Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC February 16, 1982 .. ~ o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING-FEBRUARY 16, 1982 AGENDA 1 . Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Public Hearings 7:30 P.M. - Industrial Revenue Bonds/Rademacher 9:00 P.M. - Officers/Disciplinary Action of Member 5. Discussion Items a. Advanced Enterprises/Sketch Plan b. Sewer Charges/MWCC c. Comprehensive Plan d. Snowplowing pOlicy e. Amendment/Ordinance No. 8/Setbacks f. Amendment/Ordinance No. 10/Setbacks g. Municipal State Aid System *h. Noise Ordinance Discussion *i. Good Value Homes Sketch Plan 6. Non-Discussion Items a. Amendment/Ordinance No. 22/Contractor Requirements b. Purchase of Copier c. Planning & Zoning Applicants *d. Final Payment - 1981-2A 7. Reports of Commissions, Committees 8. Approval of Minutes 9. Approval of Claims 10. Adjournment CITY 01 ANDOVER M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COPIES TO: FROM: CITY CLERK/A. ADMINISTRATOR DATE: FRRR[JIIRV 10, 1qS~ REFERENCE: IIGRNI1 A TNFORMA'T'TON - FRRRIJARV 1fi. 19S2 Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Please add the following items: 1 ) Item No. Sh-Noise Control Ordinance Discussion and Item No. Sg - Good Value Sketch Plan. and Item No. 6d-Final Payment/1981-2A. ' Item No. 4 - Public Hearing/Rademacher I.R. Bond Resolution Amendment Proper notice has been published. Enclosed please find a copy of the Department of Commerce Application for the Industrial Revenue Bonds covering an increased amount to $7,700,000.00 from the originally approved $4,300,000.00; and a time extension to November 1 , 1983. As part of the application, you will find the proposed resolution to be adopted at this meeting. Also enclosed is a letter from the Bond Counsel representing Wm. Rademacher and Boisclair Corporation. Under separate cover you have received correspondence from Boisclair Corporation, outlining the cost changes and reasons for same. Item No. 4 - Public Hearing/Officers-Disciplinary Action of Member/ Fire Department. The Hearing for this item is scheduled for 9:00 P.M. All interested parties have been notified. Ordinance No. 42 requires the City Council to conduct a Public Hearing prior to action on any dismissal of a Firefighter. Item No. Sa - Andvanced Enterprises/Sketch Plan Mr. Bjorngjeld has as-acre parecel in the Industrial Park off CSAH No. 9 and Constance Boulevard which he would like to plat into two separate 2.S acre parcels. Lot splits are not allowed on commercial property, therefore, to subdivide, he must plat. Item No. Sb - Sewer Charges/MWCC Mayor Windschitl and Jim Schrantz met with the Metropolitan Waste Control people last week reo the charges by MWCC to Andover for sewer useage. Based on the current billing, the costs would be in excess of $30.00 per quarter. MWCC has now agreed to reduce these charges, however, they are still more than we are currently charging our residents. A complete report will be given at the meeting. Agenda Information February 16, 1982 Page 2 Item No. Sc - Comprehensive Plan Mayor Windschitl, Mark Schumacher and Jim Schrantz met with Barbara Moeller and John Harrington last week to discuss our suggestions for land use/population, as presented by Mr. Schumacher at the last Council Meeting. They will have a report for you at the meeting. Item No. Sd - Snowplowing Policy Inasmuch as there is a question on the position of Fire Chief, Jim Schrantz has not been able to review the snowplowing policy; therefore, this item should probably be deleted unless you have some particular questions on the policy. Item No. Se - Amendment/Ordinance No. 8/Setbacks Item No. Sf - Amendment/Ordinance No. 10/Setbacks Enclosed are copies of the proposed ordinance amendments changing to setbacks on various streets, as well as defining the types of streets more comprehensively to fit into, not only the Compehensive Plan, but the use. Jim Schrantz has worked with the Planning and Zoning Commission on these ordinances, and will answer any questions you may have. Item No. Sg - Municipal State Aid System Glen Cook will be present to discuss the designations as prepared and recommended by the Road Committee and Bonestroo, Rosene & Anderlik. The maps were handed out at the February 2 Meeting. Item No. Sh - Noise Control Ordinance Discussion Attached is a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Before they hold the required Public Hearing, they would like the Council's feeling on this recommendation. Item No. Si - Good Value Homes Sketch Plan John Peterson will be present to review the plan proposed for the development of the 80 acres owned by Good Value, west of Bunker Lake Boulevard. A conceptual approval is needed before he proceeds. Item No. 6a - Ordinance No. 22/Contractor Requirements Attached is a proposed ordinance which will put us in compliance with State regulations for heating contractors. A motion is needed for approval. Item No. 6b - Purchase of Copier A cost sheet will be ready for your on Tuesday. We still have two more machines to try (delivered tomorrow) before I feel I can make a recommendation. Agenda Information February 16, 1982 Page 3 Item No. 6c - Planning & Zoning Commission Applicants As a result of the number of applicants not appearing for their scheduled interviews on February 8, I contacted (or attempted to) by phone. Mr. Conger did not feel well, Mr. Slayton forgot about it, and Mr. McGannon and Mr. Cann have not returned by call. What does the Council wish to do? Item No. 6d - Final Payment-1981-2A Northern Asphalt has submitted their final bill