Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC December 2, 1980 ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - DECEMBER 2, 1980 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Month1y Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on December 2, 1980, 7:30 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 Attorney, William G. Hawkins; TKDA Engineers, John Davidson and Mark Schumacher; City Engineer, Larry Winner; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others RESIDENT FORUM Rosella Sonsteby - stated there is an error in the November 18 Council Minutes on Page 2, second paragraph, ·the 40 north and west of Lot 1...·, should state ·the lot north and west of Lot 1...·. She also stated: ·1 feel your actions in passing my preliminary plat was discriminatory, arbitrary, and capricious with all those added amendments. I started with a scratch plan July 8, 1980; and after all the tossing back and forth, you completely turned everything opposite the Planning and Zoning. Park Board, and City Engineer. I'm here tonight to tell you that I cannot live with that discriminatory plat. If you on the Council want to show your authority, why then should the people, the taxpayers, have to pay for a Planning and Zoning, a Park Board, and a City Engineer when you completely ignore their findings or you tell them what you want them to do. That's not America. I want you to go home tonight and feel even taller because I've just had to throw about $4,000 down the drain. Thank you.· Chet Conger, 450 156th Avenue NW - stated he appeared before the Council in July with a petitlon signed by the residents of Nordeen Addition demanding road services. He complained about the condition of the roads, stating the roads have not been graded since October 21, which was done only after a complaint to the City. He a 1 so stated the only time the roads got graded was when someone complained -- at approximately six-week intervals. They have not been done on three-week intervals as they were told previously, and he expressed disappointment that the roads were not put into better condition prior to the ground freezing. He was particularly concerned with the potholes On Qumquat. Jerry Knutson. 15501 Juniper - When he was contemplating buying the house in Nordeen's, he was told that the roads would be graded every three weeks. Since that time, the roads have been serviced every six or seven weeks, and he felt common sense would dictate that the roads be bladed prior to the winter freeze. 157th is just a washboard with travel at 20 mph maximum, and he asked if anything could be done about it at this point. Council discussion was that it had been the Council's intention to keep a grader running during all daylight hours during the summer and reviewed the reasons the roads weren't graded the last few weeks. The Council will be having some work sessions with the Public Works staff shortly, and the priority is to be providing better road grading service in the future. Mr. Winner felt they may be able to haul some Class 5 in the area to help over the winter months. Malcom Watson - representing Walter Vosika. who has received notification of the findings of the condemnation commissioners on the purchase of Mr. Vosika's property for road easement purposes - Mr. Watson stated that Mr. Vosika feels the problem was not thoroughly understood during the Commissioner's hearing. The City appraiser valued the property at $1,140. He did two appraisals -- $1,900 On the cost approach and another appraisal on the market approach used because of the evergreens planted on the strip of land involved which serve as a windbreak against the materials that blow from the landfill area. Mr. Vosika is asking that the Council be made aware of his concern ~--~ Re9u1ar City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 2 (Resident Forum, Continued) that the market approach was not fully understood by the Commissioners, that legal costs involved for an appeal make it unfeasible to appeal the ruling, and that he appeals to the Council when making payment to consider granting something other than the minimal amount awarded taking into account there were two other appraisals on it. Walter Vosika, 1414 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW - explained the problem of the plastic bags b10wlng into his fields from the landfill. Mr. Vosika reviewed the events of the hearing of the commissioners, the problem he had hiring an appraiser for the property, and expressed the frustrations he encountered at the hearing. Because of the costs involved for an appeal of the ruling, he asked the Council for further consideration for an additional amount for the land. He also stated that he did not receive any compensation from the power company because the lines are not on his property. AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, the approval of the Agenda as published with the addltlon of 4a, DNR Public Waters Discussion, 5b(l), Westlund Variance; 5q, Snow Plow/Sweeper Purchase; 6a, Easement Approval; 7a, P & Z Candidates; 7b, Liquor Study Commission; and the deletion of 5j, Pumphouse Award. Motion carried unanimously. DNR PUBLIC WATERS DISCUSSION Mr. Winner summarized what has taken place with the DNR public waters designations and some of the problems associated with it. He also recommended that the Anoka County Soils map be used to more clearly indicate where the wetlands are. Because there are more areas shown as wetlands than what is being recommended by the DNR, he recommended addressing only those areas shown on the DNR map but use the soil conservation map to delineate the boundaries of the wetlands. Mr. Davidson explained that generally the wetlands are described by the types of wildlife and also by the biological growth and vegetation. The biggest impact to the City is that any