Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWK February 24, 2004 ~ Q../.l/ l..úuJ:t:I.vl 3-16-òt 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Special City Council Workshop Miscellaneous Items Tuesday, February 24, 2004 Conference Room A & B 1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m. 2. Sewer Study Review - Engineering 3. Discuss Crosstown Boulevard Grade Separation at Railroad Crossing - Eng.& Planning 4. Consider Zoning Ordinance Change for Temporary Structures - Planning 5. Consider Revised Tree Preservation Ordinance & Policy (Council Goal) - Engineering 6. Discuss Strategic Analysis of Long-Terrn Resource Needs (Council Goal)- Administration 7. Consider Statutory Changes in Establishing Local Speed Limits in Rural Areas of a City- Engineering 8. Stop Sign Policy - Engineering 9. Discuss Round Lake Boulevard NW & South Coon Creek Intersection- Engineering 10. Other Business 11. Adjouroment 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755·5100 FAX (763) 755·8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US SPECIAL ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 24, 2004 MINUTES The Special Council Workshop of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Mike Gamache, February 24, 2004, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. . Councilmembers present: Don Jacobson, Ken Orttel, Julie Trude Councilmember absent: Mike Knight Also present: David Berkowitz, City Engineer John Erar, City Administrator Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician Will Neumeister, Community Development Director Others APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Jacobson requested item 9, the discussion regarding the Round Lake Boulevard NW and South Coon Creek intersection, be moved to item Ia as Mr. and Mrs. Posterick were available for the discussion. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSS ROUND LAKE BOULEVARD NW AND SOUTH COON CREEK INTERSECTION City Engineer Berkowitz noted this item relates to the intersection reconstruction of Round Lake Boulevard NW and South Coon Creek NW, as Ken and Donna Posterick notified staff that in 1984 the west side of South Coon Creek NW was constructed toward the north side of the right-of-way to allow for additional setback from their house to the roadway. Mr. Berkowitz explained construction of a right-turn lane was proposed on South Coon Creek NW due to the increase in future traffic volumes. He noted the roadway would then shift approximately nine feet to the south, moving the roadway within 30 feet of the Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 2 Posterick's front door. He indicated in 1984 Mr. and Mrs. Posterick purchased additional right-of-way on the north side of South Coon Creek Drive NW to allow the road to be constructed on the new north right-of-way line and the City agreed to do this, thereby allowing additional setback from the Posterick house to the road. He added the existing right-of-way was not adjusted, however. Mr. Berkowitz cited a letter and information provided by the Postericks, along with the meeting minutes that related to this issue from 1984 and a drawing of the actual reconstruction plan for Round Lake Boulevard. He requested Council review the information from 1984 and determine if the roadway should remain in its existing location by not constructing a right-turn lane or the project should move forward as planned. Ken Posterick, 3468 South Coon Creek Drive NW, did not feel a right-turn lane would solve anything, as 95% of the traffic turned left at the intersection; however, he felt a stoplight was the correct solution. Discussion followed regarding the intersection site. Councilmember Jacobson asked why a right-turn was needed at the intersection. Mr. Berkowitz responded the decision was made based on projected development through the rural reserve. Discussion followed regarding reasons to decide for traffic signal placement. Mr. Berkowitz agreed staff could look at a redesign to make the plans more amenable to the affected properties. He asked Council for authorization to move forward with a redesign. Council advised staff work with Mr. and Mrs. Posterick while redesigning the plan. SEWER STUDY REVIEW City Engineer Berkowitz noted staff, along with TKDA, had been working on the sanitary sewer sludy to serve the undeveloped area on the east side of Andover and presented three different scenarios. Mr. Berkowitz explained the flISt scenario would include extending a trunk sewer line up Crosstown Boulevard NW from Yellowpine Street NW to Prairie Road NW and extending a trunk sewer line from the Shadowbrook 5th Addition development north across Coon Creek, west on Andover Boulevard NW, then north on Prairie Road NW. Mr. Berkowitz indicated the second scenario would include constructing a trunk lift station along Prairie Road NW near Coon Creek and extending the trunk sewer line north on Prairie Road NW to Crosstown Boulevard NW. Mr. Berkowitz explained the third scenario would include extending a trunk sewer line up Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 3 Crosstown Boulevard NW from Yellowpine Street NW to Prairie Road NW and extending a trunk sewer line east along Andover Boulevard NW from Bluebird Street NW to Xeon Street NW, then north along Xeon Street NW. The area in the southeast corner of Andover would be served by a lateral line extending from the Shadowbrook 5th Addition development. Mr, Berkowitz requested council review and discuss the three proposed trunk sanitary sewer extension scenarios and provide feedback to staff. He added a detailed report would be presented at the March workshop. Councilmember Orttel stated the plans need to be cost weighted. City Administrator Erar responded the cost benefits would be analyzed once the plans were conceptualized and that information would be part of the final report. Community Development Director Neumeister indicated that each plan was within the realm of possibility regarding cost. Discussion followed regarding when the affected areas would need service. Mr. Erar asked if the concept of one of the scenarios was preferred