for the above project. The costs are approximately 8% over bid; to-date we have not received a report on the reasons for the overage. You will recall we did over-assess on this project, so there will be no need for a Supplemental Assessment. Jim Schrantz will have a complete report for you. Item No. 7 - Reports of Committees, Commissions, Departments Nothing received. Item No. 8 - Approval of Minutes February 2, 8, 1982. - o¿ ANDOVER ~ REG~LAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 16, 1982 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on February 16, 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; BRA Engineer, Glenn Cook; City Staff Engineer, James Schrantz; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, the approval of the Agenda as published with the addition of Sj, Community Development Committee; Sh, Noise Control Ordinance Discussion; Sg, Good Value Sketch Plan; 6d, Final Payment - 1981-2A; and the deletion of Sd, Snowplowing Policy. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we suspend the rules. r~otion carried unanlmous ly. PUBLIC HEARING - INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS/RADEMACHER Wayne Anderson, representing Mr. Rademacher, Jeff Wieckert, representing Boisclair Corporatlon, and Hart Kuller, representing the bond counsel of Winthrop, Weinstine and Sexton, were present. Mr. Anderson stated the resolution should be in effect for a period of 12 months from the date of adoption. There was some question as to whether the proposed resolution rescinds the original resolution or is an additional one. Mr. Kuller explained the resolution before the Council does not rescind the existing resolutlon, but at the same time it is not in addition to that resolution. He explained there is a possibility that Federal legislation may be passed in this area, and they are concerned that it may be made retroactive to before December 31, 1981. So they do not want to take any action taking out the authority in the existing resolution. If any such legislation were made retroactive, there would still be the $4.3 million available from the existing resolution. At the same time, they do not interpret the two resolutions as being in addition to one another. If the developer were to proceed with the $7.7 million project, it would be in lieu of the $4.3 million one. There is also concern . that a subsequent bond counsel might want to see a new resolution procedure going through the public hearing procedure. If their firm ultimately acts as bond counsel, they would be of the opinion that the existing resolution could be increased. But bond counsel is often chosen by the lender, and an outside bound counsel may wish to have a brand new resolution. That is the reason they are going through this step this evening. Attorney Hawkins stated he does not see the two resolutions as being in conflict as long as they are trying to preserve the original resolution and still trying to satisfy any objections any further bond counsel may have relative to increasing the scope of the project and the necessity of a public hearing. Don Cann asked if there has been a change in the design of the shopping center. Mr. Anderson said the design has remained the same. Mr. Cann then stated he had no objectlon to the request. Mr. Anderson also stated that thelr equity in the project is $1,664,000. He also noted that the November, 1983, date in the resolution repre- sents the completion of the construction. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution giving preliminary approval to a project under the Municipal Industrial Development Act, referring the proposal to the director of the Department of Energy, Planning, and Development for approval, and authorizing preparation of necessary documents, as presented by the bond - ,- Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 2 (Public Hearing - Industrial Revenue Bonds/Rademacher, Continued) counsel of Rademacher and Boisclair Corporation; and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the necessary documents. (See Resolution R6-82) Motion carried unanimously. ADVANCED ENTERPRISES/SKETCH PLAN Dennis Bjorngjeld, 23556 Kapella Street NE, Stacy, Minnesota - presented a surveyed copy of the sketch plan for the division of property in the Hughes Industrial Center. Council discussion was on the size of Lot 1. It was the opinion of the Attorney that the minimum of 39,000 square feet required to sustain an on-site septic system should be applied to commercial property as well. Mr. Bjorngjeld stated the proposed businesses are office and maintenance shops. Council suggested that Lot 1 be a minimum of 39,000 square feet. Mr. Bjorng~eld stated he has talked with the county relative to right of way and road access, an the Council should be getting a letter that the county has no objection to the proposal. At the present time they have no plans of developing the other two lots, but they may possibly construct commercial-type buildings on them in the future. Their concern, however, is now with financing their building; and they prefer not to tie up the entire parcel of land with that financing. Council also noted that park dedication fees or land would be required. SEWER CHARGES/MWCC Mr. Schrantz stated a week ago he and the Mayor went to the Metro Sewer Board and discussed the City's sewer charges. They had metered flows and documents that show the City's flows are high, but they agreed to reduce the City's gallonage of the 1980 flow by 16 million gallons, which reduces the 1982 gallonage to 13 million gallons. The overages in 1981 and 1982 will be collected in future years. It amounts to nearly $9,000 of this year's flow, but it still leaves the City with a deficit by paying Metro Sewer more than .what is being collected. Mr. Schrantz stated they are making plans to isolate the flow. The meter should be in place very soon. His goal would be to reduce the flo.w by 20 million gallons. Mayor Windschitl explained that the problem is during the late hours when the flow within the sewer system should be almost zero, the City's flow is between 3 3/4 inches to 4 1/2 inches of sewage in the pipe, which means there is a significant infiltration problem some.where in the system. Mr. Schrantz stated it is difficult to see in the sewer this time of year, but he will begin .working on a plan to isolate the flow. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mr. Schrantz explained they discussed the same program discussed at the last Council meeting with staff members of the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commi ss i on. He felt documentation can be provided to show that the industrial flows would be closer to 500 to 800 gallons per acre rather than the 2,000 per acre they are calculating. And with that documentation, he felt the plan would be adopted. r~r . Schumacher of TKDA is working on those figures right now. Mayor Windschitl stated he asked for the Council's procedure in writing for trading designated pre-1990 development areas with designated post-1990 development areas, and the Metro Council Staff has stated it would simply be a lO-day process to amend the plan. Also, they were willing to consider the Adolfson property, which is in Green Acres, as a basis for not reducing the land any further by giving that property either a reduced value or no value. They .weren't saying it would have to be placed in the post-1990 development, but that they would look at that in their overall assess- ment of the plan. Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 3 (Comprehensive Plan, Continued) Council discussion was on possible positions to take in an attempt to reach a compromise with the Metropolitan Council, including deleting some of the currently proposed pre-1990 development lands (the areas discussed were the same as what was discussed at the February 2 meeting -- the property north of Coon Creek, west of the railroad tracks, and the property west of Shady Knoll, south of South Coon Creek Drive) and to more accurately calculate the industrial flows. Discussion was also on methods of discouraging large-lot development on the property within the urban service area that is proposed for post-1990 development. Suggestions were to allow the maximum density on a portion of a parcel being developed to average 39,000 square feet through the development, which would get the streets designed, but to allow no development on the remainder of the parcel until sanitary sewer is available or to ask the developer to put the sewer lines in the ground. Discussion was again on the questionof the Metro Council's authority to require the pre-1990 development acres to be reduced in the plan and the ramifications of the City's plan not being approved by the Metro Council. Council agreed to have Mr. Schrantz anð Mr. Schumacher work on the documentation of the reduced flow from the industrial areas and to determine how that would affect the City's proposed sewage fl ows . Council also agreed to have Attorney Hawkins contact the Metro Council attorneys to find out what authority the Metro Council has to require the City to pinpoint the specific lands within the urban service area to develop prior to 1990, as there is some question as to why it is necessary since there is agreement on the population figures and sewage flows. AMENDMENT/ORDINANCE NOS. 8 and 10/SETBACKS Ralph Kishel, Planning and Zoning Commissioner - explained the reason this came about lS there have been cases where the setback requirements along county roads were not uniform and because of the ambiguity in the ordinance. So in working with Mr. Schrantz, they compromised to make 4.15 and 6.02 uniform to require a minimum setback along county roads of 110 feet from centerline or,from,~what the centerline would be. There was some confusion as to what streets in the City are affected by this change and some concern on the part of the Council on the changes made, especially in light of the change in road standards adopted a year or so ago and the attmept to reduce road right of ways. Mr. Schrantz explained the roads affected are those minor arterial and collectors within the City as shown on the street system plan in the City's comprehensive plan. For those MSA streets, he drew a schematic of what those street sections would look like and how the setbacks would apply. Another thing is the language is clarified between what the comprehensive plan says and the ordinances. Mr. Kishel noted several problems he has seen in the past relative to setbacks along county roads not being enough and causing problems when the county wishes to widen and upgrade the road. Discussion was"on the application of the proposed setbacks to various situations, with the Council generally feeling the 50-foot setback may be excessive in view of the wide right of ways required for these roads. Mr. Schrantz argued it is an attempt to get the buildings set back away from the traffic, excessive noise, etc. Councilman Orttel noted the only ones affected by this are existing buildings where another garage may be wanted, etc.; because in new developments, houses are not allowed to front on these streets. Mr. Kishel stated there have been building permits issued for houses to front on county roads where the owner has not received county permission to do so. The Clerk stated permission is required from the county before the City issues any building permit for houses along county roads. Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 4 (Amendment/Ordinances 8 and 10/Setbacks, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peabh, that we delay this matter of Ordinances 8 and 10 over until the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting, which is the first meeting in March; at the same time we refer the 8 and 10 amendments to the Road Committee and have a report back at that meeting. DISCUSSION: Councilman Lachinski felt the question is whether or not the right of way in itself should take care of the buffer. Councilman Orttel also stated it appears the roadbed width has been changed to some extent, which he didn't understand; and he would like the Road Committee to look at it. Councilman Lachinski felt the road standards and width should also be addressed because new types of MSA road standards are being considered. Motion carried unanimously. Recess at 8:50; reconvene at 9:03 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - OFFICERS/DISCIPLINARY ACTION OF AVFD MEMBER (Because he is a fire fighter and a witness to the event, Councilman Peach stepped down to the audience for this portion of the meeting.) Bob Palmer, Fire Chief at the time of the incident, stated he is the person who brought action against Ron Keller becuase of an incident which took place on January 11, 1982, at a mutual aid fire call in Burns Township. Mr. Palmer explained the incident: Anoka requested a pumper and tanker. When the situation was half way under control, one of the fire fighters came to him saying he should have a talk with Mr. Keller as that fire fighter felt Mr. Keller was drunk. About five minutes later an officer, Dale Mashuga, also stated he should have a talk with Mr. Ke ller. He wasn't going to take a lot of time at the fire scene, but he told Mr. Keller he wanted to talk with him when they got back to the station. When he got back to the fire station, he found that Mr. Keller had already gone home. So he called Mr. Keller and asked why Mr. Keller left the station. Mr. Keller stated he was tired of being blamed for things, etc. Mr. Palmer explained that Mr. Keller wasn't the only person to be disciplined. Mr. Keller told him with some awful words what he could do, so he told Mr. Keller he would be down to get the gear. Mr. Palmer and Mr. Stone went to get the gear from Mr. Keller's home, and Mr. Keller had calmed down a little. When Mr. Palmer told Mr. Keller he would be on suspension, Mr. Keller became boisterous again, so they left. Mr. Palmer suspended Mr Keller for showing up under the influence of liquor and for insubordination. TheofflcerSvoted 6 to drop and 3 to keep Mr. Keller on the Department. Dale Mashuga was the officer in the truck with Mr. Keller and Bob Peach. Mr. Mashuga explalned the incident: Mr. Peach was driving; Mr. Keller was in the middle; and he was by the door. Usually the person driving the truck stays with the truck. When he got in the truck and left the station, he could smell alcohol, but when Mr. Keller started talking on the radio, he knew that the alcohol consumption was more than just a beer. At that time Mr. Peach said to take the radio away from Mr. Keller, but Mr. Keller was done talking, so he just let it go. He asked Mr. Keller if he had been drinking. At first Mr. Keller said no; but then said yes, he had a couple beers. Mr. Mashuga then told Mr. Keller to stay with the truck when they get to the fire scene while he and Mr. Peach go to the scene. Once on the scene, he and Mr. Peach were walking to the scene; and when half way there, he turned around and saw that Mr. Keller was gone. At that point he hollared to Mr. Keller to get back to the truck and stay there. When Mr. Palmer came to get him and walk back to the truck to talk with Mr. Keller, Mr. Keller was standing by the Health Central ambulance talking to the driver. Mr. t1ashuga then presented the Council with a written statement from the driver of the ambulance to whom Mr. Keller talked to at the incident. Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 5 (Public Hearing - Officers/Disciplinary Action of AVFD Member, Continued) Bob Peach, fire fighter and driver of the truck. Mr. Peach explained the incident: When he got into the truck he smelled alcohol, and he didn't immediately realize there was an officer in the truck. It is normal operating procedure for the middle man in a truck to talk on the radio, and he asked Mr. Keller to call Central for directions to the fire. Mr. Keller called Central, and it then became clear to him who it was in the truck that had been drinking. Mr. Keller didn't appear to have proper control of his faculties. Mr. Keller asked for directions, but talked on top of the other person speaking. Mr. Peach couldn't understand the directions because Mr. Keller was talking at the same time the directions were being given, so he asked Mr. Mashuga to take the radio away from Mr. Keller. When he got to the scene, he masked up and went into the house. But as soon as he was available, he reported it to the Chi ef . Mr. Peach felt it is very serious to have been drinking and reporting to a fire scene. It is not a matter of being legally drunk but whether Mr. Keller was physically able to carry out the duties required at a fire scene. To him it is very serious to