HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH January 18, 1979
- .
~ o¡ ANDOVER
PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 18, 1979
MINUTES
Pursuant to notice published thereof, a Public Hearing on the Street and Drainage
Improvement Project in the Stenquist Addition was called to order by Mayor Jerry
Windschitl on January 18, 1979, 7:36 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown
Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota.
Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach
Councilmen absent: None
Also present: City Engineers, John Davidson and Dave Pillatzke; City Clerk,
P. K. Lindquist; and interested residents
Mr. Pillatzke gave an explanation of a Public Hearing and reviewed the feasibility report
of the proposed street and drainage improvement project in Stenquist Addition, giving a
description of the project area, a background of the Public Hearing held in May, 1978,
showing sketches of the proposed street construction and drainage facilities, and re-
viewing the estimated project costs. He explained that the total cost for street
construction and Alternate 1 with underground storm drainage facilities at the inter-
section of 159th Avenue and the proposed street of the Ron Smith development would
amount to $194,000, resulting in an estimated front-footage cost of $11.91. Using
Altern~te 2 with a minimum amount of culverts and open ditching at that intersection
results" in a total estimated project cost of $186,000, for an estimated assessment of
$11.41 per front foot.
Mr. Davidson explained the estimated prices are reasonable representative costs of
going prices of the last year. Because there are some inflation factors built in, they
fully expect the low bid coming in would be somewhat under these. He reviewed the
procedures of preparing feasibility reports, letting bids, and the assessment hearings.
He also reviewed the project financing and the proposed project time schedule.
Mayor Windschitl asked how much pipe would be used on the proposed storm drainage
facilities at the intersection of 159th Avenue and Mr. Smith's street, as he felt the
estimated 'storm drainage costs were high. The Enginesrs stated that the difference
between the two suggested Alternates is $8,000. The ditch suggested in Alternate 2 would
be constructed in a vacant portion of the lot where the natural run-off is right now.
They tried to equate the amount of common excavation that would be appropriated to the storm
sewer construction in the total project. Included in the storm sewer construction costs
are approximately 7,000 cubic yards of ditch excavation -- $15,000 to $16,000. The
figures noted include the storm sewer costs for the entire project, representing ditch
excavation, restoration of those ditches, mulching, installing culverts, side slopes,
backslopes, as well as the pipe installation at the intersection on l59th. That pipe
culvert is approximately 300 feet at $15 a foot, plus two catch basins, amounting to
about $5,500 for that one intersection. The storm drainage is proposed to be a typical
ditch section of 2 to 2! feet deep parallel to the street, and the culverts and top
dressing make up the storm sewer system. This does not include any costs for securing
easements or right of ways.
Mr. Davidson stated that in his opinion, T-intersections are adequate in this type of
installation where it is a temporary street ending. A snow plow can turn around within
the restricted right of way, which won't require the additional cost to acquire. He felt
they are adequate for a turn around if there is not a substantial amount of traffic or
people living off the ends of the T-turnarounds.
... ~ ~'. ~----~._._~ -..> '"
Public Hearing - Stenquist Addition
January 18, 1979 - Minutes
Page 2
The Hearing was then opened to the residents for testimony. (Staff responses are shown
in parenthesis. )
Bob Fodness, 4613 l62nd Lane - went around with the petition in October. He intended to
get cost figures to see what was the best way to go for everybody concerned. He
noted the letter brought around with the petition and brought to the City on October 30,
and felt it is important that they have the streets for safety reasons more than anything
else. He stated if you haven't seen the streets in the spring, you should -- if you
have a four-wheel drive vehicle.
Bill Hemp, 4756 l6lst Lane NW - stated that they would be paying for temporary streets.
He doesn't have a four-wheel drive and doesn't have a problem getting out in the winter
or summer. The roads are rough because maintenance is not kept up. The road was not
graded before it froze up. The tar on 159th is Just as rough right now as the other
roads are. (Mr. Davidson stated these are permanent streets. They will last through
the assessment period of 15 to 20 years or even longer with normal maintenance. The
terminology is used because this isn't considered an urban street system, which is
considered a final street. The type of street proposed and referred to as temporary streets
are of rural design standards, but isn't intended to mean that they will fall apart. )
Dr. Terrell Yeager, 4810 Marystone Lane - has lived there for 10 years at a time when
none of the streets or homes in the Stenquist Addition were there. 159th was always a
bad street in the spring or fall because of the rain and traffic. As traffic increased
over the years, 159th has become steadily worse and worse. There are times when it is
questionable whether it is passable, and there have been times when he was concerned
whether he'd make it out to Seventh Avenue on an emergency call. As traffic increases,
there is more and more wear and tear. It's going to have to be done eventually; and
every year we wait, it is going to cost that much more because of inflation. He is
strongly in favor of 159th being upgraded to a paved road and felt the people deserve it
and that it would enhance all the property values.
