' Y ~ ,__-- "__-"~,;"-'-'''-'''_'':'_: _,,_,
j. t5i<j
~'''.''-'''''".,."...~~*.....-.--,-:.-;,..---,...,.---.".,--.-:--._,.,<
:J
Section 7.03 - Special Uses
In All Districts
8
Sanitary land fill provided: it is constructed in
accordance with all County and state requirements;
surface and underground water is not being
contaminated; there is no burning; the refuse is
immediately covered with dirt; the area is screened and
at least five hundred (500') feet from any residence; a
reasonable time limit is established; the operation is
continuous; adequate bonding to insure the above is
posted; adequate access away from residences is
provided and any such provision as the City Council may
require to insure that the use will not cause a
nuisance or adversely affect the health, safety, or
general welfare of any person.
Blacktop or crushing plant for highway materials
Antennaes in excess of thirty-five (35') feet in height
Public utility structures or uses except when conducted
upon public right-of-way
Excavation, except when a building permit has been
issued
Commercial animal training
... ^ .... ^ .... ^
^ ^ .... ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ .... ^ ^ ^ .... ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ .... ^ ^ ^ ^
8BB In All Districts
Add:
ments meetin
m1n1mum stan
8JJJ
In All Districts
Add: Marquees of any type, with or without signs
benches (not in
s~gns, us stop
The use of search lights, banners and similar
devices
Area Identification signs in all projects of five
(5 a.) acres or more
:.J
&.~
, '..' .....' ,-.-,... - '-,'-, - ~'..,... '... ,....'.-:- . - -.,-~,,~_ -. - '.' ,--...~,.- , . ,- d ,_ ._w_~' '.",,-"~ '."-'''_
,)
Page Two
Section 7.03 - Special Uses
In All Districts
8zz Delete: Sanitary land fill provided: it is constructed
in accordance with all County and State
requirements; surface and underground water is
not being contaminated; there is no burning;
the refuse is immediately covered with dirt;
the area is screened and at least five hundred
(500') feet from any residence; a reasonable
time limiit is established; the operation is
continuous; adequate bonding to insure the
above is posted; adequate access away from
residences is provided and any such provision
as the City Council may require to ensure that
the use will not cause a nuisance or adversely
affect the health, safety or general welfare of
any person.
'i
;
:)
fJ,~~
, .~, ~ ~:':,: ..'-"~ '~f .....:'~.. ":., ,"'. '~'-~~' ~ . ".': ~-:-,.. -,---..~~ ~~'~'- ~ .-__" '~'_-', -'.
.".',~-.__',.,_..,~ ~,~'.-,-.. c ., .. " ~__,'~...__~
, , ,- ,
----..-...........-........--, ....----........
~J
Repair Service: Repair and/or servicing of such items as
mus1cal, scientific and medical instruments, photographic
equipment, jewelry, watches, clocks, small household
appliances, office machines, shoes and clothes, and similar
uses. (8WW, 10~6-87)
Research: Medical, chemical, electrical, metallurgical or
other scientific research conducted in accordance with the
provisions of this Ordinance.
Research Laboratory: An establishment or other facility for
carrying on 1nvestigation in the natural, physical or social
sciences, or engineering and development as an extension of
investigation with the objective of creating end products.
(8WW, 10-6-87) .
(
Resort: Any structure or group of structures containing more
than two (2) dwelling units or separate living quarters
designed or intended to serve as seasonal or temporary
dwelling on a rental or lease basis for profit, the primary
purpose being recreational in nature. Uses may include a
grocery for guests only, fish cleaning house, marine service,
boat landing and rental, recreational areas and equipment,
and similar uses normally associated with a resort operation.
Rest Home (Nursing Home): A private home for the care of
children or the aged or infirm or place of rest for those
suffering bodily disorders. Such a home does not contain
equipment for surgical care or for the treatment of disease
or injury, nor does it include maternity care or care for
mental illness or infirmities.
Retail Trade and Services: Stores and shops selling the ~
personal services or goods over a counter. These include:
antiques, art and school supplies, auto accessories,
bakeries, barber shop, beauty parlor, bicycles, books and
stationery, candy, cameras and photographical supplies,
carpets and rugs, catering establishments, china and
glassware, Christmas tree sales, clothes pressing, clothing
and costume rental, custom dressmaking, department stores and
junior department stores, drugs, dry goods, electrical and
household appliances, sales and repair, florist, food,
furniture, furrier shops, garden supplies (year-round
operation only), gifts, hardware, hats, hobby shops for
retail of items to be assembled or used away from the
premises, household appliances, hotels and apartment hotels,
interior decorating, jewelry, including repair, laboratories,
medical and dental research and testing, laundry and dry
cleaning pick-up, processing to be done elsewhere,
laundromat, leather goods and luggage, locksmith shops,
musical instruments, office supply equipment, optometrists,
paint and wallpaper, phonograph records, photography studios,
service station, restaurant, when no entertainment or dancing
is provided, shoes, sporting goods, tailoring, theater,
except open air drive-in, tobacco, toys, variety stores,
wearing apparel and similar type uses. (8WW, IO-6-87)
- '.~
-.J
Right of Way: The publicly owned
private property lines within the
pedestrian way, or thoroughfare.
area between adjacent
limits of a street,
(8F, 2-19-80)
Page 14
~-","",;" ...c:~" _...'r >:.."..~, :"""~-'--'~~'",.r''''''' -, '. ,-. ,-",' c' --, .....,~..,.. . . .-" C'.-~ '1':<-'---,~" .'.' ____,", _' -:.,......_ -.- ',n"._~
, -... -,~'.~. -- .'.'. .., '-' ~~-~..~,
,.:;
~)
?~,
\
:~)
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
l6 October 1990
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
~~~~~~OR
BY: J
AGENDA SECTION
NO,
Discussion
Planning/Zoning
(~
~
ITEM 3. P d 1 . . .
NO, a u a Slgn D1Scusslon
Lot 2, Blk. 4, Pine Hills
BY: d'Arcv Bosell
.
At the request of the City Council at their meeting on October 2,
1990, and in response to a letter sent to Mr. Frank padula in
regard to the sign located on Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills
Addition, this matter is before you for discussion.
At the direction of the City Council since 1985 when I was
appointed Zoning Administrator, the normal course of events in
regard to enforcement of an ordinance violation occurs when
complaint(s) are received in regard to a particular issue.
Since mid-summer of 1990, I have received at least three (3)
documented complaints from area residents about the area of
Hughes Industrial Park, and specific reference to occupants
therein. When making complaints, the residents include as a part
of Hughes Industrial Park the lots contained in the Westview
Industrial Park and the Liquor Store/Deli property, both of which
are technically not a part of Hughes Industrial Park but have
been mentioned specifically in regard to complaints received.
Based on complaints received, letters were sent to P & R
Propertys in regard to the illegal use of the reader board sign
located in front of J J's Bottle Boutique and to Stanley Knoll
c/o Frank padula in regard to the sign located on Lot 2, Block 4,
Pine Hills Addition. Subsequent to receiving my letter, Mr.
padula called City Hall and was not satisfied with my response
and thus sent a letter to the City of Andover via Mayor Elling.
Copies of those letters are attached for your information.
Also attached are the file materials and City Council minutes for
1982 which deal specifically with the sign on Lot 2, Block 4,
Pine Hills Addition, and the Resolution adopted by the City
Council.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
, "
~)
Page Two
In Re: Lot 2, alock 4, pine Hills Addition
Illegal Sign
16 October 1990
It is apparent to this writer what the intent of the action of
the city Council was at the time of the adoption of the
Resolution; i.e., that within (1) year, the sign would be removed
and relocated in an appropriate place. This has not been done
and is contrary to the action of the city Council. Further,
there have been complaints received about the sign. And further
still, does the sign advertise a business which no longer exists?
Mr. padula will argue long and hard that if he sells one (1) can
of Pepsi (as advertised on the sign), he is a bona fide business
and thus, that portion of the Ordinance does not apply.
Mr. padula has been notified of this City Council meeting by way
of receiving the same packet materials attached as well as a copy
of the agenda.
If you have any questions in the interim or need additional
information, please contact me. I am at City Hall on Tuesday,
Wednesday and Thursday from 8:00 to 4:30.
.)
:'~~
Regular City Council Meeting
MInutes - October 2, 1990
Page 19
- "
--j
.."
<Approve Specs/Fire Department Equipment, Continued)
8) 75-foot ladder truck. The firefIghters explaIned thIs type of
truck is becomIng the state of the art in fire fightIng to be able to
get to the roofs and chimneys. The 75-foot ladder is needed to reach
the houses from the street, notIng they tried the shorter ones but
could not reach the house roofs because of the City's setbacks.
"
MOTION by KnIght, Seconded by Jacobson, that we approve the
specIfications for the fire vehIcles as presented, subject to legal
counsel for legalIty. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Orttel, that we authorize the
advertisement of bids for the fire equipment as presented, contIngent
upon the Attorney's favorable opInIon. MotIon carrIed unanImously.
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, approve dIsbursements of
$169,053.44 IncludIng a check to Kaye and Wayne Olson in the amount of
$150.92. MotIon carrIed unanImously.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, dIsbursements on the other
lIst In the amount of $11,300.00. MotIon carrIed unanImously.
MISCELLANEOUS
CouncIl agreed that Mr. Schrantz will act as the CIty's representatIve
on the project to construct the fIre statIons.
Ms. Bosel I noted the sIgn on the corner of 161st and Round Lake ~
Boulevard advertISing the dell is no longer legal, gIving a brief
background of the item. CouncIl agreed to add the item to the next
Agenda, asking that the owner be present to discuss It.
-,
MOTION by Jacobson to adjourn. The meetIng .was declared adjourned
by the Mayor at 11:39 p.m.
Respectfully submItted,
~~.tl C) ~u.. ~~
. 'M~ella A. Peach
RecordIng Secretary
~)
~~)
September 22, 1990
"
.;
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW
Andover, Minnesota 55304
Attention: Mayor Jim Elling
Re: Letter of 14 September 1990
In response to your letter -- JJ'S Liquor and Deli are still in operation.
I had a conversaztion with d'Arcy Bosell Sept. 17 and she states we are no
longer in business. It is her contention we stop advertising by means of
a sign we have located at 3261-160th Lane NW. We are still in business at
3121-161st Avenue NW, Andover.
The sign is a Pepsi sign that also states information--"Deli"--, We still
cater weddings and other functions and use the space as storage, preparation,
and promotion. I don't believe because the door is not open to the general
public at all times, this means this is not a business. The "Space for
Rent" on the reader board sign has been removed. At no time was a sign
"Closed" placed on the door or in any other location. I have the right to
rent that portion of the building to any person interested in operating a
deli,
I will continue to operate this busisness in conjunction with the liquor
store catering weddings, private birthday parties and other functions which
request our rendered services. We sell the product advertised on the sign.
I have a sign permit issued by the City of Andover,
d'Arcy states there have been complaints, but will not forward to me any
names of persons either in writing or by telephone.
This is a notice of my intention to continue the operation of JJ's Liquor
and Deli.
