Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC December 5, 1978 . ANDOVER ~ 01 TI?mJLAP CITY COU~CIL JŒRTING - DECEMBER 5, 1978 MINUTBS The pe~ular Bi-Monthly Meetin~ of the Andover City Council was called to order by Actin~ Mayor Kenneth Orttel on December 5, 1978, 7:32 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilþersons present: Lachinski, McClure, Orttel Absent: Mayor Windschitl Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, John Davidson; Plannin~ and Zonin~ Chairman, Larry Retzlaff; and others. Resident Forum Norman Myhre - informed the Council of the situation at the Andover landfill. He has used the facilities on Saturdays for the last five years, but the landfill has recently been closed to resident traffic on Saturdays. With that in mind, he changed his schedule to use it on weekday mornings; and he found that the dump is not ope~ to residents until 1 o'clock in the afternoon. He felt this is very restrictive and wondered if there was anythin~ the City could do about this. Discussion was on whether the City has the ri~ht to negotiate with the landfill operators with re~ard to hours open for residential use. The Attorney and the Clerk will review the contract with the facility to see if they can be encouraged to make the facilities open to the residents more often. d'Arcy Rosell, 2942 l8lst Avenue, representing the Rum River Hockey - noted there has been some vandalism on the li~ht switches at the hockey rink. All the knobs have been broken off. They have gotten the lights on, but she was not sure if they could ~et them off a~ain. Also, they have taken the City lock off the warmin~ house and have replaced it with two Rum River Hockey locks. The key that the City Hall has opens both of those locks. Dick Schneider - noted that do~s are becomin~ a problem, as people are letting them run lose and they are startin~ to chase deer. He witnessed this in his area. Re felt the residents shoulò be told through the newsletter or in the paper to keep their do~s leasbed. He felt it would not be worth the expense to call Animal Control, since by the time they would come out the do~s are ~one. Mr. Schneider also asked if anythin~ further is bein~ done about buying gas for the trucks through the County bid as the City is usin~ more and more gas doing winter plowing, etc. He stated there is a stora~e ~as tank mounted in the air at the school house that belon~s to the City which could be used. Gas could then be purchased in bulk or throu~h the County bid. This item was referred to Ray Sowada, Senior Publ ic ~'orks Person, ,to see if that tank is usable. Mr. Schneider also noted that surrounding communities always have a write-up in the ~noka Union, and Andover is not ~etting any publicity. Acting Mayor Orttel noted that the paper provides tbe reporters; he will check with the paper about this. ~~e"da ~p"Droval MO~ION by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, to approve the published Agenda with the following addition: Item 5i, DeGardner Lot Split. Motion carried unanimously. . --- pe¢ular City Council Meetin~ December 5, 197~ - Minutes Pa~e 2 ?Teltminary ?lat - Wobe~on Woods Mr. Petzlaff stated that the Plat was returned to the plannin~ Commission for conR1deration of a second access and e~ress from the Plat. In reviewin~ that with the developer, they are recommendin~ City Council approval of the Plat as laid out now for tOTIo~raphical reasons. Tbere are land limitations such as elevations which make it extremely costly to put in a roadway. ryiscussion was on the six lots that are substandard in width. Mr. Retzlaff stated that the Commission's >Tote B was tbat the lot fronta~e shall be on the long side on the interior street. ~ote A aska for a variance from the lot width requirement of 300 feet, as the widtb is only 264 feet. The cul-de-sacs are approximately 540 to 550 feet on Flora and 550 feet On Bidelweiss. Discussion was also in the block lengths on l74th Lane W~. Definition of a block length under the MN state Statute 505 is a conti~uous street without intersecting streets. At this point, they a~e recor,nizing , that in the future there may be a cross street to the north, even though there is no access at the present time. Mr. Retzlaff felt the variance for block length is over the entire 2~00 feet. Block 3 is more than 1320 feet lon~. On the north side, Block 1 meets the 1320-foot requirement, but Block 2 is sligbtly longer than 1320 feet. It was agreed that Lot 3, Block 3, is not a corner lot; therefore, there is no exception