Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC May 18, 1982 · ~ o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 18, 1982 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 8:00 P.M. (Please note time change) 2. Resi dent Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Feasibility Reports-MSA Streets b. Feasibility Report - Northglen II c. Comprehensive Plan Amendments d. Reimbursement-Project Costs e. Noise Control Ordinance f. Property Identification Numbers g. Rate Changes/Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates h. Variance/Lloyd Reimann i. Rezoning/Lloyd Reimann S. Non-Discussion Items a. Date/Public Hearing-Junkyards e. Sewer Cleaning Contract b. Date/Capital Improvement Program c. Resolution/Precinct Changes d. Final Plat Extension/Lakeside Estates 6. Reports of Committees, Commissions, Staff a. Enterprise Fund Budgets - Staff c. LMC Conference Attendance b. Park Commission 7. Approval of Claims Approval of Minutes 8. Adjournment CITY 01 ANDOVER M E M 0 RAN 0 U M TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COPIES TO: ATTORNEY, STAFF FROM: CITY CLERK/A. ADMINISTRATOR DATE: MAY 13, 1982 RE FERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - MAY 18, 1982 This meeting cannot begin until 8:00 P.M. due to the School Board Election on May 18. Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Please add Item No. 5e (Sewer Cleaning Contract Authorization) and Item No. 6c (Attendance/LMC Conference) and Item No. 7 (Minute Approval) Item No. 4a - Feasibility Reports/MSA Streets B.R.A. has been directed to prepare complete feasibility reports for 157th Avenue between CSAH No. 18 and university Avenue, Prairie Road between the bridge and Andover Boulevard, 173rd Avenue between CSAH NO. 9 and Tulip Street and Following acceptance of these reports, the Council should set Informational Hearings to discuss the proposed improvements with the affected property owners. Item No. 4b - Feasibility Report/Northglen II TKDA will have a representative at the meeting to present and discuss the Feasibility Report for Northglen II. Inasmuch as this was requested by unanimous petition, the Public Hearing is waived per the petitioners request. A resolution will be prepared accepting the Report and directing the firm of T.K.D.A. to prepare Final Plans and Specifications. Item No. 4c - Comprehensive Plan Amendments The Staff has worked with T.K.D.A. to prepare the final draft of the amendments, incorporating the information received as a result of the discussions between our City Attorney and Metropolitan Council Attorney, and the several meetings between the Staff and Members of M.C. Review Staff. A motion is needed for acceptance. Until this information is received and approved by M.C., permits cannot be issued for the improvements in Northglen II and any other sewer/water extensions we may want. Enclosed is a letter from Good Value Homes to M.C., relative to Plat approval delays. Agenda Information May 18, 1982 Page 2 Item No. 4d - Reimbursement/Project Costs Up until now, no monies have been charged to projects for repair work following final acceptance of the project. The Bond Resolutions do not allow us to use any of the money in the Debt Service Fundi as a result if a problem occurs in a project area three-four years following finalizing of the project, the money comes from General Fund, or in the case of Sewer or Water work , the appropriate Funds. So far we have not had any major repairs on street improvements. Engineer Schrantz feels that the City should include in the original project costs, a percentage from 1% to 5% to be placed in a Trust Fund to be transferred to the General Fund at the time any repair work is done. We cannot do this with projects already completed, however, the Council could make a motion for such procedure to be following on all projects hence. As it is now, the only way General Fund will get reimbursed is if there are funds remaining in the Debt Service Accounts on the projects after the bonds are satisfied. As you know, we do take 1% now from all projects for future assessment administration. This would simply be an expansion on this 1% to cover general administrative (Engineer and Administrator) and for repairs. Jim will cover this in detail with you. Item No. 4e - Noise Control Ordinance Following is an ordinance proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission in response to the City Attorney's request for enabling laws to assist him in the prosecution of noise complaints. If adopted, this will be Ordinance No. 59. Item No. 4f - Property Identification Numbers The PIN are a procedure now used by Anoka County. All our assessment books were prepared by T.K.D.A. and are in Plat/Parcel order. The PIN are NOT in Plat/Parcel order, therefore, all information on assessments done by the County does not coincide with the books. It is the County's intention to eliminate all parcel numbers shortly. Several of our assessment books have over 200 pages, so I think you can well imagine the time it would take to find assessment information on a lot for which you only are given a PIN; it could be on page 2 or on page 200. Other cities with numerous assessed parcels are also converting, i.e., Coon Rapids, Blaine, Fridley. Item No. 4g - Rate Changes/Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, Inc. Enclosed is a sheet showing the previous rates in comparison to the newly requested rates. A motion is needed for approval. Item NQ. 4h - Lloyd Reiman Variance Attached is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for