/
Sincerely
, ~,/:7
"_.' -;"~
- ,-
--~.-~::-:.~,~ . / .
i -----
) Frank G. Padula
./
"
.~J
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N,W, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
, '~,
14 September 1990
Stanley Knoll
% Frank G. padula
4550 NW 173rd Avenue
Andover, MN 55304
In Re:
Ordinance Violation
3261 NW 160th Lane
PIN 17-32-24-41-0014
Gentlemen:
An inspection of your property reveals that the sign which is
located on this property is in violation of Ordinance No.8,
Section 8.07 in that it advertizes a business which no longer
exists. Specifically, Sub-Section A (5) states that all signs
now or hereafter existing which no longer advertise or identify a
bona fide business conducted, a service rendered or a product
sold, shall be taken down and removed by the owner, agent, or
other person having the beneficial use of the building or
structure upon which the sign may be found, within ten (10) days
after written notice from the City of Andover.
UPON RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE, you have ten (10) days within which
to remove said sign and sign standard from this property.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
d-.!.4 80JtLC
d' Arty Bosell
Zoning Administrator
"
'- )
, ,
'J
CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N,W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
14 September 1990
P & R Propertys partnership
3121 NW 161st Avenue
Andover, MN 55304
In Re:
Ordinance Violation
Gentlemen:
An inspection of your property reveals that you have again begun
to use the "reader board" sign at the front of your property to
advertise space available at the adjoining property (formerly
Downtown Deli). Back in 1986, this matter was discussed at
length and you had two (2) options:
1. Discontinue use of the sign or
2. Place the sign as required by the Ordinance and pay the
applicable fees.
At that time you advised that the sign could not be moved as it
was taken off the wheels. You also advised that you would not
use it and it has subsequently remained unused during most of
tha t time.
You are now, however, using the sign without a permit and its
location does not meet the Ordinance.
UPON RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE you must immediately discontinue use
of the sign or make application for a sign permit and locate the
sign pursuant to the Ordinance. Section 8.07 provides that any
sign shall be located at least ten (10') feet from the property
line. The right-of-way width of 161st Avenue is sixty (60') from
centerline to your property line. Therefore, the sign can be
located no closer than seventy (70') feet from the centerline of
161st Avenue.
I have enclosed a sign permit application for your convenience.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. I
expect resolution of this violation within seven (7) days from
the date of this letter.
Sincerely,
'\
..J
-- d;?~ p;.J ~
d'Arcy Bosell
Zoning Administrator
Enclosure
"
"
/~--
'-.-//
~~'~
,',
(-,
,~
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NO. R110-82
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE REQUEST OF FRANK PADULA TO INSTALL AN
ADVERTISING SIGN ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF ANDOVER
WHEREAS, the Planning Zoning Commission has reviewed
the request of Frank Padula for a variance from the provisions of
Ordinance No.8, Section 8.07, to install an advertising sign on
Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills Addition; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has
recommended a denial for reasons 1)there was no hardship due to
topography, and 2)there was some opposition; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is in agreement with those
reasons cited by the Planning and Zoning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges that the sign
was partially installed prior to application for the permit; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that the
applicant was notified in sufficient time that such a permit was
not allowed in a residential district; and
~iHEREAS, the applicant has advised the City Council that
he was not aware of the permit requirements prior to installation;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has noted that the permit was
not approved for issuance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Andover to hereby deny the request of Frank Padula to allow
an advertising sign in a residential district.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant shall be given ~
a period of one (1) year to relocate the sign in an allowable area. ~
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 7th
day of December
, 1982.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
~~~.-
Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor
Patricia
\
" ...J
. '\
'.~
-
.-
,~
Regular City Council Meeting
December 7, 1982 - Minutes
Page 11
SPECIAL USE PERMIT/DOWNTOWN DELI
: Council reviewed the Planning Commissioil~S recCilllll1endation to approve the amended Special
Use Permit requested by Frank Padula to allow the seating of 20 persons maximum and
five tables in the deli.
Frank Padula - acknowledged the deli does nothavEdishwashing facilities that would
-meet the requirements .of a restaurant, and the intention is to use disposal plates and
utinsels. Chairman Bosell noted there are no cooking facilities on the premises either.
MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution approving the Special
Use Permit amendment to allow for the placing of tables for eating purposes at the
Downtown Deli at 3131 161st Avenue Northwest as presented. (See Resolution R109-82)
Motion carried unanimously.
SIGN PERMIT/DOWNTOWN DELI ~
Chairman Bosell explained the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the sign permit
in a residential area as there are no provisions allowing for a variance to erect this
sign. She stated P & R ~roperties requested the sign permit, paid for it, and owned
the property at the time of the application. The application filled out by the City
states JJ's Bottle Boutique, but the draft and property owner were P & R Properties.
The ordinance does not allow such signs within 75 feet of a residential district.
Counci 1 discussion was the application for a sign permit was taken out on Apri 1 28, but
the City notified Mr. Padula on May 5 that the sign was not allowed in the district.
It was also brought out that many contractors who work in the City do not feel permits
are required for anything in the rural area of the City, and SignCrafters told Mr.
Padula that a sign permit was not needed. That is a problem which makes some of the
citizens victims.
Mr. Padula presented Chairman Bosell with a statement from SignCrafters stating the
work for the sign was ordered and completed on April 28, 1982. Chairman Bosell reported
in the process of installing the sign, Mr. Padula asked SignCrafters if they had
received a sign permit from the City. SignCrafters stated no permit was needed; so
that is when Mr. Reimann came to the City Hall to apply for the sign permit. The
Commission talked a little about allowing commercial signs in residential areas, but
reached no conclusion. It is proposed that the ordinances will be redrafted in the
coming months.
Attorney Hawkins stated while that section of the ordinance does not allow a variance,
he felt it has been the policy of the City in the past if something has been done in
error as a result of misinformation or mistake by City officials, that the City has
considered that a hardship not related to the land. He stated if the Council feels
that is the situation here, he believed that would be sufficient basis for a variance.
Chairman Bosell stated there were some residents at the first meeting of the Commission.
One person was opposed to the sign loation as he didn't like it and could see it from
his house. Another didn't like the sign but was also opposed to the deli and liquor
_ storein the neighborhood.
Mr. Padula - stated the sign is down now because it was being repaired, but the pole
1S st1l1 there. Councilman Lachinski felt that some period of time could be given to
u_ move the sign to another location. Councilman Peach stated there is a hardship of the
land as traffic coming from the south on Round Lake Boulevard do not know the establish-
ments are on County Road 20 because of the trees. And the nature of this business is to
have ,advertising. The purpose of the sign is to provide that visibility. Chairman
Bosell noted Mr. Padul a does not own the property south of County Road 20 that blocks
visibility of his establishment. Councilman Jacobson had a problem with the fact that
the permit and installation of the ~ign were done on the same day. The sign had to have
been ordered in advance, and he felt the permit should have been applied for in advance
as well to be sure it was allowed.
",,~-, ,.-...-,.., '.'..,,--,,"-'.,-'. -,,- ,,~_~,,_,_._'_'h_,_, _ .___._'''--...__._r
.. '\
'\ )
"
'../
Regular City Council Meeting
December 7, 1982 - Minutes
Page 12
(Sign Permit/Downtown Deli, Continued)
Mr. Padula - stated he was told no sign permit is needed in the rural area. And such
mlstakes are made and the City has given variances for these mistakes. They came in
with good intentions to get the sign permit. He applied for the permit as soon as
SignCrafters had told them they had not applied: for a permit.
Councilman Peach stated in driving down County Road 9 yesterday, he counted 33 signs
in the residential area, excluding the shopping center and the commercial property
off County Roads 9 and 20. He guessed only one or two had permits, and this is the
only one the City is now asking to have taken down. He suggested approving the sign
because of the error for six months pending revisions of the ordinance. Councilman
Jacobson felt if there are complaints about the other signs, it should be treated
exactly like this one. If changes are desired in the ordinances, they should be changed;
but until they are, they should be enforced and not varied from.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution denying the request
by Frank Padula to install an advertising sign on residential property in the City of
Andover on Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills Addition, as presented by City Staff.
AMENDMENT TO MOTHlN by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach,to allow a period of one year for
the removal of the sign due to an oversight on the City's part for issuing the sign
permit, that the one-year period should be adequate time to have the sign moved to a
different and proper location. (See Resolution R1l0-82)
VOTE ON AMENDMENT: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach; NO-Jacobson
Amendment carried.
VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach; NO-Jacobson
Motion carried.
AG PRESERVE ELIGIBILITY AND REZONING/J. EVELANO
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution establishing eligibility and
approvlng a rezoning to AgP as requested by Janett Eveland for that part of the
Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 28, Township 32, Range 24, in
the City of Andover as presented by the City Clerk. (See Resolution R1ll-82) Motion
carried unanimously.
Discussion was on the question of requiring Mrs. Eveland to pay $150 for the rezoning
since this parcel was included in her original request; but due to the provisions of
the ordinance at that time, the Commission and Council were not able to consider it.
The Clerk reported that portion of the tape where the Council discussed the question
of whether or not to charge.the filing fee for the rezoning within the MUSA area was
unclear and no definite decision had been made. Councilman Lachinski felt Mrs.
Eveland shouldn't get charged twice just because there was a period of time that the
City needed to approve the Capital Improvements Plan and the ordinance changed.
MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that the second J. Eveland request for rezoning,
the charges be refunded because the reason for the second rezoning request was due to
delays which were caused by the City. DISCUSSION: Councilman Jacobson stated when
Mrs. Eveland applied, this parcel was not permitted. He had no problem with the
rezoning; but this is a new parcel, a new publication date, it vias not allowed before
and now is, and there are extra costs incurred. Therefore, he felt the fee should
be paid. Mrs. Eveland is getting a benefit from the rezoning, and he felt the City
should not be incurring costs that benefit her. Councilman Peach felt the reason this
could not be considered at the time of the first request is because of the Council's
inabi1ity to make a decision. Acting Mayor Orttel stated the Council decided to base
its decision on the approval of the sanitary sewer plan and capital improvements plan,
but it could have allowed AgP in the MUSA area at any time. He questioned the immediate
gain of Mrs. Eveland by the rezoning, thinkj~g the savings would not recover the amount
of the filing fee for quite some time.
, ..; y
(---: r i
~ 01 AN DOVER
.~
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 1982
MINUTES
:..
7,'
The regularly scheduled Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting was called to order
by Chairperson d'Arcy Bose11 at 7:32 P.M., Tuesday, November 23, 1982 at the Andover City
Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners Present:
Commissioners Absent:
Also Present:
Anstett, Elling, Randklev, Spotts
Apel, Perry
Frank Padula; Janett Eveland; Jim Commers, Group W Cable; James
Glatt; and others
Approval of Minutes
October 26, 1982
MOTION by Anstett, seconded by Spotts to approve the minutes of October 26, 1982 as written.
Motion carried on a 5 yes, 1 present (Randklev) vote.
November 9, 1982
Page 2, Commissioner Spotts' comment stating that he went to the deli and ordered a chicken
and had to wait so he had a cup of coffee was hypothetical.
MOTION by Spotts, seconded by Randk1ev to approve the minutes of November 9, 1982 as
corrected.
Motion carried on a 5 yes, 1 present (Anstett) vote.
-~
, '
City of Andover Variance (Comm. #10-82-5)
Chairperson Bosell noted that at the last meeting, Mr. Padula was requested to obtain
documentation from SignCrafters as to when the sign was installed. She asked if he had
obtained that documentation.
.4
Frank Padula, 4550 - 173rd Avenue N.W. - stated that he spoke to SignCrafters and they
said the work order was dated April 28th.