on lot width or lot depth. Rrnie RuUd, developer, explained that the reason Lots 1 and 3 of Block 1 and Lot 1 of ~lock 3 are substandard in width is because of the limitation of land of 594 feet alon~ County Road 9. The lo~ical place for the street is down the middle, which takes hh feet, leavin~ two 264-foot lots on each side of the street. Councilperson VanderLaan accepted the ar~ument for Lot 1 of Block 3 and Lot 1 of Block I, but ouestioned if fewer lots could be made in that area to eliminate the substandard lot of Lot 3, Block 1, possibly placin~ the street on tbe northern edge of the Plat. This woulò increase the size of tbe lots, as this is in the rural planning area in which there is an obli~ation to see that there is less development rather than more. Mr. Ruud stated they are not asking for a variance on lot size, as the lots are 2t acres in area, and they are not tryin~ to get a denser development than what is allowed by 0rdinance. Mr. Ruud also showed an aerial photo of the area showing his plat, the existin~ roadways, the surroundin~ development,-and possible road suggestions for the undeveloped land and how they would tie into his plat. With this plat, they have tried to save as mucb of the natural features of tbe area as possible and still make it a desirable place to live once the streets are put in. Councilperson Lachinski has a problem putting a deadend road in there, but was comfortable in the future extension of l74th Lane if it could be constructed as proposed on the aerial photo. Councilperson VanderLaan questioned the justification for the exception on Lot 5, Block 2, which is approximately 250 feet at the setback line measured on the arc. It was determined that Lot 6 is more than 2t acres in size. All lots are 2t acres minimum, a few are somewhat larger. Acting Mayor Orttel felt it would be most logical to put the street in the center of the Plat on the west end and had no problem with the substandard lots along County Road 9 because of the land limitation; but he felt there should be no reason to have.substandard lots on tbe eastern end as the road is designed to fit that type of layout. He, too, objected to granting the variance on the width of Lot 5. Mr. Ruud felt it would be possible to eliminate that substandard width either by moving the lot line on Lot 6 or by moving the road somewhat, and was willing to do so. Discussion was on the procedure the developer should take to eliminate these substandard lots, on whether or not it should òe referred back to the P & Z for further study and ~egular City Council Meeting necember 5, 19713 - Minutes Page 3 (Preliminary Plat - '."obegon Woods, Continued) review, and on whether the City Engineer should also investigate the plat relative to the layout and the possibility of placing l74th Lane on the northern edge of the plat. Mr. Davidson stated that their role has always been not to design plats, but to inform the developer what must be done to meet City codes. He also stated that the extension of l74th would be possible, and there would be a continuity of street systems in the future. MO~IO~by VanderLaan, Seconded by McClure, that the Wobegon Woods Preliminary Plat be referred back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further consideration with the City Council's request that the developer attempt to delete the substandard widths on the six lots having been previously mentioned in our discussion, and that the City Enginee~ before presentation to the Council, comment on the submitted redraft of the Preliminary Plat. Discussion: Mr. Retzlaff stated that except for the two holes which are ap~roximately 19 feet deep, the land is relatively flat. Mr. Ruud stated that major road changes, ete. , should be brought out at the sketch-plan stage, not at the Preliminary Plat level; otherwise he would prefer seeing a different method of approval in that sketch plans would represented to the Council before proceeding on the Preliminary Plat level. Motion carried unanimously. Special Use Permit - Andover Mission Church MO~TON by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, to refer the matter of the Special Use Permit of the Andover Mission Church back to the Planning and Zoning Commission pursurant to 0rdinance 10 for further consideration. Motion carried unanimously. Lot Snl it - Hu~hes (Peference Clerk's note on Agenda information, 12/9713) Attorney Hawkins stated the problem referred to by the Clerk is the wording which says having a width of less than 300 feet and are less