Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC December 21, 1982 , ( ,.... ea, o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING-DECEMBER'21 ,1982 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Eligibility, Rezoning-AGp/J. Glatt b. Northglen II-Sketch Plan c. Bond Sale-IR Bonds/Rademacher & Associates d. Bond Sale-1982 Equipment Certificates e. Special Use Permit-Group W Cable f. Equipment Lease/purchase g. Declare Adequacy of Petition/Sonsteby h. Feasibility Report-Hanson Blvd. (83-1) 5 . Non-Discussion Items a. Utility Rate Resolution b. Encumber Funds - Special Projects c. poliee Protection Contract d. License Approval - Tom Thumb Superette 6. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Staff a. Benefits-Council Secretary/Lindquist b. 5-Year MSAH Plan/Schrantz 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9. Adjournment ~ _.~ CITY 01 ANDOVER M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COPIES TO: ATTORNEY, STAFF FROM: CITY CLERK/A. ADMINISTRATOR DATE: DECEMBER 16, 1982 REFERENCE: AGRNDA TNFORMA~TON-DRrRMRRR ?1 1 q¡:p Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Item No. 4a - Eligibility, Rezoning-AGp/J. Glatt Attached is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for approval of a rezoning from R-l to AGp for James Glatt. The property proposed to be rezoned is located off 177th Avenue in Section 3. A resolution will be prepared declaring eligibility and approving the rezoning. Item No. 4b - Northglen II/Sketch Plan Enclosed are two proposed site plans for the Northglen II Addition. This is the area that was previously approved for Carriage House/ Single Family PUD. The lots proposed by the developer on both plans are substandard in both width and area than as required by Ordinance No. 8 ; therefore, variances would have to be allowed. Until such time as Co. Rd. 116 extension is completed, the lots fronting on the proposed connecting street to Co. Rd. 116 could not be developed any further into the plat from Round Lake than allowed by ordinance for a cuI de sac street. Item No. 4c - Bond Sale-IR Bonds/Rademacher Enclosed are copies of the resolutions for the Bond Sale for the Bonds for the Shopping Center Development. A closing is planned for the 22nd or 23rd of December. Representatives from the Rademacher group will be present to answer any questions you may have. Item No. 4d - Bond Sale-Equipment Certificates Attorney Hawkins will have the required resolutions prepared in time for the meeting. Because of the fluctuating interest rates, we do not have a firm figure as of today. , .. Agenda Information December 21,1982 Page 2 Item No. 5e - Special Use Permit/Group W Cable Enclosed is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for approval of the SUP for the tower to be located in the Industrial Park on Round Lake Boulevard and Constance Boulevard. A resolution will be prepared granting approval. Item No. 5f - Equipment Lease/Purchase We have been contacted by Valley Equipment Company relative to the consideration of a Lease/Purchase on the front end loader we have been renting from them. They are offering this loader at a very reduced price in addition to allowing us to apply all rental to-date toward that purchase price. Enclosed is a copy of the Agreement; please not the section dealing with the "Non-Appropriation of Funds". Jim Schrantz will have a memo prepared for you. Item No. 5g - Declare Adequacy of Petition/Sonsteby Mrs. Sonsteby is petitioning for water facilities to service the homes in the area previously approved for twin-homes. It is my understanding that she is not proposing to plat this for single family. We have not received a sketch plan to-date. A resolution is required to declare the petition adequate or order a feasibility report to be prepared in conjunction with the plat she will be submitting. Item No. 5h - Feasibility Report-Hanson Boulevard (83-1) Enclosed is the Feasibility Report covering the acquistion of right- of-way for the construction of Hanson Boulevard between Andover Blvd. and Constance Blvd. A resolution is prepared accepting the report and setting the date for a public hearing. Item No. 6a - Utility Rate Resolution Enclosed are resolutions covering the motion made by the Council on November 23, 1982"to increase the sewer and water rates. and connection charges for 1983. The December ENR was received this week, therefore, per Ordinance No. 55, you will note the rates are somewhat different than those approved on the 23rd (this for water only). Sewer connection charges are controlled by the 5% annual increase and sewer rates by action on the 23rd. Item No. 6b - Encumber Funds-Special Projects Jim Schrantz will have a memo for you covering the projects approved but not yet completed. He is requesting approval to encumber the funds to cover the above, with work to be completed in 19B3. Item No. 6c- Police Contract A motion is needed to authorize the mayor and clerk to execute a contract with the Anoka County Sheriff's Office for police protection for 1983. 