Chairperson Bosell asked Mr: Padula if the sign on property owned by Westview Industrial
Park is temporary. Mr. Padula stated that it is. She then asked why he couldn't make
arrangements with the owners of Westview Industrial Park to put the sign in question on
their corner. Mr. Padula noted that their property is for sale and it would be a dis-
advantage to them to have that sign on their property. Mr. Padula noted that Mr. Zan10w
stated he would send him the time tickets from SignCrafters showing that the sign was
erected on April 28th.
:- )
Commissioner Anstett asked why this item came to the Planning Commission as a variance.
Chairperson Bosell noted that that was the direction the City Council gave us..
Commissioner Elling felt that it should have come in as a Special Use Permit.
Chairperson Bosell noted that Ordinance 8, Section 8.07 (p)(2) states that no advertising
sign can be located within 75 feet of a residential district. We would be varying from
that section.
o
~,
( ,
,
Planning and Zoning.Commissivol ~~eeting
November 23, 1982 - Minutes
Page 2
(City of Andover Variance, Cont.)
MOTION by Spotts, seconded by Elling that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend. to the City Council disapproval of a variance requested by the City of Andover
to erect a sign on property known as Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills Addition for the following
reasons: 1) According to Ordinance 8, Section 8.07 (E)(p)(2), no advertising sign shall
be located within 75 feet of a residential district. This particular parcel is zoned
residential; 2) There was no hardship created due to the topography and it does not conform
with Section 5.04 of the variance code of city ordinances which has to do with characteristic
of the land and not the property owner; 3) There was some noted opposition at the last
Planning Commission meeting; 4) The original sign permit application was accepted at the
city on the 28th of April and monies were received for payment of that permit. It was issuec
to P & R Properties and paid for on their draft.
(,
.'
, .
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to' the City Council on December 7, 1982.
NOTE: Chairperson Bose11 noted that in reviewing the ordinances under the sign section, it
does not allow advertising signs in a residential district. The variance section of Ordinanc
8 by its criteria, does not allow for the granting of a variance for the error made at City
Hall.
Janett Eveland Eligibility for Agricultural Preserve (Comm. #11-82-1)
Chairperson Bose11 noted that according to Ordinance 57A, this should have gone to the
City Council first, but as long as it's on the agenda we can deal with it.
Commissioner Anstett stated
number of buildings and the
was that the property is in
for Agricultural Preserve.
of the Urban Service Area.
that the property is the correct size, they have the correct
property is being used for farming. The one question previously
the Urban Service Area and those properties were not eligible
However, Ordinance 57A deletes the requirement of being outside
Chairperson Bose11 noted that according to the State Law governing Agricultural Preserve,
the property cannot be less than 20 acres and must be surrounded by eligible land on not
less than two sides.
Commissioner Anstett stated in that particular circumstance; this property was previously
applied for and because of the ordinance, it was not dealt with.
Chairperson Bose11 asked if this property is low land.
Donald Eveland, 14744 Crosstown Boulevard N.W. - noted that itis all low except for
one acre.
Commissioner Elling noted that the intent of the state law to have 20 acre parcels was to
get away from spot zoning. He felt that this property is contiguous.
MOTION by Elling, seconded by Anstett that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend to the City Council that eligibility be granted to Janett Eveland of 14722
Crosstown Boulevard N.W., for property consisting of 24.2 acres for the following reasons:
.1 ) The land would be contiguous with already approved property (120 acres) and that due
to the original Ordinance 57 this land was not allowed. With the amendment to Ordinance
:) 57, it now is available to become eligible; 2) It would be in keeping with the intent
. and general purpose of the State Law and the Comprehensive Plan.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on December 7, 1982.
.-.
,-J
':~
:)
Mr. Frank Padula
4550 l73rd Avenue NW
Andover, Mn. 55303
,/ /'
.r") ~.~Y-;- - .
tact., tu. Sr
VbU/,vI-<-<
StgltcraJiers Outdoor Display, Inc.
m5 MAIN STREET NE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55432
612-571-2995
November 23, 1982
Dear Mr. Padula,
Re: Invoice #886l & JJ's Liquor completion date
In reviewing our records, I found that the date of 4-27-82 as
listed as completion date on the invoice was incorrect. The date
the sign was installed was 4-28-82.
If we can be of further help, please call.
HM/kb
Sincerely,
~/h~
Helen Miller
Account Coordinator
:J
..;;:,
, "
,.J
CITY 01 ANDOVER
,
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO:
Mavor and Citv Council
COPIES TO:
Attorney; City Clerk
FROM: Planning and Zoning Commission
DATE: November 3D, 1982
REFERENCE: Recommendation - City of Andover Variance (Sign Permit)
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
November 23, 1982
MOTION by Spotts, seconded by Elling that the Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission recommend to the City Council disapproval of a variance requested
by the City of Andover to erect a sign on property known as Lot 2, Block 4,
Pine Hills Addition for the following reasons:
1) According to Ordinance 8, Section 8.07 (E) (p) (2), no
shall be located within 75 feet of a residential district.
parcel is zoned residential;
advertising sign
This particular
2) There was no hardship created due to the topography and it does not
conform with Section 5.04 of the variance code of city ordinances which
has to do with characteristics of the land and not the property owner;
3) There was some noted opposition at the last Planning Commission meeting;
4) The original sign permit application was accepted at the city on the 28th
of April and monies were received for payment of that permit, It was issued
to P & R Properties and paid for on their draft.
Motion carried unanimously.
Note: Chairperson Bosell noted that in reviewing the ordinances under the sign
section, it does not allow advertising signs in a residential district. The
variance section of Ordinance 8 by its criteria, does not allow for the granting
of a variance for the error made at City Hall.
L-!0
Vicki Volk, Commission Secretary
j;~~
,
r-
r-:,
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
November 9, 1982 - Minutes
Page S
- \ (Downtown Deli Special Use Permit, Cont.)
,..J
traffic congestion from the existing use; 5) It would not seriously depreciate the
surrounding property values.
~? Commissioner Spotts asked if it would be advantageous to add that it would allow consumption
of self-service food on the premises. That would eliminate the person called a waitress.
Commissioner Apel felt that would be redundant. What if Mr. Padula wants to bring some-
thing over to an elderly person seated at one of the tables. Commissioner Spotts concurred
with Commissioner Ape1.
Vote on motion: Yes - Apel, Elling, Randklev, Spotts, Bose11; No - Perry
Thi s will go to the City Council on December 7,- 1982.
Marius Bakker Variance (Comm. #10-82-4)
Marius Bakker, 16409 Crosstown Boulevard N.W. - stated that he would like to build two
buildings, one an agricultural building and the other one for general storage, on the land
he has available. The buildings would be in front of the front line of the house.
Commissioner Spotts asked whose pipeline runs across the property. Chairperson Bosell noted
that it is the Minnesota Pipleine. Mr. Spotts then asked who wide it is. Mr. Bakker stated
that it is 30 feet.
Chairperson Bosell asked Mr. Bakker if he planned to start any businesses in either of the
two buildings. He replied that he does not. He stated that his dream is to have a total
estate, that is why he is having the property graded and landscaped.
MOTION by Perry, seconded by Elling that the Andover Planning~d Zoning Commission recommend
to the City Council approval of a variance from the requirements of Ordinace 8, Sections
5.04 and 4.05 (F) requested by Marius Bakker, 16409 Crosstown Boulevard. Because of wet,
marshy conditions, a wildlife pont and pipeline, other areas of the property are not
appropriate for building.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on December 7, 1982.
Recess 9:10 - Reconvene 9:20
City of Andover Variance (Comm. #10-82-5)
A
Jerry Windschitl. 2312 South Coon Creek Drive- stated that the reason for this item appearing
on the agenda is because the City Councll has had it on their agenda several times. The
city did issue a sign permit in error. The Planning and Zoning Commission should review it
and make their objective recommendation as to what happened.
Chairperson Bosell asked how this item came to the City Council's attention. Mayor Windschit~
stated that when the Special Use Permit for JJ's Liquor was before the Council for its
annual review, there was an objection to the sign advertising liquor and it was on a parcel
~of1andit-should not be on. . .
r ) Chairperson Bosell asked the mayor who
',_ the person objecti ng was Bruce Perry.
as to what did or didn't take place on
the objection was from. Mr. Windschitl noted that
He then went on to say that the question then came up
this.
','
"
(-:,
('")
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
November 9, 1982 - Minutes
Page 6
(City of Andover Variance, Cont.)
" \
,~ Frank Padula - stated that because of the situation he would like Commissioner Perry to
remove herself because of a conflict of interest.
)'
-.
Commissioner Perry stated that the reason the question was asked by Mr. Perry was because
a letter had been sent to JJ's by the city stating that the sign was not property placed.
She further stated that she saw no problem with her stepping down during this discussion.
Commissioner Elling stated that there are two problems here - one, that Vicki issued a
sign permit and two, a man from Pepsi told him that the sign was put up on April 27, 1982 and
the permit was issued on April 28, 1982.
Mr. Padula felt that this information was incorrect. He stated that while Sign Crafters were
installing the sign, he asked them if they had gotten a permit and they said no, they never
get permits for signs in outlying areas. He and Mr. Reimann then went to City Hall to obtain
a permit. The permit was issued the same day as the sign was installed.
Commissioner Elling asked Mr. Padula if he had talked to the property owner on the other
corner about placing his sign there. Mr. Padula noted that he had talked to him; however,
he will not allow anyone to put a sign on his property.
Commissioner Spotts noted that this particular property is strictly residential and according
to the ordinance no sign can be within 75 feet of a residential district.
Mr. Padula noted that he had the sign removed because someone through a rock through it.
Chairperson Bosell stated that the City Council is looking to the Planning Commission
as to what direction to take on this.
Commissioner Elling noted that he is hard pressed to see the difference between this variance
and the one for Dean Carlson.
;1
Mike Pa110w, 16071 Narcissus Street N.W. - stated that the sign looks like hell. You drive
past it before you even see it. Stated that he can see it out of his back window.
Commissioner Elling felt that this should have come in as a special use because it has
nothing do to with a hardship.
Chairperson Bose11 stated that the City Attorney is the one who said it should be a variance.
Mr. Windschit1 stated that one of the key items is the question of the issuance of the permit,
Also, the permit was issued after the fact.
Chairperson Bose11 asked Mr. Padula if he had any documentation from Sign Crafters showing
when they installed the sign. Mr. Padula said he did not. He also mentioned that he had
many favorable comments regarding the sign. He told the City Attorney that he would take
. the sign down.
,Commissioner Apel toldMr, Padula that we treated him badly on some issues and better on
others. He asked Mr. Padula to just take the sign down..
:_JMr. Padu1~ st~ted he would not drop this because one person brought it up and he has to go
- through wlth It.
Chairperson Bosell stated that she would like to continue this item until the next meeting so
~'1
'f
~-J
~.
P~anning and Zoning Commiss;( :,~eeting
November 9, 1982 - Minutes
Page 7
(City of Andover Variance, Cont.)
that Mr. Padula could obtain documentation from Sign Crafters as to when the sign was
actually installed. She asked the secretary why the owner's name on the sign permit was
listed as JJ's Bottle Boutique rather than P & R Properties. The secretary could not recall
why it was listed as such.
(~
:..:
~)
Commissioner Spotts noted that the portion of the permit that Mr. Reimann signed states the
following: 'I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the
same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of
work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does
not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or
local law regulating construction or the performance of construction.'
Mrs. Padula noted that this was done on a building permit, not a sign permit.
This item will be continued to November 23, 1982.
