Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP March 11, 1976 CITY of ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 11, 1976 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Richard J. Schneider on March 11, 1976, 7:30 P.M., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Blvd., N.W., Anoka, Minnesota for the purpose of adopting the Comprehensive Development Plan. Councilpersons present: Holasek, Rither, VanderLaan, Windschitl Councilpersons absent: None Also present: City Engineer, D.R. Kasma; City Attorney, W.G. Hawkins; Jim Barton of the Metropolitan Council; Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Dave Jack; and several interested citizens. The meeting began with Mr. Barton reviewing the memorandum from the Metropolitan Council (Attachment A). Mr. Kasma then explained the suggested change of the boundry line between the Urban and Rural Districts of Andover and the possibility of revising the Sewer Plan. He went on to say that the application for FHA financing had been made and sent to the Metropolitan Council for review and comments. The Metro Council has reviewed Andover's Sewer Plan and I Comprehensive Development Plan and the Andover Council should do the four things listed in the memorandum from T.K.D.A. (Attachment B). Mr. Kasma reviewed the memorandum: with the Council. He noted at this time, if the Andover Council does do the items listed in the memo they will receive a favorable review from the Mero Council and will be able to obtain a FHA loan. If they do not: 1. the City will not get any Federal money and will have to get a conventional loan;. and 2. there will be no project because to build sewers you must have a permit from the Metropolitan Waste Commission and I their boss is the Metro Council. MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson VanderLaan that the City , Council adopt the Resolution on page two of the T.K.D.A. memorandum dated March 11, 1976 (attachment B)l Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by counlilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Rither that the City Council , enter into a contract authorizing the firm of T.K.D.A. to revise our Comprehensive I Sewer Plan, for a fee not to exceed $1000. (Part of attachment B) Motion carried unanimously. I MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Rither that the City Council direct the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission to prepare the ordinances that are detailed on page three of the T.K.D.A. memorandum dated March 11, 1976. (Attachment , B) Motion carried unanimously. I Councilperson Windschitl asked Mr. Kasma to clarify the February 9, 1976 memo from T.K.D.A. Mr. Kasma reviewed the memo and said there were no problems with boundaries , or the Compreh~nsive Sewer Plan, however, according to Karl Burandt, Metropolitan Council Staff Engineer, if the City does not adopt a 10 acre minimum rural lot size, as stipulated in the "Position Paper", the City would not receive a favorable A-95 review. I I At this time there was a lengthy discussion on the pros and cons of the 10 acre minimum lot size, on-site septic systems and levels of services. The question of what happens if the City does not adopt the 10 acre minimum rural lot size was raised. Mr.-Barton-had·no-answer~ Dave Jack, Planning/Zoning Chairman cautioned that if the City Co~ncil do;s not adopt the Compre~ensive P~an with the 10 acre . minimum lot size, 1', I,".~, r~,:"':: .·;""c..t ,-'I_~l ,'J ;:.'-_.//_<',;- ~ :) ',-' -,," ~~. ,...",,1- /(·,L.~-l:'~- .-'" I I Special Council Meeting - 3/11/76 Minutes - Page 2 then any time there is something before the City that requires Metro approval, such as putting in sewers, roads, parks, etc., the City will be all by itself. If the City wants to be part of the overall community, the Council better reach some sort of compromise on this issue. Councilperson Windschitl read through his selected court cases at this time (Attachment C) . Attorney Hawkins stated that for every case Councilperson Windschitl ~ted, there are other courts in the country that have made the reverse decision. Mr. Hawkins was of the opinion that a 10 acre minimum lot size alo~with the Comprehensive Development Plan would be sustained in the State of Minnesota.,,'_ ¡) ""Ii .è :;'. "- Urban and Rural taxation districts were discussed and Mr. Hawkins stated that reassessments would have to be given to 10 acre lots and this had been acknowledged by the County. The property would not be as marketable and therefore would have a decreased valuation. There was a lengthy discussionÿ~th citizen input from: Allen Chapman, Ken Olson, Marvin Christenson and Bob Nehring. Five minute recess. MOTION by Councilperson Vander, second by Councilperson Rither that the Andover City Council adopt the Andover Community Development Plan as per the Planning/Zoning Commission recommendation of September 19, 1975, after the Metropolitan Council review and recommendation~ to include a minimum 10 acre lot provision in the Rural Planning District. VOTE: Yes - Rither, VanderLaan; No - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl Motion defeated. I Councilperson Windschitl requested that the Council go through the Comprehensive Plan page by page and anyone who had a motion to offer On a specific page make it at that time rather than go through random motions. I Mayor Schneider said he thought