Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC March 7, 1978 CITY 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 7, 1978 AGENDA 1. Call to Order -7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Public Hearings - None 5. Legal and Engineering a. Gerald Flor - Lot Split b. United Power Association - Special Use Permit c. Removal of Easements - Paul Cavner d. Change Orders (Alexander Construction) - Engineer e. Road Locations - Ron Smith f. Development Contract - Valley View Estates 6. Ordinances and Resolutions a. Su::,plementaL Asses sment (1975-1) . b. 7. Petitions, Requests, Communications a. Temporary Mobile Home Permit _ Gross b. Non-Intox. Malt Liquor License _ Nemeth 8. Reports of Officers, Boards, Committees a. Planning and Zoning Commission b. Volunteer Fire Department c. Capital Improvement Committee d. Other Committees 9. Unfinished Business a. b. 10. New Business a. 11. Approval of Minutes 12. Approval of Claims 13. Adjournment "" '" - . ~ 01 ANDOVER REGUt~R CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 7, 1978 MINUTES The Re~ular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on March 7, 1978, 7:30 p,m" at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota, Counc11þersons present: Lachinski (arrived at 8:20 p,m,), McClure, Orttel, Vanderlaan Councilpersons absent: None Also present: City Attorney, E, Babcock; City Engineer, Rex Stockwell; Planning and Zoning Chairman, Larry Retzlaff; City Clerk, P, K, Lindquist; and interested residents, Resident Forum Leon Jenkauski , 16245 V!!lleyDrllve - questioned the status of the Myron Roseland situation at this time, Mr, Babcock noted that since he talked with Mr, Jenkauski, the Council has instructed him to turn this file over to Mr, Hawkins, and at this time he didn't have any in forma tion, Mr, Jenkauski noted he talked with Bob Johnson Sr" the County Attorney, who told him the only way anything could get done was to get a suit against him that would fine him for every day he was in business, Mr, Jenkauski also stated that tonight he counted 22 vehicles in the yard plus a tractor plus piles and piles of junk in the back- yard. He is in the process of selling his house, and the VA Inspector made a definite statement towards that junkyard saying it does degrade and down-value the property, Mr. Babcock stated there is a civil suit filed against Mr, Roseland which is pending, He felt Mr. Johnson is talking about a criminal action, an action of a violation of our Ordinance, which Mr, Babcock felt is a logical step to take, The Clerk noted Mr, Roseland was prosecuted under our Ordinance violation and was found ~uilty, but it was for a different description of our Ordinance than what he is doing now, The Mayor said it was his belief that this has always been a criminal suit and that Mr, Hawkins has been awaiting a court calendar date, Mr, Babcock stated in a case of this kind there is a Statement of Case that is required to be filed before the Court, He had told Mr, Jenkauski that he found this Statement unfiled in the file, Mayor Windschitl stated Mr, Hawkins will be requested to give a written report to be discussed at the next re~ular Council meeting, Mr, Jay Clark, 16209 Valley Drive - questioned if Mr, Roseland's business is legal or illegal; why has it taken over two years to get it cleaned up; is the junkyard directly across the road on property which belongs to Jim Stack legal or illega~ and what is going to be done about it? Mayor Windschitl noted that both junkyards are illegal per our Ordinance in a residential area and that the City should do everything possible to eliminate them, Mr, Hawkins will have to address the status of them now and why it is moving so slowly, Helen Anderson, 16293 Valley Drive - noted her sister had talked with Mr, Hawkins about this many times and ended up moving because of it, What Mr, Roseland is doing is not legal, yet he is ~etting away with it, She also noted in 1976 Mr, Roseland had the four vehicles he called collectables that are now in the junHyard by Mr, Stack; it was fenced then but it was such a terrible-looking fence and such a mess that they did make him tear that down IIgain, Mayor Windschitl requested that Mr, Clough be directed to give a detailed report on wbat is visible on both properties for Council's use when discussing this item at the next Council meeting, Mr. Clark then showed Mr, Babcock a letter he had received from the Assistant County Attorney, Robert M, A, Johnson, dated November 3, 1977, which gave his opinion on the Roseland issue, Peter Byer, 16175 Valley Drive - has lived in the area since last September and is in full sU~port of his neighbors in this matter as the junkyard is an eyesore, He also noted another gentleman on the same side of the street as the Roselands has boarded up an area ~e~lar City Council Meetin~ March 7, 1078 - Minutes Pa~e 2 (Resident Forum, Continued) and has several cars in the yard. Mayor Windschitl noted this will be on the Agenda as a re~ular business item March 21 with a written report from the Attorney and the Build- in~ Official. He also noted Mr. Byer can file a complaint with the Building Official, who will investigate and report on the other yard. Mr. Anderson - stated Mr. Roseland's operation buys the junk cars, brings them in his ~arage and takes the motors out, and then hauls them across the road to Stack's farm where nobody sees them. Miks Geiseke. 