Review of Neighborhood Business Zones (Comm. #6-81-1)
Commissioner Elling stated that there was some discussion about rezoning some of the
Neighborhood Business property that had never been developed. He noted that he received
the assessment rolls on these properties from City Hall. There are some differences in
the way these properties were assessed. Back in 1976 the NB lots were assessed the same as
the residential lots. In 1980 they were assessed the commercial rates. That will be
a determining factor as to what we can rezone.
Chairperson Bosell asked what the Conroy property was assessed at. Commissioner Elling
stated that he was assessed $16.10 per front foot for streets and 7.7~ for storm sewer.
The ones we should look at are Nemeth's, the old Hockey Inn, the lots north of the Speedy
Market and Conroy's property. Out of these, we have to consider people like Mr. Nemeth.
He has intentions of doing something on that property.
Chairperson Bosell stated that on Conroy's property, all the grading, filling, etc. that
has been done would have had to be done if he was going to develop it as residential.'
She asked what harm there would be in doing nothing.
Commissioner Elling felt there would be none; we could be opening a can of worms.
Single Family Homes W/Apartments
Commissioner Elling noted that at the last City Council meeting the amendment to the
ordinance passed on a 3/2 vote; however, for an ordinance change a 4/5 vote is required.
He noted that he suggested to the Council that the Planning Commission look at this item
again.
" Chairperson Bosell noted that the Minnesota Planning Agency is having some workshops and
one of the topics is accessory apartments. She suggested that we wait until after the
workshop to see if they have any new information.
Mr. Windschitl noted that if you have a requirement of the owner being part of the building,
. how do. you know when a property is sold under a contract that there is a new owner.
1 Commissioner Apel stated that is regulatory enforcement.
/ '
Mr. Windschitl stated that if you have annual review of a Special Use Permit you could have
the owner show proof that he lives there. The other major concern is that people will
,
,,'
.,J
"'"
~)
eae; 01 ANDOVER
REZONING
REQUEST FOR
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
(Circle One)
~I~
Name of Applicant
Citv of Andover
1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W.
Residence Address
Residence Phone #
755-5100
Business Phone # same
Date of Application
October 29, 1982
I hereby petition the City of Andover for the item circled above relating to the
following described premises/property:
Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills Addition
Fully describe reason for request:
Sign in residential area issued in error by City Staff.
List names and addresses of all property owners within 350 feet of the above described
property (necessary only on rezoning and special use applications). Please attach a
complete list.
Attach drawing of the above parcel, showing dimensions, roads, ditches and watercourses,
location of present and proposed buildings, and_other pertinent information.
Enclose appropriate application fee:
Rezoning..............................$150.00 Date Paid
Special Use Permit....................$150.00 Date Paid
Variance - Single family residence....$ 40.00 Date Paid
All other requests.........$ 65.00 Date Paid
Receipt #
Receipt #
Receipt #
Receipt #
Signature of Applicant
,- ~'
<J
,
,,"~
..
.
"
"
F "
)
r
r
Regu1artity Council Meeting
. October 19, 1982 - Minutes
Page 2
CABLE TELEVISION - HUB LOCATION
Gary Meyers, project coordinator for Group W, will be building the cable TV system
for the Quad Cities of Andover, Anoka, Ramsey and Champlin. The system design is
for one main building in Anoka to receive all satellite signals which will in turn be
transmitted by microwave to a site in Andover. At that site would be a lOO-foot tower
and a building of approximately 20x20 feet or 20x15 feet that would house the
electronics needed to receive the signals to distribute in Andover. He estimated
the site would be approximately 244x205 feet. He requested the Council's opinion of
housing such a hub somewhere on the City Hall site. If such a site would be
available, it could be on a 15-year lease with an option to renew another 15 years.
The one location he felt would be sufficient is just to the north of the Public Works
Building, and he pointed out the location on a City Hall site map.
Mr. Schrantz noted that the Public Works Department had intended to use that
particular area for outside storage. Discussion was on other possible locations along
the western edge of the property so as not to interfere with Public Works or park
improvement plans.
Mr. Meyers also explained their area would be fenced along the building and around the
tower and that it would be a three-legged tower with single base. They would like to
have the footings in before the ground freezes this winter. He also stated that the
City's tower used for radio communications could be attached right on their tower.
The Attorney felt that it would be legal for the City to rent the property as long
as it is for public purpose, which the cable television would be; but the land would
probably lose its tax-exempt status.
Council felt that Mr. Meyers and Mr. Schrantz should meet to work out an acceptable
location, as none of the Councilmen opposed the concept if something could be worked
out with Public Works and with the tax wituation. If something can be worked out,
Mr. Meyers could then apply for the special use permit for the tower.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the City Attorney to
meet with representatives of Group W to discuss and bring to the Council terms for a
lease for property on the City Hall site which would contain a television microwave
tower and a building to accommodate the conversion equipment, and lease should also
address taxes on the property which is leased. Motion carried unanimously.
z;f
SIGN PERMIT/~ PADULA
Attorney Hawkins stated the application indicates that JJ's Bottle Boutique was the
owner of the property; but in reviewing the records, he has found that the property
was owned by P & R Properties who was purchasing it by contract from Mr. Knoll.
Therefore, it is his opinion that the application is not accurate and that the City
is not obligated to honor the sign permit.
Frank Padula - stated that JJ's and P & R Properties are one in the same. JJ's is
a corporation and is one of the partners in P & R Properties. He explained when the
permit was applied for, they didn't do the printing or typing of J&J's Bottle Boutique
on the application. That was done by the City Staff, feeling they were responsible for
filling out the application correctly. The permit was given in April, and he felt it
was an error to tie the sign in with the special use permit for the 1iquorstore~
. Mr. Padula felt they did everything legitimately; and though he hasn't talked to his
legal counsel, he felt they were in the right to keep the sign up. The sign was taken
down two weeks ago not because of the motion but because it was vandalized. He does
. not want his money back but wants,..t.o put the sign back up. He also felt it was up to
the Counci 1 to find ou..t whether or not he had a permit for that sign before making the
motion. He felt a mistake was made, and now the City should live with it, feeling
.the City is being unreasonable with businesses.
,---
r
I,
Regular City Council Meeting
October 19, 1982 - Minutes
Page 3
,J (Sign Permit/F. Padula, Continued)
Attorney Hawkins stated the permit was issued in error, and the other alternative is
to allow the sign by variance. Mayor Windschitl noted the sign is down at this time
so the special use permit for the coming year is in effect. If the Council is
wanting to grant a variance for the placement of the sign on the same parcel, it must
go through the Planning and Zoning first, as 'the Council has no authority to make
that determination first.,
The Mayor also stated another question is a definition of a deli, as the special use
permit does not allow food to be consumed on the premises. He asked if that means
samples of cheeses and meats cannot be given at the deli, or pizzas, sandwiches, etc.,
warmed and eaten there. Councilman Peach stated if it gets too restrictive, there is
also a lot of trouble with the Tom Thumbs and other stores that serve coffee and rolls,
etc. It was his intent with the provision in the special use permit that it not be-
come a restaurant unless the City looked at it as a restaurant. He didn't mean the
provision applying to having a cup of coffee or tasting a piece of cheese in the deli.
Councilman Jacobson felt that he would be allowed to serve samples of food but not to
have tables and sandwiches eaten there.
Mr. Padula stated every deli in the area has seating. He asked the difference between
a deli and a restaurant. His intent was to have a store which serves sandwiches,
with the main portion being take-out. A deli would have limited seating.
Further discussion was postponed to allow the Attorney to research the difference
between a restaurant and a deli.
HOME OCCUPATIONS
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that the City Council agrees with the
conclusions of the Planning and Zoning Commission as to revision of the home occupations
section of Ordinance 8, and we wait until Ordinance 8 is rewritten to make the changes.
Motion carried unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. 57 AMENDMENT/AGRICULTURE PRESERVE
Discussion was to clarify Section 4, (a) Intent.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, an Ordinance No. 57A, an Ordinance amending
ur~nce'No. 57, known as the Agricultural Preservation Ordinance, whose intent is
to allow the ag preserve district in the Municipal Urban Service Area boundary on
properties which is determined by the City Council to be not feasible for residential,
commercial, or industrial purposes because of soils or other geological conditions
of the property; the rest of it as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
o
SIGN PERMIT/F. PADULA~CONTINUED ~
Attorney Hawkins explained what the ordinances allow as special uses in LI Districts,
and Mr. Padula's business falls within the definition of retail shopping. The Council
can set the criteria within the range of uses allowed to begin with. There is no
definition of restaurant in the ordinances.
Mr. Padula - stated he does not want a restaurant, as he feels that involves waitresses,
cook 1 ng on a stove , etc. He wants ade 1 icatessen like they haveatSoderqui st I s Super
-Value in Sodervi lle or Tom Thumb stores where people can sit ata table to drink
coffee, eat a roll, etc. He stated a deli has to have all the facilities a restaurant
has as far as plumbing, counter area, etc. He does not have a cook stove or commercial
diswashing facilities as all food is served on disposables. The County says they are
a grocery store, but they are no different than the de Ue:s in Anoka or Sodervi lIe.
He didn't want to have to spend more money for another special use permit to allow tables
and eating on the premises.
~~' 1 ~
0'-
r,
Regular City Council Meeting
October 19, 1982 - Minutes
Page 4
'\
'--./
~ !
':,\i
(Sign Permit/F. Padula, Continued)
Council felt that some definition should be provided so that each knows what can and
cannot be done. Council asked Mr. Padula to bring in a written proposal as to the
type of facilities available. It was felt a definition of a deli and restaurant is
needed in the City's ordinance. Attorney Hawkins stated. if the Council desires, the
special use permit can be amended to allow eating on the premises based on the sewer
capacity, the number of tables allowed, or serving capacity.
Council took no action on the deli question, recommending Mr. Padula present a
written request as to what he wants to do in the deli, the number of tables desired, etc.
MOTION by Jacobson that the City Council return the $15 fee collected from Lloyd
Reimann for a sign permit application on Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills; such return of
such check based upon legal counsel for the City in a letter dated October 12, 1982,
indicating that the applicant was not the owner of the property and the application
is therefore void. Motion dies for lack of a Second.
Attorney Hawkins stated normally an application issued in error is granted a variance
by the City, but in this instance the application was incorrect. The fact that it
was issued in error and that the application was incorrect can be used as a basis for
denial of the validity of the permit. Also the fact that the sign is down and the
application at this point in time is not prejudiced.
Mr. Padula stated the sign is down for repair. He differed with the Attorney, feeling
the application was not in error. Council discussion was on what course of action
to take on the sign.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that the matter of the Frank Padula sign
permit for J & J's Bottle Boutique and Deli be referred to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for consideration of a variance.
VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson
Motion carried.
Recess at 9:12; reconvene at 9:24 p.m.
"
)
SLUDGE DEPOSIT - LANDFILL - MODIFICATION OF CONTOURS
Ron Roth, owner of Waste Disposal Engineering Landfill in Andover, and Jerry Sunde,
their engineer, were present. Mr. Roth asked that he be allowed to store an
additional 50,000 tons of lime sludge material to be used to cover the landfill. They
have discussed this with Anoka County, who advocates this type of material as cover
on landfills. The material comes in a basically solid state from the 'waterworks
department of Minneapolis and possibly from other municipalities. When it has dried,
it is used as a terminal cover of the landfill. They are asking for an approximate
12-month arrangement. The Hanson Boulevard Extension, which runs past the landfill,
will allow the material to come up that route rather than through the residential
area. The sludge will be stored off the landfill site. The County requires City
approval before they approve it.