the concept of the Plan had been adopted and the only question remaining was the minimum lot size. I Councilperson Windschitl stated there were provisions in the Plan that he would not I vote for in there present form. I Councilperson VanderLaan reminded Councilperson Windschitl that it Was he who had made the motion requiring all suggested changes to the Plan be submitted to the Clerk's office by March I, 1976 to be typed and distributed to all Council members to avoid this type of activity. She questioned him, as the author of that motion, why this was being done now~ I He replied he had not received the information he requested from the MetøoCouncil and , the Attorney on time. I Councilperson Rither questioned Councilperson Windschitl as to whether the changes he planned to mæ{~ concerned those documents. . I He repl~ed that one (that they still didn't have) is some statement as to what would be done if these things were contested in court. What help would be provided? He was expecting 'that to appear in one of the letters they had received. He stated he felt it was hi's right to make amendments to the Plan. I Councilperson Rither said he did not question anyone's right to offer amendments but he concurred with Councilperson VanderLaan's statement that it was a motion by Councilperson Windschitl to have them in by a specific date of there were to be any. Special Council' Meeting - 3/11/76 Minutes - Page 3 MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to change all sections of the Plan that refer to "Planning Districts", cnange Urban Planning District to Urban Service Area and Rural Planning District to Rural Service Area. 7'['- There was a lengthy discussion on the reason for such a change. According to the Metropolitan Council and the City Attorney, "Service Area" or "Planning District" is strictly a matter of semantics and means the same thing. Councilperson VanderLaan requested that Councilperson Windschitl expose the rest of his motions for the Council to see if this has an impact on the rest of the motions. Her reason was that the document was prepared by a professional planner, reviewed by the Metropolitan Council and acted on by, 13 or 14 Planning/Zoning members and she felt this was no time to change little bits and pieces. She questioned if it would ultimately corJe out that the last motion would have a bearing on the first or would they all be individual, and what impact would they have on the document as a whole. Councilperson Windschitl replied that he would reveal his motions one at a time and the Council could either vote them do~~ or pass the~ _ , "/ ' , ' . J' I J , , " ...--" I' "j .' l '" '. /1',(·1,[/'._ ;;,r¡,i" :'I'/¡"I I ··,-1-L.;',,-" /(:- _,(<-.~L·(.; '-1.J'_'.~ð--'O"'" '" I .".- ",-' 'u, ." . " . . , MOTÍON ~y Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to change page 142, paragraph 1 to read as follows: "Development shall be allowed to occur if the proposed rlevelopment is a part of the Five Year Capital Improvement Program which will guarantee essential urban services." SUike; on lots of less than to acres.(?) Councilperson VanderLaan reiterated her request that all motions be revealed to see the impact on the entire plan. She had no questions at that time because she did not understand the interrelationship of his motions while still in the dar!, on what the rest of them were. \,Ý~_'Marvin Christenson stated that it Was obvious that Councilperson Windschitl did not \:)~", understand the ,interrelationship and interdependency of the sections of the Plan. / I Councilperson Windschitl replied the whole plan did not hang together and it was a very poorly written docœTIent. I MOTION by Councilperson VanderLaan that the Council request Councilperson Windschitl fon~ard to the staff, for typing and circulation to the City Council, the chanßes he is proposing to the Community Development Plan. (Because it is difficult to assess what interrelationship each individual item has to another unless they are exposed.) Motion declared out of order. I ADDITION TO MOTION ON THE FLOOR Pase 144, paragraph 5 add the following sentence: "If the proposed development is outside the Five Year Capital Improvement Program, the property would be required to develop under the Rural Planning District requirements." Councilperson Holaseks second stands. I VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Hindschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan (Because ultimate impact on the plan has not been exposed by individual motion.) Motion and addition carried. I l!OTION by Councilperson Windschitl that eentral water be deleted from paragraph 2, page 142. Motion dies, no second. I l!OTION by Councilperson IUndschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to add to the last paragraph of page 143 the following; "All proposed development will be reviewed against standards on ground water, drainage, topography, soil conditions and the ability to provide adequate on-site sewer systems which would insure that the development would not prematurely require City sanitary sewer. The City will reserve the tight to require Special CounciL cleeting - j/ll/76 Minutes - Page 4 larger lot sizes in the development when the minimum lot size does not meet the above standards. VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. -~ Mr. Jack pointed out that this is the type of thing that could