time development occurs within a certain limit of the defined wetlands, it would require, in addition to an environmental worksheet, an environmental assessment, which is much more detailed. It may also require approval by the Corps of Engineers and other federal agencies, which also means quite a delay in any project. And it may also require more refined and costly treatment of storm water runoff because it would not be allowed to flow into Coon Creek nor into any defined wetland area. The City would probably be denied use of public wetlands without providing additional ponding and sedimentation, so it may have a direct effect on the cost of development and 10ng- range land use within the community. Councilman Ortte1 thought it was also stated that there are smaller ponding areas that will come under this list later on that are not shown on this map. And he noted that once it is designated wetland, a permit is required for any activity in that area. And the DNR will not change the designation for 10 years, even if a mistake has been made in the designation. Dick Lang, Anoka County Commissioner-Elect - was not sure of the date of the County's publlC hearlng on the matter. He urged those present to look at the DNR wetlands designation map located in the back of the meeting room; and if there are inaccuracies on it, they should call Art Dunn at the Courthouse, who is in the process of correcting these mistakes. The deadline for submission of inaccuracies to the DNR was 90 days from October, but the County is in the process of applying for a six-month extension. It was his opinion that the DNR map was done as inexpensively as possible, and now the responsibility to make corrections lies with the local authorities. John Berry, 3755 143rd - felt if a more accurate map is available, the Council should hold a hearing and have the DNR look at that map. Discussion was that the DNR response to that suggestion at previous public hearin9s was negative. The City will be filing a more accurate map under protest. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 3 (DNR Public Waters Discussion, Continued) Discussion continued on the concerns of the effects of the DNR program as it relates to storm water runoff from developments, the loss of property from the taxrol1s, the funding for payment for properties to be turned into farmland, etc. Ms. Sonsteby - was in the 10-year program years ago to keep it out of production. When the City of Anoka put their sewer and water in, the water was pumped onto her property for nine months, which also eroded her ditches. Now the water from the Ado1fson property is being pumped onto her property, which is causing problems. She has informed the County of her problem. As a matter of information, she stated the Democratic legislature passed the bill on the public waters issue, which was signed into law by the Then Governor Perpich. Mr. Berry - stated the explanations of the program from the DNR make it sound quite slmple; however, he had concerns after listening to some of the testimony this evening. Tom B1ashil1, 9936 Butternut, Coon Rapids - owns two pieces of property in Andover which arelnvolved in the program. He was of the impression that there is an existing law requiring public access to any waterways or wetlands determined as public. Discussion was that is correct, but for these particular classifications, public access will not be required to be provided. However, because it is public, a person could legally get to the wetland either by flying in or through public road access, and there is nothing the adjacent property owner can do about it. Helen Franz, 16663 Ward Lake Drive - has two pieces of property she has received notlficatlon from the Courthouse. She felt the original notifications were extremely inadequate in the way they were presented. She has great apprehension as to the word "public". Both pieces involved are on private property, and she did not want to have public access to her property by having these areas declared public waterways. Discussion was that public ditches are also included in this program, which go strictly through private property and which gives access ~o anywhere the ditches go. It also restricts the runoff into the creek. Lyle Bradley, 15202 Seventh - asked why someone from the DNR isn't here this evening as a resource person. Councilman Lachinski stated that they have held three public hearings at the Bunker Lake Activities Center already. This is the City's attempt to inform the general public of it. Mr. Bradley - also hears an undercurrent of suspicion of what the DNR is doing, and he felt they should come out to answer some specific questions as our next step. Planning and Zoning Chairman d'Arcy Bose11 stated that with the enforcement of this program, the northern portion of the City is rendered basically undevelopable because it falls within the Scenic River District, a flood plains ordinance, and the public waters designation. It would be undevelopable in the northwest area because it would be inaccessible. She felt the City should go in full force that we are not in agreement of what the DNR is doing. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that we direct the City Clerk to prepare a posltion statement resolution relative to the public waters DNR program and to authorize the City Engineer and TKDA to provide whatever necessary engineering data that is required for it. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was on whether the City should hold another meeting on the matter or urge the residents to attend the County public hearing instead and on the course of action the City should be taking at this point. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 4 (DNR Public Waters Discussion, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that we authorize the firm of TKDA, along with the Clty Engineer, to work on a map of the City of Andover with respect to the public waters and delineate on that map those areas they believe should be delineated as public waters and submit that map to the appropriate authorities under protest with whatever necessary comments that they need to have attached to the map. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that we authorize the City Clerk and/or Mayor to wrlte a letter to the Anoka County Board of Commissioners stating our position on the public waters issue and supporting the County's stand and telling them that we will provide assistance in this area in terms of time or manpower or attending of public hearings or anything that is required until the issue of the public waters is completed. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Bradlea - asked if the Historical Committee is still functioning, as no meeting has been calle in a year or two. Council stated that new Chairmen will be appointed at the beginning of the year and hopefully the committee will become functioning again. FLORIAN BACKOWSKI/FINAL PLAT - RLS MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we approve the Florian Backowski Final Plat - RLS as presented with the contingency that Mr. Backowski furnish the City with a Quit Claim deed for the easements over the property and to include the owner's duplicate certificate of title along with the other requirements. (See Resolution R142-80) Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE/J. SCHILLING Chairman Bose11 reviewed the Commission's recommendation to deny the variance request of Mr. Schilling. Mr. Schilling was present but had no comment. Councilman Lachinski questioned why this should not be allowed and questioned if the ordinance should be changed to permit it on large lots such as this. Possibly requiring a garage behind the house on such large lots is an unnecessary requirement. But he agreed that it is not allowable by the strict interpretation of the ordinance. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, introducing a Resolution denying a variance request for Jerry Schilling to construct a garage nearer to the front lot line than allowed by Ordinance 8, Section 4.05c as presented by the City Clerk. (See Resolution R143-80) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission to review the criteria for determining setbacks for accessory buildings, and specifically referring the Jerry Schilling variance request to the Planning and Zoning Commission, to consider when it may be acceptable or defining different criteria for determining the setback requirements. Motion carried unanimously. It is intended that the P & Z should be looking at this separately from the revisions of Ordinances 8 and 10 that will be undertaken shortly. VARIANCE/WESTLUND Chairman Bosel1 reviewed the Commission's recommendation to approve the variance to face the home toward the longest side of the street on 142nd and Heather Streets. The second reason for that recommendation should more accurately state "it is necessary to allow for the conservation use of the land." Mr. Westlund has made the side yard setback 58 feet, which is the same setback as the home around the corner and to the east and which will not provide a view obstruction going around the corner. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 5 (Variance/Westlund, Continued) Mr. Westlund reviewed the drawings of the plan of the house he wishes to construct on the lot. It is his desire not to put any windows on the north side of the house to reduce heat loss. The roof line is built for solar collecting, but he is not going to use it at this time but will have a passive solar system for now. Councilman Peach questioned where in the ordinance it states that the house has to face the front of the lot; as it was his opinion the ordinance defines the front of the lot for address purposes, but does not specifically address the front of the house. Council deferred action on this item until later in the meeting to allow the Attorney time to research the ordinance. ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF/DUMPING COMPLAINTS SergeantBril1e of the Anoka County Sheriff's Department was presnet. Mayor Windschit1 explained the increasing problem of people dumping garbage indiscriminately throughout the City and asked what help the Sheriff's Department could provide. Sergeant: Brille stated it is the Department's standard procedure that if a name can be found in the garbage, they would contact them. And that should be done. There are some new Deputies who may not be aware of the procedure, and he stated he would make sure that the procedures are followed through. Addressing several other questions, Sergeant Bri11e stated it is better to have an office in the City for housing the car and reporting to work, although they are normally in good shape in Andover. He also had no problem sending someone in the City a copy of the police reports. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we authorize the Mayor to be the recipient of any crime reports from the Anoka County Sheriff's Department, and all reports should be sent to the Mayor. Motion carried unanimously. HAZARDOUS WASTES/ACTION MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the letter be sent to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency as presented asking for records of all their activities relating to hazardous wastes in our City for the past 15 years; show the letter signed by the City Council and carbon copies to our State Representatives. DISCUSSION: it is intended that upon receipt of this letter, PCA should notify the City Clerk so she can go to their office to review the records and indicate which ones the City would like copies of. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution acknowledging concern and requesting licensing agencies to cease issuance of operating license to the Waste Disposal Engineering Landfill, adding an additional WHEREAS, the City cannot be guaranteed that leachate and contaminates from the landfill will not infiltrate the neighboring private wells causing health, safety, and general welfare problems for the residents of the City of Andover; and add the installation of public wells to service this area is not economically feasible. (See Resolution R144-80) Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE/WESTLUND, CONTINUED Attorney Hawkins didn't find anything other than the section which defines the lot front, but interpreted the question of intent as to why have a definition of a lot front. Under these circumstances, the Building Inspector probably made a reasonable inter- pretation of the ordinance as that requiring the house to face the front of the lot. It was his opinion that a variance is appropriate at this point, but the Planning Commission should clarify that. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 6 (Variance/Westlund, Continued) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, entering a Resolution approving a variance request of C. Westlund to construct a home facing the long side of a corner lot, variance of Ordinance 8, Section 3.02ww, as prepared with the following changes: Under the third WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission cites as reasons for such recommenda- tions as being 1. It wi 11 not adversely affect the existing or potential use of adjacent properties. 2. It is necessary in order to allow the most efficient use of solar heating for the structure to be built on the property. And leave out No.3. And leave Number 4 as it is: It is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan insofar as future solar heating possibilities are concerned. (See Resolution R145-80) DISCUSSION: Mr. Westlund will have to conform with the front-yard setback on the long side of the street and on the side yard as well. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach, Windschi1t; ABSTAIN-Jacobson, as he knows Mr. Westlund well and feels he may color his vote by their acquaintance. Motion carried. Recess at 9:15; reconvene at 9:34 p.m. NEEDS ASSESSMENT/CABLE TV Councilman Jacobson explained that the results of the Andover Community Needs Assessment is for the Council's information, and he explained the action the Council should consider taking this evening. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, a Resolution determining the advisability of determining the franchise process as presented in writing by the City Clerk. (See Resolution R146-80) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Jacobson, that we accept the cable television lobbyist policy as prepared by Pat Lindquist. Make all refereeces to the Anoka/Champ1in/Ramsey Cable Commission show as Quad City Cable Commission. (See Resolution R147-80) Motion carried unanimously. 1979-2 FINAL ACCEPTANCE (Reference December 2, 1980, TKDA letter on the Final Acceptance, 1979 Street and Drainage Improvement No.2.) Mr. Schumacher stated there is also a compensating change order to cover differences in quantities primarily for excavation and restoration in the amount of $34,019.71 in addition to the regular contract price. Mr. Davidson explained thata compensating change order is made up at the completion of all projects relating the proposed quantities to the actual quantities used. In the case of the Xenia Street project, quantities of common excavation were added because the two-foot drainage area along the edge of the mat required going farther back into the backs10pes. Also, the problems of erosion were addressed after-the- fact. That soci'~ was added as additional quantities, not as additional change orders during construction. In this case, it is their first experience with the change in the street standard design, and he explained the problems they encountered as a result and as reasons for the 15 percent overage on the project. Council discussion was on their concern over the large overage on the project, questioning what that ultimately means in assessments to the residents. Thi s project has already been assessed; however, a supplemental hearing will need to be held to assess the remaining charges. Council also expressed concern as to where the funds will come from to pay the contractor, since the bonding for this project did not include the overage, and expressed disappointment that the Council wasn't made aware of the overage at the time of the assessment hearing. Council asked the Engineers to provide the Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 7 (1979-2 Final Acceptance, Continued) figures for the proposed excavation and restoration quantities and the actual quanities used. Mr. Winner clarified that with the change order, the total project cost is approximately $336,000, and $297,000 was funded for (approximately $40,000 difference) and the project was assessed for $314,000, resulting in approximately $22,000 remaining to be assessed on the project. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that we table discussion until the next regular City Council meeting, and direct the firm of TKDA to provide us in written form the information, quantities, and amounts of money that is used to arrive at the costs they are presenting to us, and indicate to us where the differences are in the final amount and define it now as compared to what they began with the original. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we direct the City Engineer to detail the costs of the project including the engineering fees, including our own engineer, and make a recommendation as to where to secure funding to pay for this project. Motion carried unanimously. 