Mr. Sunde - stated as the material drys, it forms a crust on the surface because it
- has some cementing properties to it, and so there would be no problem with blowing
dust as the material drys. The Clerk noted they have received no complaints from the
Red Oaks area on this material.
Mr. Roth - also explained that if the sludge is trenched, it doesn't dry; so it is
placed about two-feet high and windrowed in, which is different from what they had
originally planned. Councilman Jacobson noted the special use permit would have to
be amended because it calls for trenching the material. Council asked that they present
. ,
,I
~\
,
,
("':
CITY 01 ANDOVER
M E M 0 RAN DUM
:- )
TO:
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
.
;:
;~
COPIES TO:
FROM:
ENGINEER, ATTORNEY, STAFF
CITY CLERK/A. ADMINISTRATOR
DATE:
OCTOBER 13, 1982
REFERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - OCTOBER 19, 1982
Special Presentation to County Commissioner Edward F. Fields
Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval
Item No. 4a - Northglen 3rd Addition/Preliminary Plat
Enclosed please find the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation
for approval of the replatting of Northglen II and amending the
Special Use Permit to allow such replatting. You will note the
majority of the lots now meet Ordinance 8 requirements. A resolution
will be prepared granting approval of the Preliminary Plat as well
as amending the Special Use Permit.
Item No. 4b - Cable Television - Hub Location
Jim Commers of Group W (Teleprompter) will be at the meeting with site
plans for the proposed hub. They estimate requiring approximately ~ acre.
The Council will have to determine the location of the property within
the Community Center site. I would assume they would only be looking
to a 15-year lease with option to renew.
Item No. 4c - Siqn Permit/F.Padula
.4
Attorney Hawkins has reviewed the permit and has determined that such.
permit was not in the name of the applicant, therefore, making it void.
A check in the amount of $15.00, as refund, is in the claims.
Item No. 4d - Home Occupations
The Planning and Zoning Commission was requested by the City Council
to. research the provisions' in Ordinance 8__covering home occupations .. .
As you can see from their recommendation, they do not feel a change
should be made at this time, but rather when Ordinance No. 8 is
revised.
J
~,'J
~.
,-)
"
,
__J
,1\
'\' \
\, .
l
LAW OFFICES OF
Eurke and ..Hawkins
JOHN M. BURKE
WILLIAM G. HAWKINS
SUITE 103
JEFFERSON CENTER
607 HIGHWAY 10 N,E.
BLAINE. MINNESOTA S5434
PHONE 16121764.2996
October 12, 1982
MEXTING~'!t
AGENDA. ITEM '''' I..
#: c..
~
Ms. Pat Lindquist
Andover City Hall
l685 Crosstown Boulevard
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
Dear Pat:
This letter is written in response to the City Council's request
that I examine the sign application and permit issued to JJ's
Bottle Boutique for the location of a sign on Lot 2, Block 4,
Pine Hill's Addition.
The sign permit application indicates that the owner of the
property is JJ's Bottle Boutique as of the date the application
is made on April 28, 1982. My check of the county land records
indicates that there are no recorded documents indicating that
JJ's Bottle Boutique had an ownership interest in this property
at the time the application was made. The owner of the property
at that time appears to have been Stanley W. Knoll and wife who
had sold this parcel to P & R Properties, Inc. by contract for
deed dated January 28, 1982.
Accordingly the application does not correctly identify the
owner of the property and I do not believe that any permit
issued on the basis of an incorrect application would be valid.
WGH:mk
,,'1
.
,
.
;0
d
'.' l
,:.
:~
r r
~ ~ ANDOVER
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 5, 1982
MINUTES
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by
Mayor Jerry Wlndschltl on Octooer 5, 1Y82, 8:02 p.m., at the Andover City Hall,
1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota.
Councilmen present: Jacobson, Peach
Counc ilmen absent: Lachinsk i, Ortte 1
Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, James
Schrantz; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others
RESIDENT FORUM
Doug Steele, 643 l40th Lane NW - with the condition of Prairie Road a~ the present
tlrr.e and Wl th 1 ts lmprovement north of the bridge, he was concer"ned with the safety.
He felt a definite traffic hazard exists, especlally with speeders driving across the
bridge late at night where it changes fr"om olacktop to dirt. He suggested to avoid
an accident there, the remaining portion, of Prairie Road should also be improved.
Mayor Windschitl stated the Road Committeee will be meeting later this fall planning
next year's State Aid projects, and that could be one of the items looked at.
Mr. Steele - was also upset about the garbage being dumped along the road. He picked
up over a pick-up full, and the people at the landfill allowed him to dump it free of
charge. He called the Sheriff on one occasion last summer giving a license number and
description of a truck and the man he saw dumping, but the Sheriff would not do anything
about it, suggesting he take a picture of the offender. Mr. Steele' asked what is
legally needed to prosecute those dumping in the middle of and along side the roadway:'.
Mr. Hawkins stated if the individual is known, can be recognized, and a license number
obtained, he could be charged with littering under the Statute. Normally the Deputy.
should make an investigation of that information given him. Mayor Windschitl stated
he will talk with the Sheriff's office about this matter.
Frank Padula, 4550 173rd Avenue NW - felt the decision made last week to close the ~
liquor store (JJ's) if an advertising sign was not removed was done in very poor taste.
He felt the property owners should have been notified and had an opportunity to discuss
this with the Council before that decision was made rather than taking the word of
one person. Pepsi Cola put the sign up at a cost of approximately $600 to $700, but
it has now been removed because it has been damaged. There was a letter to Lloyd
Reimann from Mr. Hawkins to remove that sign, but the sign was not on property owned
by J & J Liquors, but is on property he personally owns. He felt he should have been
the one to receive the letter. Mr. Padula also felt that the Council was fighting
business in the community rather than encouraging it. Because of the decisions made
by the Council about the deli, he cannot even let people test a slice of cheese in
the store. There are people from the industrial area that come in for sandwiches, but
they are not allowed to eat on the premises. He felt that was foolish. Council
discussion was that if it "was the intent to establish a restaurant in the deli, that
issue should be dealt with up front. Council also explained its action at the previous
-meeting with the choice of either renewing the special use permit contingent upon removal
of the illegally placed sign or to let the special use permit expire. Discussions
continued with Mr. Padula as to the ordinance requirement, Ordinance 8, Page 12, E,
No.2, P2.
Mr. Padula - stated that the City granted a permit for which they paid $15 to have the
slgn lnstalled at that location. The money has not been returned; and he felt that
means they still have a permit for that sign and it is not in violation. He also felt
there are many signs in the City that are in violation of that ordinance provision.
Attorney Hawkins stated there are many different classifications of signs. Councilman
Peach stated if the sign permit was issued in error, the money should be refunded. He
also felt the City's sign requirements were absurd and suggested revisions be made when
the ordinances are uP9ated in the coming months. Council agreed to put the item on the
Agenda and asked the Clerk to get the copy of the sign permit.
''"'
i'
/ "
'-../
.
"
\
,<
"
: .
~
:..)
r..
r
Regular City Council Meeting
October 5, 1982 - Minutes
Page 5
(Allocation/LGA Litigation, Continued)
Arnie Cox, Ramsey Councilman - explained Ramsey's position, noting they have been
gathering information for about three years, and he felt that what they are doing
will be very advantageous to the people of Andover. They feel it is important
. that adjoining communities join in this issue. They believe once the ball gets
rolling, they can stop the hundreds of thousands of dollars that are being lost from
cities in northern Anoka County to the rest of the cities. He felt that it is important
for our citizenery to get a fair return. But he also felt that the county should be
taking the initiative and the cities joining with the county.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, whereas the City of Andover is in agreement
wlth the actions of the City of Ramsey to change the State Aid formula to cities, that
the City of Andover does approve financial support to the City of Ramsey to initiate
a court suit pertaining to the State Aid formula to the cities, extent of such financial
commitment to be determined by the City of Andover later in 1982. Motion carried
unanimously. Mayor Windschitl volunteered to go with Mr. Schnelle when meeting
the other cities about this matter.
Recess at 9:21; reconvene at 9:38 p.m.
AUDITOR'S BILLING
Mayor Windschitl stated he will be meeting with the auditors and will have a report
for the October 19 meeting.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we take up the question of the billing from
the George M. Hanson Company for the auditor's billing to the next regularly scheduled
meeting in October. Motion carried unanimously.
PRAIRIE ROAD/ANDOVER BOULEVARD INTERSECTION
Mr. Schrantz reviewed his September 30, 1982, memo to upgrade the intersection from
a 7-ton to a 9-ton road. He stated there are MSA funds to do this.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we authorize the City Engineer to pave
and shoulder the north portion of Prairie Road from the intersection of Prairie Road
and Andover Boulevard northerly approximately 150 to 200 feet to increase the road
from a 7-ton to a 9-ton road at an estimated cost of $2,000, and authorize the City
Clerk and Mayor to sign such documents as may be necessary, such funds to come from
State Aid road funds. Motion carried unanimously.
JJ'S LIQUOR/SIGN ~
Mayor Windschitl explained the sign permit was taken out on 4-28-82 in the name of
Lloyd Reimann for Lot 2, Block 4, Pine Hills, resident owner JJ's Bottle Boutique.
Mr. Padula - explained the problem they had with changing ownership of that property
to the corporation, so it was finally deeded back to an independent person and then
to himself. He is now sole owner of that property. At the time of the application,
JJ's Bottle Boutique was buying the property. The liquor store is a corporation, and
Mr. Reimann is a member of that corporation with the authority to make application
'fo~.the sign permit: .
Mayor Windschitl stated the reason Mr. Reimann received the letters from the City is
obvious, and the City had no way of knowing that Mr. Padula was now sole owner of that
property. Councilman Jacobson felt the attorney should check into whether the applica-
tion was made out to the correct owner at the time; because if it was not, the applica-
tion was in error and would not be valid. But if a building permit is issued in error
and buildings are put up, the owner is not required to move the building, and he felt
that same principle should apply here.
~
i'
"J
. ~ -.
-.
'.
"
:J
,r-.
I
r',
Regular City Council Meeting
October 5, 1982 - Minutes
Page 6
(JJ's Liquor/Sign, Continued)
Mayor Windschitl suggested the attorney give an oplnlon as to whether the sign should
be removed and money for the sign permit refunded, or whether it was issued in error
and should be allowed to stand. Councilman Peach felt the sign ordinance, should be
looked at as that is the real cause of the problem.
Mr. Padula - stated at the time the sign permit was applied for, JJ's was going to
purchase that property. They were not the owners at that time.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Jacobson, that we ask the City Attorney to give us a
rullng on the request by J & J Bottle Boutique for a sign permit on Lot 2, Block 4,
of Pine Hills and to tell us whether or not the application was legally done and any
other legal ramifiactions from the permit application. Motion carried unanimously.
This item should be on the October 19 Agenda. '
HANDSON BOULEVARD/RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, approve a joint,powers agreement for right-of-
way acquisition and roadway construction for County State Aid Highway No. 78, known
as Hanson Boulevard as presented to the Council with the note on Page 3, Item 9,
Ci ty Manager of the City of And'over needs to be changed to appropri ate ti t le; and
authorize the City Clerk and Mayor to sign the document and enter into any other
documents necessary. Motion carried unanimously.
ORDER PUBLIC HEARING/PROJECT 82-7
Council asked the attorney to draft the appropriate document for non-development
agreement with Clyde Russell for his property along 165th. Discussion was on how to
prepare the assessment roll not knowing whether or not Mr. Russell will sign the
document prepared by the Attorney. It was felt it would be too confusing to indicate
the different numbers that would be used in the event Mr. Russell would not sign the
agreement. The unit cost on the assessment roll is $2,080 assuming Mr. Russell does
enter into a non-development agreement. If the lots on 165th belonging to Mr.