be handled by ordinances. MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Mayor Schneider to change page 143, paragraph 2 to read: "Residential, agricultural,. recreational and compatible commercial and industrial land uses will be allowed in the Rural Planning District. Councilperson Rither felt this Was inconsistent with the Plan. Councilperson VanderLaan stated the attempt of the Plan '~as to reduce the number of services to the Rural Planning District and when we introduce such items as sho~ing centers etc. we increase the need for services. This would discourage the''1~â~a¿ter of the Rural Planning District and therefore defeat the entire purpose of the Plan. VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Mayor Schneider to change page 152 under SECONDARY POLICIES, the second item, to read: ~ew development will be allowed in the Urban Service Area if such development is part of the Five Year Capital Development Program." Strike: on lots of less than 20 acres. Under SECONDARY POLICIES, the last item, change to read: "Compatible Industrial and Commercial land uses will be allowed in this area." ¡ VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion tarried. I second by Councilperson Holasek to delete the last MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, paragraph on page 153. VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. I MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to change "should" to "may" in paragraph 4, page 154. I /Attorney Hawkins stated that "should" is mandatory while "may" is permissive. I .. . . VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. I HOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to change "will" " to ''may'' on pag'e 157 under PRIHARY POLICY.' VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan 11otion carried. I MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Mayor Schneider to delete from page 160, the first paragraph, under SECONDARY POLICIES and replace it with the following: "Public acquisition by donation of development rights in exchange for preferential tàXation in tho'se areas not scheduled to be serviced immediately should be encouraged." Attorney Hawkids said this was a major addition and referred also to page 143, paragraph 3. He said he would need time to check it out. I Motion withdra'~. I MOTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to delete from the Plan all references to an Urban and Rural taxation district. Councilperson VanderLaan questioned if they were not destroying a particular right of the large property owner to have a reduced taxation if hedoes not develop. Special Council Meeting - j/ll/76 Minutes - PaGe 5 Councilperson Windschitl stated that all he was saying Was you cannot have different levies for different people and that it would be an administrative nightmare. Attorney Hawkins referred to paGe 2 of his letter (attachment D) in an attempt to explain urban taxation Once again. Mayor Schneider stated that Gayle Leone of the County Assessor's Office, said he didn't think it could be done. Mr. Hawkins said it has been done in Hugo for a number of years. VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. I-¡OTION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to change the last paragraph of page 165 to read: "Compatible commercial development will be allowed in the Rural Planning District."_ VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Hotion carried. J10TION by Councilperson Windschitl, second by Councilperson Holasek to chanGe page 201, paragraph 3 to read: "In areas not designated for improvements, residenti2.1 development will be al1O\~ed using the Rural Planning District regulations. Compatible commercial and industrial activities will be allowed in the Rural Planning area. Councilperson Rither remarked that he felt it was wrong and a major departure from what the Plan Was originally intended to do. I VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. I 110TION by Councilperson Holasek, second by Hayor Schneider to delete from paze 153, paraZraph 2. I There was a lengthy discussion on the practice of land banking. I , VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Hotion carried. I I MOTION by Councilperson Holasek, second by Mayor Schneider to delete from page 172, items 2f and 3b. I The Attorney stated that the City has the right according to statue. I Councilperson Holasek stated he would have no objection to purchasing land for a specific purpose but hei objected to buying land to put on the shelf. VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek; No- Rither, VanderLaan, Windschitl Motion defeated. I J.!OTION by Coun~ilperson VanderLaan, second by Councilperson Rither to adopt the Comprehensive Development Plan with the provision for 10 acre minimum lot si~e. VOTE: Yes - Rither, VanderLaan; No - Schneider, Rolasek, Windschitl Motion defeated. I MOTION by Mayor Schneider, second by Councilperson ¡¡olasek to adopt the Comprehensive Development Plan as changed with a rural lot size of 2~ acres. (To be in full compliance with our neighboring communities.) VOTE: Yes - Schneider, Holasek, Windschitl; No - Rither, VanderLaan Motion carried. I Couneilperson ~ither stated that the majority of the Council is no~~ faced with a situation of t eir own creation and had best be prepared to answer to it as this effort moves down the outline, as provided in the documents we've received over the past few days. Re hoped that the Council had not hurt itself but was fearful that it had and were in for some serious days ahead. Special Council'Meeting - 3/11/76 Minutes - Page 6 MOTION by Councilpcrson VanderLaan, second by Councilperson Rither that the subject of hiring a Building Inspector be placed on the agenda for Tuesday, March 16, 1976 and if there is a sort age of time other items be deleted. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilperson VanderLaan, second by Councilperson Rither to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 11:40. ~J~ - I METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ~~ Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 March 8, 1976 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FROM: Local Planning Assistance SUBJECT: Suggested Comprehensive Planning Implementation Program NOTE: This memorandum has been prepared for information purposes only and is intended as a basis for discussion and comment. Sugges tions., made herein should not be considered as a statement of official policy by the Metropolitan Council. In responSe to requests. an outline of a suggested implementation program has been prepared. The purpose of this memorandum will be to identify the procedure that may be followed by a Planning Commission and Council , as part of an overall program designed to implement a Comprehensive Development Plan. ! The processes discussed herein represents .somewhat of a departure from norma lly accepted implementa tion programs in tha tins tead of identifying specific products that must be prepared and adopted such as zoning. sub- division drdinances. and capital improvement programming. an attempt has , been made to provide more direction in terms of identifying the rationale and I illustrating the interrelationship between these products. At the risk of insert- I ing unwarrented planning jargen, it may be helpful to review the interrela tion- ship as a total system providing the municipality with an effective tool to manage development in a manner that is consistent with adopted municipality goals. po'licies and resources. The fOlloling is an outline of a hypothetical implication program: IMPLEMEkTATION PROGRAM OVERVIEJ Upon the comp1etion of a municipal comprehensive plan and final adoption. attention IWill become directed to the task of implementation; identify the extent of existing regulatory controls which will be revised. determining community developm~nt priorities. and provid ing reasonable es tima tes a s to their probable cost. Fidally it must be determined when community development needs must , , . be met and what fiscal resources are available to finance them. Wha t is being suggested is a means of systematically undertaking these activities through the establishment of three planning levels: long term - Approximately a 15 year time frame as found in most comprehens ive plans. Included would be an analysis to determine what can be anticipated in terms of new growth, where this growth should occur, and the amount of land consumed by land uses. After examining several options as to how best to accommòda te this anticipated growth as well . as maintain or improve existing developed areas, a set of community-wide goals are established. Appropriate policies are formulated and designed to assist the municipalities officials in the achievement of those goals. The compre- hensive plan should provide a general timing and staging scheme for future development perhaps by five year incre- ments. The importance of the comprehens ive plan is that it is a major policy statement, a guide for prioritying the expenditures of public funds, identifies major community development needs and in general serves as a basis to guide the orderly and economic development of the municipality. near term - Approximately a 5 year time frame based on a general staging scheme defined in the comprehens ive plan. This section would contain more definitive information with respect to identifying specific community development needs, establish costs, for the necessary capital improvements to meet those needs, and determine anticipated revenues and expenditures necessary in . order to fund the capital improvements. The primary purpose of this planning effort is to provide· the linkage between the planning function of comprehensive plans to a municipal management function which should be the objective of any planning effort. short term - One year time frame and as an integral part of the annual bUdgetary proces s. It is being suggested that this activity be expanded to include an overall municipal work program identifying specific actions, programs, projects and other activities or actions to be undertaken during the course oÍ the ensuing year. PREPARATION· OF A 5 YEAR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Given "'j"""n ,nd ,"gmg of grow" " '"pro"'d m ", comp"h,n"iv, plan, a d tailed program indicating timing and staging of needed public improvem nts is prepared. A refinement of community development needs is mad e through a citizen participation proces s. j' 1.0 Fiscal Analysis Concurrent with or perhaps as a prerequis ite to such detailed planning effort, the financial limitation of the municipality must be firmly established in order to determine the extent capital improvements can be made and what this relates to in terms of additional households which can be reasonably ac,?ommodated. 