than 5 acres. If someone has a parcel that was less than 5 acres but over 300 feet in width, it would not fall within this 0rdinance in the strict sense. If the "and" were chan~ed to "or", then if either one of those criteria are met, a lot split could be allowed. Technically, the parcel h,3s to be less than 300 feet and less than 5 acres to qualify, which, Mr. Hawkins stated, is not the intent of the Ordinance. Discussion was on whether the word "and" or "or" should be used in the Ordinance. The phrase "and" comes from the State Statute, and Councilperson VanderLaan recalled tbat in this case one of the lots being created does not have five acres, therefore the Lot Split Ordinance is applied, and the word "and" would be kept in the Ordinance. No reference to the wording of the Ordinance is to be made in the Resolution as suggested by the Attorney. MO~ION by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, entering a Resolution Approving a Lot Snlit of Plat 65914, Parcel 3000 for Lester L. and Donna J. Hughes ... (See Resolution II 132-8) Motion carried unanimously. Preliminary Plat - Lunds F.ver~reen Estates MOTION by McClure, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Preliminary Plat of Lunds Evergreen Estates be referred back to the P & Z. Motion carried unanimously. ~ecess at 13:55; reconvene at 9:12 p.m. MSAH - Five-Vear Pro~ram Mr. Davidson reviewed the City's five-year }~AH plan, which will be used in establishing the apportionment of funds to the community, and explained how MSAH funds are allocated to the narticipating communities. Because some communities are not using their Re~ular City Council Meeting December 5, 1978 - Minutes Uap-e 4 (~~AH - Five-Year Program, Continued) allotments for Municipal State Aid Highways, funds will be transferred from tbose communities and ~e-a~portioned to communities which need and are using them. It should be recongized that this should be updated on an annual basis. ~x. Davidson also noted that the City's MSAH account has been updated to include the negotiated prices for Prairie Road and the actual prices for the bridge construction projects, which shows a 1979 unencumbered allotment of ~70,OOO. Mr. Davidson also explained the designation of mileage for MSAH streets in the City. For this year's designation, he recommended deleting Section 109, which is l69th Lane, from the system, giving sufficient mileage to designate the entire length of Hanson Boulevard from County Road 116 to County Road 18. The County has indicated they would prefer the road to curve from Andover Boulevard to meet County Road 18 at the inter- section of County Road 109. Meeting all the criteria of the County, once the road is desi~nated and the MSAH right of way is acquired, the County is then ready to come in to construct that road. It will be designated as a County Road with a M5AH designation. Mr. Davidson asked that the formal resolution be held over to the next regular Council meeting so the Plan can be adopted by the State first. The estimation for the right of way acquisition for the two miles of Hanson Boulevard is ~127,OOO. Councilperson Lacbinski stated tbat this plan is identical to what the Road Improvement Committee proposed. Mr. Retzlaff stated that the Planning Commission took the view on the five-year plan as being beyond the financial limits of the City. ~. Davidson stated we can designate the improvement or acquisition of right of way and either use short-term bonds or encumber up to 50 percent of next year's annual allotment You want to keep the funds depleted each year so there is no penalty, because any funds carried over are re-apportioned after the first of the year. And on any normal construction proRram, final payments aren't usually completed until after the end of the year. It's better to encumber next year's funds so that the balance is always negative. Councilperson Lachinski felt there were some errors in the estimation of right of way acquisition costs and questioned the costs on the bridge projects coming out of MSAH funds. Mr. Davidson explained that the State funding pays only for the actual bridge construction cost, and any acquisition of right of way, approach, some engineering costs, etc., must be provided by tbe City.' However, the City can use their ~~AH funds as eligible funds for these costs. Mr. Davidson also stated that in purchasing right of way for the extension of Hanson Boulevard, costs that would not be eligible from the I1SAH fund but must come from the City's General Fund or