over the others. Mayor Gamache thought the third scenario (Figure No.4) was interesting if the discussed revisions were included, Councilmember Orttel suggested further changes that would make Figure No. 4 acceptable. Mr. Erar asked Council to look at each scenario and inform staff "if you like it or not." Further discussion followed regarding the individual scenarios. Mr. Neumeister suggested staff compile Council's comments into a report that would be brought to Council in approximately one month. It was decided staff should proceed to calculate the numbers on all three scenarios, as those numbers were already in progress. Mr. Berkowitz stated the advantages and disadvantages of each scenario would be included in the staff report. He noted staff did prefer the third scenario (Figure No.4). DISCUSS CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION AT RAILROAD CROSSING Community Development Director Neumeister referenced a recent memo from the Anoka County Transportation Department that drew attention to the issue of whether the City would pursue a grade separated roadway at the BNSF Railroad crossing on Crosstown Boulevard. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 4 Mr. Neumeister explained the City's current Transportation Plan shows a grade separated roadway for four different streets: Bunker Lake Boulevard, Andover Boulevard, Crosstown Boulevard and 161" Avenue NW. Mr. Neurneister indicated the question that had arisen was if Council would recommend the grade separated roadway for Crosstown Boulevard. He stated Council's decision might have a significant impact on a pending new development proposal (Sophie's Manor) and ultimately on future developments on both sides of the railroad crossing. He noted the grade separation would necessitate additional right-of-way dedication, thus causing the loss of new single-family residential lots. Mr. Neumeister stated the right-of-way would need to be widened from 120 feet (60 feet from centerline) to 175 feet to 200 feet to allow for the embankment area. He noted staff had discussed the issue and felt this was not very realistic. Mr. Neumeister indicated the future daily traffic counts would be greater than 10,000 vehicles per day on these roadways. The 2001 traffic count was IO,BOO vehicles on Bunker Lake Boulevard and 4,100 on Crosstown, with a 2020 projection of approximately 10,000 vehicles (with development of the rural reserve area). Mr. Neumeister requested that the four grade separated roadways be reviewed and Council determine whether or not to recommend they remain in the City's Transportation Plan. He added Council's decision did affect the platting of property that was going to be coming before Council on March 16,2004. Mr. Neumeister also asked Council to make a determination regarding the need to plan for a grade separated roadway on Crosstown Boulevard at the BNSF railroad crossing. Mayor Gamache suggested everything but Bunker Lake Boulevard be removed from the Plan. Councilmember Orttel stated on1y the major roads should get the roadway. City Engineer Berkowitz noted Bunker Lake Boulevard would be the most realistic location for the roadway. Councilmember Jacobson suggested the Crosstown Boulevard roadway be eliminated and staff should determine if houses needed to be eliminated if the other three roadways remained in the Transportation Plan. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to approve removal of the Crosstown Boulevard grade separated roadway from the Transportation Plan and direct staff to review the grade separated roadways planned for Bunker Lake Boulevard, Andover Boulevard and 161 st Avenue NW. Motion carried unanimously. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 5 CONSIDER ZONING ORDINANCE CHANGE FOR TEMPORARY STRUCTURES Community Development Director Neumeister cited a report to Council that provided general ideas and information regarding how other cities in the metropolitan area might or might not regulate temporary structures. He discussed the variation in zoning regulations from different cities. Mr. Neumeister indicated it was important to distinguish between "portable structure" and "temporary structure." He explained that typically a portable structure would be located on a site for a longer period of time, would likely have a post-type foundation and anchoring system and would meet the current Uniform Building and Fire Codes. He noted temporary structures are usually construction trailers. Mr. Neumeister stated the City of Plymouth also had a zoning regulation called an "interim use permit," which they used for review and approval of portable classrooms in the Public Institution District. He noted the interim use permit was similar to a conditional use permit, whereby a city could regulate how long a portable building would be allowed on a site before it would need to be further reviewed. Mr. Neumeister requested Council review the cited information and discuss the following Issues: Is there a need to make changes to the Zoning Code to institute new requirements, such as interim use permits for portable buildings? Is there a need to include a section in the Zoning Code that covers temporary structures? Did schools (both private and public) need to be made a conditional use rather than a permitted use, which was their current designation in the Zoning Code? Discussion followed regarding the use of portable structures by public schools. City Administrator Erar noted Council's concerns are not necessarily related to denial or approval but that a review be conducted, as Council would like a "use" that expanded the defmition coming before it for review. Councilmember Jacobson suggested such a "use" might be a temporary structure to be used for more than one year. Council should have the ability to ask that a long-term replacement plan be submitted, Councilmember Orttel noted Council could not determine placement of the structures, as that was controlled by State code. Discussion followed regarding Council's ability to regulate the use of these structures. Mr. Neumeister noted Brooklyn Park made changes similar to those being discussed and Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 6 stated he could bring the related information to Council for review. Mr, Erar suggested staff could install Council's concerns as part of the permitted use by tightening the review criteria. The City could regulate the structures to the extent the City's code requirements, State codes, etc., were met. Council could also change the Code and establish performance standards. It was decided Mr. Erar should prepare an administrative review guideline draft, incorporating the items discussed by Council. CONSIDER REVISED TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AND POLICY (COUNCIL GOAL) Natural Resources Technician Kytonen noted staff made some revisions to the Tree Preservation Policy and City Code 4-3 with the intent to formulate a more efficient and effective enforcement system, improve the logistics of the documents, bring the documents up to date with the latest standards and regulations and improve the composition and granunar. Mr. Kytonen requested Council consider approving these revisions and offer suggestions for additional improvement to these documents. City Engineer Berkowitz added staff's goal is to incorporate what is actually being done in the field into the ordinance. Discussion followed regarding who is responsible for dying boulevard trees. Mr. Berkowitz agreed the ordinance should continue to state the owner is responsible, Discussion followed regarding the policy of handling the problem of oak wilt. Mr. Berkowitz indicated the City is responsible to be more proactive regarding this issue as it receives grants from the DNR City Administrator Erar noted more discussion is needed regarding the internal handling of issues such as noncompliance, for example. Discussion followed regarding the City's right to go onto private property. Councilmember Jacobson felt there should be a review option. Mr. Erar agreed a revision could be included in the ordinance that indicates owners have an option to appeal to staff. He asked Mr. Berkowitz to draft the wording. Motion by Trude, Seconded by Orttel, to adopt the revised Tree Preservation Policy with the incorporation of Council's concerns and suggestions, along with related changes to City Code 4-3. Motion carried unanimously. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 7 Councilmember Trude asked if the revised policy addresses the concern for stronger tree protection. Mr. Berkowitz responded language encouraging stronger tree protection is included in the "Development Standards" section. He added staff would continue to work with the developers to save as many trees as possible. Mr. Erar noted staff is planning to bring forward a PUD addressing this issue. DISCUSS STRATEGIC ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM RESOURCE NEEDS (COUNCIL GOAL) City Administrator Erar noted it was determined that a "strategic analysis of long-term resource needs, service delivery requirements and facility space/equipment requirements affecting police, fue and general government services" be conducted for long-term organizational planning needs. He stated Council rated this goal as medium priority. Mr. Erar explained staff had reacted to a number of organizational management and service reduction issues associated with severe budget cuts in 2003 and 2004 over the course of the last ten months. He added workload levels have increased significantly due to several high-profile projects and initiatives while City stafTmg levels have been reduced; therefore, very little time had been available for departments to conduct a comprehensive self-evaluation of the City's future long-term resource needs. Mr. Erar indicated the City's management team had met recently to discuss this goal and possible approaches to achieve an appropriate and credible outcome. In his opinion, this type of strategic evaluation has the potential for creating a number of undesirable perceptions and reactions if performed internally. Mr. Erar stated staff wishes to avoid the inherent conflicts of an internal evaluation and recommends any such analysis be conducted by an outside management consultant. He explained the benefits of outsourcing this type of evaluation are varied but generally relate to the independence of the consultant to make recommendations on the basis of an objective review of the organization and related community needs. The results tend to be viewed as credible and valid in cities and agencies where an outside review is conducted. Mr. Erar indicated staff had met with representatives from Springsted, Incorporated to assemble some idea of cost. Springsted representatives are willing to prepare and present a proposal outlining scope and work activities, including their credentials, should Council support the recommendation. He added Springsted, Incorporated has a national reputation preparing these types of studies for cities, counties, the State of Minnesota and special governmental agencies, Mr. Erar requested Council discuss and give direction regarding this Council goal. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 8 Councilmember Trude stated she felt someone from the outside would not necessarily address unique factors pertaining to the City of Andover. Mr. Erar responded Springsted would offer a unique analysis of Andover's needs and Council would be involved in discussions regarding perceptions and requirements of the City, after which a report would be written to meet those requirements. Councilmember Trude asked if this was an appropriate time, as the City is under the stress of two years of deferred expenses. It would be adding another workload on staff. Councilmember Orttel requested Council look at a report done for another City to get an idea of what kind ofresults would be given. Mr. Erar responded Council was not under any obligation if Springsted completed a proposal and, in addition, Council's concerns could be addressed at a workshop after the proposal was received. Councilmember OrtteI agreed he would like to see what Springsted offers. Councilmember Jacobson suggested waiting at least one year before starting the