1.1 Based on household (determined by population forcasts and characteristics) forcasts, income levels and anticipated increases in assessed valuation, anticipated revenue will . have to be determined. Intended as part of this task is to identify possible sta te and federal funding sources. 1.2 Unless already compiled in other facilities studys, determine local system capacity for roads, water, sewer, parks and open space and even schools. Although the municipality does not have direct authority over school districts, they are never- theless directly affected by construction and maintenance of school facilities. , 1.3 Quantify existing levels of service such as police and fire j ,,"o,"oUon, <oM mn in'"nnno", nnd noo"" 'O'V'O" '0'" 'nd programs. 2.0 C mmunity Development Plan T~iS plan would apply to those areas or area being activily urbanized during this 5 year period. It should be pointed out that other portions o~ the municipality not in the area of active reurbaniza tion may also b included. The distinction that must be made, however, is that certain capital intensive investments such as sewer, water, etc., will bl programed for the urbanizing area, while in others, cäpital investr:1ent m y be made only to maintain existing facilities and levels of service. 2.1 Identify community development needS and priorities through a citizen participation process. This could be the first in an annual process to solicit citizen input to the planning ar,d managemen t proces s. Once a list of needs is prepared and prioritized it will then become necessary to compare t;,e prioritized community development needs to forecasted available funding, through local, state and federal sources, (Task 1. 0). 2.2 Policy Framework - A set of overall policies should be established to implement and refine those found in the comprehens ive plan as well as those identified through the citizen participation process. These policies would be used to assist in the decision-makir.g process and could address such issues relating to land use, , i housing. transportation. recreation/open space and environ- mental protection. As part of this policy formulation phase. consideration could also be given to establishing guidelines and standards for the evaluation ofçJevelopment or redevelop- ment through municipality reviews. 2.3 5 year implementation program: 2.31 A 5 year capital improvement program scheduling the commitment of community fiscal resources needed such improvements to streets and roads, sewer and water, and recreational facilities required to support anticipated development. 2.32 Identify local programs needed to meet documented community development needs. 2.33 Regulatory controls - The legal planning tools available to the community in order to assist in controling tho timing and staging of development in a manner consistent with the programmed provision of public service and facilities. Typically there are direct land development , control such as zoning, subdivision, building codes and I ALOI Ploe ordinances, official mapping and other supporting ordin- ances as deemed necessary by the municipality. 3.0 I On an annual bas is the municipality would prepare a managemen t I program, which would include an operation and maintenance budget arid the capital bUdget. This activity would also offer officials an opportunity to review the 5 year element of the community development , prtgram through the citizens participation process. This annual plan w uld also describe those programs that are presently under way or b1ing undertaken in order to meet stated goals and objectives. Finally, in the preparation of the annual plan, the policies contained in the policy framework are used as a basis for all decision-making to provide guidance and promote cons is tency. The underrking of an effort to initate an implementation program described herein or modification thereof would be the initial step in establishing wtat has been ommonly refered to in the planning profession as the 3C process - continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive. . t I ) TKDA TOm, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED M E M 0 R A N D U M ~ To: It!". Andover City Council Copies To: tbe. Andover Staff From: Mr. DuWayne Kasma D ate: March 11, 197 6 . Reference: Andover 1976-1 Sanitary Sewer Proiect CDMMISSION NO. 6454 The purpose of this memorandum is to review the action required by the Council to obtain (l) review approval of our grant and loan application to the Farmers Home Administration from the Metropolitan Council and (2) approval of working plans and specifications from Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) for a permit to construct the system. In a letter1from Mr. Karl Burendt, Metropolitan Council Staff Engineer dated February 6, 1976 we received a list of the action required by the City. The following . , lIems must be done: I , 1 ) Adopt Metropolitan Urban Service Area Boundary , I 2) Revise Comprehensive Sewer Plan to add additional items requested in MWCC Ado,' C04mnnuy Dove10pmcnC Pion 3) 4) Adopt an implement Ordinances to protect rural area. We are to submit a time schedule for the above items if we cannot submit by April 15, 1976 We will r1view in detail the action required to accomplish each of the above items: 1 ) Metropolitan Urban Service