Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC February 19, 1980 · I ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 19, 1980 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Crooked Lake Boat Landing b. 201 Study:Cost Increase c. TKDA Contract d. Industrial Zoning e. Street Standards - Urban Area f. Feasibility Report - 133rd Avenue/G1adiola Street g. Installation of Trunk Sewer Lines/Section 32 h. Summer Program i. Ordinance No.8 Revisions j. Ordinance No. 10 Revisions k. Adoption of Ordinance Requiring House Numbers 1. Baker & Sons Rezoning m. 5. Non - Discussion Items a. Municipals Meeting b. Special League Legislative Meeting c. 6. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Boards a. Planning & Zoning Commission b. Park & Recreation Commission c. Volunteer Fire Department d. Other Committees 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9. Adjournment Ihterviews - Planning & Zoning Commission 7:00 P.M. r'laynard Ape 1 7:15 P.M. Patricia Anstett I CITY 01 ANDOVER MEMORANDUM TO: MAVOR ANn rOllNrTl COPIES TO: ATTORNEY, ENGINEER. STAFF FROM: CITY CLERK/A.ADM. DATE:: FEBRUARY 14. 1980 REFERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - FEBRUARY 19. 1980 Item No.2 - Resident Forum You have received information reo the noise levels on Round Lake Boulevard. An abutting property owner may be at the meeting to request action by the City Council Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Please add Item No. 41 (Baker & Sons Rezoning). This item was omitted from the published agenda and cannot be carried over to the March 4 Meeting inasmuch as a full Council will not be in attendance. Item No. 4a - Crooked Lake Boat Landing The Park and Recreation Commission conducted the Public Hearing on this matter on January 10. Those not contacted for the Public Hearing, i.e., Coon Rapids residents, have since responded to the Park Commission. Attached is further information from the Department of Natural Resources, etc. The Park Commission is requesting approval from the City Council to proceed with the project under the Grant Guidelines. Item No. 4b - 201 Study/Cost Increase The City Engineer has advised there will be a cost increase of approximately $8,000 to $10,000 for the Step I Studies. You will recall, the original estimate was not to exceed $15,000, which was approved by the City Council, noting $13,500 to be from Grant Funds and $1,500 from City Funds. There will be someone in attendance from TKDA to cover this with you. Item No. 4c - TKDA Contract This item was briefly reviewed at the January 22nd Meeting, however, no specific items were addressed at that time. The multiplier is increased from 2.4:~ to 2.5; meetings are to be billed at $50 for 3 hours, not to exceed 4 meetings per month, with additional hours/meetings to be charged out at salary x 2.5; and a finance charge is to be added to all accounts not paid within 30 days of receipt of invoice. Item No. 4d - Industrial Zoning The Planning & Zoning Commission did not discuss this item at the February 12 Meeting, therefore, therejis no recommendation from them. ----' . Regular City Co~ .il Mee g February 19, 1980 Agenda Information - Page 2 Item No. 4e - Street Standards (Urban Area) At the February 5 Meeting, street standards providing for a 24' minor street and a 28' thoroughfare street were adopted, however, after discussion the question of urban streets was left open. In checking with other cities, streets in areas of small lot size requirements (.5 acre or less), require 32' mat: with surmoúntab1e curb; except in the areas where utilities are not all in, some use the 24' w/berm. Two of the cities I talked to are thinking of revising the standards to narrow down the 32' mat in the areas of average traffic. All engineers in each of the cities stated that some type of curb was necessary in areas of nO ditching. The mat depth varied between 1" and 2". Item No. 4f - Feasibility Report (133rd/Gladiola Street Area) You have received feasibi1ity~reports from the engineer, showing estimated costs for the various types of streets available. A resolution is prepared acceping the study, and setting the date for a public hearing. Item No. 4g - Installation of Trunk Sewer Lines, Section 32 All abutting/affected property owners have been contacted. To-date the only response received has been from Good Value Homes and Bill Rademacher. Information is not in f~om any others. Item No. 4h - Summer Program Nancy Hagman has requested time to briefly cover the proposed Summer School Program; and to ask the Council's permission to use the Constance Free Church property instead of the Community Center site. This request is due to the small response in 1979 at this lòtation. I have checked with our insurance agent On coverage for non-City property and he reported that in most situations, the church )ipbility insurance would cover if there was negligence On the part of the church, i.e., equipment, etc.; if negligence could not be established both City and Church would be named. It would require a notation on our policy that this site is being used, and should not involve any premium costs. Item No. 4i - Ordinance No.8 Revisions Residential dwelling - square footage requirements: This item change was requested by the staff, with the only item of concern being two-story dwellings and garages. The definition revision for "floor space" was recommended in order to show a two- story requiring 80% of the now required in Section 6.02, to be area covering ground,i.e., in a ,Residential 1 District, a two-story home would require a minimum 768 square feet on the first floor; and Residential 2 would require 960 square feet on the first floor. The recommendation of a garage was to assist in having a covered area to store yard equipment, etc. ¡might 'note that the way the present ordinance reads insofar as square footage requirements, one could construct a two-story home with only 430 sq.ft. on the first f1õor (24'x18'). This item was cOntinued from the February 5 Meeting, therefore, you have already received recommendations from Planning & Zoning. The other sections covered in the proposed amendment are matter which have presented problems as written now, either cos to P&Z or'to the staff. '~" Item No. 4j- Ordinance No. 10 Revisions This revision was also requested by the Staff. This item has created many problems and misunderstandings between staff people and developers and property owners. ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 19, 1980 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Month1y Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschit1 on February 19, 1980, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineers John Davidson, Mark Schumacher, and Walt Sternke; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others Resident Forum Stan Deden, 13836 Round Lake Boulevard - expressed his concern, along with that of his nelghbors, that when the land to the north and east of their neighborhood is developed by Good Value Homes, sanitary sewer will be extended to that property. Mr. Voth of Good Value Homes has suggested they express to the City Council their desire to be included in any plans to extend the sewer lines in that direction. He presented a petition from the neighbors that they be included in the sewer planning in the future. Tim Ryan, 14733 Butternut Street NW - his daughter's pet rabbit was killed by a 1Dse dog yesterday afternoon. He stated that the dog situation is getting totally out of hand, running allover the place in packs, chasing people, even his children can't play in the yard or streets. He expressed great frustration, concern, and anger over the problem and asked what can be done about it. He has called City Hall and asked for dog catcher assistance in the past and has even had the Sheriff out on several occasions. He did know the owners of some of the dogs. Discussion was that a saturation patrol of the dog catcher has had some success in the past. It was also suggested that the Sheriff can be asked to come out to a specific dog owner, if that person is known, or to come out and observe the dogs. Agenda Approval MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, to approve the Agenda as published with the addltion of Baker and Sons Rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we suspend the rules for this evening. Motlon carried unanimously. Crooked Lake Boat Landing Mayor Windschitl stated that it is his understanding that the Coon Rapids Park Commission has recommended in favor of the Crooked Lake Boat Landing project in Andover, but that the Coon Rapids City Council has not yet acted on it. Wes Mand, Park Commission Chairman, went over the questions that the City of Coon Rapids had regarding the project (reference January 23, 1980, letter from Rick Packer, Assistant Planner, City of Coon Rapids). Their first concern was whether the projPct was a package, and Mr. Mand stated that it is a package as far as the park and launching facilities are concerned. Surface zoning would be optional. ¡~r. Mand then reviewed the DNR's responses to questions 2, 3, and 4 (reference January 31, 1980, letter from Delos Barber, Regional Trails and Waterways Coordinator, Department of Natural Resources). Question 5 was On the enforcement by the County. Mr. Mand reported he had not received a written reply from the County but has been told verbally by the County that they have adequate enforcement capabilities of any ordinances that would be enacted. Question 6 was on surface zoning of the lake, and the Mayor Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 2 (Crooked Lake Boat Landing, Continued) reported that if this would be done, it would be done jointly with the City of Coon Rapids. But there is some question as to whether surface zoning would be needed. Mike Markell, Supervisor, DNR Water Access Section - stated that offers have been made to the property owners involved, but he was not sure what the status of that was. To date they have not actually purchased any property. It was also his belief that if for any reason the City decided not to go ahead with this project, that the DNR would still proceed with the acquisition of the property and the construction of the boat ramp. He explained that this has been a joint effort between the DNR, the Metropolitan Council and the State Planning Agency, and it is one of their priority lakes listed in their agreement with the other two agencies. Carl Stromer, property owner on the lake - stated it looks like this thing is being rallroaded through because a great majority of the owners on the lake are opposed to the boat ramp. He felt the policing of the lake needs further consideration, because he thought Anoka County does not have a Sheriff's boat. He also asked what is going to be the cost for maintaining this situation and didn't think that has been figured into a yearly budget. Who is going to be assessed for those costs. He a 1 so didn't understand how a small lake like Crooked Lake can get $200,000 from the DNR when their budget for the coming year is $3 million. Why is Crooked Lake given priority? The majority of property owners on the lake are opposed to it because it is going to be so congested and there's going to be injuries, and the City of Andover is going to be responsible for them. Mr. Markell explained that Crooked Lake is one of many priorities they have established with the Metropolitan Council and State Planning Agency and is not singled out as being a separate lake. Not just the Department's budget, but that of the Metropolitan Council and State Planning Agency are working on lakes within the metropolitan area that do not have public access. They have approximately 20 accesses going at this time between the three Agencies. The priorities were d=veloped by a joint task force. Mr. Markell left the