have to go into a burning house with someone who may not be able to bring you back out again in case there is trouble. He also asked Mr. Palmer to review other disciplinary actions taken against Mr. Keller in the past. Mr. Palmer - stated Mr. Keller was verbally warned about his driving several times, as he has been clocked at traveling over 80 miles an hour to the station. Also, Mr. Keller was put on a 30-day suspension last August for a drinking situation which involved the Fire Department at a waterball tournament. Ron Keller - stated this is the second time he has been told about being drunk, stating he should have learned the first time. He didn't mean to disgrace the Fire Department and will resign if he has to. He stated he has been on the Fire Department for three years and gave a lot of his devotion to the Department. He doesn't want to quit because he does love it and enjoy it, but he stated he can see that he did destroy it for himself. When questioned by the Council, Mr. Keller admitted he was drunk and did do what has just been alleged. He used to hunt in the area of the fire and knew where it was located. Bob Dillon, fire fighter, stated there have been quite a large number of resignations of experiencéd people this past year, which he felt is a very serious problem. He felt they are experiencing a great deal of frustration. Individuals who are very committed and who have given up a great deal of their time have suddenly dropped out when an issue comes up that may not have gone their way. And there have been other instances where people have come very close to resigning or have dropped from all committees. He didn't know how to resolve the problem and wanted to call it to the Council's attention. The Chief did suspend Mr. Keller, which is within his authority; and the officers voted on the issue as well, which is not required. The vote of the active members, which is required, to dismiss Mr. Keller did not carry. Mr. Dillon felt that Mr. Keller's problem would have taken care of itself if it hadn't been brought before the Council, as he didn't think Mr. Keller would have carried a vote on a third offense. It would have retained the integrity of the by-laws and probably would have had something to do with the morale of the Department. Mr. Dillon stated there has been a movement within the Department to remove people who are already members, which he finds repulsive. He stated unfortunately the same spirit of excitement that draws people to the fire service also gets them in the party spirit which causes problems. The Department has dealt with it by suspensions, etc., as adequately as any department he knows of; and he felt it has been effective. It has been a super Fire Department which has made great achievements, but he felt there is a great morale problem with seasoned, trained people becoming frustrated and resigning. He felt the problem must be solved within the Department. Mr. Dillon hoped that the vote of the active members within the Department would be indicative enough to the Council that the issue has been dealt with. Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 6 (Public Hearing - Officers/Disciplinary Action of AVFD Member, Continued) There was then a lengthy discussion by the Council and members of the Fire Department on the issue, on some of the problems mentioned, and on a course of action. Attorney Hawkins advised that because no legal action is threatened or wage negotiations, etc., there is no authority for a closed meeting between the attorney and the Council. Council repeatedly noted that it would be the preference that because they are not familiar with the inner workings of the Department, that the matters be handled internally by the Department; that the Council would do whatever they could to help and to support the Department to solve some of the problems; that the Council is very much appreciative of the efforts that have been done and on how well the Department has done things; and that the Council must look to the Department for suggestions as to what can be done to improve matters. Mr. Palmer stated that his suspension for this incident was originally a permanent suspension until it could go through the proper channels. Assistant Chief, Frank Stone, stated after Mr. Palmer indicated he would not run for Flre Chlef, Mr. Keller was put on a 30-day suspension for not obeying his officers and an additional 60 days for being under the influence. In response to a Council question, Mr. Keller stated he felt he is not an alcoholic, that he can control himself, and that he doesn't need treatment. Further Council discussion was it was generally felt that the seriousness of the incident warranted some disciplinary action, that alcohol consumption as it relates to fire service is an extremely serious situation, and debated what action to take realizing Mr. Keller has been active in the Department for three years, does enjoy it, and wants to continue serving as a fire fighter. Councilman Jacobson suggested a suspension until January 1, 1983, to allow Mr. Keller time to contemplate; but if there are any problems after that time, he would strongly advise a permanent suspension from the Department. Mr. Palmer noted that it is not a written policy, but it is known by the fire fighters that if they have been drinking at the time of a fire call, they are to stay home. Bill Bush, fire fighter, stated there have been two other alcohol-related incidents. One was dismissed early in the Department's formation, and the other received a 30- day suspension. There is an attempt