Area Boundary I I I. Council should pass resolution adopting Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The proposed Urban Area shown on Figure No. I of Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan dated December 13, 1974 should be that boundary. The j' MEMORANDUM Andover City Council March 11, 1976 Page Two resolution should include the following: WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has requested the City of Andover define the Metropolitan Urban Service Area line (MUSA) to be consistent with the guidelines of the Development Framework Plan; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to set and establish the MUSA boundary in the same location as the Andove r Urban Planning District; and WHEREAS, the Andover Urban Planning District and the Andover Urban Service Area have the same boundaries; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Andover hereby establishes the Metropolitan Urban Service Area line to be as delineated on Figure No. 1 of the Compr·ehensive Sewer Plan dated December 13, 1974 and described on the· attached sheet: 2) Revise Comprehensive Sewer Plan The MWCC has established new requirements for Comprehensive Sewer Plans (CSP) and is currently preparing letters to all Communities in Metro , Area outlining required information. The rlvisions required to our CSP are as follows: 1) prepJre updated maps showing locations of the existing public sewerage systefo, installed in 1975, and private on-site sewage disposal system. 2) prep~re updated future use of proposed sewerage system map showing maps to include CAB.Interceptor System capacities for major trunk sewer lines. 3) List t e present scwcred population and number of sewer connections including proje ted increases each year for the next five years. 4) prep~re map indicating USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil classes and areas of high ground water tables. (Available from Community Development Plan) 5) Prepare existing and proposed land use, proposed streets, highways, and open spaces. (Available from Community Development Plan) ¡, ¡' MEMORA NDUM Andover City Council March 11, 1976 Page Three 6) Prepare existing and projected ultimate zoning and land use including open space, flood plains and similar restricted areas. 7) Prepare time schedule for sanitary sewer construction by year for first five years period and by five year periods for twenty years. 8) Assist City Staff in completing Ordinances and Regulations, and adminis trative procedures required in CSP work list. 3) Community Development Plan The Council plans to act on the Community Development Plan on March 1, 1976. 4) Ordinances The following Ordinances need to be prepared and adopted: 1 ) Adoption of MWCC Rules and Regulations - done in Ordinance No. 32 2) Sanitary Sewer System Ordinance controlling inflow/infiltration - to be prepared at this time. 3) Flood~lain, Wetland, Steep Slopes and Drainageway Ordinance - to be prepared after completion of Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. 4) sanitaly Sewer Ordinance governing installation of sanitary sewer system and s Irvice connections - to be prepared. 5) Sanita y Sewer Ordinance controlling discharge of septic tank and holding tanks umpage into local sanitary sewers - to be prepared. 6) On-Sir Sewage Disposal System Ordinance - ready for Council approval. 7) City Administrative Procedure for Public and On-Site Disposal Systems - I to be prepared. SUMMAR Y The Counc 1 could take action on March 11, 1976 to complete the requirements as follows: 1 ) MUSA Boundary - adopt March 11, 1976 I ¡ MEMORAND UM Andover City Council March 11, 1976 Page Four 2) Comprehensive Sewage Plan - Authorize work to be accompleted not later than May 1, 1976 3) Community Development Plan - Adopt March· 11, 1976 4) Ordinances - a) Authorize Sanitary Sewer portion of WJ rk to be com- pleted by City Staff and TKDA by July 1, 1976 b) Statement to Metro Council that Floodplain, Wetland, Steep Slope and Drainage Ordinance to be completed after completion of Comprehens ;ve Storm Drainage Plan, no t la te r than July 1, 1977 DRK:vlo I Mr, Norman J. Werner February 6, 1976 Pa ge 2 I Commencing at the southeast comer of Section 36, T32N, R24W, thence west on the south line of said section 36 and 3/4 mile farther west more or less to the westerly 1/16 I line of section 35 of said T32N, R24W; thence northerly on west 1/16 line of section 35 and 26 for 1 3/4 miles more or less to the N.E. corner of the S.W. 1/4 of the NoW. 1/4 of Sec. 26; thence west 2 1/4 miles more or less on the north 1/16 line of section 26,27, and 28 of said T32N, R24W to the S.W. corner of the NoW. 1/4 of the NoW 0 1/4 of section 28; thenc8 north 1/4 mile more less to the N. E. corner of Section 29; thence westerly one mile more or less to the NoW, corner of section 29; thence northerly 1/4 mile marc or less to the N.E 0 corner of the S.E. 1/4 of the S.E. 1/4 of section 19, T32N, R24W; thence westerly on the south 1/16 line of section 19 approxi- mately 3/4 mile to the center of the Rum River and to the westerly City Limi ts of Andovcr and there terminating. Ml that afCa to the south of the above described line, in Andovcr, are to be a part of the Urban Service Area in Andover, If AndoveJ is desirous to include the south 1/2 of Section 20, T32N, R24W as part oflthe Urb¿Jn Service Area such a request to the Metropolitan Council would be considered reasonable provided that the S.W. 1/4 and the N.W. 1/4 of the SoW. 1/4 of Sec 0 3S, T32N, R24W. wcre deleted from the proposed Urban Service Area 0 Such a change in land areas could be offered to the Metropolitan Council as reasonable because of the large amount of Róund Lake and adjacent low land in the south 1/2 of Section 200 The Urban , Service Boundary line would then fuIIy encompass a!! of Round Lake and the shore Jinc around the lake and would make it possible for the, Clt'! of Andove to morc fu!!y control any possible problems of this ¿¡rea in Section 20. '"dow, ,t"ld "o<,,¡,b- "C"",,¡,U'g olUm"," """0" ,OWo< uno,,",,,,,,-, now in exl tence with present and future capacity as is now avai!