HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC February 6, 1979
,
CIYY 01 J!GJEJO VIER
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 5, 1979
AGENDA
1. Call to Order - 7 :30 P. M.
2. Resident Forum
3. Agenda Approval
4. Public Hearings
5. Legal and Engineering
a. Special Use Permit/Menkveld
b. Final Plat Approval/Oakmount Terrace
c. Final Plat Approval/Dostaler Hane Addition
d. Reconsideration of Plat Extension/Cunningham Addition
e. Rezoning/Rademacher
f. Preliminary Platt Lund I s Evergreen Estates
g. -.
h.
6. Ordinances and Resolutions
a. Resolution/Planning Grant
b. Resolution/Minnesota Cities Week
7. Petitions, Requests, Communications
a.
8. Reports of Boards, Committees, Commissions
a. Planning and Zoning Commission
b. Park and Recreation Commission
c. Volunteer Fire Depa;rtment
d. Legislative Committees
9. Unfinished Business
a. Appointments/Planning & Zoning, Park & Recreation
b. Establishment of "Liquor Study Committee"
10. New Business
a. Dedication of Public Services Building
b. Tour/Meadowcreek School
11. Approval of Minutes
12. Approval of Claims
13. Adjournment
.., --
~ o¡ ANDOVER
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 6, 197;1
MINU'¡'ES
The Re~lar Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Anqover City Council was called to order by
Mayor Jerry WindschitI on February 6, L979, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall,
1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesot.a.
Councilmen presen~: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach
Councilmen absent: None
Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, John
Davidson; Planning and Zoning Chairperson, D'Arcy Bosell;
Park/Recreation Commission Chairman, Wes Mand; City Clerk,
P. K. Lindquist; and interested rasidents
Resident Forum
John Gerrick, 204 138th Avenue - expressed concern about the landfill and asked if'
the City has any control over it. He'd like to see it shut down. Mayor
Windschitl stated that the control the City has over the landfill is almost non-
existent but ¡¡ide of the fact that we can prevent them from expanding. The Anoka
County Board of Commissioners, the Anoka County Health Department, and the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency regulate and control the facility. Mayor Winds chi tl
reviewed the meetings the City has had with the landfill operators relative to
covering the completed slopes and to getting their agreement not to disturh the tree
line near Crosstown Boulevard. Their projected life of the landfill is to end
somewhere in 1981. Specific complaints of problems with the Ilmdfill should be
addressed to Bob Hutchinson from the Anoka County Health Department.
Denn'is Askey, 2034 138th Avenue NW - asked if the landfill is supposedly going to
be done by 1981. Mayor Windschitl recalled their projected range for completion
of the landfill was from 1979 to 1982. Attorney Hawkins stated he has reviewed the
agreement with the landfill, and there isn't anything in there that would give the
City any control over the hours the landfill must be open to Andover residents. The
only thing the contract states is that Andover residents shall be allowed to dump
free of charge, but it doesn't state anything relative to when this can be done.
A,o:enda Approval
Item 5b - Discussion was on the legality of changing the name of the Johnson's Field
Preliminary Plat to Oakmount Terrace. Mr. Hawkins stated legally,_if he wants to
change the name, he can do it; as it doesn't affeot the plat as such. For the City's
records, reference should also be made to Johnson's Field, since the Preliminary
Plat was approved under that name.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, for acceptance of the Agenda as published
with the addition of Item 10c, Stenquist Roads; Item 10d, Discussion, Ordinance 28,
Section 7, Subsection 2; and 10e, Discussion of Seéretarial Position. Motion carried
unanimously.
Special Use Permit/Menkveld
Jack Menkveld, 761 Buchanan Street, Anoka - representing the petitioner - stated he
had no objection with the additional 17 feet of right of way off of Crosstown
Boulevard to extend the right of way from 33 feet to 50 feet, nor did he have any
objection to limiting the driveway to the north side of that lot (Reference letter
to John Davidson, TK1JA, from Paul Ruud, County Engineer, dated January 19, 1979).
Mr. Menkveld stated the proposed service road on the Conroy property north of this
lot will be a public road, and he would be willing to exit out onto that service road.
- ---- ~~ -
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 2
(Special Use Permit/Menkveld, Continued)
Most of the lots off of 138th Avenue were for four-plexes. This lot meets the
Ordinance requirements for duplexes; the duplex he is considering is a split foyer,
60 feet wide including garages.