16 hour per day protection was approved in the Budget. The total cost of the Contract is $127,437. (You will note this is approximately $5,000 higher than the budget amount as I deducted an Agenda Information December 21, 1982 Page 3 Item No. 6c - Police Contract (continued) estimated $5,000 as State Aid Rebate. Item No. 6d - License Approval/Tom Thumb Superette A motion is needed to approve a Cigarette License and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Off-Sale License for Tom Thumb Superette #574. We had received some complaints in 1981 relative to the sale of cigarettes to minors, however, no such reports were received in 1982, so apparently the problem has been corrected. Item No. 7a - Benefits/Council Secretary Attached is a memoradum covering the payment of certain benefits by the City to the Council Secretary. If the Council feels they would like to have the Personnel Committee review the recommended percentages and policy, a request is made that she be allowed to enter the Andover Medical Insurance Group at this time. A determination on the amount the City would pay could be made at a later date. Item No. 7b - MSAH 5-Year Program Attached is a memorandum from Jim Schrantz covering this Program. If the Council would like the Road Committee to meet to discuss the proposal prior to adoption, the proposal could be approved contingent upon action or further recommendations by the Road Committee. This must be submitted to MNDot no later than December 31, 1982. The recommendations are not Ilcast in concrete", so Council approval at this time would pose no problems. Item No. 8 - Approval of Minutes November 16, 23; December 1, December 7. ~ o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - DECEMBER 21, 1982 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on December 21, 1982, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, James Schrantz; Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman, d'Arcy Bosell; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; and others RES WENT FORUM Charlie Veiman ~ complemented the Council, stating they did a remarkably good jOb this past year. He reviewed several incidents during the past year, thanked the out-going Councilmen Jacobson and Peach and their families for their many, many hours put in for the City, and again thanked the Council for their efforts. John Zillhardt, 3753 l4Sth Avenue - felt the same way as Mr. Veiman. He then informed the Council of a problem of the high speed use of snowmobiles on Round Lake. He explained the problem of a group of young men with very fast machines racing on the lake exceeding 100 mph. It is totally uncontrolled at this point. They are intimida- ting other users of the lake and it creates a potential for a serious accident. He felt a speed limit might be imposed, though he realized it would be difficult to enforce; or some lane could be established specifically for the racing. Attorney Hawkins stated the reckless driving statute is also applicable on the ice of any lake and would apply to snowmobiles. There is no way to be able to clock the speed limit of the snowmobilers on the lake. Other than the use of existing statutes, he didn't know how this problem could be controlled. After further discussion, the Council asked Mr. Hawkins to talk with the Sheriff's Department about enforcement and control of this situation and that Mr. Hawkins then make a recommendation to the Council. AGENDA APPROVAL Mayor Windschitl suggested the addition of 4i, Senior Citizen Center Building; Se, Final Meeting Date; and 6c, Uniform Fire Code Drdinance. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, approval of the Agenda with those changes. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we suspend the rules. Motion carried unanimously. ELIGIBILITY/REZONING - AgP/J. GLATT Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation to approve the rezoning request of James Glatt from R-l to AgP of 115 acres located off l77th Avenue in Section 3. The Attorney advised the Commission that the irregularities of the housing conditions be dealt with separate from the rezoning of the land. The Planning Commission then felt it is under the responsibility of the City Hall to deal with those irregularities. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution establishing eligibility and approving a rezoning to AgP as requested by James Glatt and Barbara Feltl for that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 32, Range 24, in the City of Andover as presented by the City Clerk. (See Resolution Rl13-82) Motion carried unanimously. -~. ., ~ - Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 2 NORTHGLEN II - SKETCH PLAN John Peterson of Good Value Homes and John Uban of Howard Dahlgren Associates reviewed the two schemes for Good Value's Northglen II area west of Round Lake Boulevard. Mr. Peterson stated they are not confident with the marketability of twin homes in this area and are now proposing single family residences in that area. Mr. Uban - reviewed the previous proposal of multiple housing and the similarities and differences of the single family housing proposal. The concept is to cluster the single family homes, keeping the same open spaces and street locations