ùblc or is bein planned for through the CAB fùcility. Andovcr should consider ANDOVER, MINNESOTA A UTHORIZA TION FOR PROFESSIONAL SER VICES To: Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson Order and Associates, Incorporated 1408 Pioneer Building Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Date March 11, 1976 Pursuant to your agreement dated August 8, 1974, you are hereby authorized to proceed with the professional services described as follows: COMPREHENSIVE SEW ER PLAN We will prepare a Comprehensive Sewer Plan in accordance with the Metropolitan Council Waste Management Policy Plan for Sanitary Sewers. The attached informa- tion list outlines items to revise the Andover Comprehensive Sewer Plan dated December 13, 1974. The work program consists of the following: 1 ) Prepare updated maps showing locations of the existing public sewerage system installed in 1975 and private on-site sewage disposal systems. 2) Prepare updated future use of proposed sewerage system map showing maps to in- clude CAB Interceptor System for capacities for major trunk sewer lines. 3) List the plesent sewered population and number of sewer connections including projected increases each year for the next five years. . 4) Prepare map indicating USDA Soil Conservation Service soil classes and areas of high grÓund water tables. (Available from Community Development Plan) 5) Prepare e~isting and proposed land use, proposed streets, highways, and open spaces. ( vailable from Community Development Plan) 6) Prepare e isting and projected ultimate zoning and land use including open space, floodplain and similar restricted areas. -1- j 7) Prepare time schedule for sanitary sewer construction by year for first five year period and by five-year periods for twenty years. For the services outlined above, we are to be paid on the basis of our General Engineering Agreement dated August 8, 1974. The amounts shall be payable monthly and shall not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). Approved at a Special meeting of the City Council on March 11, 1976. By Attest Mr. Richard'Schneider, Mayor Mrs. Patricia K. Lindquist, Clerk I -2- [ ~ ATTACHMENT AS PER REQUEST OF COUNCILPERSON WINDSCHITL ,!i'iY'Y' U URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Court Decisions \J p..42 National Land and Investment Co. vs Kohn "A four acre minimum lot size requirement was invalidated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court because a community cannot "stand in the way of the natural forces which send our growing population into hitherto undeveloped areas in search of a comfortable place to live..... p. 59 "A zoning ordinance whose primary purpose is to prevent the entrance of newcomers in order to avoid future burdens, economic and otherwise, upon the administration of public services and facilities cannot be held valid. It continued, "Zoning provisions may not be used, however, to avoid the increased reponsibilities and economic burdens which time and natural growth invariably bring." p. 59 Appeal of Kit-Man Builders, Inc. "The court said, "They may not refuse to confront the future by adopting zoning regulations that effectively restrict population to near present levels. It is not I for any given township to say who mayor may not live within its confines, I while disregarding the interests of the entire community." p. 61 "The court rejected the township's argument that large lot sizes were needed to prevent on-site sewage problems, preserve the rural and historic surrounding of the neighborhood, and lessen the burden on the township to provide municipal services." p. 59 Appeal oflGirSh I "The court stated, "Zoning is a tool in the hands of government bodies which enables them more effectively to meet the demands of evolving and growing communities. It must not and cannot be used by these officials as an instrument by which they may shirk their responisbilities. Zoning is a means by which a governm¿ntal body may plan for the future -- it may not be used as a means to deny the future." I p. 61 Steel Hill Development, Inc. vs Town of Savbornton I "The Court upheld a six acre requirement adopted to preserve the natural resources of the area and prevent ecological harm where no exclusionary effect existed." p. 64 Fulling vs Palumbo I "The New york case of Fulling vs Palumbo sees evidence of diminution in value as serving a very specific task. Starting with the presumption of validity. The landowner in order to prevail must come forward with evidence that he will suffer a severe financial loss by the operation of the ordinance. Once this is established, the burden of going fo~.ard shifts to the municipality, which must show that some legitimate public purpose will be served by so restricting the property owner's land. This is not to indicate that the burden of persuasion has switched, merely the burden of going forward with the evidence." ) BAnCOCl\:. LOC:;::::J. ¡;:;:;:..c:~::~ ::: :.1A~J:;2LLA ATTOl.i:NEY6 AT LAW NORTliTOWN CENTER 117 NORTHTOWN DRIVE BLAINE, MINNESOTA 55434 TEL.l (612) 786-0250 ED:.