Russell are assessed, the cost drops to $1,790 per unit.
Council directed the Engineer to use the $2,080 figure for the residents within the
addition but not to put an amount on Mr. Russell's notice. The Engineer can verbally
explain the the situation with Mr. Russell. Then if the agreement is not entered into,
the unit cost for those within the Addition could be lowered and the lots along 165th
assessed at the assessment hearing.
Mr. Schrantz also briefly reviewed the assessment roll, especially as it relates to
those lots previously questioned as to whether or not they would be assessed.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, a Resolution accepting the assessment roll and
setting date for Assessmeng Hearing for the improvement of bituminous streets for
Project No. 82-7 as presented by the City Clerk. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, to reconsider the motion just passed on the
Russell/Stack Addition. Motion carried unanimously. _ . .
It was agreed to set the date of October 27, 1982, 7:30 p.m., for the hearing and to
-show the adoption of the Resolution by the City Council at a regular meeting the 5th
Day of October.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, to reinstate the same Resolution with those
changes just made. (See Resolution R88-82) Motion carried unanimously.
~.:~
~J
. ,
~)
r
Regular City Council Meeting
September 21, 1982 - Minutes
Page 3
(Forest Lake Contracting - Mining Permit, Continued)
MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution approving a Special
Use Permit for the purpose of mining as requested by Forest Lake Contracting, Inc., as
prepared; and an additional condition, note that the plat showing the finished elevations
as amended by the City Engineer on 9-21 be attached to the Special Use Permit and be
made a condition of the Special Use Permit; and Item 8 note any additional easements;
and subject to a one-year review (See Resolution R82-82) Motion carried on a 4-Yes,
1-Absent (Peach) vote.
WILLIAM RADEMACHER - AMENDED SPECIAL USE PERMIT/GAS PUMPS
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution approving an Amended Special
Use Permit for additional gasoline pumps and storage at Bill's Superette at 14041
Round Lake Boulevard as presented on Agenda Item 5c, on meeting 9-21-82. (See
Resolution R83-82) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, l-Absent (Peach) vote.
REVIEW SPECIAL USE PERMIT - J & J LIQUORS
Bruce Perry, 17337 Roanoke - stated the business has a sign on the opposite corner
from their place which is on a residential lot and is in violation of the ordinance.
The Clerk stated the owners of J & J's have been notified in writing that the sign is
in violation of the ordinance and must be removed.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we move the matter of the Special Use
Permlt for J & J Liquors to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council,
and have the City Clerk relay to the owners of J & J Liquors the illegal sign advertis-
ing the establishment on property owned by one of the owners of the liquor store, and
relay at the same time the contention of the City Attorney and ask them to appear at
the next meeting of the Council for resolution of the matter. DISCUSSION: The
Special Use Permit is good only until the First of October, and it was felt approving
the permit contingent upon removal of the sign would be the best procedure.
Councilmen Lachinski and Jacobson WITHDREW the Second and the Motion.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, approving the Special Use Permit for J & J ~
Llquor through October 1, 1983, contingent upon the removal of an illegal sign on
residential property in the vacinity of the J & J Liquor store.
VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Windschit1; ABSTAIN-Jacobson; ABSENT-Peach
Motion carried.
(Councilman Peach returned at this time, 8:18 p.m.)
REVIEW SPECIAL USE PERMIT - BONNEVILLE BEAUTY SHOP
A gentleman representing the beauty shop reported there has been no problems or
complaints with the shop from any of the surrounding neighbors.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council renew a Special Use Permit
for the Bonneville Beauty Shop for a period of 12 months. Motion carried unanimously.
SPECIAL ROAD PROJECTS
Council reviewed the September 17, 1982, memo from the City Engineer on the special
road projects suggested and to find funds for the surfacing of the parking lot around
the Public Services Building.
After discussion, the Council generally agreed to all the special road projects with
the exception of the shoulder work in the LakeRidge Addition. Mr. Schrantz stated
there are several options to repairing the shoulders. The Engineer was directed to
review the past events relative to the LakeRidge Addition to determine if the~ is
some liability on the part of the developer and/or the engineer or engineering firm
:4
I
.!
'\
,)
Ii
.,
,-~
~~
,-'t
.j
~
:J
~
.
LAW OFFICES OF
COpy FOR YOUR
INFORMATION
RurKe I1ltd .Hl1wKiltS
SUITE 103
JEFFERSON CENTER
607 HIGHWAY 10 N,E.
JOHN M, BURKE
WILLIAM G_ HAWKINS
BLAINE, MINNESOTA 55434
PHONE (612) 784-2998
May 5, 1982
JJ's Bottle Boutique
3121 l6lst Avenue NW
Anoka, MN 55303
Gentlemen:
I have been advised by the City Building Official that you
have placed an advertising sign on a residentially zoned lot
next to your business establishment. This letter is to
advise you that City Ordinance 8.07 prohibits the placement
of advertising signs in residential districts. I am, therefore,
requesting that you remove this sign within seven (7) days
from the date of my letter.
It is also my understanding that you have been advertising a
delicatessen which will be conducted at your business location.
Your property is presently zoned limited industrial which
does not allow for the sale of retail food products. Only a
liquor store and any related supplies are permitted in this
district. We will expect that you will meet all of the
requirements of the ordinance to avoid any further legal
action by the City on this matter. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
,.., '- -
,_ UT'_'" .,_~
William G. Hawkins
WGH/bm
'.:!;-; {,~ :3,::;l~:"~~:-:Z~'. ~, ~;,'~;::.,: ~-:'::~~ ..::r.~:..'
r."l:'-'-'-' "~'-,
~'_.:.,:.- ~ ,-;.-:,:-~~':.-.,-..~-;-.:...:-~-~_:..;,..,.,.-~.;~",.;.:,--. .;..-.(.~---~...::.:...:..","'" . .'
~':'~-.--~~-",:",:,,:,'" " .'
" ... "
.. u~ r,"~ ,~..-;:,'.~
--9'1 J
~ PERMIT APPLICATION
N~ ~J~~
PERMIT #
"
Jurisdiction of CITY OF ANDOVER
'- 1685 Crosstown Blvd. - Anoka. Minnesota
'pplicant to complete numbered spaces only. 7'i 'i _ 'i 100
Joe AOO" lESS
o
,
z
"
.
:;
.
'-
>
o
o
.
"
.
.
1...01' "lO, I'" I UACfJ . /-f, ~L-S (CSIEIE ATTAC:Io4IED S~[ETI
"CAe I c2. ~
10t.5c". I';':="
DW".r.R ~fll. "'- '-'l...11.. AOOI'II(S5 ". "-'ONE
2 ~'J'S 6c7l.<.!/Q...<::-
CO,.,. 1'IU.C 1'01'11 0..'lA11.. 1>.00l'llt15 ",..0". IE I..IC[N$(. NO.
3
.....'''01'IEC... 0111 OE5IG""I[III ""'AI L. "'00,11[$5 PloION[ L.tC[N$[ "'0,
4
(.....(;1"1[[" ......1 L ACC,llE5S PIolONE L.lCE"IS[ NO.
5
~E"'OE" ........I\.. AOO"1E55 I!IIU,NCIol
6
USE 0" I!IUIl.CING
7
8 Class of work: DNEW D ADDITION D ALTERATION D REPAI R D MOVE D REMOVE
9 Describe work: 5/ x. ~ / S,'c-1J
10 Change of use from
Change of use to
11 Valuation of work: $
Occupancy fee
PLAN CHECK FEE
I Surtax
PERMIT FEE
/.s: trV
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Type of
Const.
Occupancy
Group
Division
Size of Bldg,
(Total) SQ, Ft.
No, of
Stories
Max,
Oce, Load
"~,c~r;;{~D~
PLA"'lS CHECKED BY
Fire
A.PPROvED FOR ISSUAf\lCE BY Zone
No, of
Dwelling Units
Use Fire Sprinklers
Zone Required DYes DNo
OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES:
Covered I Uncovered,
~
NOTICE
SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL. PLUMB.
ING. HEATING. VENTI LATING OR AI R CDNDITIONING,
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUC.
TION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 120 DAYS, OR
IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED
FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS
COMMENCED,
I HFRFRV r"FRTIFY THAT I HAVF RFAn ANn FXAMINFn THIS
APPI I~ATION ANn KNOW THF <;AMF TO BE TRUE AN~ R RECT,
ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES GOVE l~!~Ci ..!._r-:!.I.?
TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED
HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT
PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE
PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING
CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Special Approvals
ZONING
HEALTH DEPT.
FI RE DEPT,
SOIL REPORT
OTHER (Specify)
~
.c-rr
Required
Received
Not Required
.
.
~",j ~ ~
SIGNATU 0" CONT"AC 0" 0" AUTPiOIllIZEO A<iENT
lOA TEl
IGNATU"E 0'- OWNE" I" OW,,"E" BUILOE")
(OATE)
M,O.
CASH
/
PLAN CHECK VALIDATION
WHEN PROPERLY VALIDATED UN THIS SPACE) THIS IS YOUR PERM
CK. M.O, CASH PERMIT VALIDATION
TOTAL FEE COLLECTED $ /s. rl
by
/' f' .
j j.JLI
~)
,- '\
....J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
october 16, 1990
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
ITEM
NO.
Engineering
~
4. South Coon Creek
Drive Sid w
Don Jacobson asked to place this item on the agenda.
Don will discuss this item with the City Council.
The status of the project is as follows:
- Creekridge Estates Park is nearly complete. The trails are in
and playground equipment installation will begin the week of
October 15th.
- Plans and specs for the sidewalk have been getting the final
touches. Approval by the State could come as early as January
of 1991. Shortly thereafter, the cutting would begin.
Construction of the sidewalk would begin in the spring.
NOTE: There is a possibility to use State Aid Funds to replace
trees along the north side of the sidewalk between Jonquil
Street NW and Kerry Street NW.
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
MOTION BY
TO
o
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
Appoint Accounting
Firm
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Finance
Howard D. Koolick ~
Finance Director
BY:
ITEM
NO. __
J'
~~~~ FOR
BY, ~~
AGENDA SECTION
NO, Staff, Committee, Comm.
REQUEST
j
The Andover City Council is requested to review the enclosed
information and select an accounting firm for the 1990 audit.
BACKGROUND
At the City Council meeting on July 17, 1990, Council requested
two or three reputable accounting firms be contacted and
interviewed regarding performing the 1990 audit. The firms of
Pannell Kerr Forster and Voto Tautges Redpath and Co. were sent
information about our City and asked to submit quotes.
Copies of the two proposals are available for Council review if
desired.
Attached is a comparison of the two firms.
,r."
'-J
MOTION BY
TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
City Council Meeting
October 16, 1990
Appoint Accounting Firm
, -\
o
COMPARISON OF ACCOUNTING FIRMS
Years auditing cities
Number of cities
audited in 1989
Pannell Voto,
Kerr Tautges,
Forster & Redpath
at least 22 over 20 years
14 15
population range of
ci ties audited
in 1989 678 - 22,775 650 - 30,230
Percent of business from
governmental clients over 20% 36%
Review of internal
controls completed
without exception Yes Yes
Number of accountants
in office 46 20
Number of accountants
assigned to
governmental clients 12 + junior staff 12
Proposed Fees:
One year engagement $12,000 $14,700
Three year engagement
1990
1991
1992
$12,000
$12,500
$13,000
$14,700
$15,800
$16,300
,J
City Council Meeting
October 16, 1990
Appoint Accounting Firm
~.J
As part of the proposal, each firm was asked to list at least
three cities which it no longer audits. These cities were
contacted to determine why the change was made. Below is a
summary of these cities and their responses.