from assessment of property owners, would be attorney's fees, certain engineering costs which relate to drawings and legal descriptions -- any work the City has to do to put it in order for acquisition. If it is contested, the court process becomes City costs. He felt that allowances shoUtl be made in the City's 1979 budget for these items, although he felt that the costs could be assessed back to the property owners. MO~I0N by VanderLaan, Seconded by McClure, that the TKDA proposed Five-Year Improvement Program for the Municipal State Aid System for the City of Andover, reference ~!emo dated ~ovember 22, 1978, be approved and adopted by the City Council. Discussion: Counciluerson Lachinski noted that it is the program uresented by the Road Improvement Committee and tbe exception by the Planning and Zoning Commission is strictly a matter of financing and what year it should be in. Motion carried unanimously. Award Contract - Public ~ervices Building Discussion was on how much money is left from the ß430,OOO bond issue. Councilperson Lachinski noted that the City can utilize the interest accrued on money that is investeq and that one should make sure that that money is invested to its best potential. Pe~ular City Council Meeting December 5, 1978 - ~Iinutes Pa~e 5 (Award Contract - Public Services Building, Cont~nued) Fire Chief Vic Evans explained that the Building Committee is proposing to take $4,400 tha twas previously allocated by the Council for the bond election from the $17,540 election expenses noted by the Clerk, leaving $13,140 in bond election expenses to be taken from the bond itself. tt13l,704 has been award for the fire trucks plus 59,217 for eoui'Pment. Originally Mr. Evans included $5,000 for building equipment from the bond; he felt that that could be limited to $1,000. There is $29,596 in equipment which has yet to be purchased before the Fire Department can function. He recommended taking ~5,OOO off that amount and replacin~ it with $5,000 in the 1979 budget which was originally requested but cut by the Council. This would leave $24,596 for equipment to come from the bond. A good portion of this equipment will be on the trucks, and Mr. Evans is wanting to purchase it as soon as þossible because the longer one waits, the higher the prices go. Subtracting 513,140, $131,704, $9,217, $l,OCOand $24,596 from the $430,000 bond issue, leaves 5250,341 for the cost of the public services building. The bid recommended by the Building Committee minus the alternates comes to $249,761. Discussion was on the reserve money needed and whether the interest from money invested can be used on the project. Councilperson Lachinski stated he talked with Mr. Forness, who stated any interest the City can accrue between the time we receive the bond and the time the money is all spent, can be used for the project. The cushion is the over-levy of 5 percent which is required by law. Councilperson Lachinski went on to say that V~. Forness stated that if 563,496 were assessed, that would include l~ years' interest plus 5 percent over-levy. If that is the case, any money we collect can be used on the project. Acting Mayor Orttel stated that the 1979 budget is tight, and there is some question about whether the 55,000 requested by the Building Committee can be so designated. He also exuressed concern that accepting this bid for the building leaves nothing for contin~encies whatsoever. Should something happen, we are in real trouble. Councilperson IIcClure stated that as the Building Committee started working, things were added to the buildin~ alon~ the way, and it started to get out of hand. When they realized the bids would be too high, they came back with some deducts. Councilperson VanderLaan asked how firm the figures are for equipment, as there has been an underestimation of prices since the Ordinance was passed, that a future Council isn't faced with more departures from the five-year capital program. She went on to say that this puts the future Council in a position of determining whether the levy will need to be raised for fire protection in the City or whether some of the other programs are going to be as valuable. Aren't we going to be looking at a very very high dollar cost for fire protection in the future. If this keeps getting out of hand, she saw some very serious problems for the City. Chief Evans stated that they are asking that the 55,000 originally requested be put back into their 1979 budget. Chief Evans also stated that Bloomberg wants to do the site