Council a copy of the document showing the lakes given priority by the Agencies. Phil Frederickson, 13641 Heather Street - didn't think the DNR was doing a favor to the resldents of the State of MInnesota by making a fishing lake out of Crooked Lake. He felt that what they were doing is inadequate and felt the park, boat landing, dredging the lake, etc., were necessary to make it worthwhile. He felt the entire project should be stopped. He was also opposed to zoni ng the 1 ake. He bought the property on the lake, ,and he felt he should be entitled to use it. Mr. Mand stated he has been told that the Sheriff's Department has at least three boats now that are capable of doing the patrolling work On the lake. Mayor Windschitl stated that neither Council involved has made a determination that the lake should be surface zoned. Mr. Stromer - asked how the residents can legally protest this project. Mayor Wlndschltl explained that they would have to deal with the State if it is about the DNR's acquisition of the property. If there would be any consideration for zoning the lake, it would go through the normal public hearing procedures. Park Board CommissiorB' Bill LeFebvre, 14278 Underc1iff - stated the Park Board has been hearing from those on the lake who would llke to keep things as they are. But he felt the Council should also consider that those people who are several blocks or miles away from the lake feel that having a fishing lake close by would be desirable. Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 3 (Crooked Lake Boat Landing, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, to move the Crooked Lake Boat Landing to the flrst meeting of the City Council following a recommendation from the City of Coon Rapids, but we consider it no later than the last meeting in the month of March. Discussion: Mr. Markell stated their position is that they would like to proceed as soon as possible with the acquistions. Motion carried unanimously. 201 Study Cost Increase Members of the Council were given copies of the 201 Study application. Walt Sternke, TKDA's Enviromental Department, addressed the Council relative to the 201 Study application. He explained that this facility plan is a comprehensive study and reviewed the Plan of Study located about midway through the application. The Plan of Study includes three phases, and Mr. Sternke reviewed the tasks involved in each phase. Phase One has already been done. Phase Two is to cite specific needs determination where public hearings would be held and where 270 sites would be inspected to determine the needs of the community. Phase Three is a completion of the Facilities Plan. Mr. Sternke went on to say the last five pages of the report is a detailed listing of how their costs will be incurred as they see it, with a total of the two phases amounting to $26,000, which, if the application is approved, will be 75 percent Federally funded, 15 percent State funded, and 10 percent City funded. Council discussion was that after this study has been completed, not one on-site system will have been fixed. The Engineers explained that this will take into account a 20-year projection of what is going to be done in unsewered areas of the City. This may also be used by the Metropolitan Council and Waste Water Control in a long-range planning function when planning future sanitary sewer extensions, etc. They are looking to handling problems with alternative methods other than extending sewer lines. Mayor Windschit1 asked if it is even a feasible project in identifying on-site systems within the City, as many times a homeowner doesn't even know what system he has. And the City has no records of on-site systems before 1972. The Engineers stated in some cases perk tests may need to be taken, or going back to original contractors, or asking neighbors, etc., to make an accurate determination of the system. Mr. Davidson also explained that the reason for the cost increase was that at the time of the $15,000 estimate, the PCA had not yet determined the precise analysis they wanted in the Study. They have since set out a rigid set of specifications and guidelines. He stated that it may be that an alternative for Andover would be to let the septic tanks fail and take care of them individually, but in that process you do not have the overall planning concept where you might be able to deal with several problems at once. Council discussion was on their doubts about being able to obtain the specific information on individual on-site systems; generally feeling the cost does not justify the results; and asking what amount of money the City has invested in the Study to date. Mr. Davidson stated he would research that figure and relate it to the Council. Mr. Sternke explained that after submitting the application, it takes 30 to 90 days for approval. Once approved, they have 12 months to come up with a completed Facilities Plan which gives a recommended course of action. After that there is another gO-day review period by the EPA during which time the City would be expected to submit an application for Step Two and possibly Step Three. Step Two is design; Step Three is construction. Councilman Lachinski felt that there may be some positive aspects if it is the City of Andover's plan with City staff being directly involved, possibly the City's own Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 4 (201 Study Cost Increase, Continued) engineer when, or if, one is hired, or the Building Inspector. Mr. Davidson stated that the entire Study will require individual participation and cooperation and felt the City staff would be able to participate. The final recommendation to the Agencies will be that of the City, as TKDA is merely an extension of the City staff. The Engineers also stated that they are using minority business enterprises to do aerial photography, mapping the area, etc. Mayor Windschit1 stated that aerial maps of the City have already been taken. Councilman Ortte1 felt that the residents may not cooperate because of their fear of getting sanitary sewer. He also stated he would like toæe the PCA and EPA direct their funding towards the barrels of hazardous waste in the City rather than spending their money to study a problem that may not exist. Councilman Peach expressed opposition to the Study feeling it is a foolish waste of money and questioned the costs of TKDA. Mayor Windschit1 also felt the question of what benefit the City is going to get out of it has to be answered, as he felt that it will be very difficult, if even possible, to get accurate information on individual on-site septic systems within the City. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that the City Council, City of Andover, resclnd its previous motion on the 201 Study pertaining to Site Specific Surveys/ Facilities Plan, Step One, Wastewater Treatment Improvements, and we discontinue any further activities on the project. Motion carried unanimously. Street Standards - Urban Area Mayor Windschit1 reviewed those standards passed by the Council at the February 5 Council meeting. Discussion was on handling the storm water within the urban areas. Mr. Schumacher reviewed a TKDA memo of February 19, 1980, relative to storm drainage runoff in rural areas versus denser urban areas as a tool to compare one form of development to another. It basically shows that R1 has the lowest runoff, and it increases 14 times in multiple housing areas. This is based on a five-year storm, which includes 3~ inches of rainfall in a 24-hour period, which is what storm sewer design is normally based on. He stated that they were confident of the previous standards, but felt that in the R3, R4 areas, that some type of drainage control should be included. Mr. Davidson stated that it would be their recommendation that some type of separate curb, be it concrete or bituminous, would be preferable over a shoe- type birm. There was a lengthy discussion between the Council and Engineers as to which road standards were desirable, how storm drainage would be affected in the urban areas, and balancing out between obtaining effective drainage control and cost. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that City standards on the streets be modified so that bituminous shoe and/or variable depth ditches be used where necessary to remove standing water from the street proper. AMENDMENT TO MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that because of the higher use contemplated ln areas designated R5 and above, multiple housing areas, M1 and 2, and all commercial, industrial areas, that cOncrete curb and gutter and adequate storm drainage be provided in those areas. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: Carried unanimously. Discussion: The existing standards adopted at the last meeting will stand; however, in areas R5 and above, there will be COncrete curb and gutter. And bituminous shoe or variable depth ditches can be used in any areas where needen. Discussion was On the road width to be used in areas with concrete curb and gutter. Councilman Peach ADDED TO MOTION: R5, M1 and M2's, Commercial and Industrial would be 32-foot road width. Second still stands. Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 5 (Street Standards - Urban Area, Continued) Discussion was on whether or not the 28- or 24-foot street should be widened in areas where a bituminous shoe would be used. There was no agreement for additional width of the road mat when a bituminous shoe is used. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. Feasibility Report - 133rd Avenue/G1adiola Street Mr. Schumacher reviewed the estimated costs of the various road standards for the benefit of the residents, noting that the feasib1ity report will be covered in more detail at the public hearing. Carl Stromer, 13336 G1adio1a - stated with the addition of the boat landing on the north side of Crooked Lake, that G1adiola Street will be much more heavily traveled with people coming off Crooked Lake Boulevard on 133rd and up Gladio1a as a short cut to the boat landing. He didn't think it was fair that they should be paying for a road which is going to be utilized very heavily by a lot of other people. Mr. Schumacher replied that he felt most of the traffic will be using Crooked Lake Boulevard and Bunker Lake Boulevard. It was also noted that controls, such as stop signs, could be used to discourage the use of G1adio1a Street as a short cut to the boat landing. Vern Knowlton, 13445 G1adiola - asked what it is going to cost for storm sewer. Mr. Schumacher explalned that under the present road standards there would be no storm sewer improvements other than a few culverts where necessary. The cost of culverts would be included in the cost of the street construction. Dave Stenger, 13365 G1adio1a - was confused as to what the estimated cost was, as Mr. Schumacher gave the figures on various street widths. Mayor Windschit1 explained that the price that it will be near will be the 28-foot streets for the most part, which will be approxiamte1y $15.50, which includes whatever culverts will be needed and driveway construction to the property line. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, directing TKDA to revise its feasibility study and ordering a public hearing for the improvement of bituminous streets for 133rd Avenue, 134th Avenue, 135th Avenue. Gladiola Street, Eidelweiss Street, and the East 1/2 of the south quarter of Section 33, Township 32, Range 24... (Public hearing date set for March 20, 1980, 7:30 p.m.) (last paragraph: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council, City of Andover, to hereby direct the City Clerk to give mailed notice to all affected property owners proposed to be assessed under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 for the improvement of bituminous streets and storm water...) (See Resolution R13-80) Motion carried unanimously. Recess at 9:30; reconvene at 9:45 p.m. Summer Program Nancy Hageman, Community Schools Coordinator, addressed the Council relative to the tentative plans for the 1980 Andover Summer Recreation Program, as presented to the Council. She noted that the schedule evolved as a result of. a parent meeting held in January. Council generally agreed with the proposal to charge a $5 registration fee per participatn for the baseball program. Discussion was also on finding two other sites to hold påyground. Ms. Hageman noted that Jerry Ryding, who lives in 159th Lane, has offered the use of his yard for morningpbyground. She has also received approval from the COnstance Church to use their yard for an afternoon playground for one day a week. She asked the Council's feeling on this and questioned the liability. She also presented the Attorney with Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 6 (Summer Program, Continued) a lease agreement that is used in- other communities when community schools are held on other-than public property. The Council had no problem with either location; however, it was noted that Mr. Ryding should check with his insurance on the question of liability. It was also suggested that a lease cou1d"be used for the Ryding property simi1iar to what is done with Aztec Park. Ms. Hageman stated she would pursue that further and report back to the Council. The Clerk reported that the insurance agent has stated that use of the church property would require a notation in the City policy that this site is being used and that it would not involve any premium costs. It was suggested that in the event the Ryding property is not usable, that Constance Church be used for both playground sessions. Installation of Trunk Sewer Lines/Section 32 Mayor Windschit1 read a letter from George Adolfson dated February 15, 1980, expressing opposition to the extension of the trunk sewer line at this time. Mr. Davidson reviewed previous events relative to those petitioning or indicating a desire to have that sewer line extended. He also explained that the lateral system would need to be developed for Chapman's Additions if direct benefit is desired at this time; that the developers have asked that a central water supply be studied, along with addressing the overall surface water drainage taking place in that area; plus addressing the matter of street improvements. Mayor Windschit1 noted that formal request for sanitary sewer and street improvement has been received from Chapman's Additions. He also read portions of a letter just presented by Mr. Larry Carlson, developer of Woodland Terrace on the south side of Bunker Lake Boulevard, requesting they be included in a feasibility study for sanitary sewer, streets, storm water drainage, and city water. Mr. Carlson also asked for a cost estimate for such a study and proposed cost sharing of the studies. Frank Voth, Good Value Homes - stated they will be following up with a letter, but asked to partlcipate ln the feasibility study for storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water. The immediate area they are concerned with is the 80 acres on the north- east corner of Bunker Lake and Round Lake Boulevards, exclusive of the land already sold to Mr. Rademacher. Wayne Anderson, Bill Rademacher's Associate - stated they have approximately 20 acres of the parcel Mr. Voth referred to and asked to join in this request for streets, storm water, sanitary sewer, and water. John Peterson, representing Grace Lutheran Church - stated they are interested in the sanltary sewer if it were to come through. Mr. Deden, 13836 Round Lake Boulevard - stated they were mainly interested in the sanitary sewer and had not talked about street improvements. Dr. LynnBoeh1and - asked if he does not need the sanitary sewer, would he have to pay for it if he is included in this study. Does he have to hook up to sanitary sewer if he would already have a sewer and would not need it. He also asked how the service road is going to affect the property. He presumed the trunk line would be coming under the service road. He questioned if the traffic is heavy enough to warrant that road at this time, or will it be constructed just for the sanitary sewer. If it is just for the sewer, who is going to pay for the road? Dr. Boeh1and also didn't think the service road benefits him, and stated he thought Mr. Chapman would feel the same way. Mayor Windschit1 explained that each of the parcels would be assessed for handling their own storm water. And if he ponds his storm water, the Mayor didn't feel an assessment could be made against that property. The reason the interceptor is being run down the side is because it is substantially cheaper than tearing up and going under Bunker Lake Boulevard. Mr. Davidson stated the cost Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 7 (Installation of Trunk Sewer Lines/Section 32) of the service road will have to be addressed in more detail. He stated that the cost of the service road itself will more than likely be part of the total construction. Whether or not the road will be improved at this time to a finished condition needs to be addressed, with the cost of the service road being determined by whether or not there is more of an individual benefit or area-wide benefit. Mr. Davidson also stated that normally there is no requirement to hook up to a city water supply unless the City would adopt some ordinance requiring it. There is a requirement by Metro Waste Control requiring connection to a sanitary sewer within two years of its availiabi1ity. Dr. Boehland - stated right now he is in favor of sanitary sewer. He didn't see a benefit to himself or Mr. Chapman for having the service road built. His concern is who is going to pay for this road if it is not really necessary other than for sewer. Wes Mand, 3457 141st Lane - asked if