Councilman Peach's concern was this would be the first duplex on County Road 18,
across the street from a residential area, with the plat north of this proposed to
be residential as well. This would be the only duplex on that street. He felt it
would be very inconsistent to have one duplex expanding around the corner onto
Crosstown.
In the discussion on the dedication of additional right of way, Attorney Hawkins
stated the only authority the City has for requiring road dedication is in the
subdivision regulation. But the City does have authority over the access question.
Mayor Windschitl stated the real question is does the Council want to start providing
mixed zoning. He didn't feel they should be mixed; and if this permit was allowed,
there would be nothing to prevent Conroy from putting in duplexes north of this
property if he were to petition to do so. At the present time, all duplexes face
138th.
Councilman Orttel stated the City has had some bad experiences with duplexes in the
past; however, the whole idea of the double living unit has really changed over
the last few years in that they are quite nice, and people are looking to that as
an alternative to home ownership. Duplexes are allowed only in the residential area
in the City. Also, it almost seems by congregating duplexes in one area, you tend
to decide the fate of that area. The City might be better off if they are not grouped
together.
Mr. Menkveld - the doubles built today can't be compared to the ones built in the
late '60's. They are now worth in excess of $100,000, and he didn't feel it would be
detrimental to the neighborhood. He reiterated his willingness to make concessions
to provide additional road right of way for the County and to provide limitations
for the driveway so it will align with future plans.
Ms. Bosell questioned if the access can be restricted on a non-existent plat.
Because Mr. Conroy is still in the formulation stage of the plat, he could elect
to change those lots to DIIllti-family units.
Attorney Hawkins reviewed the criteria for granting special use permits. This is an
allowable use in the district and is subject to meeting certain conditions. If
it is going to be denied, the criteria in Ordinance 8 DIIlst be applied, such as
the creation of traffic problems, it being detrimental to the health, safety, morals,
general welfare, eto. This criteria and findings would have to be made on the
Conroy lots platted adjacent to it if he were to apply for a similiar Special Use
Permit.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, entering a Resolution approving the Special
Use Permit for the construction of a two-family dwelling on' Plat 65933, Parcel 450...
(See Resolution R6-9) Discussion: Attorney Hawkins stated if the feeling is that
the access would create some traffic problems, it is a reasonable solution to place
the contingency of the driveway exit onto the Conroy plat service road at such time
as that service road is constructed.
VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel; NO-Peach, Windschitl; PRESENT-Jacobson
Motion defeated.
Mayor Windschitl - MY no vote reflects that I believe there would be depreciation of
the property in the area by allowing of the Special Use Permit for the duplex.
~-
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 3
(Special Use Permit/Menkveld, Continued)
Councilman Jacobson - MY present vote was cast because as & member of the Planning
and Zoning Commission, I was the one who originally made the motion sent to the
Council; and I don't believe I should vote on the matter twice.
Councilman Peach - Agreed with the Mayor's comments.
Final Plat Approval/Oakmount Terrace (Johnson's Field)
Bruce Hay. 39 North Oaks Road, st. Paul - represented the developer - stated the
reason for the name change is because they thought it sounded better.
Mr. Hawkins noted there were two problems relative to the final plat: 1) The abstraot
didn't cover a portion of the plat which is going to be dedicated for street, which
must be done before it can be approved; and 2) The Letter of Credit was incorrectly
written. The City does not assess if these things are not completed. The City does
this based strictly on a contractual ar.rangement with the developer; so that if there
is a breach, the City has a civil action against the developer or can make demands
for breach of contract from the lending institution that supplies the Letter of
Credit. That section should be reworded so that with written certification the City
of Andover merely has to construot the improvements if the developer has not complied
with the development contract.
This will be placed on another agenda as soon as these things are done.
Final Plat Approval/Dostaler Hane Addition
Jim Hane, 14532 Seventh Avenue - developer - noted that the park fees have been paid
and that the barn will be removed by June. Mr. Hawkins felt that the money
provided in the contract would cover the removal of the barn.
Mr. Davidson reported that during the process of review, the Planning Commission
felt that the streets should be 50 feet wide to correspond with the adjacent streets.