preparation as soon as possible and put the footings in before it freezes too deeply. They won't get the fab- con uanels until February. It was noted in the discussion of cutting something out of the building to save costs that there are no frills left in the building, that all the paneling, cupboards, and carpeting have been taken out of the building already. The bid includes a 6-inch well at 200 feet and 7 hours development time. If it goes deeper or takes longer, it would be a cost overrun to the City. ':'OTTO'T by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, introducing a Resolution Awarding contract for the Public Services Building to be constructed from proceeds of $430,000 GO bonds. The City ~ouncil of the City of Andover hereby resolves: Pursuant to advertisement for bids as required by law, bids were received, opened and tabulated for construction of the Public Services Buildin~ on Friday, December 1, 1978, 2:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard ~rN, witb the following results: T?e~ular City Council Meeting T')ecember 5, 19713 - Hinutes 1'a~e 6 (Award Contract - Public Services Buildin~, Continued) Base Bid ABJ Enterpriser, Tnc., Bxcelsior, ~r ~322,19!J Elview Construction, Tnc., IIpls., }W 327,650 Lowry Hill Bnter]'rises, osseo, M'! 339,000 Bloornber¡:; Co., Inc., Chanhassen, MN 2513,1375 and that the City Council anprove the low bid of Bloomberg , Tnc., as recommended by the 1'ublic Services Buildin~ Committee to Bloomber~ Company, Inc., less deductibles 111, G2, G3, GUt G5, G6, and III for a total of ~9 ,114, and for a total bid of ~249, 761. ~he Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into a contract with Bloomberg, Inc., in the amount of ~249,76l. The Clerk is further directed to return to all bidders exce]'t tbat of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder, deposits made with their bids. Ado]'ted by the City Council of the City of Andover this Fifth day of 'December, 19713 (See Resolution 1'133-13) Discussion on Alternate M2: The bid includes two pumps and two tanks, which is what the Committee wants. Alternate !e calls for one pump and one tank; the BuiJ.ding Committee does not what that alternate; therefore, it should not be deducted from the bid. VOTE 0'1 MOTTO';: YES-Lachinski, McClure, Orttel; NO-VanderLaan Motion carried. Tt was sug¡;ested that the question of how much interest money will be accrued from the bond and whether or not it can be used for the project should be directed to the ~inance Committee to make sure the money is invested most properly. Chief Evans explained that/îfie Building Committee meeting, Dave Almgren and Ray Sowada were desirous of takin¡; the top soil out of the hole in front of the tennis court to be salva~ed for use around the tennis courts and the public services building. The dirt from the Public Services Buildin¡; site would then be moved to fill that hole. ~hief Bvans requested authorization for Mr. Sowada to s]'end up to ~500 to hire a dozer to salva¡;e that black dirt. There are no provisions for landscaping other than final ¡;radin¡; in the Bloomber¡; bid. The City of Columbia Hei¡;hts moved about half of the black dirt out of the hole but didn't ]'ush it very far. That pile has to be moved further back toward the tennis courts so there is room for the fill from the buildin¡; site. Tt was noted that the Clerk is authorized to spend up to $500. This item is to be put on the next Council A~enda fo~ further consideration. Discussion was on the retention of the Public Services Building Committee until the construction of the building is com]'leted. MOTTO'; by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, to extend the term of the Building Committee until the completion of the Public Services Building to expedite and resolve problems durin¡; construction of the bUilding. Motion carried unanimously, Annual Sealcoat Pro¡;ram/TKDA Mr, Davidson noted the concern expressed about TKDA's billing for the Annual Seal- coating report, He explained that he understood that the City wss wanting an Annual Sealcoating program. As a result, he did a total system analysis, showing which streets were rural and urban, which bituminous streets were concrete curb and gutter, bituminous birm, and rural in nature, and computin~ the total yardage of coverage re- ouired for each ty~e of street system, He then related that to the methology of determtnin~ which needed to be sealcoated, recommending a policy and the amount of money it would cost annually. 