16604 Yakima - wondered what the City plans to do about the roads in his area, narticularly l65th and Yakima as it is practi~ally impassable and it is not being e:raded. Ssveral years a~o Class 5 was put on it, but it has since been graded into the yards and no crown is put on the road when it is ~raded. The rest of the roads in ths area are muddy and full of chuck holes but are driveable. 165th is the worst extending from the end of the bituminous surface back to the river -- the entire unimproved portion. Mayor Windschitl stated this will be investigated further. Mr. Anderson. 1620, Valley Drive - questioned what can be done about the dogs running lose.. The Clerk noted the dog catcher has been sent on at least 5 or 6 calls in that area on almost every bill we receive; once in a while they manage to catch a dog, It you can êatch the dog, the dog catcher will be there within the hour to pick it up. It does cost the owner about ~40 to ~50 to get their dog back. ,Teri Byer. 16175 Valley Drive _ questioned if the dog catcher will come on private property to catch a dog. Ms. Lindquist stated if it is not on your property, the most he can do is check to see if the do~ has a license. Ae:enda A nnroval MOTIO~ by Orttel, Seconded by McClure, to approve the published agenda with the additions of Itsm 9a, Tulip Street; and Item lOa, Mt. Oliveto, Lutheran Church Hall Rental. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote. Gerald Flor - Lot Snlit Mr. Retzlaff noted the Plannin~ and Zonin~ Commission reviewed the Flor ~t Split request and has recommended that tbe City Council approve it under Ordinance 40A, Section lc in that the Lot Snlit is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan; it does not interfer with orderly plannin~; it is not contrary to public interest; and it does not nullifY the intent of Ordinance 40 or 40A. MOTION by VanderLaan, Seconded by McClure, offering the following Resolution: A Resolution annrovin~ a Lot Split for Plat 65004, Parcel 6900...(See Resolution R21-8) Motion carried on a 4-0 vote. United Power Association - Snecial Use Permit Mr. ~airns, United Power Association representative, noted the substation is 35, feet high with a lie:htsnin~ shield on top of that, for a total hei~ht of about 50 feet. MOTION by VanderLaan, Seconded by Orttel, offering ths following Resolution: A Resolution apnrovin~ a Special Use Permit for United Power Association to construct an electric distribution substation...(See Resolution R22-R) Motion carried on a 4-0 vote. Pe~ular City Council Meetin~ Ma.rch ?, lq7R - Minutes Pa~e ." ~emnval of ~asement - Paul Cavner Mr. Stockwell stated the turnaround waS built on the park property in Red Oaks Manor r~ther than usin~ that temþorary easement, and he saw no future need for the easement. Dtscussion was on the process involved when abandoning an easement, and on whether a public hearin~ should be beld by the P & Z in this case. Paul Cevner _ stated the title simply states easement of record. The plat that was re- corded does have a location that says easement for turnaround to be removed; however, the statement to tbe County does not include that removal; so the County stated the easement wes not removed because of that statement. The Clerk stated the original plat showed no easement. Approximately two weeks after filin~, the developer of the plat prepared a quick claim deed for this easement. Our minutes show no indications of acceptin~ it or even bein~ aware of it. It was not recorded at the time of the plat. It was Mr. Babcock's opinion that to properly remove this easement, the Ci ty sh ould ~o throu~h the re~ular vacation procedure and have the P & Z hold the public hearing; as he felt the easement was properly recorded even thou~h the City has not officially accepted it. Mr. Cavner stated he is selling this parcel to a third partrand questioned when a buildin~ permit is issued would the setback be measured from the easement line or from the new property line. Councilperson VanderLaan stated it would be issued from the new property line when the easement is removed. MOTION by VanderLaan, Seconded by McClure, to refer this for earliest possible consideration to the Plannin~ and Zoning Commission to hold the Public Hearing and follow the necessary Statutory, procedures for vacation of the street in discussion (on Parcel B, Lot 1, Block 2, Ped Oaks Manor, Third Addition, property owned by Paul Cavner.) Motion carried on a 5-0 vote. Change Orders (Alexander Construction) Mr. Stockwell noted the first chan~e order is for the extension of the project completion date on Prairie Road in order to finish the project. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council approve a Change Order to Alexander Construction Company, Inc. , for Prairie Road construction; the only change to be to chan~e the contract stipulation as to completion date from November I, 1977, to July I, lQ7R. (See Resolution R23-R) Mot~ carried unanimously. Mr. Stockwell noted the second change order for Alexander Construction Company is for the Prairie Road project for a dollar amount of 52,820, which is for mobilization cost of eouipment because of the delay due to right of way acquisition. He has not yet received a firm answer from the State Aid department as to whether or not this amount is State Aid reimbursable or not. This change order request was first brought to Mr. Stockwell's attention on January 12, which is after the Public Hearing held by the City on the Prairie Road project. Alexander Construction Company has also requested a unit price change for the granular borrow; however, Mr. Stockwell has taken a firm stand on this in that he felt it is not justifiable and that they be compensated only for their original bid price. He has not heard from the contractor since he took that stand. Councilperson VanderLaan stated that if this amount is not State Aid eligible, then it will have to come from the Gene~ Fund; as per Council action in January, it would not be assessable. Mr. Stockwell stated this was not specifically estimated in the normal overrun figure; but it is a normal practice of contractors that at any time there is a problem where the contractor has to brin~ in, take out, and brin~ equipment back at a latter date that they ask for additional cnm'Pensation. At the time the Council awarded the bid, it was Mr. Stockwell's opinion that Mr. Holasek was ~oin~ to give his approval to enter the right of way so there would not have been this construction delay or additional cost. Another reason he recommended awarding the project at that time was because it was getting well into the construction season and -- Re~ular City Council Meeting March 7, lq7~ - Minutes Page 4 (Change Orders - Alexander Construction, Continued) he felt it wae in the best interest of the City to ~et the project completed this year, Mr, Stockwell also noted that generally they don't break out mobilization as a specific item in a contract as it is left up to the contractor where to bury the initial mobilization cost. When an item is not specified and it does come up, it is then treated as "extra work". MOTIO~ by McClure, Seconded by Vanderlaan, that the Council approve Change Order Number 2, by TKDA to Alexander Construction Company, Inc., for Prairie Road construction: Change Order Number 2 being an increase in the contract sum by S2,820, cost for remobilization of equipment during the work on Prairie Road, (See Resolution R24-8) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, McClure, Orttel, Vanderlaan; NO-Windschitl Motion carried, Mayor Windschitl - My no vote reflects that I feel had better planning been done with the starting of the job or the reviewing of the right of way, that this expenditure would have been eliminated. From what information I have been provided here tonight, I find nothing that was given to us that requires us to pay it, as it is not in the contract we had with Alexander Company, There is nothing spelled out for mobilization, There would be no Question that if it were spelled out, we would be required to pay it, I don't find that here. Mr. Stockwell - The MHD specification book defines what extra work consists of, and mobiliza- tion is included, There is definitely a provision for that, Counciluerson Vanderlaan - In my opinion the City Council is responsible for the expendi- ture; and from information supplied by the Engineer, it is one of those items which would be a supulemental charge during a construction project under Municipal State Aid standards, It is a most re~etable cost. The circumstances under which the City is being charged this can be reviewed by the examination of the delay in the easement procurement during the uroject, Road Locations - Ron Smith Ron Smith - explained he is dividing the lots into 5-acre lots with 300-foot frontages, The Highway Department has given approval of where they wsnt the highway to come out. Of the two options Mr. Smith has for constructing the road, he preferred theoption to construct the road straight on the northern end to make it easier to plat by metes snd bounds. Discussion was that there is nothing in the Ordinance which allows the Council to give an ouinion on the placement of the roads on a metes and bounds plat. Mr, Stockwell stated that he recommended Mr, Smith bring this before the P & Z and the Council because in this case Mr, Smith is required to build a roadway in which he is hoping at some point in the future the City is going to take over for maintenance, After Mr, Smith obtains some kind of concept approval of the roadway from the Council, then he can obtain an engineer to prepare plans and specs for the roadway, which would be submitted to Andover's City Engineer for review and approval, Primary acceptance will be determined by the County, as they will determine where they will accept