Ms. Bosell noted that l46th Lane, 146th Avenue, and 145th Lane are all 50-foot
streets to provide continuity. The only time,50-foot streets are recommended is
so they align directly with corresponding streets. Otherwise, 66-foot streets are
required. It was noted that the Preliminary Plat did recommend approval of the 50-
foot streets and that the Final Plat is in conformance with the approved Preliminary
Plat. Attorney Hawkins noted that the title opinioh.,l development contract, and Letter
of Credit are satisfactory.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, introducing the following Resolution approving
the Final Plat of the Dostaler Hane Addition... (See Resolution R7-9) Motion
carried unanimously.
Reconsideration of Plat Extension/Cunningham Addition
Mr. Hawkins explained the primary reason for time limits on platting is if there are
challges in the we of zoning, regulations, etc., the City shouldn't be bound with
going through that type of development, so there is a time period and it doesn't go
on to infinity.
Mr. Hane explained he was involved in a custody suit which took him out of state
during the time the plat was to be finalized. He also noted the fees owed the City
have been paid.
On November 9, 1978, the City Council terminated the Prelimi~ATY Plat. Council
discussion was on which course of action to take at this time and on what had
previously been done relative to the Preliminary Plat. There hasn't been any change
that anyone was aware of that would affect the preliminary approval to date.
- - - -.
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 4
(Reconsideration of Plat Extension/Cunningham Addition, Continued)
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, to rescind the motion on November 9, 1978,
pertaining to the termination of the Cunningham Addition Plat. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to extend the time limit on the Preliminary
Plat of the Cunningham Addition for a period of 6 months from February 6, 1979.
(See Resolution R8-9) Discussion: Mr. Hane stated he is in the process of buying
the land right now and has a Letter of Credit from the First National Bank. He
asked about the Ordinance relative to the Letter of Credit. Mr. Hawkins explained
that the City puts the improvements in and assesses it back. City policy requires
either 35 percent of the cost in cash or a Letter of Credit for 125 percent spread
over 5 years, which will be reduced correspondingly, as the Letter of Credit always
equals the outstanding balance on the assessment. Mr. Hane also asked if there was
any way he could put the sewer in himself. Mayor Windschitl stated that that is
something the Council has not resolved nor allowed at this point. This will be
decided soon (meaning the allowing a developer to install utilities himself).
Mr. Mand asked if at this point the park fees dedicated could be brought more into
line with what they have been receiving lately. It was noted that the dedication
followed the Ordinance, which cannot be changed at this time. Motion carried
unanimously.
Rezoning/Rademacher
Eugene Brandstrom, 4010 West 56th Street, Minneapolis, and William Rademacher, 1901
Pennsylvania Avenue N, Golden Valley, were present. Ms. Bosell stated the Planning
Commission looked at the Rademacher rezoning at the corner of County Roads 116 and 9
in several stages and reviewed the Commission's public hearing on the request and
their motion recommending its approval.
Mr. Rademacher stated he is the fee owner of the property and that his time schedule
for construction depends on Good Value Homes for extension of sanitary sewer. He
also hopes to tie into their proposed water system. Mr. Rademacher also hopes the
oenter is completed in about It years but hasn't looked into financing yet; felt
he could begin construction as·. soon as facilities are available; was aware of the
City's requirement that this could be brought up for another vote with~Ttwo years
if some action isn't taken by then; in v£ew of the proposed shopping centers
developing in that area, he felt that there is increased potential for business on
that corner because the other centers uill be bringing people in from areas alot
further away; would begin constructing the supermarket first and do the rest
of the center as trade centers are warranted; won't build anything unless it is
leased; and noted that this would be a supermarket as opposed to the small grocery
stores presently in Andover.
Ms. Bosell stated the previous Chairman of the Commission did visit and examine the
other shopping centers of Mr. Rademacher and was very satisfied with the upkeep,
layout, etc., of those shopping centers.
Gerald Gerard, 3442 136th Lane - representing the residents opposed to the rezoning
request - presented copies of his statement opposed the rezoning. He gave a
presentation relative to the proposad commercial development on all quadrants of the
intersection of Bunker Lake and Round L~e Boulevards; how the proposed development
relates to the Comprehensive Development Plan; that this would establish the major
retail area of Andover in the extreme southwest corner of the City; and that approval
of this rezoning request would be giving explicit and implied approval of over 31
acres of commercial development in that area. Mr. Gerard asked what studies and
specifio documents were used to approve this request and suggested it be referred to
the City planner for a specific opinion on how the resulting commercial development
fits into his future plans for this part of the City.