denial of the request to construct an adòition to the existing building closer than the required 10' from the property line. When the building permit for the structure was rpceived, the applicant did not have the plot plan for the original building, therefore, prepared the plans for the addition based on stakes in the ground (supposedley indicating the lot lines). The plot plans in our files for the original building were not checked at the time, so the building progressed to a point of 75% completion before the Building Official issued the Stop Work Order. Please refer to P&Z Minutes of 4/27/82. Agenda Information May 18, 1982 Page 4 Item No. 6c - LMC Conference Advance Registration for the Conference if $80.00 as opposed to $85.00 at the door. They must be received by June 1, 1982. To-date I have not heard any confirmation on which Councilmen plan to attend. Authorization should be given at this meeting so we can get the check prepared and to the League by June 1. Itßm No. 7 - Approval of Minutes April 27, 1982, May 1, 1982, May 4, 1982 ·Agenda Information May 18, 1982 Page 3 Item No. 4i- Lloyd Reimann Rezoning Attached is date received to-date on the Reiman rezoning. This item has been continued by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 8, Section S.02, the City Council must act upon the request at this time. Simply a motion to refer the matter back to the Planning and Zoning Commission will suffice as far as meeting ordinance requirements. Item No. Sa - Date/Public Hearing-Junkyards Photographs of the entire area, including all the yards both licensed and unlicensed have been taken. Very little has been changed since the Council's visit on May 1. There are approximately SO photographs which will be available for your review on May 18. The Minutes for the May 1 Special Meeting will also be available by the 18th. A Hearing Date should be set for the lateL'.part~of June, thereby allowing time for notification to all owners with impending revocation of license for ordinance violations. , Item No. Sb - Date/Capital Improvements Program The Final Draft of the CIP as prepared by the CIP Committee will be available by May 18. Because of the complexity of this Progam, a date should be set for discussion of the proposed and final adoption. Item No. Sc - Resolution/Precinct Changes Attached is information covering the proposed precinct changes. Using as straight of lines as possible for divisions is by far the best way to go both for residents and our bookwork for the election judges. My only concern was that some residents may become upset over the fact that they have to drive by two polling places to get to their own; but the problems of staggered lines certainly outweighs the very few persons that will be inconvenienced. A motion is needed for adoption of the resolution . Item No. Sd - Final Plat Extension/Lakeside Estates The Preliminary Plat is due to expire on June 1. The developer has requested a 6-month extension to allow him time to complete the streets. Item No. Se - Sewer Cleaning Contract Attached is the Contract with PSG, Inc. for the televising of our sewer lines to determine where and the amount of infiltration. The estimated cost of $780 would certainly be off-set by MWCC charges for renegade sewage. Item No. 6a - Enterprise Fund Budgets This item is continued from the May 4 Meeting. Item No. 6b - Park Commission Chairman LeFebvre will be present to discuss the Kelsey Park acquisition with you. Attached is a letter from the Commission. ~ o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 18, 1982 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on May 18, 1982, 8:00 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; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others AGENDA APPROVAL It was suggested the following items be added to the Agenda: 4j, John Deere Endloader; Se, Sewer Cleaning Contract; 5f, Schrantz/Probationary Period Increase; and Sg, Authorization for Part-Time Employee. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, adoption of the Agenda as printed with the ãaãffíonal items as noted. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we suspend the rules. Motion carried unanimously. FEASIBILITY REPORTS - MSA STREETS Glen Cook of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, reviewed the following feasibility reports. It was determined that the City has approximately $272,000 MSA funds available for road construction this year, but up to 50 percent of next year's allocation could be borrowed. lS7th Avenue between Prairie Road and Holl , Project No. 82-3 - The project cost or an ur an sectlon lS estlmate at , o an or a rura section at $141,070. Mr. Cook stated the existing roadbed lends itself better to an urban section, and he then explained the problem with storm sewer drainage near Prairie Road. Raising the road about one foot in front of the driveway in the southeast corner of that intersection would eliminate the need for storm sewer construction entirely. He has not talked with the property owner as to his preference in the matter. Water from approximately 500 feet of l57th would also have to be taken to the west across the Prairie Road intersection from north to south. They would also prefer to build the roadway off center at the Kumquat location because the driven roadway is about 8 feet south of centerline due to the bank on the north side. l73rd Lane between County Roads 9 and 58, Project No. 82-4 - Because the area is urban in nature, the recommendatlon lS to