the access to their throughfare, Mr, Smith noted the lots will meet the provisions of the Ordinances; they will be larger than what the Ordinances requires (5 acres with the exception of the one lot in the southern corner which may require a variance); he plans to put blacktop on the road; about 24 or 25 lots will be generated out of the 130 acres; that by constructing the road to Alternate 2 (straight to meet Highway 7 on the northern end), long legal descriptions of the lots will be avoided; and he felt that basically mat of the traffic from the development will be going out through the southern end, Mr, Smith has tried platting the area several times; none of them worked out; and in his opinion, this is his only alternative left. Re~ular City Council Meetin~ March 7, 197R - Mir>utes Page 5 (Road Locations - Ron Smith, Continued) Councilperson lachinski was concerned that by platting metes and bounds the developer'.ts circumventing the normal platting procedure. If the Council were to in any way approve that road after it has been built, we are really saying anyone can bypass tho Platting Ordinance, as the only controls we have to make sure a developer follows the platting Ordinance is the fact that the road doesn't exist and it is not a City street. Mr. Retzlaff noted the problems Mr. Smith had when trying to plat the area, but still felt there is a feasible platting of the area. The Clerk noted the cemetery in the area has been torrens but the City has not yet received the title. Mayor Windschitl stated the item will be placed on the Agenda for two weeks from tonight, and Mr. Babcock was requested to investigate this further as to any State Statute requirements regarding metes and bounds canveyances. Councilperson orttel stated the City of Blaine has this procedure, that they don't specifically say yes or no, just gives implied approval, and directs the Engineer to supervise the street construction to make sure it is done correctly, because they are trying to encourage larger lot development. Ten-minute recess at 9:12 p.m. Development Contract - Valley View Estates Mr. Raymond Klenk - stated he has already hired a consulting engineer who will be working with Mr, Stockwell and who will engineer the road construction. He questioned if he needed a development contract to proceed with the construction of the roads and at what point does he need it. He hopes to begin construction by the middle of May with completion by the end of August. Discussion was on the need for a developant contract and what, if any, Council action is needed. When the plat was filed, it did not have the road cross sections in the plat. Both Mr. Babcock and Mr. Stockwell recommended that because it is the City's right of way, it would be to the City's advantage to require Mr. Klenk to sign a development contract and deposit an escrow account, which would assure the City tint the roads and storm sewer will be constructed per our standaræ and to completion. Mr. Klenk stated when he has reviewed the contract, he will talk with the City Attorney. Supplemental Assessment (1975-1) The Glerk noted that tbe day school was in existance at the time they made their original hookup; howeverf the City was not aware of it. The new construction at Meadowcreek Baptist Church is not expected to increase the student enrollment; therefore, no additional unit char~e has been made for the new construction. MOTJO~ by Vanderlaan, Seconded by Orttel, a Resolution adopting a Supplementary Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project 1975 in the City of Andover...(See Resolution R25-8) Motion carried unanimously. Temporary Mobile Home Permit - Gross MOTTON by Orttel, Seconded by McClure, that the City Council grant Randall Gross a 90-day temporary permit allowin~ him to park a Mobile Home on his property located at 12 l77th Avenue NW to allow for rebuilding a fire damage in his home, sUbject to it being hooked up to adeouate on-site sewage disposal system and well water system. Motion carried unanimously. Non-Intoxicatin~ Malt Liouor License - Nemeth MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by lachinski, that the City Council grant an Off-Sale Non- Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Nemeth Grocery, effective through December 31, 1978. Motion carried unanimously. " - -. . . Regular City Council Meeting March 7, 1978 - Minutes Page 6 Volunteer Fire Denartment Vie Evans, Fire Chief, stated after giving considerable thought to heving Mr. Muscovitz attend the fire training school on Monday mornings, he felt it would not be justified at this time as it will be about a year before we could start any kind of structure coverage. Therefore, Mr. Evans withdrew his request to have Mr. Muscovitz attend the Monday morning training sessions. Mr. Evans again asked the Council if Mr. Muscovitz would be allowed to attend the two-hour Wednesday morning weekly meetings as he has agreed to make up this time by working addi- tional hours. Council discussion was on the amount of time Mr. Muscovitz would be spending fi~hting fires such that his