Joe Saunter, 16036 Potawatomi Street - has been told it will be 20 years before sewer is
put in there; but wondered if the water is found to be polluted, do they have any
control as to when the sewer comes in. Also, what do the residents or the City do if the
water is considered contaminated? (Mayor Windschit1 stated all the interceptor lines in
the planning process have been taken over by the Metropolitan Waste Water Control
Commission. They have their plans through the year 2050. The interceptor in the south
end of the City has no physical capability of getting to the Stenquist area because the
capacity would be used up before it got that far. There is an interceptor line being
proposed that will come up through the City of Anoka, through Ramsey, and cross in the
north somewhere in the neighborhood of 159th. The earliest proJ ection is somewhere around
the year 2000 or later. This would have a capacity in it for 2,400 residents in Andover,
and this is the total capacity in the master plan for the entire City. Mayor
Windschit1 also stated the options available to the City in the case of contaminated water
would be to put in a localized lagoon system, or the possibility of considering a water1ess-
type system that is being developed in the Scandinavian countries, or to work with sealed
systems in a particular area. Running pipes in a lagoon system doesn't necessarily mean
that the roads would be tore up, as there is still a substantial amount of right-of-way
to work with. )
(Mr. Davidson stated that should there be contamination of private wells, there are a
number of immediate solutions. You are dealing with your potable water supplies. The
first thing that could be done would be to provide a safe potable water supply as the
central water system. And the ditches are such that water mains could be run through
- _u' _ - ,. "_0·'
Public Hearing - Stenquist Addition
January 18, 1979 - Minutes
Page 3
them without cutting up the blacktop streets. There are so many solutions both temporary
and permanent that could be used to address the problem that the street is rather
insignificant. At some point, you would be crossing the road; but it wouldn't have to
be run down the center of the road. )
Mr. Saunter - asked about load limits on the streets as there are some people who drive
semi trucks and find it necessary to drive on the streets. He was concerned about going
around corners and kicking up blacktop. (Mr. Davidson stated a few number of loads is
not all that detrimental to the roads. It's the repetition of heavy loads by truck
traffic that is detrimental to the roads. An occasional heavy load could be tolerated.
It should not kick up blacktop when going around corners. The road could be posted so
trucks heavier than 7 tons couldn't drive on it. )
Mr. Saunter - stated there is no question that 159th is the worst road out there, and the
others are much better. He asked whether the City put out bids last fall to bring
159th up to grade; and if so, will that work take place in the spring. (Mayor Windschit1
stated there were no bids let on 159th. The plan from the Road Corrnnittee was to do some
improvement on 159th to try to solve some of the problems. It was strictly a maintenance
project with no blacktop. That portion of blacktop there on 159th was put in as a
requirement of the developer of Kiowa Terrace. )
~Ær. Saunter - one of the County Commissioners told him today that 159th may be a
Municipal State Aid Road now or it may qualify to be one. (Mayor Windschit1 stated it
is not a MSAH road at this time. The problem is the definition for City State Aid roads
is that it start and end on a County State Aid road. 159th starts on one but does not
End on one. )
Mr. Saunter - asked if that road should really belong to the Stenquist Addition. He felt
there would be more time and money spent on 159th in comparison because the ditches are
higher than the road and the road would have to be raised. He also asked what the
mainenance would be on the blacktop road and who will pay for it. (Mayor Windschit1
stated that 159th could be divorced from the Stenquist Addition and done by itself. The
storm sewer allocation would be changed, but the front-foot road cost would remain the
same. The sea1coating and maintenance is the City's responsibility. Mr. Davidson stated
they don't intend to change the present grade of the street appreciably. The material
that is usable from the excavated areas would be used in building up the road system
itself. So there would be some balance in cutting and filling to increase the height
of the road and lowering of the ditches on either side. )
Mr. Saunter - stated that 159th is certainly rough, but stated when all the roads are
filled with snow they are pretty smooth. He is against the improvement, especially when
looking at the price. A friend has just built a home and paid around $7 to $8 a foot for
blacktop. He believed that a blacktopping company, H & S, is quoting a price of $7.25
per linear foot. He stated in his calculations, taking various factors into account, he
comes up with $7.18 a foot; and he can't believe drainage, etc., would make the
difference between that figure and the estimated $11.91 by the Engineers. (Mayor
Windschit1 stated that H & S has bid on every project the City has had and assumed they
would give that quote to the City as well. Mr. Davidson explained the assessment policy
relating to the 200-foot relief on corner lots. Assessable frontage is that property
which can be assessed for the improvement on an equal benefit basis. The prices used
by TKDA relate to $6.65 per running front foot for blacktop. It is built up by
including grading, creating ditches, placing culverts, excavating, and using assessable
frontage to get the total of $9.50 for blacktop on the streets.)
