HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP February 11, 1980
· I
~ 01 ANDOVER
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 11, 1980
MINUTES
A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry
Windschit1 on February 11, 1980, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard NW for the purpose of discussing an in-house city engineer and
concerns over the events involving the Musket Ranch.
Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach
Councilmen absent: None
Also present: City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist
In-House City Engineer Discussion
Representatives from the City of East Bethel were Mayor Wayne Anderson and Councilman
Bob Sylvester.
Discussion between the Andover Council and the East Bethel representatives was on the
possibility of hiring a registered engineer on a joint basis between the two cities.
Neither city knew exactly how much work they had for an in-house engineer; however,
it was generally felt that there would probably be more work in Andover. Mayor Anderson
felt the biggest problem in East Bethel is their inspections on projects, but he
didn't know the magnitude of their special projects in the future. Both cities
expressed the feeling that an in-house engineer would increase the quality of work
done, as that engineer would be looking out after the cities' best interests, and
that such a person would also decrease engineering costs, especially on projects.
Mayor Windschit1 estimated a registered engineer would cost about $25.000 to $27,000,
possibly going up to $35,000 a year with benefits included. Because this is still in
the planning stage, Mayor Windschitl stated Andover is flexible as to the days or
hours that would be required for the city, the location of office space, etc. It
was generally felt by both cities that an in-house engineer would have an office in
each city.
Discussion was also on the type of work an engineer would be doing for the cities, on
what the engineering consulting firm of each city does at the present time, and on the
costs of the consulting engineering firms. It was noted that some jobs can be done by
an in-house engineer, but some cannot; therefore, a consulting engineer would still
be required in some instances. It was noted that Andover is placing an advertisement
for a registered engineer. Various suggestions were made as to how the time would be
divided between the two cities with both cities expressing their flexibility and
willingness to work out an equitable arrangement. It was suggested that both cities
would look at previous years' engineering costs in an attempt to determine the number
of hours an in-house engineer would be needed in each city.
Councilman Sylvester felt that East Bethel would probably require between 25, 30, or 35
percent of an engineer's time. He and Mayor Anderson both stated they personally felt
a shared in-house engineer would benefit their city and stated they would bring
this matter up at their regular council meeting on February 20 to find out the general
feeling of their council. They will then report back to Andover.
Recess at 8:17; reconvene at 8:23 p.m. East Bethel representatives left at this time.
The possibility of using another engineering consulting firm rather than TKDA was discussed.
Further discussion was that with an in-house engineer who would be familiar with every-
thing the city is doing, it would not be necessary to have the same consulting engineering
firm for every project in the city; that the city could work on a project by project
basis as to who would be the city engineer rather than the idea that TKDA is the city's
engineer; that until an in-house engineer is hired, it could become difficult for
attendance at meetings, etc., if different firms on different projects were used;
that for a smooth transition to an in-house engineer, it might be better to retain TKDA
I
Special City Council Meeting
February 11, 1980 - Minutes
Page 2
as they have an extensive background of knowledge on the city; that time may be a
problem in that the extension of the trunk line west on Bunker Lake Boulevard may
be coming up very shortly and questioned having TKDA or another consulting firm
doing that project; and questioned the experience of the engineers from TKDA who
would be designing a major project such as this sewer trunk line extension.
The Clerk was directed to ask several engineering firms and TKDA to give a cost
estimate on doing a feasibility study for the extension of the sewer trunk line
west on Bunker Lake Boulevard and getting it to the point of a public hearing. She
is also to ask who would be the engineer on that project and what experience he has.
From that a determination could be made as to who would be the engineering firm for
that project.
Discussion on problems at the Musket Ranch
Mayor Windschitl reviewed various aspects of the stipulation agreement presented to
Cecil Heidelberger by the PCA relative to the removal of the hazardous waste barrels
on the Heidelberger property. He asked the Council's feeling of Anoka County becoming
involved in the stipulation agreement in the event all else fails, granting them
authority to remove the barrels and assess the costs back to the property owner. It
is to be understood that Anoka County has not yet officially agreed to do this but
would like to know the City's feeling on it.
Council discussed ways of eliminating the problem and getting the barrels out of
there; that the city may have the power to get the barrels removed due to a health
hazard; expressing frustration that the city has not yet received the results of the
sampling of the barrels to know what chemicals are being dealt with; on how the
threats made by Mr. Heidelberger to burn the barrels should be dealt with; that there
are barrels on other properties in the area that are not being dealt with by PCA;
and on the suggestion that any junkyard that has hazardous waste barrels located on
their property should not be relicensed.
Mayor Windschit1 also noted that there is a court hearing on Friday on the enforcement
of the Junkyard Ordinance against Mr. Heidelberger and asked if the Council wished to
proceed with it. No action was taken by the Council regarding that item.
Councilman Jacobson left the meeting at 9:07 p.m.
Further discussion on the problem of the hazardous waste barrels was over the disagree-
ment with the PCA's handling of the entire situation feeling that the health, safety,
and welfare of the residents are being jeopardized by their actions; asking the PCA
to enforce their ordinances and regulations uniformly on adjacent property owners and
in whatever other areas of the city these barrels of like-type substances are found;
on the speculation as to the PCA's and Mr. Heidelberger's positions on the removal
of the waste barrels; and on the County removing the barrels if all else fails.
It was generally felt that the City should not be involved in the stipulation agreement
with Mr. Heidelberger which was drafted by the PCA. The council also generally agreed
with the County getting directly involved in the stipulation if they should decide to
do so.
Further discussion was on the possibility of preparing a plan of action for the City
to dispose of the barrels if need be; on what course of action the City could take
should an emergency become eminent and the City would need to remove the barrels
immediately; and on the possibility of meeting with the City Attorney at a closed
meeting to determine the City's legal position in the matter.
I
Special City Council Meeting
February 11, 1980 - Minutes
Page 3
MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, to direct the City Clerk to prepare a Resolution
not1fying the PCA that the City expects it to enforce the State regulations regarding
hazardous waste disposal equally on all the areas in the Bunker Lake salvage yards
and any known or unknown hazardous waste sites in the City. Discussion: The
Clerk was also directed to list known sites. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote.
Discussion continued on hazardous waste barrels which have been sited on other
properties, on the location of some of these barrels, and on what the City can do
about them, especially in terms of licensing the salvage yards.
It was generally a9reed that an emergency Council meeting should be called if there
is eminent danger relative to the Musket Ranch situation.
MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Ortte1, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 9:54 p.m.
Respectfully submitted _ "/
\~~ach ~
Recording Secretary