11e£;ular City Council HeeUnr, December 7, 197r) - Hinutes ""a~e 7 (Annual Sealcoat Program/TKDA. Continued) Mr. Davidson eX]1lained the metbod of rating by visually inspecting the street and setting UP a priority system of sealcoating streets with the greatest need first. He noted that Mr. Sowada also rated the streets and came up with a similiar recommendation to what the Engineering firm had found. ~he Council has a detailed re]1ort of the names and hours spent on this report. All streets were individually checked and measured for exact surface area. The differences in footages of streets is caused by variances in the widths of streets. cul-de..sacs, etc. , -- each subdivision was analyzed On an individual basis. Councilperson Lachinski stated a representative from TKDA was at their Road Improvement Committee meeting, who was told to make sure authorization from the Clerk/Treasurer was received before proceeding with this report. He thought there may have been a misunderstanding on her ]1art ~elative to the type of report and the total number of dollars. Mr. Davidson said to scratch the ~42.94 bill. as he was told the totál bill is ~7%.15. M0~I0~ by Lachinski, Seconded by VanderLaan, to authorize ]1ayment in the amount of ~7)h.17 to ~KDA for the ~e]1ort on the Sealcoatinr, Program for the City of Andover, which has already been reported. Motion carried unanimously. ~et Public Hearinr.:/Stenauist Aòdition M0TI0~ by VanderLaan. Seconded by Lachinski, introducing the following Resolution, A Resolution accepting the ]1reliminary re]1ort and setting the date for a Public Hearing for the improvement of bituminous streets and storm drainage in the west half of ~ection lr). Townshi]1 32. Range 24 and Roanoke Street south of l59th Avenue in Section 13. ~ownshi]1 32. Range 25 ... (Setting Public Hearing for January lr). 1978. 7:30 p.m.. at the Andover City Hall) (See Resolution R134-8) Motion carried unanimously. DeGardner Lot Split ~~. Davidson stated he has provided the legal description and the sketch to establish lot lines that were r)5 feet in width at the setback line. He stated it does require a triangle from a portion of the lot owned by Mr. DeGardner to the south. He recommended a]1proval subject to the filing of the legal document for our Attorney to check. MO~I0~ by Lachinski. Seconded by McClure. to approve the Richard DeGardner Lot Split under Ordinance 40 and 40A and direct the Clerk to prepare a Resolution for approval subject to having the three properties described as outlined in the TKDA informational letter dated December 5. 197R. (See Resolution R135-r)) Motion carried unanimously. Plrtnnin~ and Zonin~ Commission Report Mr. Retzlaff was told to inform the Clerk of the three Commission vacancies so she can nlace an advertisement for applicants. Hr. Retzlaff also presented the Council with Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan update on the City's inventory. He asked the Council to review it and direct changes or suggestions to bim at the December 19 City Council meeting. Personnel Committee Councilperson Lachinski stated the Personnel Committee has the information necessary to meet with the Council on the three items that were before them -- merit increases for the two staff members. consideration for the acting administrative position, and the salaries for 1979. Pe~ular City Council Meeting December 5, 1978 - Minutes Page 8 (Personnel Committee, Continued) M0TI0N by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, that we handle the current personnel matters on the necember 20 Special City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously, Probationarv Increase/Sawada Because there was not a full Council and because of the confusions as to why this item is on the agenda, it was carried over to the next Regular City Council meeting. ~0~I0N by McClure, Seconded by Lachinski, to continue the subject of Probationary Increase for Ray Sowada to the next Regular Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Approval of Claims tl0TION by VanderLaan, Seconded by McClure, that the City Council authorize Check ~umbers 222? and 222? throu~h 2240, total amount ~10,444.07, and Checks from the Imnrovement Accounts Number 243 tbrough 254 for a total amount of $78,461.02. Those Imnrovement Accounts are 77-1 and 78-1, 78-2 and State Aid Bridge Fund. Motion carried unanimously_ tIOTTC),¡ by MCClure, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, \\~~~ -c:-2-:~ I. t /1<1 Marcella A. Peach Pecording Secretary ""2.- f ! Q <" i-' ,l () çl' fl' G1/