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