Regular City Counoil Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 5
(Rezoning/Rademacher, Continued)
Scme comments made during the Ccuncil discussion were that the City has no control
over the development in the City of Anoka; the Metropolitan Council has taken a
pcsition that an urban zone must be created and defined by a given boundary in the
City, which essentially says that they do not want any industrial or commercial
activity outside the urban area; the City Hall site is in the rural area where
commercial activity would be inconsistent with this official Met Council position;
that the Comprehensive Development Plan is used as a guide, '1 planning document,
which indicates there should be some commercial development in that area (Bunker
Lake Boulevard and Round Lake Boulevard intersection); Ordinance 8 states that a
shopping center site should not be zoned as such until aotual need is presented and
construction of the center can be expected within 2 years, which has been done in
this case; that having a shopping center in.that location should not greatly increase
traffic, especially when one considers the development proposed by Good Value Homes
in that area; if development is coming, the City must plan intelligently for it;
Midwest Planning did review the Conroy rezoming request in Red Oaks Manor, which is
a similiar request within a residential area, and found it consistent with the
Ordinances, Comprehensive Plan, etc.; that probably the major reason why that land
was zoned R-l in the 1974 Comprehensive Plan is because the land was agricultural
at the time; that because the work on the 1974 Comprehensive Plan was done prior to
any sewer facilities within the City, they stopped allowing small lots; that many
things have changed in the las ¡ four years that will change the Comprehensive Plan;
and that it would be more the üouncil's job to deoide what kind of development is
wanted there rather than trying to stop any development in that area.
Mr. Rademacher hadn't mown about the proposed Conroy neighborhood business, but
he didn't feel it would interfere with the supermarket he is proposing. The proposed
shopping center is 57,000 square feet.
Mr. Gerard felt that property values would be lowered as a result of all this
commercial development in their area. He was not necessarily advocating stopping
development, but was concerned about the size of the commercial land in that area
(meaning potentially 31 acres at that intersecti0n).
Further Council discussion was that there is a church and a major thoroughfare which
acts as a buffer between those residents in Ch~pman's Addition and this proposed
shopping center; that the lowering of property values of those houses next to a
shopping center is questionable when Good Value Homes is willing to invest a sub-
stantial amount of money to develop the land adjacent to and across from this area;
that there are those people who would find the location of these homes an asset;
that some reasons people want shopping centers close by are for convenience, saving
time and gas money, ability to walk or bicycle for supplies, etc.; that the rest of
the City might look on this as a oonvenience; and that the Council should be alert
to the fact that they shouldn't be foroing the streets, sanitary sewer, etc., onto
those people in Chapman's who are forced to put up with this shopping center in
their back yards.
Ms. Bosell explained that at the public hearing the residents were asked what was a
feasible alternative for use of that property. It was agreed it would not be a
good area for a park. Other suggestions were multi-family or PUD's to act as a
buffer zone; but the residents couldn't come up with any agreeable or useful
alternatives, nor could they come to a concurrence with the Planning Commission's vote.
The Hutton and Rowe property in Anoka is not limited to 6.4 acres, but oould be as
large as 20 acres. The area around the 6.4 acres is zoned multiple; and apparently
the City is deliberating whether they want multiple development or commercial in
that area.
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 6
(Rezoning/Rademacher, Continued)
Marnel Wilber, 3510 1 36th Lane NW - asked about the safety of the children in
Chapman's Addition with the increased traffic going through the Addition. The
traffio presently goes down 136th instead of Bunker Lake Boulevard as a shortcut.
And eventually some of these streets will go through to the west. Disoussion noted
that traffic signals will eventually be installed at that intersection. It was felt
that the problem of ~affic going through Chapman's could be controlled with stop
signs, etc. The Road Improvement Committee will look at the situation at their
February 26 meeting.
MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution approving the
rezoning request to SC from R-l on the west 330 feet of the southwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 32, Range )4, Township 32 ... (Item 3 - delete the word
"updated" to read: ...Comprehensive Plan...; Second Whereas, change to: ...County
State Aid Highway No. 9 will alleviate a large portion of the traffic problem and
entrances and egresses have been approved by the County Engineer in a letter dated
October 24, 1978...) (See Resolution R9-9) Motion carried unanimously.
Recess at 9:23; reconvene at 9:44 p.m.