as the multiple housing proposal. The advantage of the clustering is cost by bringing the homes to- gether in the most developable part of the land, keeping the same buffering, parks, and open space previously proposed, and proposing a smallen lot size than provided by Andover ordinances. The overall density would be within the guidelines of the ordinance. He stated a typical lot size averages 10,000 square feet, which is the norm in most communities. The 60-foot frontage and smaller square footage helps to bring housing into a more affordable range in today's market. The style of house is also changing to be more square shaped. The proposal is for 120 to 145 lots depending on the road a 1 i gnment. Mr. Uban also realized the portion of the easement in the southeastern portion of the plat has been vacated, so that area would have to be redrawn. Mr. Uban also felt that the reduced lot size could be done under the PUD that Good Value has over the area. Mr. Hawkins advised that a Planned Unit Development applies to more than one type of housing in a development; and because this is basically a single-family development, he felt the PUD would not be applicable in this instance. Council was very concerned over the lot size. Mayor Windschitl felt the same rules for single family residential housing should be applied to everyone; and if smaller lot sizes are desirable, the ordinance should be changed to allow for it. If the ordinance is not changed, he felt the existing standards should apply to this development. Councilman Jacobson was generally opposed to the smalle~'lot sizes in this proposal, personally feeling the multiple housing proposal was a better proposal. He felt smaller lot sizes makes it easier for this to become a slum area in a few years. It has happened in other cities where lot sizes are smaller and houses more crowded. He was concerned with short-term benefits for some people and developers now when it may create a problem for the City and residents- in the future. Mr. Uban - explained under the current proposal, the land to the north would be either ãmïõütlliJt owned by the homeowners that live there, or the lots can be platted back to encompass that area so everyone owns a piece of it. Councilman Lachinski stated he is having trouble thinking about sinale family lots in a PUD setting, not seeing the need for a formal association. Mr. Hawkins doubted that the owners of each of the 150 lots are going to want to own 1/150 of that swamp. Councilman Orttel noted a PUD allows the Council to vary from some provisions of the ordinance, but it doesn't require them to do so. He stated the majority of the lots he noted are between eight and nine thousand square feet. He was concerned that the proposed lots are approximately 70 percent of the ordinance requirements, which is a big drop in the City standard. Commissioner Bosell felt there is no uniqueness in the proposal to allow a PUD status, as the proposal is simply for rows of homes. Counciman Peach noted in this particular plat there is the large area that is undevelopable because it is low, which is rather unique. He stated there might be some argument for reducing the lot sizes in some areas of the City because of the problems in the housing industry, etc. He felt that possibility could at least be looked at. He personally felt the proposal is too far from the existing standards. Mr. Peterson - stated they really want to develop that piece of land but are in a dilemma. The l3,OOO-square-foot requirement is totally outdated where sewer and water are available. Relative to the quality of life, he stated many of the north suburban Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 3 (Northglen II - Sketch Plan, Continued) communities are doing this type of thing. He asked the Council's opinion as to whether their first plan is marketable in Andover. Councilman Lachinski felt it is and thought the original plan proposed was the best one they had, but that this is their worst plan. Mr. Peterson - stated it is a question of affordability and marketability, and they worry that they can't sell quads in this area. He stated he is sensing a 'no' from the Council on this idea. Councilman Lachinski stated there may be some consideration for reducing the lot size somewhat, but dropping to 8,000 square feet is close to what was expected in the last subdivision on the twin and quad homes. He said it would also be helpful to see the house sizes and styles and how much of the parcel the houses will be taking up. Council discussion was on the suggestion to ask the Planning Commission to review the lot size required in Andover as to whether or not it should be reduced and to what size. It was felt the Commission could address the lot size and the setback if the standard is reduced for single family lots. All Councilmen expressed difficulty with an 8,000 or 9,000 square foot lot. Councilman Jacobson was opposed to having the Planning Commission look into the matter, feeling 13,000 square foot lots is reasonable. If other cities are using smaller lot sizes, in a few years possibly Andover will be a better place to live because of the larger lot sizes and nicer asthetics. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Council direct the Planning and Zoning Commlssion to hold a public hearing to consider amendment to Ordinance 8 regarding lot sizes and setbacks in areas with sewer and water facilities. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson Motion carried. Mayor Windschitl explained the vote is to look into the matter, not necessarily to have the standard changed. Winslow Holasek - asked if this has caused a lot of problems in the past. If this is the only tlme lt has arisen, he stated it seems unnecessary to hold a public hearing. Mayor Windschitl explained the original request and that of other developers has been done under a Planned Unit Development where smaller lot sizes were being proposed. He thought this was the first time the problem has arisen in a single family development. Councilman Orttel noted there has not been a single family plat in the City for quite some time. BOND SALE - IR BONDS/RADEMACHER & ASSOCIATES Frank Dunbar, 292S Dane Parkway, Minneapolis with Andover Partners - requested authorization of the $7.7 million tax exempt bond issue to finance the shopping center project in the City of Andover. They are proposing bond closure on December 23, pending approval of the Resolution. The bond resolution would permit the shopping center project to go forward in its entirety. Two phases are contemplated. Phase one for 97,OOO square feet and 40,000 square feet in the remaining phase. They are contemplating construction next summer or fall. First National Bank has subjected the first major construction draw to them performing a number of requirements, primarily regarding leasing. There has been a tremendous response to this shopping center from retailers they have talked to. The actual borrowing entity will be Andover Limited Partners. In the documents the bank has requested three dates in which they could call the bond issue. The first is 18 months from the date of closing in the event they do not live up to any of the conditions to start construction. In that event, they would pay any costs incurred while the issue was outstanding; however, they do not see that as occurring. The next call date is three years from the date of closing where the bank has a right to call a portion of the loan in the event phase two doesn't proceed. And in the tenth year the bank has the right to call the note in its entirety or to continue on for the remaining 20 years of the note. Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 4 (Bond Sale - IR Bonds/Rademacher & Associates, Continued) Wayne Anderson - explained the same poeple are involved in Andover Limited Partners, those being Biìl Rademacher and the Boisclair Corporation. They are equal partners. Council noted there was a specific design proposal for the shopping center in terms of size, appearance, etc., and the City should be involved in any modification of those plans. Mr. Dunbar stated the patnership would commit to coming back to the Council prior to requesting the building permit. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, a Resolution, City Council, City of Andover, Mlnnesota, authorizing the issuance, sale, and delivery of $7.7 million Commercial Development Revenue Note to Andover Limited Partnership project, such note and the interest and any premium thereon shall be payable soley from the revenues derived from the loan agreement; approving the form of and authorizing the execution and delivery of the dispersing agent, the loan agreement, the assignment of the loan agreement, and the adjustable rate agreement; approving the form of the combination mortgages and security agreement, fixture of financing statement, the assignment of leases and rents and the guarantee agreement approving certain other documents, and authorizing execution of certain documents; approving the form of and authorizing the execution and delivery of the note and providing for the security, rights, and remedies of the holders of said note as presented to the City Council this day in Resolution. (See Resolution Rl14-82) Motion carried unanimously. BOND SALE - 1982 EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES Attorney Hawkins reviewed the resolution authorizing the issuance of Certificate of Indebtedness to finance street and fire equipment that the City is going to purchase in 1983. The First National Bank indicated they would purchase the five-year issue at 8 percent interest on each of the bonds, maturity beginning December, 1983, through December 31, 1987. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, introducing a Resolution authorizing issuance of Certificates of Indebteness, prescribing certificate form and making tax levy as presented by the City Attorney. (See Resolution RllS-82) Motion carried unanimously. SPECIAL USE PERMIT - GROUP W CABLE Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the SUP for the Group W tower to be located in the Industrial Park on Round Lake Boulevard and Constance Boulevard. Terry O'Connell, Group W - presented a new drawing of the location of the tower, explaining the drawing for the Planning Commission was drawn to the wrong scale. He assured the Council that the tower will be located such that in the event it would fall, it would do so within the confines of the property. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, introducing a Resolution as presented, adding the following three requirements: The resolution would be to approve a Special Use Permit as requested by Group W Cable, for the installation of a l2S-foot microwave tower at l62nd Lane Northwest and CSAH No.9 in the City of Andover. The three additional requirements would be that the tower be provided with adequate security fencing not less than six feet in height; and the second requirement would be that the position of the tower would be located in such position that if the tower fell it would fall totally within the property boundaries; and the third requriement would be that written permission by the fee owner be provided to the City. (See Resolution Rl16-82) Motion carried unanimously. ,. , Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 5 EQUIPMENT - LEASE/PURCHASE Mr. Schrantz reviewed his December 16, 1982, mmeo requesting the Mayor and City Council to consider the lease/purchase of a John Deere S44C offered by Valley Equipment Company. He explained there was no line item for this rental, so other line items were combined to rent this equipment this summer. It was rented in 1982 for $4,806. Council discussion was that there may be used equipment of this kind available for purchase, that the budget is already fixed with little or no room for expansion, and suggested some need be established. It was also noted a lease/purchase would be under the levy limits, but a purchase as a capital equipment would be outside the levy limits. It was also felt this item may fit into the 1984 capital improvement budget. It was suggested for a future meeting that Mr. Schrantz document the need for this equipment and provide a proposal as to how it would be paid for. DECLARE ADEQUACY OF PETITION/SONSTEBY Rosella Sonsteby - explained all the lots on that particular piece of property were assessed for sanitary sewer. She is petitioning for water on that entire parcel and stated she is planning to submit the plat for that area for basically the same plan but for single family homes. She also wants sewer stubs for the lots, but has not submitted written request for them. She then explained a proposal for parkland in that area, stating she will not give the land in that plat for park that was requested by the Council. Because she did not feel small parks were beneficial to the City, she proposed taking the money applicable for her plat for park dedication and apply it to the sale of a 40-acre piece of land she owns west of Auditor's Subdivision 82 for parkland. She felt that as Good Value and others develop in the area, they too could contribute to that park to make a nice big park for that entire area. She stated the land is high and has lakeshore. She also stated she would be willing to meet with the other developers on the proposal but did not know if the fees for park dedication would be enough to cover the purchase of the parcel. Council generally expressed a desire to see something like this work out; and suggested if some agreement could not be reached, she might donate a portion of that':land based on Rosella's Addition, generally feeling that would be a suitable place for a park. Ms. Sonsteby - also stated the area west of Rosella's Addition ismainly lowland. There lS an area that will be for a church when the new road is put through. She rejected the sketch plan for that area brought in at the time Rosella's Addition was proposed. Council noted that a proposal of the exact land area must be submitted to the City. The original proposal of Rosella's Addition may be used except the legend on the drawing must be changed. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, a Resolution accepting the petition and ordering feaslbility report for the improvement of public water and sewer for the proposed Sonsteby Addition in the City of Andover as presented to the Council this evening subject to the following conditions: subject to providing a map of the area satisfactory to the engineer so that they can determine what area to be studied and subject to Rosella's (Sonsteby's) written request to the City to include the sewer facility report within the same geographic area. (See Resolution Rl17-82) Motion carried unanimously. Rècess at 9:12; reconvene at 9:33 p.m. FEASIBILITY REPORT - HANSON BOULEVARD (83-1) Mr. Schrantz reviewed the Oecember 16, 1982, Feasibility report, 83-1, Hanson Boulevard between Andover Boulevard and Constance, using an estimated average land cost of $1,400/ acre with $6S0/parcel acquiistion cost plus engineering and administrative costs, for a total proposed cost of $80,000. He explained he included the lots in Hartfiel's Estates " , Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 6 (Feasibility Report - Hanson Boulevard, 83-1, Continued) in the total figure in determining the assessments but is not proposing to assess them. They will be