there would be any benefit if Quickstrom's Additlon, which is directly north of the Good Value property, was included in this entire study. The Mayor explained that there is no requirement that they be included, but often there can be an economic benefit by being included in a larger over-all project rather than as a small project some time in the future. If a petition were brought in from that area, the Council will consider it. Mr. Davidson stated that the project could be constructed this year for the extension of the trunk line. It may be that the extension of the lateral systems would have to be phased in. The Mayor asked the Engineers to draw up a map for a meeting early next week showing the grade divide for sanitary sewer and where the lift station as proposed in the sanitary sewer plan would be located. Dean Kellar - asked when they are going to develop Bunker Lake Road. The Mayor stated that the intersection at Round Lake and Bunker is going to be changed this summer and that the County is going to do Round Lake Boulevard all the way up to County Road 20. That intersection is also being wired for signals. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, that we hold a Special Council Meeting on February 25, 7:30, to discuss the potential sanitary sewer project. Motion carried unanimously. Bill LeFebvre, Auditor's Su~ 82 - asked if that area would be out of line for extenslon of the sanltary sewer. The Mayor stated that the Council can consider the request if a petition is brought in. TKDA Contract Mr. Davidson explained that the change in the contract is using the 2.5 multiplier for both office and field work and the addition of a 30-day penalty clause for over- due accounts at a charge of 1 percent per month, which is something they are writing into all contracts. The penalty clause is subject to a negotiated-type arrangement. It is also suggested that they define attendance for general service as four three- hour meetings per month for $50 per meeting. Any time over the three hours at the meeting would be charged at the rate of the 2.5 multiplier. There would be no addi- tional charge for travel time and expenses. Council discussion was on whether the City can be assessed a finance charge. The City Attorney was directed to research this. Because of the slow reaction time of city governments at times, it was suggested that the 30-day penalty clause, if it is legal, be extended to at least 60 days. There was also a lengthy discussion on the 2.5 multiplier, as to why there should be an increase; that the multiplier is based on a raw salary, not payroll cost; and that auditors have indicated to TKDA that this is the rate that they have to have over and above salaries to pay overhead costs and obtain a reasonable profit. Mayor Windschit1 didn't understand the need for the Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 8 (TKDA Contract, Continued) increase in the multiplier. Salaries are increasing at inflation, which in turn raises the amount received from the multiplier. The multiplier amounts to a built- in price increase. Every time a person's salary is raised, there is a substantial increase in cost of services already built in. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that we accept the new rates as outlined by Mr. Davidson, the only change to that contract I would suggest that accounts not payable within 30 days of receipt be changed to 60 days. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1; NO-Windschit1, Peach Motion carried. Industrial Zoning MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we carry the matter of the industrial re- zoning to our next regularly scheduled meeting to allow the Planning Commission time to complete their deliberations. Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No.8 Revisions Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman d'Arcy Bose11 reviewed the proposed changes to Ordinance 8. Discussion was particularly On the Minimum Floor Area requirements as proposed by the P & Z, especially as it relates to two-story homes. Chairman Bose11 stated that the figures of 956 and 1056 square feet are those footages generally referred to by contractors. Discussion was on the reasonableness of those figures; questioned how it relates to two-story homes; that the State Building Code requires a minimum square footage per room in a house so that does not,need to be mentioned in the ordinance; feeling the need. for the R-2 estates to remain at the 1200 square foot minimum requirement; generally agreeing with the suggested change in the definition/¥~ 1in9 the minimum requirement should remain the same as the present ordinance; and agreeing to add a provision that in all zoning districts, a two-story house would have to be 80 percent of the floor area required in a one-story home. Discussion on the Definition of Planned Unit Development was on the fourth and fifth lines, ".. .on a single parcel of land and shall include townhouses, mobile homes, modu 1 ar homes, si ng1e- and two-family homes, apartment projects..." It was agreed to change the fourth line to "...on a single parcel of land which shall include townhouses... " Council agreed with the proposed Right of Way definition. Discussion/~AsSection 4.04, Lot Provisions, changing it so that a lot must front on an accepted and currently maintained street. Discussion with Mrs. Ma1eman, who is wanting to construct a home on property abutting a public right of way but which has nO constructed roadway (reference February 5, 1980, regular City Council meeting Minutes), was that the Building Inspector had inspected the property today, but she has not yet applied for the building permit. It was noted that if she applies for a building permit before this ordinance change is published, she would comply with existing ordinances. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that we adopt Ordinance 8F as proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission with the following changes: under (EE) FLOOR AREAS: Square footage of ground coverage of dwellings exclusive of garage except that a full two-story dwelling shall have floor area defined as 80 percent of the minimum requirement for one or two family dwellings in Rl, R2, R3, and R4 districts under Section 6.02; and under Definition (RRR), we need to change the second sentence from "and shall include" to "which shall include"; all references to square footage under 6.02, Minimum Requirements, Floor Area for Dwellings, to be left the same as Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 9 (Ordinance No.8 Revisions, Continued) MOTION, Continued: it was under the original Ordinance 8; Section 6.02, Minimum Requirements for garages to be as proposed; Section 7.03 as proposed; Section 4.04 as proposed. Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 10 Revisions Discussion was on the requirement of requiring 66 feet of right of way on all streets. Chairman Bosell stated that 66 feet has been required on all plats coming into the City except where roads abut to existing roads of 50 feet, and that this is changing the ordinance to reflect that requirement. Mayor Windschit1 asked why we would require 66 feet when it is not needed and when the Metro Council and others are trying to compress lot sizes, etc. Discussion was also that 66 feet can be undesirable to the residents, especially if it is clear-cut and not needed; suggested that the 66 feet be dropped down to 60 feet; that a definition of minor streets is needed; and that the Council has been told in the past that the road mat plus utilities can be installed within a 50-foot right of way. Because of the right of way question, it was decided to delete this portion of the proposed Ordinance No. 10E at this time and to confirm whether utilities can be adequately installed within a 50-foot right of way. Chairman Bose11 stated that Section 16.02 is the same language as in Ordinance 8E which was just approved. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, a Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 10, ~ffective February 15, 1972, an Ordinance known as the subdivision and platting Ordinance of the City of Andover; Section 16 Permits, shall be revised to read as follows: Subsection 16.02 Access. No permit for the erection of any building shall be issued unless such building is to be located upon a parcel of land abutting a public street right of way which has. been accepted and is currently maintained by the City, or which has otherwise been approved by the City Council. This limitation on issuing permits shall not apply to planned unit developments approved by the City Council pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Baker & Sons Rezoning MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, entering a Resolution accepting the Agreement and dlrecting the Mayor and Clerk to execute same for use and structure of the property to be rezoned Limited Business in Section 17, Township 32, Range 24, between Baker and Sons and the City of Andover as presented at the meeting. (See Resolution R14-80) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach, Windschit1; ABSTAIN-Jacobson Motion carried. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, entering a Resolution approving the rezoning request of ~aker and Sons to rezone from R-1 to Limited Business property described as: Part of the NW~ of NE~ of Section 17, Township 32, Range 24, commencing at a point in the center of the road 59 rods south of the :IN~ corner of said section 17, thence westerly 10 rod~ thence southerly 10 rods, thence easterly to the center of said road, thence northerly 10 rods to the point of beginning... as presented in the Resolution to the Council this evening. (See Resolution R15-80) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach, Windschit1; NO-Jacobson Motion carried. Adoption of Ordinance Requiring House Numbers MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Ortte1, to postpone that issue until the Fire Department is here to speak for it. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 10 Municipals Meeting MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that City authorize that two City employees be authorized to attend the Municipals Meeting for one day and pay the registration fee of $18. Discussion: Mayor Windschitl questioned if we can afford this time away from the City, as there has to be a limit as to how many times people can be away from the City. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Orttel, Peach; NO-Jacobson, Lachinski, Windschit1 Motion failed. Special League Legislative Meeting No one on the Council expressed a desire to attend the meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission Report Chairman Bosel1 explained that the last page of the TKDA report on the proposed industrial rezoning along the railroad tracks recommends that some study be taken by the City to determine the levels of industrial commercial development, potential market, etc. Council discussion was that the current market indicates that commercial land is selling in the twin city area; that that type of study would only be a guess; that some landowners along the railroad spur in the area have requested that their land be zOned industrial; questioned whether a market analysis for rezoning is needed; and that this type of zoning would be long term because the sewer would have to coincide. Council generally felt that a market analysis for rezoning the area to industrial would not be necessary, and also agreed to meet with the Planning and Zoning Commission at the February 25 meeting at approximately g o'clock to discuss the rezoning in the urban service district. Planning and Zoning Commission/Appointment MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, to appoint to the Planning and Zoning Commlssion for term to end on December 31, 1982, Pat Anstett. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that we appoint Maynard Ape1 as the alternate for the Planning Commission to fill any term which should be vacated during the current year. Motion carried unanimously. Park and Recreation Commission Chairman Mand stated they are having some site plans in the parks done by University students, and asked if the Council wishes to give final approval On the plans before the Park Board begins expending any money on them. Council generally felt that for plans on the City Hall site or any major parks, that they would like to see them; however, it would not be necessary to approve plans for other smaller parks. Mr. Mand was also directed to investigate how much it would cost to have a site plan done for the City Hall. Chairman Mand also reported that they will be running low on the park maintenance budget this year and asked if some consideration could be given to have some monies from the 1979 surplus directed for park maintenance. Council will address this when the exact surplus is known. Chairman Mand also asked if the Council wished more support from residents within the City in favor of the Boat Landing project. Discussion was on individual personal feelings of the Councilmen about the project at this time, noting that additional support from residents would be helpful. Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 11 Volunteer Fire Department MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that the City Council authorize the Fire Department Equipment Committee to spend up to $150 for a sliding step on the new fire truck and to spend up to $250 for a radio for the new fire truck. Motion carried unanimously. Committee Appointment for City of Ramsey Committee (Reference February 15, 1980, memo from City Clerk to City Council on Committee appointment) Council discussion was that if grant monies are available, the City has not been aware of it; that the site for the proposed Community Center is located in Ramsey approximately in the area where the Rum River Bridge is being proposed to cross; that there is no guarantee that that bridge will ever be built, which means for Andover residents to use it, they would have to travel through the City of Anoka to get to it; discussed whether the City should make a proposal for such a center at Bunker Hills; and questioned the chance of Ramsey getting the grant money. Council agreed to have Mayor Windschit1 talk with the County Commissioners as well as Representative Oberstar about this and report back to the Council. Approval of Minutes January 15, 1980: Page 2, bottom of page, change amount to $40,343.78 Page 2, axle (sp) Page 3, under Landfill Meeting Date; change to landfill license Page 3, axle (sp) Page 5, five lines down: change to landfill license MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 15, 1980, as corrected. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Peach, Windschitl; PRESENT-Orttel Motion carried. January 22, 1980: Page 2, Urban Street Standards, third line, change to: on-street parking Page 3, Xeni a Street Improvement Bill i ng, 1 ast 1 i ne, change "changes" to "discrepancies" Page 3, Xenia Street Improvement Billing, second line: especi ally (sp) MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we accept the Minutes of January 22 as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. February 5, 1980: Correct as written. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Jacobson, that we accept the Minutes of February 5 as Wrl tten. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Ortte1, Peach, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Lachinski Motion carried. Appointment to Horsemen's Council MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that Carol Almeida be appointed to the Horsemen's Council for a three-year term. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting February 19, 1980 - Minutes Page 12 Approval of Claims MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Ortte1, the payment of $45,823.82 for the following Checks: Number 2967 through 2991 excluding 2990 which is void, 2988 which is void, and 2969 which is being held out; Check Number 351 for $1,029.25; Check Number 346 for $2,550; Check Number 347 for $100; Check Number 350 for $1,361.37. Motion carried unanimously. NOTE: Check Number 2970 to Andover Firefighters, $137, was for fire extinguishers purchased by the City from the Andover Firefighters at the same price the extinguishers are sold to the general public. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:38 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~,-CL Mar 11a A. Peach Recording Secretary ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 19, 1980 MINUTES A Special City Council Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on February 19, 1980, 7 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose of interviewing two applicants for appoint- ment to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach (arrived 7:10 p.m.) Councilmen absent: none Also present: City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; Planning and Zoning Chairman, d'Arcy Bose11 Maynard Apel was interviewed at 7 p.m., and Patricia Anstett was interviewed at 7: 15 p.m. Both applicants were asked a set of pre-determined questions alternately by the Councilmen. In addition, the applicants were asked if there is anything that would put them in conflict with the City of Andover, why did they apply for the position, what qualifications they feel they possess that would be an asset to the Commission, and do they feel they have the time that is required to prepare for the meetings. Appointment to the Commission will be done at the Regular City Council meeting this evening. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully SUb~ ~\\\::j-tL~ CC ec~ Marte1la_A. Peach Recording Secretary