Preliminary Plat/Lund's EverRreen Estates
Chuck Lund - developer - was present. Mr. Mand reviewed the Park/Recreation Commission's
meeting with Mr. Lund relative to an agreement on parkland dedication (reference
Minutes of Special Park/Recreation Commission Meeting of January 25, 1979). The
Commission is recommending accepting Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1; and the balance of
2.12 acres in cash of $4,078.88 in lieu of land, and to allow the developer to grade,
restore, and develop the park area in accordance with plans approved by the City
Engineer and the Park/Recreation Commission in lieu of money. These lots are
virtually the only open land in the plat.
Mr. Davidson reviewed TKDA's letter of December 21, 1978, suggesting the road easement
aoross Lot 3 of Block 4 be vacated and that a variance be granted for Block 3
because it exceeds the 1320-foot requirement. Mr. Hawkins stated that apparently
it is a private road easement. The City Ordinance states that the City shall not
accept any plat with any private easements in it, but his interpretation of that
section would mean that any road that would be installed to provide access to lots
would fall within that criteria. This road easement has no relationship at all to
the access of the plat and is an agreement between two private landowners. He felt
it is beyond the City's scope of control and didn't think the City has the authority
to require vacation of that easement.
Discussion was on the concern of building homes on such densily wocded property, as
the land is dense pine tree~which is an extreme fire hazard. It was Mayor Windschitl's
understanding that the DNR 11",s taken the position of requiring clear-cutting so
many feet around the house because the fire hazard is so severe.
Fire Chief Bob Palmer - understood that in Isanti County they have the DNR inspect
it before building permits are issued. He has heard they require a cutting of 100
feet all around the house. Councilman Peach stated that the DNR people say that if
these trees caught fire in a dry-time of year, it is virtually impossible to save
the house if trees are closer than that. Attorney Hawkins stated there may be some
general authority under the Building Code that the Building Inspector would have to
follow at the time the building permit comes up. Mr. Hawkins also recommended in
the Park Board recommendation that the City require the payment of money and that
the City pay for the services the developer performs in clearing the park. Mr. Lund
agreed to that.
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 7
(Preliminary Plat/LtL~d's Evergreen Estates, Continued)
Ms. Bosell noted that part of the rationale behind picking the property they did
for park was to look to the future development of that area and that any area that
was developed adjoining that property would be required to add to that parkland.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, entering a Resolution approving the
Preliminary Plat of Lund's Evergreen Estates... Discussion: Mr. Lund wanted to
be sure the money dedicated would be spent on the restoration of the dedicated parkland;
and if anything would be left over, that money be used for putting a toddler park
in that park.
Aàdition to Motion by Lachinski: ...5.52 acres in the northeast corner of the plat
was being accepted and that a fee of $4,078.88 is being provided in oash in lieu of
the remaining acreage, and that those monies be spent within the dedicated parkland
by the City. Second still stands. Discussion continued: Mr. Hawkins stated when
a building permit is asked for, a site plan must be provided. It is a function of
the Building Code as opposed to the platting process to place restrictions on the
building within a fire hazardous situation. He didn't feel that the Council's
action of approving a preliminary plat would be, in affect, creating a fire hazard.
It would depend on the Building Inspector, and the Council's concerns should be
conveyed to him. (See Resolution RlO-9)
VOTE ON MOTION: YE8-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; PRESENT-Jacobson (For
the same reason as the Menkveld Special Use Permit) Motion ca=ied.
Resolution/PlanninR Grant
Councilman Jacobson noted he had not seen the original grant and was concerned about
the changes from the original grant. Ms. Lindquist statè.d that the City has already
spent $4,230, and this agreement must be returned to Met Council by February 15 in'
order to get the balance of the grant monies. The original grant is attached; and
th~ only thing they are changing is the final page. Originally Midwest Planning was
allowed $4,800 when the P & Z was going to do the majority of the work themselves.
In August, additional monies were allowed. That, plus the City's cost, will equal
75 percent of the total. The City has alroaiy spent enough to make the 25 percent
requirement. The $4,800 in Appendix B is changed to $8,400, with the additional $1,000
for staff costs and publication. Otherwise it is the identical resolution approved
by the Councjl last year. The new Appendix A refetred to was already approved in the
original resolution.
MOTION by Jaoobson, Seconded by Orttel, approval of the First Amendment Grant Agreement
between the Metropolitan Council and the City of Andover on the Contract No. 7846,
dated March 3, 1978. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to sign the
First Amendment to the Grant Agreement between the Metropolitan Council and the City
of Andover. (See Resolution Rll-9) Motion ca=ied unanimously.