analysis, as he felt the City did too much consulting work now when compared to other cities. Mr. Erar responded the entire management team did not agree with Councilmember Jacobson. Discussion followed regarding the pros and cons of allowing Springsted to make a presentation to Council. The consensus of Council was to delay consideration of hiring an outside consultant to conduct the analysis for a period of one year. CONSIDER STATUTORY CHANGES IN ESTABLISHING LOCAL SPEED LIMITS IN RURAL AREAS OF A CITY It was requested Council consider recommending a re"ision to the existing State statute to allow all cities (or at least those in the seven-county metro area) to establish 30 mph zones in 2.5-acre developments, along with recommending a letter (signed by the Mayor) with this request be forwarded to State Representative Tingelstad, State Representative DeLaForest and State Senator Johnson so legislation could be introduced before the session ended. Mr. Erar suggested Council invite the City's representatives to attend one of its meetings, as it might be helpful to discuss this issue with them. Discussion followed regarding whether the areas to be zoned should be measured by acres or footage. City Engineer Berkowitz indicated revision to the statute would enable the City to set the speed limit at 30 mph without a speed study in areas where there are concerns. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 9 Discussion followed regarding if the appropriate speed was always 30 mph. Mr. Berkowitz briefly discussed sign layouts. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to recommend staff contact MnDOT for advice regarding the best way to proceed and implement the advice given. Motion carried unanimously. STOP SIGN POLlCY Council is requested to discuss' a stop sign policy and how Council would like to deal with existing unwarranted stop signs that do not meet Chapter 2B.I of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD). The City Engineer met with the Public Works Committee in January of 2004 to discuss possible unwarranted stop signs and what Public Works was doing regarding updating traffic signs throughout the City to ensure the signs are in the proper location and meet reflectivity standards. It was stated there are a number of locations throughout the City where Council authorized installation of stop signs over the years due to neighborhood requests that did not or might not meet stop sign guidelines. A copy of the Council meeting minutes from January 18, 1994, was provided, which includes the City Attorney's opinion regarding the State statute and the authority to place stop signs when conditions meet certain criteria listed in the MMUTCD, Staff requested when each zone is evaluated and updated the locations of three- or fout- way stop signs not meeting the requirements of the MMUTCD be forwarded to Council for authorization to conduct a warrant study. It was recommended the stop signs in Zones 1,2 and 7 be evaluated. The City Engineer will hold informational meetings with the neighborhoods within 300 feet of the intersection to discuss the results and actions Council might take to bring the intersection into compliance, if necessary, with the MMUTCD. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to authorize the City Engineer to conduct the warrant study and then perform traffic counts, at which time the results would be brought to Council for review prior to the public meetings. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Naming of Collector Roadway Mr. Erar cited the list of suggested names for the discussed roadway and the location of the roadway was sho\\'Il to Council. He noted this is the time to make the change to one Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 10 name for the entire roadway. City Engineer Berkowitz added this is an opportunity to create a theme for the area. It was noted staff would provide additional information to Council regarding this issue in March 2004. Community Center Fundraising Meeting Councilmember Jacobson asked Tony Howard for an update, as he had just attended the Community Center fundraising meeting at Oak View Middle School. Mr. Howard responded approximately 60 people attended the meeting and he noted the crowd was diverse. The feedback was positive and the one negative comment related to the goal not being met. Mr. Erar noted the CDBG could go up to $150,000 and added he met with the y the previous Monday. He stated the Y is willing to look at a resolution to fully reimburse the City at the end of the lease for any shortfall. He added the City wanted a workable lease by March 30, 2004, and a letter would be sent out discussing what the Y would be doing for Andover residents. Mr. Erar indicated the Y did not contest the City's right to determine if concessions should be self-operated. He added they did want input regarding the menu and noted this item would be incorporated into the lease agreement. Concern Regarding Newsletter Article Mayor Gamache asked Council if they agreed with changes made to a specific newsletter article. Council agreed they did not have any problems with the changes. Public Hearing Regarding 2004 Overlay City Engineer Berkowitz noted a public hearing will be held March 1 for the 2004 overlay, which requires a 4/5 vote by Council, as it was initiated by the City. He indicated he would request to delay until the next meeting if it looked like the vote would be short. He added redoing the road was wanted; however, a curb was not. City Administrator Erar asked if Council felt comfortable with the existing policy, Councilmember Orttel responded the street would not be done if there was opposition, which was the City's standard. Additional Comments Mr. Howard noted another comment made at the Community Center fundraising meeIing Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - February 24, 2004 Page 11 was that residents want the ball fields lit. Mr. Erar thought the dollars would be available. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Gamache, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, MaIjorie Jenkins, Recording Secretary