Loading...
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