to treat such incidents in a like manner. Mr. Palmer also stated that after talking with the fire fighters following the vote by the general membership that they may not have had all the detailed information about the incident prior to voting on it. He felt that given some of the past actions by Mr. Keller that drinking is a continuing problem. Mr. Stone felt there was no morale problem in the Department, as he hasn't really seen It. Mayor Windschitl felt the alcohol problem that may exist should be dealt with in a prescribed manner in the by-laws, suggesting the officers set up a specific procedure. MOTION by Jacobson that based upon Mr. Keller's admission that he was intoxicated at a fire scene in Burns Township on January 11, 1982, and the Council finds that the condition that Mr. Keller admits to being in could have been life threatening to himself, to members of the public, and the Andover Fire Department, the City Council suspends Mr. Keller until January 1, 1983, as a disciplinary action for his actions of January 11, 1982. Motion dies for lack of a Second. Discussion was on the suggestion that if Mr. Keller were to come back in January, 1983, that it be under a probationary situationtoallow Mr. Keller to be retrained and to allow the active fire fighters an opportunity to vote on Mr. Keller's re- admission to the Department as is done for the acceptance of all applicants at the end of the probationary period. Mr. Dillon explained the suspension of Mr. Keller Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 ~ Minutes Page 7 (Public Hearing - Officers/Disciplinary Action of AVFD Member, Continued) amounted to a 30-day suspension from all Fire Department activites and the balance of the 60 days Mr. Keller is expected to participate in training activities but not to be involved in the active fire fighting. The reason for that was to keep things up to date. He felt that the length of the suspension period is insignificant, and he again hoped that the Council would go along with the vote of the membership of the Fire Department. And at some later date the disciplinary action of the Department can be revi sed. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, to reinstitute his original motion; however, to add on January 1, 1983, Mr. Keller would then be subject to the normal probationary period set up by the Andover Fire Department and the normal procedure at that time, whatever they may be for reacceptance. After further discussion, Councilman Jacobson made the following change to the motion: and as of January 1, 1983, Mr. Keller would become a probationary member of the Fire Department subject to normal reacceptance procedures. Second stands. DISCUSSION: Several fire fighters noted the length of probation varies depending on the individual's experience, etc. A 6-month probationary period was talked about by the Council but it was decided the length of the probationary period would be left to the discretion of the Department. Councilman Orttel noted that it is an attempt to compromise between the two positions, realizing that compromise may not satisfy anyone. Councilman Jacobson intended that a suspension means Mr. Keller would not be involved in the Department. Bill Bush felt the probationary period would be the time for Mr. Keller to become retrained, etc. Motion carried on a 4-yes vote, with Councilman Peach not votin9 on the matter. (Councilman Peach returned to the Council bench; 10:20 p.m.) ANDOVER FIRE DEPARTMENT REPORT Assistant Chief Frank Stone advised that a special election is being held tomorrow evenlng. There are two candidates for Fire Chief and three for Assistant Chief. Also, he has been asked by Oak Grove representatives to attend a meeting this Friday to discuss the possibility of the Department contracting fire service for Oak Grove. He will keep the Council informed as he receives more information. MUNICIPAL STATE AID SYSTEM (Reference the February 1, 1982, preliminary Municipal State Aid Street Program, prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc.) Glenn R. Cook of BRA reviewed the report outlining the MSA system to establish corridors through the City using a color coded map showing county roads, existing MSA designations, and proposed MSA designations. He also reviewed the annual MSA apportionment of funds, noting the funds available for 1982 construction is $272,597.60, and the 10-year capital improvement program for MSA roads. There was discussion with the Council as to soils conditions and alternative alignments for some of the proposals. Mr. Cook stated the city's funding would allow construction through Item 3 of the improvement program. If all bonds available were sold and projects 1 through 3 were constructed this year, it would commit the funding through 1984 or 1985. Discussion also suggested a possibility of a joint venture with the county of constructing the 142nd Lane alignment and South Coon Creek Drive improvement since it would provide the link between the proposed Rum River Crossing and a county road to the east to provide an east-west route through the City. Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 8 (Municipal State Aid System, Continued) There was also discussion on the issue of preserving right of way for the proposed MSA roadways as to whether the exact locations should be finalized pr or to any development in the area or whether the exact locations would be determined at the time a parcel is developed to determine how it would best fit into the develope's and the City's proposals and to obtain dedicated right of way at that:time. Mr.]cook explained most collectors are wider to handle a greater volume of traffic, S,ODO to 10,000cars daily maximum; however, houses normally do front on them. An example 0 such a street is Bunker Lake Boulevard between Seventh Avenue and Round Lake Boule ard; although the traffic on that particular stretch of roadway may be somewhat haz rdous because the houses are not set back far enough and because it is the only roa in the area and is actually serving as a minor arterial function. He didn't feel it would be necessary to eliminate fronting on collectors, depending on what traffic an location dictates. If homes are allowed to front on that street, they can be assesse more eas ily and more miles of road can be built. If access is restricted onto a ollector, it would be more difficult to assess the property for the road; and that w uld mean building the entire system with MSA funds. Council discussion was on the desirability of not having houses f~onting on collectors and of advantages of determining MSA alignment prior to any furth r development through those areas. It was also noted that the Council must mak a commitment as to the implementation of the capital improvements program and whi h projects to begin with. It was suggested that property owners of the land involved with the tentative alignment be notified of the City's intent and an informational or public hearing be held. It was àlso suggested that Mr. Schrantz and Mr. Cook contact the Anoka County engineers relative to the proposals and a possible joint effort on l42nd and South Coon Creek Drive. Mr. Cook was also directed to prepare a proposal of costs to establish a right-of-way acquisition program for the first two projects in the proposal. Mr. Cook stated that the costs are reimbursable from the MSA fund if the City is looking at acquiring right of way. It was agreed that, prior to public hearings being held for right-of-way acqusition that the Council establish the assessment policy on MSA streets. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we put that as an Agenda item at our next regular Council meeting (referring to the establishment of assessment policy on MSA streets). Motion carried unanimously. NOISE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION Planning and Zoning Chairman d'Arcy Bosell asked for direction, noting that George Lobb has taken responsibility for this Agenda item on the Commission. She quest i oned the need for an additional ordinance or whether Ordinance 8, Section 8.19 could be amended to provide authority to the law enforcement people to control noisy parties. Attorney Hawkins explained the ordinance came about becauæ,over the past year or so there have been two or three instances where Anoka County Deputies were called to loud parties and have found themselves at a loss as to how to charge and break these up. He had come across this ordinance which was used successfully by other cities that covered this problem plus others that have come up over the past year. The problem he sees with Section 8.16 of the City's ordinance is it is directed to a more permanent type situation which isn't practically applicable toward breaking up loud parties. And he doesn't feel that Section C has anything to do with noise. He feels a standard is needed that doesn't require the mechanical equipment that the Deputies don't have, which the noise ordinance addresses. It also gives the Deputies authority to order people out of the party. The rest of the ordinance he presented to the Commission was for discussion purposes only. The noise standards for loud parties is the section he is concerned about. Regular City Council Meeting February 16; 1982 - Minutes Page 9 (Noise Ordinance Discussion, Continued) Discussion was whether existing ordinances can be amended or whether a separate noise ordinance should be considered. Mr. Hawkins advised if only loud parties are going to be addressed, an existing ordinance can be amended. But if other noise problems are going to be considered, such as mini bikes, etc., he felt all noise standards should be addressed in one separate ordinance. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that the Attorney be authorized to attend a Planning and Zoning Meeting to discuss the noise ordinance. Motion carried unanimous ly. GOOD VALUE HOMES SKETCH PLAN John Peterson of Good Value Homes and John Uban, Planning Consultant, reviewed the Good Value Home sketch plan for 78 acres west of Round Lake Bouelvard. Mr. Peterson asked that the following issues be addressed: 1) Can they plat 22 acres out of the 80 acres rather than present a preliminary plat for the entire 80 acres? 2) What about the quad-home and townhome housing? and 3) What about the proposed county road through the area as the Rum River crossing connection between Seventh Avenue and Round Lake Boulevard? Mr. Uban reviewed the sketch plan as to the road system, the single-family housing buffer, and the housing of quad-homes or 6-modules with a density of more than single family but far less than typical multiple or townhouses would be because of the greater amounts of open space. He also explained the problem they are having because of the uncertainty of a possible county road coming through that property and the inability to date to receive proper information on the matter. The Fire Department is concerned about the width of the cul de sac to the north to be able to turn the fire trucks around in it, but he feels it is of sufficient size to meet those concerns. Council discussion was that the county should be