acquiring 25 feet of right of way along the east side of the section line and 125 feet of property west of the section line. The assessment is determined by the amount of land opened up by the road divided by $80,000 for $162 an acre as an assessment. Winslow Holasek - questioned the 25 feet off the section line, stating the poles are almost on the section line. ? , Hartfiel's Estates, Lots 14 and 15 - also asked about the 25 feet, stating that would put lt to hlS back fence. Mayor Windschitl stated the power company probably already has a 50-foot easement through there now, and there probably would not be any type of construction on his property. It's just the width of the easement, explaining the State requirement of a l50-foot easement for such roads. Construction will be between the two sets of power poles. The map shows an easement through almost half of this gentleman's lot. The gentleman stated he was not aware of that ,easement. He stated if construction stays within the power poles it would be all right. Mr. Holasek - stated the easement can be used for drainage, utilities, etc., which takes away from the individual's use of the property. The gentleman stated he has several hundred Christmas trees planted between the power poles for privacy and they would have the right to put in a ditch through there. He also questioned the validity of the road. Mr. Schrantz stated he did not yet have the county plans for this road, but he agreed to review those plans with this gentleman to determine what is being planned with that area. If there is some destruction of a portion of his lot, that should be reviewed further. Mr. Holasek - stated the trail between the poles was built by the construction company when they built the line, and now there is trespassing by people with RVs and dirt bikes who destroy corn crops, etc., and even the City can't keep that closed. Mr. Schrantz explained the county has budgeted construction of this road for next summer, and the agreement with them is for the City to acquire the right of way and the county to construct the road from Bunker Lake Boulevard to Constance Boulevard. Attorney Hawkins advised that he cannot begin purchasing right of way until he receives the proper descriptions from the County, noting it is getting very close to construction and the time needed to process the acquisition. Mr. Holasek - asked about the assessment on Parcel 5400 and Parcel 6000. Mr. Schrantz stated with the credit off Crosstown for 5400, it is not adjacent to Hanson Boulevard and could be taken out of the project area. Mayor Windschitl didn't feel Parcel 5400 could be assessed. Councilman Orttel also questioned the assessment for Parcels 9000 and 6000 because they already have road frontage, Parcel 9000 having road frontage on two sides already. The construction of Hanson would also mean a loss of developable land, setback requirements, etc. But that also brings up the quesUon ,jf an assessment is waived for some reason, should that amount be made a part of the total cost to be spread among the remaining assessable area. He stated this is done in other projects, but questioned it being done in this instance. Mr. Schrantz stated he figured the area in the Hartfiel area but proposed the City pick up that cost. Councilman Lachinski suggested looking at deferring assessments on these types of projects until the property is developed. At that time, if the developer would use this road for development, the assessment would be paid at that time. If the rcàd is not used and no benefit is received, the assessment would not be paid. He also asked that the City receive an official county policy as it relates to access onto Hanson Boulevard. He fe 1t Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 7 . (Feasibility Report - Hanson Boulevard, 83-1, Continued) there is questionable benefit being derived if the County is going to restrict access to the road. He also felt the City should make a formal statement in its ordinance as it relates to frontage roads. Mayor Windschitl suggested the Engineer make a proposal of under what definition a parcel would be assessed. Walter Laptuta, 15026 Crosstown, Parcel 9000 - feels he does not need Hanson Boulevard, as he has enough frontage as it is and feels he should not be assessed. He also objects to the construction of Hanson Boulevard. Mr. Holasek - asked if the $80,000 is for the entire road. Mr. Schrantz explained it is the estlmated cost for the acquisition of right of way between Andover Boulevard and Constance Boulevard. Someone asked if there is any way to stop the extension of Hanson Bouelvard. Mayor Windschitl explained that the county clearly has this road planned as a major road. Mr. Holasek - felt that because it is a major north/south road, it should not be assessed. He's totally against the road if it is going to be assessed. It's a road for the county, not just for the City. He felt it is circumventing the law to have the City purchase the right of way and then assess that cost back to the property owners. Counci lman Jacobson felt it would be appropriate to assess those costs, but defer the assessment until the landowner wants to develop the property. If that development includes using Hanson Boulevard, the assessment is paid at that time. If the land is never developed or the road not used as an access, there would be no assessment. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, that we direct the City Engineer to prepare an amendment to the assessment policy which would defer assessments on MSA improvements until such time as the property along the improvement is developed and actually realizes a direct benefit of the improvement, and to specify the terms and the number of years it would apply, etc., and also to obtain in written form the county policy as it relates to access along Hanson Boulevard. DISCUSSION: Councilman Jacobson felt that no interest should accumulate during that time period. Councilman Orttel also suggested including something in the policy which defines which properties are to be excluded from any assessment for topographical reasons, etc. Councilman Lachinski ADDED TO MOTION: to specify the terms, etc., and also to specify guidelines for properties which are excluded from any assessment. Second stands. Motion carried unanimously. Doris Paschem, Drake - wondered if there was any chance the road could be set over on the other slde of the poles for one-half mile so that it isn't next to their back yard. The poles are right next to their back yard. Council discussion was the county design people would be making that decision, but it could be brought to their attention. It was felt some concession may be able to be made to maintain privacy. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, entering a Resolution accepting feasibility report and setting date for Public Hearing for the Improvement of bitminous street construction for Hanson Boulevard between CSAH No. 16 and CSAH No. 20 in the City of Andover, with the date for the public hearing being set at the Second Regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council in January, 1983. (See Resolution Rl18-82) Motion carried unanimous ly. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that the assessment policy for Municipal State Aid Streets be carried to the First Regular Meeting in the Month of January. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 8 SENIOR CITIZEN BUILDING Discussion was that little or no progress is being made on the building and what course of action to take at this time. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we declare Allstate Builders in default of the contract to build the Senior Citizen Addition to the City Hall and direct the City Attorney to take whatever action necessary to get the building under way. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hawkins explained basically the company is being declared in default and the City is now seeking recovery under the bond, and if necessary, to seek new bids through the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. Chairman Bosell stated when the contractor was wo~king on the Addition, the lights to the hockey rink were disconnected. The Hockey Association is in desperate need of a place to skate and asked if ther$: is any possibility that-the lights could be connected. Council direct the City staff to have the lights connected. UTILITY RATE RESOLUTION MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, a Resolution establishing sanitary sewer user rates and sanitary sewer connection charges to be effective January 1, 1983, pursuant to Ordinance No. 32 and Resolution No, §8-8l. (See Resolution Rl19-82) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution setting rates for permits, connection fees, services, and water usage pursuant to Ordinance No. 55, Section 3, and Resolution 101-82 as presented. (See Resolution R120-82) Motion carried unanimously. ENCUMBER FUNDS - SPECIAL PROJECTS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council authorize the encumbering of 1982 General Fund monies to pay for the expenditures of the special projects approved by the City in September, 1982, per the attached list provided by the City Engineer, for total amount of $5,800. Motion carried unanimously. POLICE PROTECTION CONTRACT MOTION by Jaçobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract with the Anoka County Sheriff's Office to provide police protection for the City of Andover, 1983, based on a l6-hour per day protection schedule at a total cost to the City of $127,437. Motion carried unanimously. LICENSE APPROVAL - TOM THUMB SUPERETTE MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve a Cigarette and Non-Intoxicating Mùlt Liquor Off-Sale License to Tom Thumb Superette, Number 574 to run until December 31, 1983. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Jacobson Motion carried. FINAL MEETING DATE MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we set the Final City Council Meeting for the year 1982 for Wednesday, December 29 at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. BENEFITS - COUNCIL SECRETARY Ms. Lindquist reviewed her December 14, 1982, memo recommending the Council consider amending the Personnel Administrative Policy to allow the Council Secretary to participate in the Andover Insurance Group. " . Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 9 (Benefits - Council Secretary, Continued) MOTION by Orttel"Seconded by Jacobson, that we would allow the Council Recording Secretary position to participate in the City Group Benefits with no City contriQution. VOTE ON MOT! ON : YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; PRESENT BUT NOT VOTING: Peach Motion carried. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that the entire matter of benefits for the Councll Secretary be referred to the Personnel Committee for their first meeting after the first of the year. Motion carried unanimously. FIVE-YEAR MSAH PLAN/SCHRANTZ Mr. Schrantz reviewed his December 14, 1982, recommendation of a S-Year Construction Program. Council discussion was on the suggested projects, generally agreeing some work should be done on South Coon Creek Drive on the blind curves by the bridge. It was also questioned whether l5lst Avenue would be done because: of the resident opposition in that area. Some also had a problem with lS2nd Avenue from Round Lake Boulevard to Hanson Bouelvard. It was agreed that the 1987 to 1990 designation should be changed to South Coon Creek Drive, realizing the list can be changed in the future if it is so desired. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we accept the five-year capital improvement plan for Municipal State Aid road construction with the following change: the years 1987-1990, South Coon Creek Drive be substituted for lS2nd Avenue proposal. Motion carried unanimously. ANDOVER FIRE CODE ORDINANCE Council discussed the proposed ordinance with Fire Chief Frank Stone. It was thought some conflicts occur by not allowing Christmas trees in hospitals but allowing them in schools, and by not allowing private welding on water mains but allowing the City to do it. There was some discussion on whether or not the City should be allowed to weld on water mains. Chief Stone explained it is the intent to have only professionals do such work on the City lines with the City taking full responsibility for thawing water mains. This would only be done in cases of definite emergency. It was agreed to delete the paragraph No.3, Section 49.101, paragraph (c) which states: Exception to the above is the Public Utility Department of the City of Andover, in the case of a definite emergency. Page 2, Section 11.204, Paragraph (b), d) change to: natural or resinbearing trees shall not be stored on balconies. Chief Stone stated he would research why Christmas trees would be allowed in schools but not in hospitals. Page 2, Section 11.204, paragraph (c): Council questioned the difference between a .two-family house and single-fami ly house when applying this restrictdòn;, and would a salamander-type 'heater, which is an open flame-type heater, be a permissible use. It was felt a definition of 'open flame' is needed. Chief Stone stated he would research this item further. Page 2, 11,205, paragraph (d): questioned the restriction on the use of barbeques on balconies above ground. It was also interpreted that barbeques could not be used on patios unless it is greater than 15 feet in width. Chief Stone stated he would clarify that further, feeling it would be applicable to where patios are above each other. Page 1, title, correct spelling: PRESCRIBING REGULATIONS Page 1, last paragraph, correct spelling: 'corporation counsel' Regular City Council Meeting December 21, 1982 - Minutes Page 10 (Andover Fire Code Ordinance, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we move the Uniform Fire Code to the Second Regular Council Meeting in January. Motion carried unanimously. Chief Stone requested authorization to purchase ten coats and hoods for the Department, stating there is $2,450 left in the budget, Item 412.53. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the purchase of ten coats and hoods for the Fire Department for an amount not to exceed $2,450. Motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REPORT Chairman Bosell explained there are four positions open for next year and suggested the Council consider reducing the number of P & Z Commissioners from seven to five members. Mayor Windschitl stated this item will be on the Agenda of the organizational meeting in January. POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, based on the document that the landfill is not ln compliance, which seems to support the City's concern about the landfill, that the City Clerk be directed to prepare a Resolution for the last meeting of the year to the effect that the City is aware of the problems of the landfill as documented in the letter and that the City strongly concurs with the recommendations that the County and PCA require the landfill to be terminated until such remedial action has been taken. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, to approve Checks Numbered 6043 through 6096, noting that 6087 is void, for a total of $168,764.61. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ \\J ~G-- :~ Mar ella A. Peach Recor ng Secretary ,. ,