1980-1-2/FINAL ACCEPTANCE Mr. Schumacher asked to postone action on these items until they can prepare the final documents. 1980-3/STATUS REPORT Mr. Davidson reviewed the Status Report #2, SW Area Improvements, letter dated Oecember 2, 1980. Because of weather conditions, the streets in Auditor's Sub. 82 have not been gravelled, but there will be access through the winter months, assuring that emergency vehicles will have access and they shouldn't be getting stuck. The contractor is responsible for maintaining the roads through the winter construction period, and he believed the contractor will remain on site during the winter. ~. Davidson also agreed that if weather permits. some gravelling will be done to prevent the streets from becoming muddy and impassible as the weather warms. It was also noted that only portions of Auditor's Sub. 82 have been assessed for the storm sewer system which was previously constructed in the subdivision. In addition, the contractor is responsible for keeping the storm sewers free from sand and gravel and to provide adequate drainage until the streets are surfaced in Chapman's Additions. Discussion was on TKDA's engineering fees for the project as it relates to any reduction in their fees when the City Engineer is involved in the project. It is expected that the City would be receiving some income from the project for the City Engineer's involvement in the project. Mr. Davidson stated he had talked on this matter with Mr. Winner. The fact that the City Engineer is doing some work that TKDA isn't, the City can place costs of the project back to the City funds for staff engineering. They exceeded the top engineering fees in the design phase with the pumphouse construction, but the construction phase of a project falls outside of the top of the curve. TKDA is only billing for actual costs, the individual on the job times the multiplier. Every person the City puts on the job that TKDA doesn't have to put on is a savings for the City. He doesn't know how it could be done more cost effectively. Mr. Davidson agreed to discuss this further with Mr. Winner. 1980-3 PETITION/WATER EXTENSION BOEHLAND AND SONSTEBY CHANGE ORDER Mr. Schumacher requested Council approval for a change order for a provision of adding water facilities to the Boeh1and property and a provision of water service to the Rosella Sonsteby property, total amount of $45,562.69. Dr. Boeh1and has assured Mr. Schumacher tOday that he wrote a letter and mailed it to the City today waiving the 429 public hearing proceedings. Regular City Council Meetin9 December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 8 (1980-3/Water Extension Boeh1and and Sonsteby, Continued) Rosella Sonsteby - stated that regardless of what happens to the Rosella's Addition plat, she still wants water service to her property. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that we authorize the extension of the water services to the Boehland property contingent upon receipt of his waiving the 429 procedure. Motion carried unanimously. Council again asked Ms. Sonsteby her intention with her property, and Ms. Sonsteby again stated she still wants water service to her property regardless of what action she may take with her Rosella's Addition plat. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we extend the City water services to the Rosella Sonsteby property as requested by the property owner and direct the Engineer to make a recommendation as to additional bonding required. DISCUSSION: the funds for this change order are not included in the bond for the 1980-3 project. Mr. Schumacher explained this is simply extending the 12-inch water line to the west side of Round Lake Boulevard to the entrance of the Sonsteby property line. Construction on this will not be done until next spring. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson, Peach Motion carried. Councilman Jacobson: I think instead of doing it now we should wait until spring. I have no problem with providing water if she wants it. Councilman Peach: I also have no objection to approving it, but don't think it should be done now when we don't know what we are approving. Mr. Davidson stated that since the last meeting he has learned that one problem with injecting po1yphosphates in the water at certain levels is that it will affect home water softeners in that it hangs up in the zeolite and creates a membrane. As a result, most of the home water softeners marketing people will object to adding po1yphosphates to the system. Counci 1 agreed to postpone action on this matter unti 1 more research can be done. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, to extend the 10:30 time period for committees tor 15 minutes. Motion carried unanimously. ANDOVER COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER/FINAL PLAT Ed Aims, Land Surveyor for the Andover Community Shopping Center, explained that the easements shown are centered over the utilities as they are being constructed in this project and runs to the manhole. Mr. Winner and the TKDA Engineers had no problem with the location of the easements. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that we approve the Final Plat of the Andover Community Shopping Center. (See Resolution R148-80) Motion carried unanimously. ANDOVER WEST SUBDIVISION/BOND RENEWAL - ACCEPTANCE OF STREETS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that the City authorize the reduction in the amount of the Letter of Credit for the Andover West Subdivision from the amount of $60,000 to the amount of $53,000 and that we accept the streets in the Andover West Subdivision for winter maintenance only for the winter season of 1980-81. DISCUSSION: Attorney Hawkins stated that the City is accepting the streets for a specific purpose, for winter road snow plowing, and the City will be plowing on publicly dedicated right of way. The only problem he has is if the developer would hold the City liable if gravel were graded off, etc. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 9 (Andover West Subdivision, Continued) Councilman Jacobson CHANGED MOTION: reduce the bond to $53,000, that new bond to run until July 1, 1981. Secondly, that when we accepted the streets for winter snow plowing, reference as per Mr. Berger's letter of November 18, 1980, subject to the condition that he states in his letter of that date. Second still stands. (See Resolution R149-80) Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF EASEMENTS - 1980-3 MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, that we authorize acceptance of the easement from Robert Sabeskis from the 1980-3 Improvement Project at no cost. Motion carried unanimously. LIQUOR COMMITTEE Jim Elling, Chairman of the Liquor Committee, was present. Council again discussed the question of municipal liquor in the City. Attorney Hawkins clarified the State Statute, that issuance of private on- and off-sale liquor does not require an election. If the City begins municipal liquor, on- or off-sale, at such time that the City attains the population of 10,000 as taken by the U.S. dicenia1 census, the matter must be placed on the ballot as to whether or not the City should continue to engage in municipal liquor or to issue private licenses. If the City engages in municipal off- sale and then desires to issue private on-sale liquor licenses, an election must be held. However, the Statute is not clear as to what would take place if private on- sale liquor licenses are issued first and then the City wishes to engage in municipal off-sale. Council discussed the pros and cons of municipal liquor, what other cities do on this matter, etc. No action was taken by the Council to change the decision made previously, that decision being to issue both private on-sale and private off-sale liquor licenses in the City. Mr. Elling also informed the Council that two members of the Liquor Study Committee will not be serving on the Committee any longer, and he asked whether the Committee should function with the three remaining members or to have two other people appointed. Council agreed to attempt to place two more people on the Committee. Mr. Elling also asked several questions of the Council's intent on several issues: According to existing ordinances, liquor licenses are allowable in Neighborhood Business zoning areas under special use. Council tended to think that it should not be allowed in the NB districts. Attorney Hawkins also advised that Ordinance 28 regulating the issuance of beer licenses be kept separate but should be in conformance with any new ordinances that are adopted. Mr. Elling noted that in the event the City would want to issue Sunday liquor licenses, an election would have to be held. He also stated that the State law presently allows the City six on-sale liquor licenses and asked how many should be issued and what criteria should be used to issue such licenses. Council expressed opinions of not issuing all six liquor licenses to begin with, that applicants for licenses should furnish information and be screened with licenses issued based on specific criteria rather than using the lottery system. General opinion was also that on-sale licenses should only be issued to restaurants with a capacity of at least 100, agreeing that the ordinance should provide for investigation fees prior to deciding the issuance of licenses; and suggesting that the licenses be non-transferable. Council directed that the Liquor Committee draft the ordinance on the issuance of licenses, after which the Council and the Liquor Committee will meet jointly to review their suggestions and recommendations. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that Councilmen Jacobson and Councilman Ortte1 each be allowed to select a representative to the Liquor Study Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 10 VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Chief Bob Palmer asked if it is legal to assess the installation of a rainy well in Hugh's Industrial Center to those in the industrial park. Mr. Hawkins stated such projects are allowable under the 429 proceedings and can be assessed, but the question is is that property increased in value because of that installation. Discussion was that it is a large industrial center with inadequate fire protection in that area; that the well would primarily provide service for the Hughs Industrial Center and the immediate vacinity. Chief Palmer was directed to talk with those in the industrial center to determine their opinion of the installation of the well. Chief Palmer also informed the Council that a speaker will be out on December 10 to talk on legal matters involved with emergency medical services, and asked the Council- men to attend if possible. He also invited everyone to the Christmas party on December 19. Chief Palmer then noted that the Department is considering removing the high pressure pump on the pumper 4881 because of the problems they have had with it, though no definite decision has been made yet. He will come before the Council with the proposal after more exact figures are known. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that the $7,647.72 of the insurance premiums refund be transferred to the Fire Fighters Relief Association of the City of Andover and to be placed into the special fund. VOTE ON MOTI ON : YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Windschit1; PRESENT-Peach, as he is a fire fighter. Motion carried. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Fire Department be authorized to purchase a radio for the life support vehicle, from the 1981 funds, at a price not to exceed $1,500. Motion carried unanimously. Fire Marshall Rich Lindeen reviewed what has taken place relative to the installation of a fire protection system in Meadowcreek Christian School, noting that the plans for the system should be in the mail for his final approval and feeling that the system should be installed by the end of the year. One problem that has arisen is that two rooms of Grades K and 1 were on the upper level, which still needs to be resolved. Mr. Lindeen also asked that any questions anyone has on the system be referred to him. Discussion was also on the Smoke Detector ordinance (Reference Burke and Hawkins November 26,1980, letter to Mr. Steven M. Bia1ick). Attorney Hawkins recommended that a portion of the ordinance be changed to correspond with the State law which states one cannot require electrically wired smoke detectors in buildings constructed prior to January 1, 1980. 1980-3 PONDING AREA Discussion was on the December 2, 1980, TKDA memo On the Chutich Ponding Area, with Mr. Davidson explaining the overall drainage plan for the Chapman's Additions, the Church, Dr. Boeh1and's property, Chapman's property, and a portion of L. Carlson's property. Discussion was on servicing a portion of Mr. Carlson's property and whether he can still legally be assessed for a portion of this project; questioning whether the storm sewer assessments were clearly understood at the public hearings; and noting that since the public hearing the Church has expanded its parking area and no longer has its own ponding area for its storm water runoff. Mr. Davidson also stated that he has been working closely with Bob Johnson of the City of Anoka relative to the affects of the overflow through culvert outlets from the Chutich pond to the City of Anoka when the pond is used as a storm water holding pond. He felt that if the City has control Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 11 (1980-3 Ponding Area, Continued) of that ponding facility in terms of easement rights or fee rights, it is a good faith action by the City of Andover in providing for the storm water in the event there should be some problem in the future. But they have been careful in the design not to cause any problems in Anoka. The Chutich ponding area also has the potential of serving the Good Value property to the north as well. Mr. Hawkins stated that the preliminary appraisal for the seven-acre pond came to $7,500. MOTION by Ortte1, Sèconded by Peach, that we refer the matter of thedrainagapond for thelg80-3 project to the City Attorney to begin condemnation proceedings. (See Resolution R150-80) Motion carried unanimously. Councilman Lachinski could go along with the condemnation, but he felt that the Attorney should also use the alternative of acquiring a portion of the low area and construct a dike as a negotiating tool. 1980-4 TIME EXTENSION MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that we extend the completion date of the 1980-4 project to July 1, 1981. Motion carried unanimously. BRIDGE APPROACH/FINAL PAYMENT MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we authorize final payment in the amount of $18,238.65 for the South Coon Creek Drive bridge approach project which includes a change order in the amount of $313.66, and that the authorization be contingent upon approval by the State Aid Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. MSAH REPORT (Reference the November 28, 1980, MSAH Balance Report from Larry Winner) Mr. Winner stated that the $6,000 final payment for the Ho1asek easement was not shown, which makes the expenditures $6,000 more than what is shown on the ~eport. He stated it would be possible to delay purchasing the right of way for the Phases II and III of the Hanson Boulevard extension and use the funds for a road project next year, such as completion of Prairie Road from the bridge to Andover Boulevard. It was agreed to decide the next course of action when the Council meets to discuss the five-year capital improvements program for MSAH road improvements. PURCHASE SNOW PLOW AND SWEEPER FOR TRUCK MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we recognize bids from Cloverleaf Motors, Inc., for $1,195; LaHass Mfg. & Sales for $1,250; Barry "Jeep" for $1,260; and Gnerer Welding, Inc., for $1,295 for the purchase and installation of a Webster 7~" Hydra- turn snow plow for the 1980 Chevrolet and award the purchase to Cloverleaf Motors, Inc., for $1,195. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Windschitl; PRESENT-Peach Motion carried. P& Z CANDIDATES MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, to authorize the Clerk to advertise for posltlons on the Andover P & Z Board. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 18, 1980: Page 2, Second paragraph, last line, change "40" to "lot" MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we accept the Minutes for November 18 as amended with the one revision. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting December 2, 1980 - Minutes Page 12 APPROVAL OF CLAIMS After discussion on the Walter Vosika payment for the Hanson Boulevard easement, it was generally felt that the payment should not exceed that amount set by the court appointed commissioners at the condemnation hearing. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of Checks Numbers 3619 through 3649 excluding Check Number 3620 which is void, Check Number 3633 which is void, and Check Number 3638 which is being left out, for a total of $30,125.33. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, the approval of Check Number 179 out of the 75-1 Fund to Farmers Home Administration for $78,500. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, the approval of Check Number 413 for 1980 Englneering fees for $70,330.20. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:35 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~'"~L ~G..... '-c'-C./ Mar 11a A. Peach - Recording Secretary