íCl'ò OJ I". U/'..DCQC:;; ANOKA OFFICE :r.¡.:;v(:lL J. LOC¡¡:z::.t 118 EAST MAIN' STREET JA:,:::J .!.r. ;"'EIL::::;1~ ANOKA. MINNESOTA 5~303 F":::¡..1:è; .\.. MA,,""';:"ELLA. TEL. (012) 421-51,,1 JO.L~ ~ (:.:;.:>¡~AI;1>r.AN nlc~:....r..D il:;ENS 0 H01H'::';'T 1'", MANNELLA JOHN M. DURH:E WILLIAM O. IIA'vr~:S RONALD D. PETERSON ~\l~ll'~ll 0, 10 '(G City Council Cit.y of Andover , .-"- Crosstown Boulevard N.W. ...;..û::)~ '" -"'\ ,-~ ivIinnesota 55303 ¡"J."- l.......... ~ n...' : Cù::lprehensi ve Development Plan/Property Tax Consideration::;/ Vested Rights Gentlemen: This letter:is written to provide the Council with additional information regarding various property taxation alternatives that could be considered in conjunction \dth the adoption of the cOI:";.n1uni ty development plan. I 1976, In my letter of January 12, I indicated the possible need fo~ property tax adjustments on lands subject to large lot zoning or :'estricted development. Und8r 11innesota law, the City of AnGc"¡',c' :",';::; the authorirly to divid8 the munieipality by ordinance, into an urt~~ wcrvic8 distirict and a rural service district, constitutinG separate taxinß dist~icts for the purpose of all municipal property taxes. The rural sJrvice distriet ~ay include such platted and unplatted lands as in the judgment of the City Council at the time of the ~dop~ion of an ordinance are rural in character and are not dev01~~0d f 0:' CO!;;!!\CrC1al, indus trial 0: urban r8sidential purposes, ,and !o~o_ ~110SC rcaso s, are not benefltted to the same degree a~ otncr ~Q~Q~ by n;unicipa] services, financed by general taxation. The rural scnvice district ma~ include lands which are not contiguous to one &nothc~. r.lhe ordinan e adopted shall deter~ine the approxi~ate ra tic llhi C~1 ~n the judGmen of the governing body exists between the benefits reJultirlg fro!!1 tilX GU ported municipal service to parcels of land of like value, situated in the rural s8rvice district and in the urban service district rc::.;pectively.. ] PCl[';e 2 March 9, 1976 The law provides the authority to the City to amend the boundaries of the urbCln and rural serviee districts as well as to annually review the tClX rCltio affixed by the eouncil. In addition, the statute requires that when any lot is platted or was previously platted and an application for a permit for construction is wade or if basic urban services~ such as water and sewer, are extended to any lot, ~he council shall transfer the lots so affected to the urban service district. It would be our opinion that the adoption of such districts would have a rniti~atinß effect on a constitutional challenge to large lot zonins. ,':~:>·,-,~~'::.'¡a":'ìl·L', the 8stabli[jhmcnt of theca d:L:::trict;::; could be accor.;jl~~~~:-,~;rJ ",;",;;; i ;;;Ì\'\'\I:~l~r \v iUl the Jrl1plc'l!!cnLaL"ion p11"'1.~~c of t11c C()mpr'(:hr:[J:~i -If: :,-., r.. ..\1. ¡ Ill' l~l)l!¡!¡:I! JU¡'I'LIII1': Oil ,J:tll!!.'U',V 1J:> L(j'/r.;) ::(.!v¡~f';ll (!LIí:;~LJIJ!I:: \r/(,I',< 111:¡lj,· J'l'1';~U'dillii tile pL)~;:JJble alLcl'natlv(; 01' chanc;JDt~; rYla:ckul.; value (.In ifr·():)(:~·L.J GUbj0Ct to developmental restriction~. .At the time of writinE thi~ ::',," ~- .,-,':', tÎ1i~:; ìn;lttcr is still beinG explored and I am tillable to fJ2'.I-r" '>: ~~u:·:.~i('l\;;~nt information at this t:l.r;¡e. I will, h01¡Jcvcr, be: £ttl'~ trJ ~~.:-":;.,,"';:- ~-"'lì\- l.:lh~~)tion:J that m:J.Y arisc at the i'lI.J.rch 11th m.cetin[~. ;\:l,-~l.lìl.~':'· i.1Ul~~~ti\...)n concerned the ri[';ht~) of :l~divic1uD..l~ or clcvclopcr~~ -...r:-;r) ';'i.'(¡ property that would be included within a ten acre zone that had not te0n previously platted. The test of an individual or developer's rig~~ to develop land depends on whether a vested right to build has been creato~. ~iIinneôota cases of vested rights stand generally for the proposi~cion th2.t no vested right is acquired unless substantial construction has t2.~cC'n place pursuant to a valid building or subdivision permit. A recent Minnesota case decided in June of 1975 adopted the general rule recoGni~ed throughout the United States. This states that the Court ~ill rofuse to recocnize a vested right to develop property unless the municipality ;,a~ issued Q permit which was valid under existinß law and the propc~ty G:'!~0r, in reliClnce th0reon, made a substantial change of position in rel~"~;i(", to ti1C l,'lnd. It \'lould, theref'ore, appear that under the IF.;.'/; in r,:~ln~J:;:'/~:;::,'., ~"1 ,--:,'\"(~lo~)cp would have to have commt~ncccl con~tT'llct:lon :J.n'; -:n';L-:-'-,'-'~.', ~~;:·l':-~<i :111i.'¡:ll l~X~')~'n~~l' ror :1u(~h t1¡1l11';;; :1;; ('(/:)(1 r;( r¡;~Lr'II(;Li(Jf } ;;I.r'P'-; ; ì'\:1111\1\\)'·" I'i. ~~\'l.l~l·a, ill ()I'dt'I' \,¡) 1, · 'I·\~Ljv(·¡.y CIJ;I.L.I,!;tl!':(~ Lip' ¡:IJlJ"Li LI';,'('II·,J; í..J , ,¡' (.II!· l) l'd i I I: III~~ {' . -.::. ." , "' ,.,-, l \' , -, , . ''', , (. , "t I f . ' .' "'. C -1-6 -é!~ 1,."- _ .~ '-~'-~ \ \.i:-, \ 1 \ ;;.::J- I ~G\....\J /V -: 1 ~ .j.~: ,: l... -ÌI~l\~r ClnG ,'J j