Resolution/Minnesota Cities Week
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that the Cityaiopt the Model City Government
Week Resolution as proposed by the League of Minnesota Cities naming February 26
through March 2 as Minnesota Cities Week; and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign
said proclamation. (See Resol~tion Rl2-9) Motion ca=ied unanimously.
,
I
Reg¡¡.lar City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 8
Planning and Zoning Commission Appointment
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that the City Council appoint Mr. Richard
Okerlund as a member of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission for a term which
will expire on 12/31/79. Motion ca=ied unanimously.
Fire Department Report
Chief Bob Palmer reported there are 21 fire fighters in the Department -- 18 on nights,
3 on days with a possibility of three more for days. They had a First Aid training
class held for at hours one Saturday in January. Three men are attending EMT
training (Emergency Medical Technician). The City is paying for two; one man's
company is paying for his. The Ordinance is almost reað¥ to be presented to the
Council; the equipment list is almost ready; the public Relations Committee has
been working on a recruiting <h-ive; and the Training Committee is planning another
house to burn. Chief~almer will also give the Council a roster of fire fighters.
Discussion was on the adoption of the Uniform Fire Code. There is no requirement that
a public hearing be held; but it was suggested that the Planning Commission review
it and look for any inconsistencies with the City's other ordinances.
Park/Recreation Appointment
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that Gary Longbella be appointed to the
Park/Recreation Commission for a term to expire 12/31/81. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that Sharon Anderson be appointed to fill
the unexpired term of Gary Anderson on the Park/Recreation Commission to run until
12/31/81. Motion ca=ied unanimously.
Establishment of "Liquor stud.v Committee"
Council discussion was on the various ways the Committee could be set up and on the
options open to the City relative to the issuance of liquor licenses and the sale of
liquor. It was noted that without a referendum, the City can agree to set up a
municipal on-sale or municipal off-sale or 60 all private. If you are wanting to
split it in any way, a referendum is required. First it must be determined whether
or not the residents of the City want liquor in some form; then how it should be
split up would be decided.
It was recommended that by the next City Council ~eeting each Councilman would submit
a name of someone to serve on the Committee and the Mayor would appoint one of these
as chairperson. Those COI!lInittee members can then talk with the Finance Committee,
Law Enforcement, etc.,; then make a recommendation to the Council to aot on. It
was suggested all information be gathered and a presentation be given at a public
hearing.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that each member of the City Council nominate
one person to serve on a Liquor study Committee and that the Mayor of the City of
Andover appoin~ one of the five members as Chairman; and that they be empowered to
hold publio hearings on the issue and to make a report to the City Council on their
findings. Motion carried unanimously.
Dedication of Public Services Building
DiQ~ussion was on a date for the dedication and that the City Council, City
Staff,. Fire Department, and Public Services Building Committee would be invited.
The possibility of inviting State elected officials was also suggested. Mayor
Windschitl stated he would try to contact the state elected officials to see if he
can a=ange a date for the dedication.
--
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 9
Tour/Meadowcreek School
Ms. Lindquist explained that the Council has been invited to tour the Meadowcreek
facilities and for pie and coffee afterwards. Attorney Hawkins felt that if no City
business is discussed, there would be no legal problem with the tour.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that we set 6:15 p.m. on the 20th of
February as the time in which we'll meet at the Meadowcreek Church and School for
the touring of the facilities. Motion carried unanimously.
Stenquist Addition Discussion
Mayor Windschitl reported that some residents are upset and felt the Council should
put out something to the residents telling them what took place at the Stenquist
Addition Public Hearing. They are confused as to what really took place, what
action the Council took, and have some questions about the methods used to obtain
signatures in the second petition.
Discussion was on the possibility of sending them copies of the Minutes of the PUblic
Hearing and on some of the problems that would entail. It is extraordinary to
spend money after a public hearing to send something to the residents, and it could
be setting a precedent. It was questioned if the Minutes would answer the questions
of some of the residents relative to what had taken place. Mr. Davidson recommended
not doing anything, as he felt that the problem couldn't be addressed. If one group
is satisfied, the other group is going to be dissatisfied and nothing would be gained
by it. The item was dropped from further consideration.
