Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC February 17, 1981 ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 17, 1981 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Contract/Bonestroo, Rosene,Ander1ik b. Agriculture Preserve Act c. Time Extension/Kim Sai Sia d. Well #1/Fina1 Acceptance & Change Order e. Pumphouse #I/Change Order f. 19S0-1 & 1980-2 Assessment Report g. Water Service Ordinance h. Civil Defense Sirens i. 5. Non-Discussion Items a. Cigarette, Non-Intoxicating Liquor/Speedy Market b. 6. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Boards, Staff a. Planning & Zoning Commission b. Park & Recreation Commission c. Volunteer Fire Department 1) Relief Association/By-Laws 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9. Adjournment - ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 17, 1981 mNUTES The Regular Bi-Month1y Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschit1 on February 17, 1981, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Counci lmen present:. Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; TKDA Engineer, Mark Schumacher; City Engineer, Larry Winner; Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman, d'Arcy Bosel1; City Clerk. P. K. Lindquist; and others AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that we approve the Agenda as published with the addition of Items 4i, Dog Ordinance; 4j, Watershed Resolution; 4k, Stop Sign Report/Green Acres; and 5b, Meeting Dates/Cable TV Public Hearings. Motion carried unanimous ly. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we suspend the rules. Motion carried unanimous 1y. CONTRACT/BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK Discussion with Mr. Otto Bonestroo was on the contract itself: Page 11, Section 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 and Page 12, Section 4.3.3: Mr. Bonestroo agreed to the additional language to the effect that payment would be made within 30 days unless other arrangements for payments have been agreed upon by both parties. Page 13, Section 5.7: Mr. Bonestroo agreed to send the Clerk the certificate of insurance for the City's files. Page 10, Section 4.2.3, Subsections a and b: Mr. Bonestroo clarified that the per- centages referred to in the contract are cumulative, based upon the total fee less any sum already paid. Section 4.1.2: Mr. Bonestroo explained that this does not include any payments to the engineer for costs which are the responsibility of the City or of other consultants. This section is for the definition of construction costs only, which is the basis for using the fee curve. At public hearings, the total project costs would be presented to the residents. Page 11, 4.2.2: Mr. Winner explained that compensation for staking is not normally included under the fee curve. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve a contract between Bonestroo, Rosene, Ander1ik and Associates, Consulting Engineers, 2335 West Trunk Highway 36, St. Paul, Minnesota, as presented with the following change: That on Page 11, under Item 4.2.2 and Item 4.2.3 and on Page 12, Item 4.3.3 where reference is made to payment within 30 days, that that language be changed to reflect payment to be made within 30 days unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by both parties, and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the document. Motion carried unanimously. AGRICULTURE PRESERVE ACT Council did not have a chance to read the Agriculture Preserve Act. Mr. Hawkins gave a brief summary of the Act noting that the City has to have areas designated in the Plan as Agricultural, and those areas need to be rezoned to allow only one home per 40 acres; -- Regular City Council Meeting February 17, 198J - Minutes Page 2 (Ag Preserve Act, Continued) any property currently classified as agricultural for tax purposes is qualified for that treatment; individuals can then make application and within 30 days they are restricted to the use of that land; no improvements can be extended to serve that property; any improvements that are in the vacinity are deemed not to benefit that property and there would be no ability to assess; any loss of revenue that the City would sustain as a result of the decrease in valuation is to be certified by the County Auditor and the State is to pay that back to the City out of the general fund commensing on July 15, 1983; and the Act specifically refers to the inability to special assess for sanitary sewer and water improvements but that it appears assessments can still be levied for road improvements, the Watershed levy, etc. Mr. Hawkins felt that the assessments for sewer and water could be picked up when the land is taken off the Ag Preserve Act, but there is an eight-year waiting period from the application for de- certification to when the classification ends; it has to be currently classified as agricultural and be actively farmed; inactive land will not qualify; there is a specific procedure for eminent domain action against this land if it is for over ten acres but it appears there would be no problem obtaining easements, etc., if it is for less than ten acres; and the City is not mandated to participate in the Ag Preserve Act. Chairman Bosel1 cautioned the Council that the future extension of sanitary sewers needs to be carefully considered, for if land is to be rezoned Agriculture and certified under this Act, it would be a minimum of eight years following application for decertification that the land would no longer be under the protection of the Act and at which time could be assessed for sanitary sewer extension. Janett Eveland - felt the Act would be a benefit for both the City and the farmers. It provldes an opportunity for the farmer to be able to plan ahead for a minimum of an eight-year period, and the City will know that this land is going to be used for agricultural purposes for eight years and will therefore not need assessments. She understood those eligible are those already under Green Acres, so she understood that because of the low tax rate in Andover, there would be no difference in the amount of taxes received by the City. Council agreed to add the item to the Agenda for the next regular Council meeting to make a determination as to whether or not this is something that the City should pursue. TIME EXTENSION/KIM SA! SIA Mr. Sai Sia stated the house was moved onto the foundation on January 3. He felt a 60-day extension would be sufficient. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that we approve a 60-day extension to Resolution 133-80 to allow the individual time to complete the reconstruction of the moved structure. (See Resolution R10-81) Motion carried unanimously. WELL #l/FINAL ACCEPTANCE & CHANGE ORDERS Mr. Schumacher reviewed the letter and documents of February 11, 1981, from TKDA on the SW Area Improvements, noting that there is significant site restoration to be done before footings can be placed for the pumphouse; that the change to the augered method used to complete the well drilling and the discharge of pumping slurry increased the erosive damage to the site; that an agreement has been negotiated with E. H. Renner and Sons that they will credit $2,500 for their share of the original cost for restora- tion of the site; that the remaining amount for site restoration will be added by change order to the Johnson Engineering contract; that the increased restoration necessary is partly Renner's fault but also because of TKDA's decision to use the augering method to considerably reduce the development time of the well; and that the augering method was chosen because of the significant amount of sand in the well that needed to be cleaned out and the normal bailing method was taking much too long. --. Regular City Council Meeting February 17, 1981 - Minutes Page 3 (Well #1/Fina1 Acceptance & Change Orders, Continued) Discussion was on the costs being requested on the change orders for the site restoration. Mr. Schumacher explained that a considerable amount of very wet ground needs to be completely removed and replaced with dry material that can be compacted, and the erosion on site needs to be dealt with. He also stated that it is TKDA's feeling that Johnson Engineering is not entitled to the claim for delay costs, but that the Attorney should review the contract and render an opinion, noting that their request for damages is related to having a one-month delay so they weee unable to bid on any other work during that time. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve Change Order No.4 to E. H. Renner and Sons, Inc., for a reduction to the contract price in the amount of $2,500 for restoration of the site that was not completed by that contractor. DISCUSSION: Renner is receiving a $2,500 reduction but that there is an increase to Johnson Engineering for $4,250 to do the restoration work, which means a net increase to the City of approximately $1,750. Mr. Schumacher stated that Renner does not feel they are 100 percent responsible for the site restoration because the City changed the method of well development to expedite completion of that project, which in turn caused greater erosion to the site. Discussion continued on what actually took place, how much material must be removed and then replaced, and the costs for that. Mayor Windschit1 questioned the cost for the site restoration, feeling a total of $4,250 was extremely high and that it shouldn't take that much time to complete the restoration. Councilman Jacobson questioned why the City should be responsible for the additional $1,750, feeling the well company should make up that difference. Discussion was then on the calculations by Johnson Engineering for the site restoration costs, debating the reasonableness of some of the figures and the amount of work that needs to be done, but noting that total reconstruction costs were figured at $5,225.46 with a credit of $974.23, a savings from what was originally bid. Stan Deden, 13836 Round Lake Boulevard - explained that there was an eroded ditch approxlmately four feet deep, three feet wide, and 40 yards long caused by the well drilling methods. He also commented that they were bailing the well for about three weeks before switching to the augering method, and there was just as much sand at the end of that three weeks as there was to begin with. Mr. Schumacher stated that part of the building site is in that eroded ditch area. Also, it still took a couple weeks to clear the well after changing to the surging method. Mayor Windschit1 was also troubled that Johnson Engineering was already authorized to proceed with the restoration and has begun the work prior to receiving Council approval. Others on the Council felt that because of the change of development methods which saved money in the development of the well, the City has some obligation for the site restora- tion; and also that by having Johnson Engineering do the work, it is expected that they would be responsible for any damages that may result in the future. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson Motion carried. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we approve Change Order No.5 (Compensating Change Order) to E. H. Renner and Sons, Inc., for addition to the contract in the amount of $2,819.50. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was then on the amounts of the previous change orders. A recess was called to allow the Engineers time to verify the figures. Recess at 8:40; reconvene at 8:49 p.m. It was noted that the figures as presented in the documents are correct. Regular City Council Meeting February 17, 1981 - Minutes Page 4 (Well #l/Final Acceptance, Continued) MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we accept certified receipt of the final estlmate and approve the final payment to E. H. Renner and Sons, Inc., in the amount of $27,708.72. Motion carried unanimously. PUMPHOUSE #l/CHANGE ORDER Mayor Windschitl asked if it would be more advisable to pay on a unit price basis rather than the flat rate being suggested. He felt that $180 an hour for 24 hours to do the site restoration was excessive and that it actually would take much less time to do the work. The contractor should certify what equipment was used and for what period of time. Several others on the Council felt that for the price difference it would be agreeable to approve the change order in an effort to expedite the project. Mr. Winner stated that the site restoration was begun yesterday and that equipment is still being used on site. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, approval of Change Order No.2 in the amount of $4,251.23 to Johnson Engineering, Inc., for an addition to the contract price for site restoration and additional footings and soil compaction. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach; NO-Windschit1 Motion carried. It was agreed to have the Attorney review Johnson Engineering's claim for delay costs. No further action was taken on that matter. 1980-1 & 1980-2 ASSESSMENT REPORT Mr. Winner reviewed his February 11, 1981, memo to the Mayor and Council on the Improve- ments Projects 1980-1 and 1980-2 Assessment, explaining that the main factors for the lower price for the concrete curb and gutter streets on 138th and Xavis than for the other streets in the two projects are the difference in assessable footage and the large difference in the turf establishment cost. It was also noted that the storm sewer for 138th and Xavis was very minimal. Discussion was on the price difference for the two street standards involved, questioning whether in the long run it is really cheaper to build to the modified road standard without the curb and gutter. Council agreed to take no action on the matter until Mr. Winner and Mr. Schumacher complete the draft of the letters to the residents explaining the difference in their assessments for the improvement projects. There was also some confusion over the actual and proposed assessments for 138th and Xavis, and Mr. Winner was directed to determine which figures are the accurate ones. WATER SERVICE ORDINANCE Because the Council had not had an opportunity to review the ordinance, it was agreed to defer the matter to the next regular Council meeting and to have the City Attorney review it. It was generally felt that because the ordinance does not pertain to planning or zoning, that the P & Z Commission does not have to review it. CIVIL DEFENSE SIRENS Councilman Jacobson requested Council approval to investigate the possibility of having civil defense sirens placed in the City. Council had no objection to the suggestion, noting that the Fire Department may have some information on the matter. --., Regular City Council Meeting February 17, 1981 - Minutes Page 5 OOG ORDINANCE MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, the adoption of Ordinance No. 53, an Ordinance repealing Ordinance No.5, Ordinance No. 14, Ordinance No. 20, and Ordinance No. 38, as presented by myself with the changes as recommended by the City Attorney, and the fourth word in the last paragraph on Page 6, change from "or" to "of". AMENDMENT TO MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, to make Section 9 read as follows: NOTICE OF IMPOUNDMENT. Upon taking up and impounding any dog, the Poundmaster shall within one day thereafter have posted in the City Hall a notice of impounding in sub- stantially the following form: and Section 14, the second line of that Section which reads '~.wise abuse any animal..." change to "...wise abuse any'dog..." DISCUSSION: was:: on whether or not the word "animal" used throughout the ordinance should be changed to "dog". It was generally agreed that the ordinance would not be as restrictive by using the word "animal" rather than limiting enforcement to "dogs". Councilman Jacobson agreed to WITHDRAW THAT PORTION OF THE MOTION on Section 14. Second still stands. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: Carried unanimously. VOTE ON MOT! ON: Carried unanimously. CIGARETTE, NON-INTOXICATING LIQUOR/SPEEDY MARKET MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we approve a Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Llcense and Cigarette License for the Speedy Market and its owner for the period of 1/1/81 through 12/31/81. VOTE ON MOT! ON: YES-Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach, Windschitl; PRESENT-Jacobson Motion carried. COON CREEK WATERSHED RESOLUTION Mr. Winner reviewed his February 12, 1981, memo on the Resolution discussed at the last meeting. He explained that it is intended that the cities would be funding the study to be done by the Watershed District, and the Watershed Board would repay the cities over a two- to three-year period; however, the Management Committee has not yet made a determination as to what each city's share would be. The top three consultants to do the study were chosen today, and the Watershed Board will be interviewing them next week. Discussion was on the,Council's concern that it is being asked to approve a permanent mill levy but no costs have been provided to do the hydrological study nor has any determination been made as to how the plan will be financed nor a formula devised as to how much each city should contribute to it. It was felt that the Watershed Board has the authority to ask for a mill rate increase without city approval; some questioning the benefit to the City from the results of the study; questioning the increased mill levy to everyone within the watershed district, even though some areas have paid to have their storm water ponded; and questioning where the cities would get the funds if asked to pay for the study. The Clerk was directed to find out when the Management Committee plans to meet on the question of financing the study and to notify the Council of that date. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that the Council direct Public Works, City of Andover, to monitor the U.S.G.S. installed crest gauges in the watershed area of the City. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting February 17, 1981 - Minutes Page 6 STOP SIGNS/GREEN ACRES Mr. Winner stated it was his opinion that stop signs would not solve the problem in the Green Acres area, feeling dips placed in the road and increased patrolling of the area may be a better solution. After discussion, Council directed Mr. Winner to check into the costs of placing dips in the road, of installing grooves in the road as is done by the County, and of placing warning signs in the area. MEETING DATES/CABLE TV PUBLIC HEARINGS Councilman Jacobson reported that the Committee is in the process of compiling a contract for bidding purposes. Prior to requesting proposals, public meetings must be held. A general meeting has been set for April 2 for all City Councils involved, but the City must then hold a public hear~ng, which he suggested be held on April 21. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we set the date of April 21, 1981, as the date for a public hearing on the Cable Television request for proposals for the City of Andover. Motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Discussion with Chairman Bosel1 was on the bids previously received for the revisions to Ordinances 8 and 10. Council generally felt it would be preferable to wait until the Metropolitan Council has approved the City's Comprehensive Plan before beginning the ordinance revisions. Chairman Bosel1 also stated that the Commission felt that the existing platting procedures are adequate relative to water testing in new plats, and that it would be costly to the developer to require test wells in every plat. She stated that they are still considering the item and are looking for suggestions. It is felt that instead of just accepting the standard potable water tests, possibly more extensive tests should be required that would detect carcinogens that may be present. Council stated the intent was not necessarily to require every developer to put in a test well, but that neighboring wells could be tested instead. It was generally felt that the ordinances allow the City the opportunity to require whatever tests are deemed necessary. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that Bill LeFebvre be appointed Park Commission Chalrman for the year 1981. Motion carried unanimously. VOLUNTEER-FIRE OEPARTMENT - RELIEF ASSOCIATION REVISION OF BY-LAWS Firefighter Tom May and the Council agreed to make the following changes to provide greater clarity in the Revisions presented: ARTICLE VIII, Section 1, last sentence should read: ".. .any amount paid to him as a disability pension shall be deducted from his retirement pension accrued at the time of such disability." ARTICLE IX, Section 1, fourth line should read: ".. . the ba 1 ance of /~gmber' s account... II ARTICLE IX, Section 2, first line should read: liThe Associ at; on sha 11 pay upon resignation to each Association member..." Discussion also noted that there is a provision fOM the City to provide $5,000 of term life insurance for each of the firefighters. Mr./st~ted he has received information from an insurance company that specifically covers fire departments, noting he would provide that information to the Clerk. Regular City Council Meeting February 17, 1981 - Minutes Page 7 (AVFD, Continued) MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Revision of By-Laws for the Andover Firefighters Relief Association, by the addition of Articles VIII, IX, and XI as amended at the Council Meeting on February 17, 1981. DISCUSSION: The Attorney was asked to review Article X to determine whether it requires Council approval. Mr. May also was told that the special funds must be established prior to the City releasing the funds to the Fire Department. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschit1; PRESENT-Peach Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 3, 1981: Page 1, bottom: pea-rock (sp) February 9, 1981: Correct as written. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we approve the Regular City Council Minutes of February 3 and the Special City Council Meeting Minutes of February 9, 1981, as amended. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, the approval of Checks 3788, and 3818 through 3856, excluding 3820, 3825, 3826, 3849 which are void, for a total of $8,280.41. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we approve Payroll Check Number 3529 in the amount of $280.40 to Patricia K. Lindquist, said amount is for additional time required to perform bookkeeping duties during the absence of the bookkeeper. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, the approval of Check 437 from 80-3 for $471.30; 439 from 80-1 for $16,996.22; 442 from 80-2 for $350; 443 from General Obligations street, sewer improvement bonds of '75 for $885.50; and 448 for improvements professional services for $16,903.49. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, -'\\1\ ~~c~L Ma~e11a A. Peach , Recording Secretary --