Public Hearing - Stenquist Addition
January 18, 1979-Minutes
Page 4
Mayor Windschitl stated he felt the Council is confused over the petitions, as there is
one overwhel1ningly in favor and another received this evening which appears to be
considerably opposed to it.
Mr. Saunter - stated the first time the petition came around, they didn't get involved and
didn't understand everything that was going on. When the petition before this "no"
petition was passed around, three gentlemen told him and his wife that this was only to
vote for a study. On Monday he called Ms. Lindquist, who told him that that isn't
true, that it is more than a study and it looks like everybody wants it. He has talked
to people who stated they had that same impression because there were quotes of $8 or less
in RalIlsey. So the study was to find out exactly what it would cost, and that may be why
there is confusion in the petitions.
Adrian Yeager, 4810 Marystone Lane-has been informed by legal counsel that if 159th were
not improved and if, during certain conditions that that road is sobadly deteriorated and
impassable that an ambulance has to come to the aid and rescue of someone who is in need
of help or a fire engine has to come under legal limit speed, that the people who have
voted against the improvement on 159th, along with the City Council, could very easily
be held liable by the injured party for not receiving adequate fire protection or medical
help.
Mr. Fodness - stated he was one of the people at Mr. Saunter's home, and noted the letter
passed with the petition which verifies exactly what was said.
Gary Zavadil, 4530 159th Avenue - the first lot off of Seventh. Stated he signed the
second petition, but it was more in relation to the costs and he didn't quite understand
it. He wants the tar and doesn't want the study to die here tonight. He was not
against the blacktop streets in the second petition. He felt that al1nost all of those
signed against on the second petition was because of the price. He also felt that the
figures presented did not give a true reflection of the cost they might expect. He is in
favor of blacktop.
Bill Hemp, 4756 161st Lane - stated there was someone concerned about not being able to
get down with an ambulance, but they don't want their particular area done, which was
somehow removed from this project. 159th probably does need blacktop, but the costs are
way too high. He felt a .lot of people in the petition signed strictly because they are
against these costs. It is too high for him to pay. People want to see the exact costs.
(Mayor Windschitl stated each year the costs will go higher and higher. Council1nan
Lachinski guessed these figures would be very close to what it would cost. )
Mr. Hemp - again stated he feels it is too high. ~~at happens if next year the bottom
falls out in the money situation? Who is going to pay the taxes when you are out of work?
He's in favor of doing 159th and asked if the rest of the people use it, do they have to
pay for it. (Mayor Windschitl stated if 159th were done by itself, and it appears
there are a considerable number of people on 159th in favor of doing it, the properties
on 159th would pay for the blacktopping. On the storm water, if there is run-off out of
Stenquist Addition, Ron Smith's Addition, or Kiowa Terrace that contributes to it but is
not fronting the road, they would be assessed some part of the storm water project.)
Mr. Hemp - cited an occasion when people were passing him on the streets who were not
concerned with speed or roughness. He didn't feel ambulance drivers would have any trouble.
Helen Hemp, 4756 161st Lane - asked what happened to Roanoke Street. Wasn't it in the
original petition? (Mayor Windschitl stated Roanoke was not in the original petition.
- ~... .... -- ,-...--. - ,. , .., -".
Public Hearing - Stenquist Addition
January 18, 1979 - Minutes
Page 5
He read the letter circulated with the petition which defines the affected area. It
affected the people on 159th up to Marystone Lane point. From a legal standpint, they
can only recognize the defined boundary of a petition presented to the Council. Mr.