regular duties are not sacrificed; the fact that situations might exist where additional staff would be needed if Mr. Muscovitz were allowed to serve On the Volunteer Fire Department; that both the Clerk and Mr. Thurston, in their memos to the Council, were apprehensive about Mr. Muscovitz being away from the City Hall the number of hours needed for drills and fighting fires because of the work load; and on the un- predictability of how many fires there will be and exactly how much time Mr. Muscovitz would be spending fighting fires. Mr. Evans felt that if it is the Council's intent to provide fire protection to the entire City, then that should take precedence over the other functions that Mr. Muscovitz has. Also, consideration could be made for Mr. Muscovitz to be on the initial attack; and after a short period of time when enough men are available, he could be released. Mayor Windschitl felt if Mr. Muscovitz is on the Volunteer Fire Department as a paid City employee, then that item must be budgeted for and possibly adding other people to do the jobs that Mr. Muscovitz hasn't had time to complete now. Council- nerson Orttel felt our responsibility is to the residents of the City and that's whose pr~ tection we are talking about, and he didn't feel anyone would argue with Mr. Muscovitz's other duties being more important than fighting fires. Councilperson VanderLaan stated it is a Question if ths City is financially able to allow him to fight fires at this time. Mr. Evans also noted that even though most volunteers fight fires during the hours they are not normally working, fires may often sxtend into their working hours where they would be missing some hours from their normal jobS; he also felt it should be encouraged that anplicants for City employment be interesred in joining the Fire Department. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, to refer the matter of City employees desiring to become Volunteer Firemen be referred to the Personnel Committee for study and recommenda- tions. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Evans also requested that consideration be given to Mr. Muscovitz to attend a three- day fire school, May 19, 20, and 21. Mr. Muscovitz would be missing one work day. Council discussion was again on allowing time for City employees to be trained for the Volunteer Fire Department on City time. The Personnel Committee will also discuss the issue of allowing an employee to attend school and training for the Volunteer Fire Department during City working hours. Capital Improvements Committee Mayor Windschitl explained the Committee Guidelines of the Capital Improvements Committee, a Committee guide they would work with in viewing projects. This is not to prohibit the Council from taking action on any items of an emergency nature. Mayor Windschitl noted when looking at prioritizing items, the Committee will check the item off against a number of snecific items: 1) does it fit into the Comprehensive Plan; 2) does it fit the 5-Year Plan; 3) ability to fund. if Public funds ; if Private funds, do an analysis of pay-back. The entire 5-Year Plan will be put to a Public Hearing. Mayor Windschia stated this will be placed on the Agenda again for two weeks from tonight along with the prepared form for reouests. H ~ _ , . . Re~ular City Council Meeting March 7, 1<)713 - Minutes Page 7 Road Im~rovement Cemmittee Councilperson Lachinski stated the Committee is working on prioritizing the construction of MSAH roads, on the placement of gravel on dirt roads, and on items in the assessment policy that they would like to see changed. He requested the Committee meet with Mr. Stockwell on March 20 for his comments. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by McClure, that the City Engineer be directed to attend the March 20 meeting of the Road Improvement Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Councilperson Lachinski stated the Committee has questioned why the Committee is not being utilized in the same fashion as the P & Z or Park Board or the CIP; why aren't more things being passed to the Committee for their recommended proposals; and why doesn't the Engineer meet more regularly with the Committee rather than spending most of his time with the Council. Mayor Windschitl felt that mere use could be used of the Committee. Possibly a time slot could be devoted to the Committee on the Agenda, with the Committee having a report in advsnce of items tbey are wsnting the Council to consider. MOTION by VanderLaan, Seconded by Orttel, that we taken up Item lOa, Item II, and Item 12, A~~roval of Claims, this evening. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-McClure, Orttel, VanderLaan, Windschitl; NO-Lachinski Motion carried. Mr. Olivet' Lutheran Church Hall Rental LeRoy Stunek. 