Voto, Tautges and Redpath
City of Chanhassen - New City Council wanted to change all
consultants to get new perspectives. City Administrator
spoke highly of firm.
City of White Bear Lake -
ensure they were paying
and Redpath was not the
City Council wanted
competitive price.
least expensive.
quotes to
Voto, Tautges
City of Shoreview - Policy requires soliciting proposals
every five years. Finance Director required some
specialized knowledge that another firm could more easily
provide. Finance Director was very happy with management
report and information generated.
Pannell Kerr Forster
City of Fairmont - After first three contract, City Council
wanted to solicit bids again to attempt to award job to a
local firm instead of a Twin Cities firm. Job was awarded
to a Mankato firm who was low bidder. City Administrator
was sorry to see relationship end. He was very happy with
quali ty of work.
Since this firm has lost no other cities in the last seven
years, no other references were provided.
Jim Schrantz and I interviewed representatives of both firms.
Both firms are very competent in the area of City audits, and I
believe either firm would do an excellent job for the city. Voto,
Tautges and Redpath provide are extremely thorough and provide a
more easily understandable management report. This thoroughness
encompasses more than just a regular audit and is the cause of the
price difference. Pannell Kerr Forster has a long history of
client retention, which is indicative of their providing excellent
service.
)
:J
~
city Council Meeting
October 16, 1990
Appoint Accounting Firm
CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS
1. Appoint one of the firms and have the Finance Director obtain
the engagement letter covering the 1990 audit for approval at
a subsequent meeting.
2. Appoint one of the firms and have the Finance Director obtain
the engagement letter covering the 1990-1992 audits for
approval at a subsequent meeting.
3. Appoint one of the firms and authorize the Mayor to sign an
engagement letter covering the 1990 audit.
4. Appoint one of the firms and authorize the Mayor to sign an
engagement letter covering the 1990-1992 audits.
5. Request additional information on these two firms.
6. Request additional firms be contacted. Council will need to
provide direction on which firms to be contacted.
7. Choose to not change auditors and request an engagement letter
from George M. Hanson and Co. for the 1990 audit.
, ')
"---'
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE
October l6, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Committee, Comm
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Admin.
ITEM Schedule Mtg/Canvass
NO.~. Election Results
BY:
V. Volk \\.
APPROVEDfOR
AGENI)! !
l //
,/
BY: / L'
/
The City Council is requested to schedule a meeting to canvass
the results of the City's General Election.
state Law requires that the Council meet within 48 hours of the
election, which would require a meeting either wednesday,
November 7th or Thursday, November 8th.
COUNCIL ACTION
. '\
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
, -.-/
u
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
ITEM
NO."
Close 1978 Bond
Fund
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Finance
Howard D. Koolick ~
BY: Finance Director
AGENDA SECTION
NO. Staff, Commi ttee, Comm.
APPROVED FOR
AGE~~
BY: /
l/
REQUEST
The Andover City Council is requested to review the attached
information regarding the General Obligation Bonds of 1978 and
approve the attached resolution after the proper amounts are
inserted.
BACKGROUND
The General Obligation Bonds of 1978 were issued to finance the
acquisition and betterment of firefighting equipment and public
services building to house this and other equipment.
The final bond payment was made in 1989. The fund balance as of
December 31, 1989 was $111,358.21. Attached is a summary, of
activity of the bonds showing how this balance came to be.
Subsection (c) of Section 2.02 of Resolution Number 74-90 (the
resolution which established the PIR Fund) requires the balance
remaining in a debt service fund for any general obligation bond,
once the bonds have been paid be deposited in the PIR Fund.
City Council will need to provide direction as to whether the
monies should be placed in the Public Improvement Account (PIA) or
the Capital Improvement Account (CIA) of the PIR Fund. To refresh
your memories, the PIA is to finance assessable projects and the
CIA is for purposes other than operating expenses (i.e. capital
outlay). The total to allocate between these two accounts is
$111,358.21 plus interest credited in 1990.
COUNCIL ACTION
- '\
'J
MOTION BY
TO
SECOND BY
~ ~. "\ -" '" , - '" ., "'
,',<, .'1' ., ./ ,".,.," .
I i
I
I ,
CITY I OF ANDOVER
SVMMARY iOF ACTIVITY or '
19 8 GENERAL OBLIGATION ;ONDSI
:) I :
,
! !
!
I I
I I
(~l ...-I Ii') 0' 0 0 0 ~
al r<) f'J ~ 0 0 0 I'-
Co iil t'- ~ 0 u) I u) ~
"" , I
al (IJ"'f'. "- .1 (oj I I'- -
(T> ~- u) ~ - 1 '" (oj
i 1
1
I I
i I
1
M-f"') 0 I'- 0 ,'u OJ 1 ""
("1 f'o) w..-f r<) 0 (l"j (Ij I (u
0...-1 ("') l(l 0 0 0 1 I'-
~ 1~lj a:n c5 ,. .1
al (T> 0 '1 1.1) I' -
(T> I ~- u) ~ '1 I, -
I , I' -
, I
! 1 I
i 1
, I i ,
I I
wf'oJ-..:tM u) 0 r<) .J I 0
I aJ ('IJ M..... tIl 0 0 0 I' - I
W (~l 0) ('IJ 9, 0 "J .J 1 (u I
;"J c5'~ui . 1 r-:
al tIl 0 "- I'- I
(T> ('J(IJ , u) ~ -:' .1 I (T>
- I I I
I I
I i I
I I I
I I , , , 1 1
I ..;t'lJJ 0) 0 I al 0 .J- ~ I'- 000 rl.i-:t <1J li11OC!l...-t1JJ 0 ~ 1 al I en
I -..:tOl.O- I ~J 0 en al .1 OO'lOJCO- <1J <D 0' u1 I'- .1 0 <D 1 0 I u1
..;t"(IJ\.O('IJ 1 I(J 0 "' '1 ~ J e, _ I:'IJ I)J '" ~ 1.11111 0 lJJ-..:t 0 I'- I - 1 .J
(\J 1 ,. rf; rf; <t .:) .; [i1 (.) M 1I1oj-ilJioj 0 . I . 1 ,
al 0) 0 1J1 I ~ 0 0' f- I' I)j 1 -
0' M(IJ I u) ~ u1 al 0 f")..... (Tl co I)J i 0_ f.J u1 - 1 -
I I , >-: i"-- - .J - ~ - 0 1 -
, 1 I I . I
I 1 , .: - I
I
i : 1 i
.....(11(\1- 1 <D i 0 - r<) cD al ~ 0 0' 0' al
I -..:tl.JJf'l')(Tl I ':'IJ I 0 (u (u - I'- f'J 0 0 'u 'u ".,
-.;tr'l(rl_ I 'r. 0 I'- I'- "1 ~ ": (lJ 0 <D <D f'J
- .1 "1 u1 1 ,; .,; 0' i (J , <5 ..:- ..:- ..:-
01 I 1 0 "" al 1 0
(T> I ('1(IJ I u) I .J ,.., '" al 0' - u1 u1 -
- I I -
I I I
,
I I' I
1 I I
I i I I I I I ,
r<)~01 I 111 U1 (-') 0 ..- (IJ al lJ'l OJ If) 'j) 0 u) y) .,
(,'),... LIl 1 <D ,..0' 0 oIl O' 0 a) OJ (.) 0 0 (u (u al
I ~1I~(P" 1 r. ., y) 0 tIl .~ I f<J 1J)(1Ja:l al 0 ~ ~ I'-
0 I 1 I. . .,; 01 .0 rf;
oIl I I'--<D I ~ ~'J ..... 0 .J I'- I 01 OI'-l'- '1 .,. (u
O' (')(lJ I <D I ~ r<) ~J O' I'- 0' ..-- I y) u1 .1 "1
- I 1 I I I - I
1 I
I I I I
I I
i I
I 1 ...-01..... (--1 , ,
,)J 4" r'1 I 0" (01 en r..D oIl '1 .1 tIl I 0 I'- I'- ,.,
Wl'/)!J'l I 0) .;t t-- 1.11 0 01 f<J 0)001 <D 0 I'- I'- 0
, r--t--l]'l 1 ~ 1'-"'..- f., ..- I (T> lJJ !Il~ I 0 ..- I ":.1 .,.
O' I ' I. I I. I. . , '. ,;1 ,; I'- 111 00 lJi I " I ..D1
I'- <Dy)I'- I ... ..-f....l(,J al 01 0 0 I'- 1 I'- 1
0' I ..--- 1 0) <D_ O' I 0 (T> ..-- I'- u1 i 1 "" 1 ~
,.. I 1 I (IJ'I""'I f., - , I I
I I , , I
,
I , I i 1
I I , !
I , i
, I I l. I
0 0 I 0 tIltll I 0' 1 OJ uJ f"1 I 0 0 0 I '"
c- O' I 0' <DO' ~I r<) r.Jl ("1 III tIl I 0 ... - 1 ...
0 1 0 111 1J1 0' 01<D01 .J I 0 - - I'-
al I ,. ..:- <1J '. I . I
I'- 0 I 0 !Ii (lJ 01 1 01 ~~'1 I'- .1 0 "1 1 ,.J
(I) ., 1 ., I (u O' <D I ..- - u1 I f.,
~ I r I ~ - I -
I I I 1
1 I I i I
1 1 I I 1
I I I I
I J.
ill I ill ,
.... ~ J. I .... ~ 1
'M " 'M I " I
"" ill " III I "" w I " III
III W ill III ,> ill " ill f- III ill W I III > ill " ill f-
" x S. ~ ill U " ill ~ W <to: " x S. ~ ill U " W ~ ill <tCl:
ill ~ U 0 0: " 010 lJ_ '"- <t ill~U I 0 0: " 010 u_ '"- <t
'\ ill>- QJ , Ul ~ ~ '... '004 l'G~. Ww illf- ill Ul ~ " 'M ,jot I'ti-+-l' WW
'J u " " - W ::I ~.... -+-l' +' > Cl In..... Wo>- U " " w ".. '.... -I-l ~ >a.U1..... wo>-
o >. ro 4-J ~ ~ '" l/I 0 's.. (J C s.. '... W IU Z o)..,ro.kl'G ~ 0: Ul U r... u c s...'.... Q.l oJ Z
S-,p CJ 1fI..... .... :J UI ID W ::I fu ~ U s.. U <t'"- s..... Will- .... :J III ill W ~ III ID U s.. U <t'"-
Ul uS-.j.Jow_ 0 f- --&.JWS-EUJS:WUl JO Ul ?-~~tID 0 f- -....W s.. E rJJ s: QJ Ul JO
W llt VI s... W f- - '1"'1 ,.:..... 0. : ,I"'I+' ..... <t W f- ... '... ~ ..... a. I ......j..) '.... <I
:J 1J D.. OJ OJ u I '" 1J.!:;"U1,.........s..CLL "'''' :J "E3-~~~ , '" -0 ..c '.... Ul '.... ..... 1- s: LL "''''
Z s: 0 E ..... III Z s: u CIS: :'-00.10--4 I z z I Z CUOlS:::I.nQ.HI Z
W I) s.. 0 lo':: '" J w o s.. s: 0 [J'" OJ J:W W (I So. 1:1 s: ..... i w I) s.. s: 0 a OJ J:W
> CDo..J:_E U "'<twuw,:, I Ul > lIICi.I_E U ma:wuLUCI UJ
w ! x <t W I I x I . <t
0: W ,J.,,' , u 0: , W U
,
"
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
\
, ~)
RES. NO. R
-90
MOTION by Councilmember
to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION CLOSING THE 1978 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND AND
TRANSFERRING THE REMAINING FUNDS TO THE PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT
REVOLVING FUND.