making a commitment on the proposed road through that property. On the quest ion of parks, Mr. Uban exp 1 ai ned they had previously proposed to include a lot of the fringe property of the wetlands as park. They planned to dredge the wetland to create an open pond for ice skating, etc., with ,what is dredged out being used to fi 11 in the perimeter to provide an area for park facilities. In this plan they can continue with that proposal or submit park dedication fees or some combination. Mayor Windschitl felt it would be most realistic to encompass the entire area so that as the rest is developed, the park is added to. Ideally one park would be created for all four 40's in that area, as that will be the last of the development in that corner. Council also suggested conferring with the property owner to the south in an attempt to coordinate street alignments for a north- south street if one is needed. Discussion returned to the density question and what is allowed by City ordinance. Mr. Uban stated on this particular piece of property, the proposed gross density is about 3 units per acre, but the net density is up to 6 to 8 units per acre because so much of the land will not be used. Attorney Hawkins noted the ordinance requires a minimum of 4,000 feet for each unit. If there are other factors, such as sewage capacity, a special use permit would be denied on that basis and higher standards would be required. Conceptually the Council was in agreement to the plan as proposed. Mr. Peterson explained that they have had tremendous success with the quad-home market. Th i s is the next parcel of land that Good Value Homes would like to develop, and they are hoping to develop it this fall. There was also discussion as to the desire to plat and develop only 22 acres at this time. It was again felt that the county should answer the street alignment question through that property. If the county cannot make a decision before Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 10 (Good Value Homes Sketch Plan, Continued) the critical stage of this plat, it was felt the plat should simply proceed. If the county has no present plans for a road through the property, they should so state in a letter to the City. Also, it would be desirable to see the park plan in total, and the parkland could be dedicated in segments by metes and bounds as the plat is finalized. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Council agreed to allow a lS-minute presentation at the next regular meeting by representatives of the Anoka Chamber of Commerce who are interested in forming a Community Development Committee composed of Andover, Ramsey, City of Anoka to urge industry to locate in the area. AMENDMENT/ORDINANCE NO. 22/CONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, Ordinance No. 22D, an Ordinance amending Ordlnance No. 22, an Ordinance regulating and licensing construction activities, as presented. Motion carried unanimously. PURCHASE OF COPIER Because of the late hour, it was agreed to postpone discussion of purchasing a copier until the next regular meeting. PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICANTS/APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION Don Cann stated his work hours have changed and that he must withdraw his name as an appllcant. Council agreed that it would not be necessary to interview those applicants who did not appear at the scheduled February 8 interview. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that for the three-year term ending December 31, 1984, the City Council appoint Marjorie Perry for the vacancy on the P & Z. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Orttel; ABSTAIN-Lachinski Motion carried. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that Cheryl Randeclev be appointed to a three- year term on the Planning and Zoning Commission. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Lachinski Motion carried. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that Don Spotts be appointed to a two-year term to the Planning and Zoning Commission. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Lachinski Motion carried. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the City Clerk to prepare a letter of appreciation to Ralph Kishel noting his years of service on the Planning and Zoning Commission, using the appropriate language, for all the City Council to sign. Motion carried unanimously. Councilman Orttel - My no vote on Marjorie Perry had to do with the fact she told us there was somebody on the Commission, at least one member, she felt she would have a problem working with. It wasn't told who that was; and I don't know if the person is still there or not, and I was trying to avoid the decent. ~ - , Regular City Council Meeting February 16, 1982 - Minutes Page 11 ( P & Z Applicants/Appointment to Commission, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, to add to his motion on the letter that everybody who served on the Commission should be sent a letter. Motion carried unanimous 1y. FINAL PAYMENT - 1981-2A Mr. Schrantz reviewed the February 8, 1982, BRA letter relative to the Smith's Rolling Oaks Street Improvement and explaining the reason for the overrun of the bid contract by $4,947.52. No Council decision was made on the matter. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we approve Checks 4618, 4657, 4700, and 4700 through 4744, and 4699, in the amount of $17,887.40. Motion carried unanimous ly. MOTIDN by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, '\~~c-;:~¿L Mar lla A. Peach Recor ing Secretary