Davidson stated at the time the petition was submitted, he recommended 159th be extended
west to Roanoke Road. We can reduce the scope of a project, but it cannot be increased
once the hearing is held. The extension of 159th was to Roanoke Street, but not to
include it. Ms. Lindquist clarified when the petitions were brought in and verified for
35 percent of the signatures, Dr. and Mrs. Yeager had signed it for both of their lots,
but they were looking at where the top of their property abuts 159th. A portion of their
property goes down one side of Roanoke. So when she countèd and marked the maps, she
included the whole north section of Roanoke because their property abuts that and does
constitute 35 percent. But they were not actually signing it for Roanoke Street, and they
have asked that Roanoke be removed.)
Mrs. Yeager - stated they are the only property owners on Roanoke Street that own property
abutting 159th. To show their interest in improving 159th, they had to sign the pètition
as property owners and signed in favor of the improvement on 159th.
Al Struwve, 4613 159th Avenue - didn't feel that the City would be sued for not being
able to respond to emergencies. Would ]îke to see 159th and other roads taken care of
by other means. He hoped the vote tonight is against tar and that they would be getting
Class 5. (Mayor Windschitl stated all road improvement projects have been assessed to
the local areas, because they can never be balanced out fairly. On feeder streets like
159th, they are talking about bringing the road up to some maintainable standard. This
is a situation where there is a development with streets that are not the standard of
what is being required today. If the entire area were done with a Class 5 road, the
assessment would be less. The biggest problem with Class 5 roads is the housewives after
it is put in. There are a lot of complaints because the dust problem is substantially
greater than the sand due to the clay stabilizer. Councilman Lachinski stated the
Class 5 was approved and authorized to be placed last summer. It wasn't done because
the contractor had too much to do in the City. Also, there was some idea last spring
that you might be wanting tar streets in Stenquist Addition. He explained that in
determining the roads in the City to be upgraded, it was hoped that people wouldn't have to
travel more than 1/2 mile on just a sand road. It does get difficult justifying Class 5
over sand roads when there are areas of the City which have paid $2,000 to $3,000 to
have bituminous streets, and it costs substantially less for maintenance on them with
sealcoating every 5 or 6 years. It was also noted that gravel will last only about 4 years.
Dr. Yeager - stated when they put the present blacktop on 159th, they pushed the stabilizer
down to Oneida. Today, that's probably the worst part of the road and is the roughest
in the spring and the fall. He was not impressed with it. It didn't last very long and
doesn't seem to be worth the money. (Councilman Lachinski stated that that is a
characteristic of Class 5 and that it does get rough. )
Bill Bush, 4613 161st Lane - felt that something has to be done. Even if it is just 159th.
He felt more time should be spent grading. He called two days in a row a week before
the freeze asking to get bladed, and they never came out. It's too late now. $2,600 to
put blacktop in front of his house so he could drive out seems quite high; but if more
grading was done, maintenance costs would be up, but he wouldn't notice it because it
would come out of the taxes. Hopefully the problems out there can get resolved one way
or another.
Art Stenquist, 4731 159th Avenue - hasn't seen the plat to the south, but understands
that Potawatomi will go down to the river and come around on Seventh Avenue. (Mawor
.- -,.,-- - .. ->
Public Hearing - Stenquist Addition
January 18, 1979 - Minutes
Page 6
Windschitl stated that is correct, and it also comes out on 159th. Those streets will
be blacktopped.)
Mr. Stenquist - felt when those roads come in, the people will go down Potawatomi to
get to Seventh, as it will be 1/4 mile shorter. He felt seventh-five percent of the
present traffic will go off of 159th. (Mayor Windechitl stated it is an inner street
so it will not lend itself well to through traffic. It is difficult to speculate what
traffic patterns will be established. Councilman Lachinski stated you might pick up
as much traffic on 159th as you'd lose, so it would tend to equalize itself.)
George Kerr, 4644 161st Lane - hasn't yet moved into his house, but is still in favor
of the blacktop. He is a realtor and felt that the property will be much more valuable
with the blacktop streets than without it. In other areas, special assessments for
blacktop aren't as high, but he felt in the long run everyone will benefit from the
blacktop streets.
Mayor Windschitl then read letters from Leone Struwve, 4613 159th Avenue NW and Mrs.
Diana DesRoches, 16014 Potawatomi Street, both opposing the project.