WHEREAS, the City of Andover issued General Obligation Bonds
in 1978 for the acquisition and betterment of firefighting
equipment and public services building to house this and other
equipment; and
WHEREAS, the City of Andover has repaid all obligations
arising under these bonds and there are monies remaining in the
fund reserved for payment of this debt; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. R74-90
which established the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund and
requires these monies be deposited into this fund.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Andover that the 1978 General Obligation Bond Fund is
hereby closed.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all monies rema1n1ng in the 1978
General Obligation Bond Fund be deposited into Permanent
Improvement Improvement Revolving Fund with $
allocated to the Public Improvement Account and $
allocated to the Capital Improvement Account.
MOTION seconded by Councilmember
16th day of
October
and adopted by the
, 1990, with
City Council on this
Councilmembers
voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmembers
voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared
passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
James E. Elling - Mayor
'\
,
'~
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
<J
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
ITEM
NO. '/,
Approve Bond
Sale
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Finance
Howard D. Koolick if
BY: Finance Director
AGENDA SECTION
NQ Non-Discussion Items
REQUEST
The Andover city Council is requested to authorize the
solicitation for bids for a $1,550,000 bond sale as recommended
by the City Attorney.
BACKGROUND
Attached is a recommendation letter from Bill Hawkins. The
proposed bond issue is to refinance the 1987 temporary bonds. The
amount proposed represents the future tax increments, amounts due
from Anoka County and special assessments yet to be collected.
The required resolution will be presented by the attorney at the
meeting.
MOTION BY
r-~'
'J TO
COUNCIL ACTION
SECOND BY
LAW OFFICES Of"
,J
BurKe ond JlawKins
JOHN M. BURKE
WILLIAM G. HAWKINS
October 3, 1990
SUITE 101
299 COON RAPIDS BOULEV ARO
COON RAPIDS, MINNESOTA 55433
PHONE (61 21 784-2998
Mayor and Members of City Council
Andover City Hall
1685 Crosstown Blvd.
Andover, MN 55304
Re: Recommendation for Issuance of $l ,550, 000 of General
Obligation Temporary Improvement Bonds, Series 1990B
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
On December I, 1987, the City of Andover issued $l,550,000 of
General Obligation Temporary Improvement Bonds, Series 1987B for
the purpose of funding the following improvement projects:
Estimated Cost including overhead:
87-6
87-12
87-22
87-25
87-28
87 -29
86-05
86-19
Commercial Park (grading,
utilities and streets,
including Crosstown
relocation)
Wobegon Woods
Hills of Bunker Lake Second
Addition
Kensington Estates, Phase 2
Creekside Estates
Shady Knoll/Oaks
Hanson Boulevard unreimbursed
costs
Dehns Pond (including overhead)
$
844,480
101,244
258,069
79,342
43,914
44,483
69,760
55,000
Pursuant to our recommendation on October 27, 1987, temporary
bonds were issued since these projects were previously con-
structed to develop the Andover Commercial Park, relocate
Crosstown Boulevard and tel install utilities in several newly
developing areas of the City. It was anticipated that the City
would receive a substantial payment from the County of Anoka for
construction of Crosstown Boulevard, that tax increment funds
would be generated to pay the Commercial Park improvements and a
substantial amount of prepayments would be received on the new
developments since assessments have to be paid in full on a new
subdivision within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
.:)
~J
Mayor and Council
October 3, 1990
Page 2
We have met with Howard Koolich and Jim Schrantz to discuss the
status of the collection of revenues for these projects. As of
July 3l, 1990, there does not appear to be sufficient funds in
the Debt Service Fund established for the improvement projects
to substantially reduce the temporary bonds at this time. The
reasons are as follows:
The Tax Increment Financing District l-l Fund has approximately
$278,000 as of July 31, 1990. At this time these funds would
not be available since the City will need to redeem $205,000 of
tax increment bonds in December of 1990. The $205,000 Bond
proceeds were used for land acquisition and associated costs for
the Commercial Park. The balance of the available tax increment
funds have been appropriated for use in payment of the cleanup
of the Pumpkin City property. In reviewing the tax increment
collection projections, however, it is anticipated that approx-
ima tely $750,000 will be collected over the next three years
from Tax Increment Distr ict I-I. In addi tion the County has
been billed $265,437 for its share of the Crosstown Boulevard
road construction. The County has not yet paid this billing,
however, the latest information that the Ci ty has received
indicates that it may be paid in 1992 or 1993. Therefore
approximately $1,OOO,OOO of funds will be available within three
years to substantially reduce this bond indebtedness.
The second reason for the deficiency is that a substantial
portion of the assessment collections from the new developments
have been placed into the Trunk, Source and storage Fund and was
used to reduce the temporary bond issue that was sold in July of
1990. In reviewing the remaining lots to be developed within
these subdivisions it appears, however, that if they are com-
pleted wi thin the next three years, there would be sufficient
funds to entirely payoff the debt incurred for the construction
of the facilities.
We believe that the City has two options in considering the
refinancing. The first would be to issue permanent long term
financing to cove r the costs 0 f the temporary obliga tions.
Since there is some uncertainty as to when the assessment
collections will be received, as well as the County payment,
structuring a permanent bond' issue may be difficult. While we
could move most of the principal payments to the end of the bond
issue, this would substantially increase the net interest cost.
Furthermore if long term bonds are issued at this time, the net
interest rate on these bonds may be substantially higher which
may require the City to reassess all of the properties which
have outstanding assessments to increase the interest rate on
their assessments.
':_) The second alternative would be to issue additional temporary
bonds. The issuance of temporary bonds would allow us to
substantially reduce our debt within three years if all of the
,.)
Mayor and Council
October 3, 1990
Page 3
receipts are received as pr oje cted above. Fur thermore the
interest rate on the temporary bonds would be less which should
not require the City to reassess any of the projects. In three
years we would be able to more definitively determine what the
debt service needs in the future would be.
One disadvantage of the issuance of temporary bonds is that the
City will incur the issuance cost for this temporary issue as
well as the issuance cost for a long term bond issue in three
years if it is needed. I would expect this to add between
$40,000-50,000 of costs to the project, however, this cost can
be funded from. the existing funds that are currently in the
construction account and the tax increment account. Also the
lower interest on the temporary bonds shoUld offset this cost.
A second disadvantage would be the possibility that if the City
is required to issue long term bonds in three years, that the
interest rate for the bonds at that time would be signif-
icantly higher than the market at the present time. The City
would be able to respond to this change in market conditions,
however, by reassessing properties who have not paid these
assessments by increasing the interest rates accordingly. Since
the maj ority of the properties which were assessed for these
projects are developers, this would not be as controversial as
it at first may seem. In order to provide the City with flex-
ibility concerning the interest rate, we would provide a call
feature in the bonds which allows the City to call them at the
end of the first two years and any time thereafter.
With the above information in mind and the financial situation
indicating that substantial amounts of funds will be received
within the next three years, we are proposing that the City
refinance the $1,550,000 of General Obligation Temporary
Improvement Bonds by the issuance of another temporary bond
issue. Within three years when the new bonds mature, the City
would, in all likelihood, be able to pay the bonds off entirely
wi th tax increment collections, County payments and special
assessment receipts.
The bonds would be dated December l, 1990 and the first interest
payment would be due on June! I, 1991. The interest would be due
thereafter on December ls;t and June lst of each year until
December l, 1993 when the entire temporary bond issue would
mature and must be refinanced, unless called earlier as set out
above.
:J
The City is currently rated Baa-l by Moody's and we do not
anticipate an improvement in the rating. We recommend that the
City obtain another rating from Moody's Investors Services for
both bond issues since it will be necessary for their
marketing.
~)
,'J
Mayor and Council
October 3, 1990
Page 4
We are recommending the City authorize the taking of bids at
their meeting on October 16, 1990 and that bids be considered
for award on Tuesday, November 13, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. at the
Andover City Hall. If the awards of the bid is made on
November 13, 1990, funds Shouid be available in time to meet the
maturity date of the outstanding bonds on December I, 1990.
If any members of the Council have any questions regarding this
matter, please feel free to contact me.
WGH:mk
Enc.
/
()
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
ITEM
NO, 9.
Woodland Development
Escrow Refunds
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Finance
Howard D. KOOliCk~
Finance Director
BY:
REQUEST
APPR~~ FOR
AG~ ~i\
BY:/ :;
j
AGENDA SECTION
NQ Non-Discussion Items
The Andover City Council is requested to approve releasing the
plat escrows for the following projects:
prairie Meadows
Timber Trails
Woodland Creek
Woodland Terrace 1st
Woodland Terrace 2nd
Woodland Terrace 3rd
Woodland Terrace 4th
Woodland Terrace 5th
Woodland Ridge
BACKGROUND
Sylvia Britton of Woodland Development has requested the City
release the plat escrow for Woodland Creek. Further investigation
into the escrow records disclosed several plat escrows with
positive balances that could also be refunded as well as several
plat escrows with negative balances that should be billed to
Woodland. We agreed to combine all of the plat escrows that are
no longer needed.
The following is a summary of the amount of the plat escrow as of
October l6, 1990 for each development:
Development
prairie Meadows
Timber Trails
Woodland Creek
Woodland Terrace 1st-5th
Woodland Ridge
Amount to be
Refunded or
(Owed)
$ 153.46
1,708.20
1,619.10
(2,243.58)
98.88
Total
$ 1,336.06
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
r \
'J TO
SECOND BY
"-
',-,J
\
\., _/
City Council Meeting
October 16, 1990
Woodland Development
Escrow Refunds
The City is still holding the plat escrow for Woodland Creek
Second Addition. We also still have project escrows for Woodland
Creek and Woodland Creek Second.
The schedule of bills to be approved at the meeting includes a
payment to Woodland Development for this amount. Should this item
not be approved at the meeting, the list of bills will need to be
adjusted.
, "
, ,
''---./
CITY OF ANDOVER
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
October 16, 1990
AGENDA SECTION
NO.
DATE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Engineering
~*
R
ITEM
NO.
10. Kirby Estates
Escrow Ref
BY:
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution approving
the grading of Kirby Estates.
Approving the resolution will release the escrow for grading. The
Finance Department has prepared a check to release as part of the
bills.
The developer will be required to monitor erosion control, keep
streets clear of any debris and mow the boulevard area to control
weed growth.
It is recommended to approve the resolution as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION
MOTION BY
, "-
',_../ TO
SECOND BY
..- "
'~J
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL GRADING OF KIRBY ESTATES AS
BEING DEVELOPED BY WAYNE AND KAY OLSON IN SECTION 34-32-24.
WHEREAS, the developer has completed the grading of Kirby
Estates.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Andover to hereby approve the grading of Kirby Estates.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this
day of
, 1990.
CITY OF ANDOVER
James E. Elling - Mayor
ATTEST:
Victoria Volk - City Clerk
,"
'-J