construct an urban section at a cost of approximately $119,190. There are two drainage problems, and it is estimated storm sewer construction near Tulip would cost $57,960 and the problem presently served by a swale would cost $21,190. At the intersection with Tulip, they could meet with the County to get permission to construct a deeper ditch north from 173rd approximately 600 or 700 feet, which would greatly reduce the storm sewer cost. And for the problem at the intersection of Poppy Street, they could meet with the property owners affected to see if they would be willing to leave the drainage as it presently exists across their driveways and through their properties, which would also reduce storm sewer costs. Mr. Schrantz was confident MnDot would allow the City to designate this street an MSAH street for construction of the road this year. He thought a decision would be made within the next week. Prairie Road from the Bridge to Andover Boulevard, Project No. 82-5 - Mr. Cook reviewed the feasibillty study, recommending an urban section be constructed for an estimated cost of $52,750. The existing road is on the easterly half of the right of way. The existing row of trees are where the southbound lane of the Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes Page 2 (Feasibility Reports - MSA Streets, Continued) roadway would be located. They would also move the steep grade from its present location at Andover Boulevard to tile south and provide a landing area at the intersection. l6lst Avenue from County Road 9 to Tulip, Project No. 82-6 - Mr. Cook stated the recommendatlon is to construct a rural section even though it would be more expensive because of the rural nature of the area. Approximately 50 trees will have to be removed with a rural section, but a buffer of trees would still remain along the southern side of the roadway. They would also realign l6lst at the intersection of County Road 9 to match County Road 20 east of Round Lake Boulevard. There is a drainage problem near Tulip; however, it is recommended with a rural section to leave the drainage as is since most of it would percolate into the soil. If an urban section is constructed, they would be looking at swale drainage rather than storm sewers. The cost of a rural section is estimated to be $152,020. Council discussion was then on prioritizing the construction of the projects realizing there are not enough funds to do all four projects in one year. Council- man Lachinski suggested holding public hearings for all four projects for public input prior to making the decisions as to which ones would be done this year. Others didn't want to bring the people in who have expectations of having their road improved only to have it turned down because of lack of funds. Councilman Orttel hoped the Council's intent would be to construct whatever projects can be done this year with the funds available and to do the remainder next year. Mr. Schrantz stated his proposal would be lS7th Avenue, l73rd Lane, Prairie Road, and then 16lst Avenue. l6lst has the least amount of traffic. Discussion also noted if storm sewer costs are involved and are to be assessed, affected residents must be so notified at the time of the public hearing. It was generally felt that such storm sewer assessment would be done on a front footage basis as has normally be done. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, entering a Resolution accepting Feasibility Report and setting Public Hearing for the Improvement of MSA 82-3 lS7th Avenue between Prairie Road and Holly Street NW in the City of Andover as presented with the insertion of the date of the meeting June 10, 7:30 p.m. (See Resolution R2S-82) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, a Resolution accepting Feasibility Report and setting Public Hearing for the Improvement of MSA 82-5 for Prairie Road between Andover Boulevard and the bridge approach, hearing to be held the 10th Day of June, 1982, at 7:30 p.m. (See Resolution R27-82) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, a Resolution accepting Feasibility Report and setting Public Hearing for the Improvement of MSA 82-4, l73rd Avenue between CSAH No.9 and Co. No. 58 in the City of Andover for the 10th of June, 1982, at 7:30 p.m., subject to approval of the change in classification. (See Resolution R26-82) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that MSAH designated roadways within the City, any ineligible storm water drainage costs on MSAH projects be assessed to the benefitted property owners on the same basis as we always do. DISCUSSION: For the past several years storm water drainage has been assessed either on a front footage basis or a unit basis; and it is intended that that policy would also be used for ineligible costs on MSAH projects. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes Page 3 (Feasibility Reports - MSA Streets, Continued) MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, accepting the Feasibility and setting Public Hearing for l6lst Avenue between CSAH No.9 and Tulip Street. DISCUSSION: Councilman Lachinski wanted to have a backup project in the event one of the other projects would not be approved. Others felt it would not be good policy to ask affected property owners to come in when it is entirely possible the project will not be ordered and that some of those owners attended the last meetings on this matter and did not speak in favor of improving l6lst. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski; NO-Jacobson, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl Motion failed. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, accepting Municipal State Aid Street Improvement Project No. 82-6, l61st Avenue, Tulip Street to Round Lake Boulevard Feasibility Report. (See Resolution R28-82) Motion carried unanimously. FEASIBILITY REPORT - NORTHGLEN II Mark Schumacher of TKDA reviewed the feasibility Report on 1982-2 Northglen II utllity and street improvements, Commission No. 7791. The sanitary sewer construction costs were estimated at $86,670; watermain construction costs of $85,170; storm sewer costs of $41,690; and street construction costs of $77,113, for a total estimated project cost of $377,804, amounting to an assessment of $3,936 per unit. Mr. Schumacher noted that the entire development being proposed would be able to be serviced by the Coon Rapids Interceptor sanitary sewer lines. Mr. Schumacher explained they are providing for future interconnection with the property to the south, but no oversizing is being done in the project. Also the water system is being looped from l39th Circle back down to where l39th meets Co. Rd. 9. It is not shown on the map, but that has been discussed with the developer and will be done. John Peterson, Good Value Homes - stated the Metropolitan Council has told them they would not get approval for the construction of the sanitary sewer facilities until the City's Comprehensive Plan is approved. They are hoping these things will be done as soon as possible. There was then a very lengthy discussion on Good Value Home's request to construct surmountable curb and gutters in the project. Mr. Schumacher stated the curb is recommended because of the high density and the larger number of driveway openings coming off of a short span. Such a curb would have a four-inch curb instead of a six-inch curb, and a l2-inch gutter rather than a l6-inch gutter. The total curb width is different than the City's B6l8 standard. Mayor Windschitl was opposed to the surmountable curb, feeling such curbs create more of a problem in terms of maintenance (street sweeping, snow plowing, etc.), that such curbs do not present the completed image as does the B618 curb, and that the City has spent a great deal of time in developing the existing street standards which should not just be changed without further investigation. Council- man Jacobson felt the curb would encourage parking off the street and onto the lawns. Mr. Peterson - explained they have successfully used this type of curb in other projects. They feel it is overbuilding to require B618 curb, particularly in a subdivision with these road widths and drainage problems. One of the things that has been suggested is to use the stand-up type curb on the corners to prevent cutting across. The cost difference is about $5,000 on the project. Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes Page 4 (Feasibility Report - Northglen II, Continued) Councilman Orttel felt the surmountable curb was more attractive and agreed it would be better with all the driveway cuts. Mr. Schrantz stated the problem for maintenance is the bituminous curb. Frank Stone, Public Works, also stated that a cement curb is preferable to bituminous for maintenance. He stated the sur- mountable curbs would not present a maintenance problem. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that the City Council authorize the use of curb design Number BP4l2 in the 1982-2 Northglen II utility street improvement project because of the high density of driveways and relative quality of maintenance DISCUSSION: was on the entire width of the roadway between the proposed curb and the City's standard. With the proposed surmountable type curb and gutter, the overall roadway would be 16 inches narrower--one-foot less bituminous, four inches less gutter. Mayor Windschitl and Councilman Lachinski argued a wider street is needed in the high-density area and were concerned with the narrower width being proposed. Councilman Peach noted the motion does not deal with the street standard but only addresses the different curb design. Councilman Lachinski stated he didn't have any problem with the curb, only the driving width. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach; NO-Jacobson, Windschitl Motion carried. Discussion returned to the street width. Mr. Schrantz ,stated he felt a 32-foot street width wasn't necessary and he doesn't believe l~-inches of bituminous is adequate when concrete curb and gutter is installed. So that is why he recommended the width of 32 feet back-to-back with two inches of bituminous. Mayor Windschitl, Councilman Jacobson, and Councilman Lachinski again expressed concern over changing a street standard this evening. They did not feel they had adequate enough information to make a decision to change the width at this time. Councilman Jacobson stated he is not necessarily opposed to making a change in the road standards but felt it should be done independent from any development. Councilmen Orttel and Peach felt the trade-off of a slightly narrower street but the increase to two-inch bituminous mat would be in the City's favor and should be allowed. MOTION by Peach the Council approve the road plan as proposed in the feasibility report by TKDA on Drawning No. 22. Motion dies for lack of a Second. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Street Section sample attached to the feasibility report for the Northglen utility and street improvement project be designated as the street standard for the project. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Orttel, Peach; NO-Jacobson, Lachinski, Windschitl Motion failed. With no further motions to change the road standard, the road design for Northglen II would be the City's urban street permanent section width, l~ inches of bituminous, but that the surmountable type curb and gutter may be used. It was suggested the design shown on Drawing No. 22 be bid as an alternate. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, enter a Resolution accepting a Feasibility Report except for the street section, waiving the public hearing for bituminous, sanitary sewer, public water, streets, storm sewers for the Northglen Second Addition, No. 82-2, and order preparation of the final plans and specifications as presented to the Council. AMENDMENT TO MOTION by Lachinski to allow for potential typical changes that may be approved by the City between now and bid award date. Motion dies for lack of a Second. Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes Page 5 (Feasibility Report - Northglen II, Continued) Councilman Jacobson ADDED TO MOTION: to allow as an alternate to the developer and the engineers in the bidding form the alternative of a road as presented at the public hearing tonight, a copy of which is attached to the back of the Feasibility Report. Second Still Stands. (See Resolution R29-82) Motion carried unanimously. Recess at 9:47; reconvene at 10:04 p.m. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that the Council direct the City Clerk to prepare a Resolution adopting the amendments to the Andover Comprehensive Plan for submission to the Metropolitan Council and authorize the Mayor to sign the Resolution. (See Resolution R30-82) VOTE ON MOT! ON : YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; NO-Peach Motion carried. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, adoption of the amendments to the Andover Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan originally dated June, 1976, and updated May 18, 1982, Items No. 1 through 6 and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign such documents as necessary to send the Sewer Plan to the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission for their review and approval and insertion into our Comprehensive Plan. (See Resolution R3l-82) VOTE ON MOT! ON: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; NO-Peach Mot i on carried. Councilman Peach - My objections are to the Metro Council attempting to rezone our City. I think it is inappropriate according to the Land Planning Act, and that is exactly what they are trying to do. REIMBURSEMENT - PROJECT CDSTS Mr. Schrantz reviewed his report of Miscellaneous Repairs to Improvement Projects, a list of recommended repairs on past improvement projects. He also stated there is money in the Special Funds portion of the budget. Discussi,on/ðRSthe problem at 15931 Vintage Street, Project 79-3. Mr. Schrantz showed a picture of the problem. Counci 1 felt that the problem of water ponding in driveways exists in many other areas of the City as well and that patching this one would be setting a precedent. Council agreed not to correct this problem. Mr. Schrantz stated the problem on l72nd is still covered under warranty. The problem in Project 80-4, 3714 l74th, is also under warranty. And Mr. Schrantz suggested talking with TKDA about the problem on Project 80-4 of the outfall storm drainage into the Rum River at 17400 Blackfoot Street for a solution. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Council approve up to $4,000 from Special Projects Account for the solving of miscellaneous repairs and improvement projects problems presented by the City Engineer, and note 79-3, water ponding in driveway, is not being included. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE/LLOYD REIMANN d'Arcy Bosell, Planning and Zoning Chairman, reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial of the request to construct an addition to the existing building closer than the required ten feet from the property line. Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes P~e 6 (Variance/Lloyd Reimann, Continued) Lloyd Reimann, 2813 l42nd Avenue - explained the addition is 36xSO feet and is approximately 75 percent completed. He explained the location of the stakes in the ground; and when they originally measured for the placement of the addition, it was felt they would be 12 feet from the property line. It has since been dis- covered that a wrong stake was used in the measuring and they are actually only 1.5 feet from the property line. Mr. Reimann showed the lot line in relation to the county road and why the mistake was originally made. He stated he has also talked with the adjacent property owner, to the City Engineer, and to the Building Inspector as to the impact this variance would have on the adjacent property owner. All are now in agreement that it would have no adverse impact if a fire wall is installed in the building. Dennis Bjornj~eld, Stacy, MN - property owner to the west - is basically in agreement. H1S concern was further constraints on their ability to build. Since Reimanns are close to the property line, does he have assurance that they will not have to build further away or provide additional fire walls, etc. Fire Chief Frank Stone - stated he would have to check the codes as to whether or not a buildlng on Mr. Bjornjgeld's property would need a fire wall. With access now being provided in the entire area, Chief Stone felt there is adequate fire protection even if this variance is allowed. Dave Almgren, Building