Ordinance 28, Section 7. Subsection 2, Discussion
Councilman Jacobson stated this relates to "non-intoxicating malt beverages",
which states that no on-sale license shall be granted for any place within 1,000
feet of any public or private school nor within 400 feet of any church. He requested
that that section be referred to the P & Z to consider what he felt is a problem
in that the churches should be placed on an equal basis as the public or private
school. He'd like to see the 400 feet changed to 1,000 feet. Churches are open
almost every night now and should receive the same consideration as a school. Mr.
Hawkins' recollection was that the wording of 1,000 feet and 400 feet is from the
State Statute; however, he felt that the City could be more restrictive than the
State Statute.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, recommending we ask the Planning and Zoning
Commission to review Ordinance No. 28, Section 7, Subdivision 2 to consider changing
of the reference of 400 feet from any church to 1,000 feet from any church to be
consistent with the 1,000 feet mentioned with public and private schools. Motion
carried unanimously.
Discussion of Secretarial Position/Hanson Resignation
The Clerk noted she has placed an ad in the paper to be run Friday and next Wednesday,
with closing the following Friday.
Discussion was on whether Ms. Hanson would want to stay on as the Planning and Zoning
Recording Secretary; and that the Personnel Committee Should take a look at the
whole employee situation as there are other questions coming up relative to the
hiring of Administrator, eto.
Regular City Council Meeting
February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 10
(Discussion of Secretarial PositionjRanson Resignation, Continued)
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we authorize the City Clerk to hire
Deloris Hanson as temporary Recording Secretary for the P & Z at the same rate as
the Council Recording Secretary. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we accept the resignation of Deloris
Hanson from services of the City of Andover and at the same tine authorize the City
Staff to draft a letter of commendation to Mrs. Hanson to be signed by all members
of the City Council. Motion oarried unanimously.
En~ineer Report/Developers Installin~ utilities
Mr. Davidson stated that the question has arisen about the City Consultant working
with a private developer. The only way TKDA could work on private property is through
the private developer agreement approach. 1ary Carlson, who owns the property on
the south side of Bunker Lake Boulevard, has asked to meet with him on Thursday
morning. He wanted to use the City Engineers for the development of the sanitary
sewer system within the subdivision. Mr. Davidson will make it clear that he would
have to escrow the necessary 35 percent. If.Mr. Carlson chooses to do it on his
own, TKDA, as City Engineer, would be used for review and approval. Mr. Davidson
suggested the Counoil consider the fact that anytime a utility system is going in
on private property, it becomes a public facility. From that standpoint, the
decision must be made whether you want your Engineer to make sure that they are done
in accordance with all standards, or do you want to expend the funds to review and
approve the work of other engineers' work as it comes in.
Council discussion was that a decision must be made as to whether or not the City is
going to allow a developer to do the internal sewer and water laterals. If they do,
the City's Consulting Engineer would be required to review that, and the developer
would have to pay for those costs. In the past, Mr. Kasma of TKDA wa.s of the opinion
that any oversizing costs of the trunks would be calculated, and the City would pay
for the oversizing and pass it ont'o future subdivisions.
This item is to be put on the next Council agenda to establsih a policy.
Approval of Minutes
January 16, 1979:
Page 4, Motion by Jacobson under Verbatim Minutes/Bosell: Change to: City
Council, City of Andover, authorizes payment to Mrs. d'Arcy Bosell
for the actual hours worked...
Page 4, Elected Officials Seminar: ... Saturday seminar.
January 18, 1979:
Page 1, bottom paragraph, third line: ...restricted right of way, which won't
require the additional cost to acquire ... Change to: . . .restricted
right of way, which won't require any additional cost or easement area...
Page 3, Paragraph 5, 5 lines down: ...the front-foot road cost would remain the
same... Change to: ...the front-foot road cost would remain basically
the same...
Page 3, last paragraph: ...H & S has bid on every project... Change to: ...H & S
has bid on virtually every project...
Page 7, last paragraph: .. .He was denied approval to split his lot because ~
acres is now required for development in the rural area: Change to:
.. .He was informed that the current zoning is now ~ acres...
-~ .~ "-.,
Regular City Council Meeting
. February 6, 1979 - Minutes
Page 11
(Approval of Minutes, Continued)
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to accept the Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes for January 16 and 18, 1979, as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
Approval of Claims
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to approve Claims Check Numbers 2325 through
2345 in the total amount of $5,608.05. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 11:49 p.m.
RespectfUlly submitted,
'\)~~
-.
Marce . Peach
Recording Secretary
- - -. -.--.--." - ~-