Recess at 9:07; reconvene at 9:22 p.m.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, to close the public portion of the Hearing.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Windschilt noted that on the second petition, only 27 percent are in favor of the
improvement project. He brought up the question of whether this new petition should be
validated and of how many votes would be needed for approval of the project.
Council discussion was on deciding whether the total project should or should not be done,
on doing 159th by itself, or on doing some Class 5 improvement on some or all of the streets.
Mr. Davidson felt that doing 159th Avenue could stand alone; and in case of the storm
sewers, the tributary areas off of 159th would be assessed. Mr. Davidson also stated it
is their intent that drainage easements would be provided at no cost to the City, and that
any pond development that would be required as a result of the increased run-off would
be developed at no cost to that owner. The development of the pond would be such that it
would not increase its level. With the limited amount of blacktop being considered here,
they don't think additional storm drainage run-off would be a large impact. He would
definitely recommend that the easement be secured for the protection of both the owner
and the City, and that they be maintained to cause no damage to the private property.
Council discussion was on the feasiblity of doing only 159th Avenue at this time. Mr.
Davidson didn't feel there would be an appreciable difference in assessment to the
property owners if only 159th was blacktopped at this time. The assessment for the
corner lots would be assessed in reverse, in that they would be assessed for 159th now and
credit would be given when the interior streets were improved. The entire front footage
along 159th would be assessed at this time, but a detailed calculation would have to be
done to determine exactly what that assessment would be for both storm sewer drainage and
roads. The tributary area would have to be assessed for storm sewer work as well. From
that standpoint, Mr. Davidson guessed that the assessment for 159th alone would be something
less than the $11.91 because there is more assessable front footage.
Mayor Windschit1 explained the State law regarding the holding of public hearings and how
the costs of the feasibili~ studies are carried until a project is ordered. If 159th
were done by itself, the costs for the feasibttlty study would be pro-rated on the
. ...-- - .. ~ -. ..
Public Hearing - Stenquist Addition
January 18, 1979 - Minutes
Page 7
effort in the project. The City would carry the remaining cost until wuch time that
the project is ordered.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, to order the Improvement of 159th Avenue
and to have the firm of TKDA prepare the Plans and Specifications for that stretch of
159th from Roanoke Street east to the in-place blacktop, and to terminate the remaining
streets in the Stenquist Addition from further consideration at this time. (See
Resolution R5-9) Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Windschitl explained the procedure followed in doing the project, noting the
Council can terminate the project if the bids come in higher than expected. He also
explained that residents may be part of the assessment role on an area basis if their
property contributes to the storm drainage on 159th even if the street does not go
past their property. The engineering fees will be pro-rated between what has been
expended versus what has been ordered. The part expended by TKDA will be put into the
project, and the rest will be carried by the City until such time there is a majority
for doing the rest of the project.
tlr. Stenquist~ asked who pays for this. (Mayor Windschitl explained that property owners
along both sides of 159th will be assessed. ) He felt that all people in Stenquist
Addition should be paying for it, as they are the ones who will be using it most. He
also asked if he would be allowed to split his lot to reduce assessable front footage.
(t~yor Windschitl explained the law regarding assessment policies, noting that on Mr.
Stenquist's lot, when the interior streets are done, the first 200 feet would be free
and the remaining footage assessed. He was denied approval to split his lot because 2!
acres is now required for development in the rural area. Possibly it could be appealed
before the Planning Commission to see what their interpretations would be.
Mr. Fodness - stated he didn't understand in hearing testimony from the Council that part
of the reason we haven't had the grading done is because there is not enough equipment
to do a proper job. And yet we just said we have expended about $5,000 for these hearings,
which may not be a lot of money to the City but is to a lot of people, and are just
sitting on it. It seems that that is a hasty decision. (Councilman Lachinski felt the
figure might be closer to $3,000, and most of this was spent last year when this was
brought up. Some monies will be recovered in doing 159th. Mayor Windschitl explained that
that money won't be lost; as when those streets are done, it will be brought into the
project. As the project on 159th is being done, if the people change their minds and
decide they want the streets done, Mayor Windschitl recommended it be brought backto
the City as quickly as possible so that costs might be saved. )
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Public Hearing of the Stenquist Addition
Improvement be closed. Motion carried unanimously.
Hearing closed at 9:52 p.m.
Respectfu~lY SUbmit.:ted'~
\~~~p~
Recording Secretary