Inspector - explained the building occupancy listed for Mr. Reimann's buildlng would require a minimum of one-hour fire wall in relationship to the property line, and the most restrictive would be a four-hour fire wall. The building on the adjoining property could still be built with the 10-foot setback requirement, but the fire wall would depend on the type of building and its occupancy. The adjoining property owner mayor may not be required to install a fire wall depending on the type of building occupancy as it relates to his lot line. The location of Mr. Reimann's building, as it relates to fire codes, has no impact on Mr. Bjornjgeld's property. If a variance is approved, Mr. Almgren stated that Mr. Reimann would have to provide a one-hour fire wall, which is required in this type of building in relationship to his lot line without any openings. Mr. Bjornjgeld was then asked if he felt it is reasonable to have a building 1.5 feet from his property line. Mr. Bjornjgeld stated their concern is how it impacts his development. If they will not have to place their building 20 feet from the lot line and will have assurances of that, then they are not really adversely affected. Attorney Hawkins stated the building code calls for ten feet from the property line, and there is nothing in the ordinance that would change that because of the location of a building on adjoining property. Discussion was also on the question of the two parcels shown on the sketch as a lot split has never been approved by the City. Mr. Almgren explained the showing of Parcels A and B are for description purposes only. Documents show that when Mr. Allen originally purchased the property and when he sold it, it was done so as a five-acre parcel. The five-acre lot is legally described by the two parcels. The Clerk noted the variance would be granted to the entire S.S2-acre parcel. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that the City Council approve a variance being requested to Mr. Lloyd Reimann for the property located at 3121 l6lst Avenue NW, the parcel being 5.52 acres in size, allowing Mr. Reimann to build the building closer than the required lO-foot setback from the sideyard as shown in the attached lot survey by Caine and O'Malley; noting that the building was under construction and the error was not caught until the current point of construction and that it is the City's determination that this does not adversely affect the setback requirements Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 ~ Minutes Page 7 (Variance/Lloyd Reimann, Continued) (Motion by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, Continued) of the property to the west, and that the property owner "0 the west has indicated that this being the case, that he has no objecti~n to the variance; also note. that the Reimann building will be required to build a one-hour firewall to provide adequate fire protection to the neighboring parcel. (See Resolution R32-82) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson Motion carried. DATE/PUBLIC HEARING - JUNKYARDS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we have a Special City Council Meeting on May 27 following the end of the Board of Review to discuss the matter of the junkyards within the City of Andover and to ascertain what action the Council intends to take. Motion carried unanimously. REZONING/LLOYD REIMANN It was noted the ordinance allows a 30-day extension on the rezoning if the applicant so requests. Mr. Reimann asked that the rezoning request be extended. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that pursuant to the request of the petltioner, that the Lloyd Reimann rezoning be referred back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further action, and that the Planning Commission would have it back to the City Council before the end of 30 days from May 18. Motion carried unanimously. VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT REPORT Bill Bush, Fire Fighter, explained the Personnel Committee of the Department has declded lt would be agreeable to allow Ron Keller to attend only training drills for the last six months of this year, after which he would come,back to the Department under a year's probation. Discussion was on the question of whether or not someone can legally be brought back as a probationary member after a year's suspension from the Department. No further action was taken on the matter pending the Attorney's opinion of that question. Chief Stone stated they have reviewed fire protection in the Hughes Industrial area and are in agreement with the Council action requiring the road easement for a fire lane through the Westview Industrial Park (See Minutes of the May 4, 1982, City Council Meeting). PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION - KELSEY PARK ACQUISITION (Because some of the land involved is owned by Mayor Windschitl, he stepped down to the audience for this portion of the meeting. Acting Mayor Orttel chaired the meeting.) Wes Mand, Park and Recreation Commissioner - stated the grant application has received preliminary approval. The City can get $43,550 in State money for the acquisition of Kelsey Park. The appraised value of the land is estimated at $107,920. They would also spread the City's share of the purchase over at least three years, and possibly up to five years. However, he did not know in what manner the City's share could be spread over that time period. Discussion was on what course of action should be taken at this time. It was felt that negotiations could begin with the landowners prior to filing a final grant application. Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes Page 8 (Park and Recreation Commission - Kelsey Park Acquisiton, Continued) MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the City Attorney and Park Board Chairman to negotiate with Programmed Lands for the purchase of Kelsey Park property. DISCUSSION: was that the Park Board Chairman would be sharing information with the City Attorney, although Mr. Hawkins would do the actual negotiations. Mr. Hawkins also thought that the Statutes require any purchase of ·land from a Councilmember or Mayor to go through eminent domain proceedings, at least to the step of the first court-appointed commissioners hearing. He wi 11 review the Statutes further on this matter. Motion carried on a 4-Yes vote, with Mayor Windschitl ~ot voting. (Mayor Windschitl again chaired the meeting.) PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION - CROOKED LAKE BOAT LANDING Commissioner Mand reviewed the list of equipment the Commission is recommending to be purchased and placed in the Crooked Lake Boat Landing park. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we direct the City Engineer to prepare specifications for a shelter with steel posts covering the existing slab on the boat ramp site. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the Park Commission to purchase two BBQ grills at $100 each, three concrete picnic tables for a cost up to $400 each for the Crooked Lake Boat Landing site, plus the grant sign. Motion carried unanimously. It was noted the parking area has been constructed for eight parking places, but at times there are more cars parking on the grass, etc. The City Engineer was directed to either add more posts or a chain across the posts to keep cars in the parking area. It was also suggested the Deputy be asked to tag those vehicles not parking correct ly. EESOLUTION/PRECINCT CHANGES MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, introducing a Resolution dividing the City of Andover into four voting precincts, setting forth boundaries and polling places for each pursuant to State of Minnesota Election Laws, 1982, as prepared. (See Resolution R33-82) Motion carried unanimously. FINAL PLAT EXTENSION/LAKESIDE ESTATES (Mayor Windschitl stepped down to the audience. Acting Mayor Orttel chaired this portion of the meeting.) Mr. Windschitl stated the western portion of lS2nd Lane in LakeRidge is not constructed to the property line. Approximately 20 feet of the road must be built, plus a culvert must also be installed. The City must also decide what to do with the temporary turnaround. Mr. Hawkins stated usually temporary turnaround easements are worded such that they terminate when the road is extended. Mr. Windschitl also asked for a six-month extension rather than for a shorter time period in the event something would prevent the filing of the final plat before that time. This way he would have not have to come back in to ask for another extension. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, that we approve the extension for Lakeside Estates for a period of six months. (See Resolution R34-82) Motion carred on a A-Yes vote, with Mayor Windschitl not voting. (Mayor Windschitl chaired the remainder of the meeting.) Regular City Council Meeting May 18, 1982 - Minutes Page 9 SEWER CLEANING CONTRACT MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we approve up to $800 for the televising of the sewer lines to determine the infiltration area. Motion carried unanimously. SCHRANTZ/PROBATIONARY PERIOD INCREASE MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that the City Council approve Mr. Schrantz for permanent employee having successfully completed six-month probationary period under the terms of the agreement with him when he was hired that his salary be increased by $2,000, with recognition for exceptional performance to date. AMENDMENT TO MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the permanent employee status be effective after Sunday, May 16. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: Carried unanimously. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. PART-TIME HELP EMPLOYEE MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we authorize Pat Lindquist to post an ad and interview for position of part-time office help for the summer not to exceed the amount previously approved. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Jacobson Motion carried. LMC CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE It was agreed that those Councilmembers wishing to attend the LMC Conference will inform the Clerk prior to June 1. EQUIPMENT RENTAL/JOHN DEERE ENDLOADER MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Council authorize an expenditure of up to $1,500 from the Street Maintenance Fund under the Item of Rental, and up to $1,200 out of the Park fund under the Item of Rentals for work done for those respected departments by the 554 Endloader that is being rented, and the Council also authorize other funds up to a total expenditure of $5,000 based on park improvement approved by the Park Board for this same equipment rental. VOTE ON MOTI ON: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson Motion carried. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, approve Claims 4927 through 4958 in the amount of $18,226.99. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:12 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~J- Recording Secretary