131335 Underclift - explained this is a joint endeavor between Mr. Olivet of Anoka and Trinity of St. Francis. They are looking for a place that is fairly centrally located in Andover to meet on Sunday mornings for their service. They have their synod's approval for this project. Mr. Stunek requested that they be able to rent the City Hall for a three-hour period on Sundays until they are able to put up a facility of their own somewhere in Andover. They are planning a door to door canvas of everyone in Andover on April 26 and hoped to be able to tell people where they will be meeting to conduct their services. He projected possibly 50 to 70 people will be attending the Sunday morning services to start out with; hopefully it would grow. They have financial backing from their synod, and both congregations are providing additional financial backing. They would do maintenance on the hall if necessary; a Sunday School program is not planned to begin with. Discussion was on some of the problems involved with renting the hall on a continuing basis. The item is to be placed on the Agenda for March 21, 1978. The Clerk was asked to research the following: maintenance (The Clerk noted it could be possible to have the cleaning dene on Monday morings); having an authorized person in attendance during the services; check ..011:. the liability of our insurance policy for renting the hall on a reoccurring basis; the issue of separation of church and state should be investigated to see that the~ would be no problem; and the length and method of termination of agreement between the church and City from both parties is to be investigated. Mr. Stunek was asked that he provide the Council with an estimate of how much of a notice would the church need if the City wanted to terminate the rental agreement and how long do they feel they will need the faciU ties. Approval of Minutes October 4. 1977: MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by VanderLaan to approve the Special Council Meetin~ Minutes of October 4, 1977, as written. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Orttel, VanderLaan, Windschitl; PRESENT-Lachinski, McClure Motion carried. Regular City Council Meeting March 7, 1978 - 11il.nutes Page 8 (Approval of Minutes, Continued) October 18. 1977: MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, to approve Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting and the Special City Council Meeting of October 18, 1977, as corrected December 21, 1977. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, VanderLaan, Windschitl; PRESENT-McClure Motion carried. December 20. 1977: MOTIO~ by Lachinski, Seconded by Windschitl, that we approve the December 20, 1977, Minutes as written. VOT"!': O~ MOTION: YES-Lachinski, McClure, Orttel, Windshhitl; PRESENT-VanderLaan Motion carried. December 21. 1977: MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by McClure, that the Council approve the December 21, 1977, Minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. December 27. 1977: MOTION by McClure, Seconded by Lachinski, to approve the Minutes of December 27, 1977, as written. VOTE ON HOTION: YES-Lachinski, McClure, Orttel, Windschitl; PRESENT-VanderLaan Motion carried. January 3. 1971\: Page 8; Due to a bookkeeping error, Mr. Thurston's salary stated incorrectly in motion, should be $16,757.62. Page 6, last line of 1st paragraph: Mayor Windschitl also felt the equipment purchased by the Fire Department should be donated to the City ~ remain with the City. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by HcClure, to approve the Minutes of January 3, 1978, as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. January 12. 1978: Page 1, 1st paragraph: Barnes (sp) Page 6, fourth paragraph from bottom: descenting (sp) Page 7, last paragraph: Testimony is often heard from the residents that the road, waterf sewer, etc., does not benefit him TIersonally. The Council has to determine-==-ls the .. MOTION by McClure, Seconded by Lachinski, to approve the Minutes of January 12, 1978, as corrected. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, McClure, VanderLaan, Windschitl; PRESENT-Orttel Mo tion carried. January 26. 1971\: Just before the Motion, add: Thatbesides the additional contiguous vacant property, a contiguous lot already has been built on. MOTION by HcClure, Seconded by Orttel, to approve the January 26, 1978, Minutes as amended. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, McClure, Orttel, VanderLaan; PRESENT-Windschitl Motion carried. February 7. 1978: Page 5, Councilperson VanderLaan's comment for the record, add: Indicating in this motion that no significant difference . ...of the property that simply ...., metes and bounds conveyances do not. MOTION by McClure, Seconded by Lachinski, to approve the Minutes of February 7, 1978, as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. - - - . . Regular City Council Meeting March 7. 1978 - Hinutes Pa~e 9 Auuroval of Claims MOTION by Vanderlaan. Seconded by McClure, to approve Checks 1701 through 1720. total amount $4.425.10 and Check Number 135 to the City of Andover for $1.305.25 from the 1975-2-4 Fund. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Vanderlaan. Seconded by Oattel. to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted. ,..,{\\~~~~ Marc~lla A. Peach . Recording Secretary -- ~ - -, . .