Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC May 4, 1982 ~ o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 4, 1982 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Variance/Jerome Gau b. Preliminary Plat/Westview Industrial Park c. Storm Drainage/R. Sonsteby d. Final Plans/Senior Citizens Building e. Mobile Home Construction f. Ordinance No. 8 Amendment/Beauty Salons g. Property Identification Numbers/TKDA h. Bonestroo,Rosene, Anderlik " Inc./Rate Changes 5. Non-Discussion Items a. Resolution/Precinct Changes b. Planning & Zoning Commission Member c. Authorization/Feasibility Report/Northglen II 6. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Staff a. Fire Department/R. Keller b. Staff/Enterprise Fund Budgets c. 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9. Adjournment - -- CITY 01 ANDOVER M E M 0 RAN 0 U M TO: MAVOR A1\Tn rOTTN("TT. COPIES TO: A'J"I'ORNEV, STAFF FROM: CITY CLERK/A. ADMINISTRATOR DATE: APRTI, 7Q, 1 Q¡P REFERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - MAY S. 1982 Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Please add Item No. 4h (B.R.A. Rate Changes) and Item No. Sc (Authorization Feasibility Study/Northglen II) Item No. 4a - Variance/Jerome Gau Mr. Gau is requesting a variance to allow him to place his garage nearer the front lot line than the principle structure; he will not encroach into the required front yard setback. Planning and Zoning Commission is recommending approval of the request. A resolution will be prepared showing Council approval. Item No. 4b - Preliminary Plat/Westview Industrial Park Enclosed is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for approval of the Preliminary Plat. All contingencies referenced in the 4/19/82 recommendation from P&Z have been met and are shown as required on the enclosed drawings, dated 4/29/82. A park dedication fee is to be paid prior to the meeting. Item NO. 4c - Storm Drainage/R. Sonsteby Attached is correspondence from Mrs. Sonsteby covering her allegations that storm water is being discharged onto her property without the benefit of an easement. Jim Schrantz has reviewed the matter with TKDA; his comments are attached. Mrs. Sonsteby would like to discuss this with the City Council prior to proceeding with legal action. Item No. 4d - Final Plans/Senior Citizen Building The Final P&S are scheduled to be delivered by B.R.A. early on Tuesday, so they will be available for your review prior to the meeting. A resolution approving such P&S and directing advertisement for bids will be prepared. Item No. 4e - Mobile Home Requirements With the passage of new legislation providing for the placement of mobile homes on private parcels, the Council feels some problems could arise. This item is on for discussion prior to referral to P&Z. Agenda Information May 4, 1982 Page 2 Item No. 4f - Ordinance No. 8 Amendment/Beauty Salons-Rural Area Attached is a recommendation from Planning & Zoning to allow beauty salons and barber shops in unsewered areas of the City. Also enclosed is a memorandum relative to criteria for issuance of a Special Use Permit; as well as a recommended amendment for Ordinance No. 8 outlining such criteria. I would recommend another subsection, i.e. (k) Lot size, sanitary sewer availability, age/size/maintenance record of existing septic system shall be a determining factor in the issuance of a Special Use Permit. Our primary concern in the non-sewered area has always been that of pollution and forced sanitary sewer service in the rural area, therefore, I would think such a provision would be absolutely necessary. If a Special Use Permit were requested for a beauty shop on a ~ acre or less sized lot in the rural area, where the property now has a 7 or 8 year old very minimum sized septic system (or cesspool system), according to studies, this system is not going to last if any strain at all is put onto it; the question would be--"how many new drain fields will this particular lot support. Inasmuch as the intent of Ordinance No. 32 as far as MWCC's description of REC would be violated in this instance, it could not be used as a reference for allowance of the construction of other facilities in the non-sewered area. Item No. 4g - Property Identification Numbers/TKDA As you no doubt noticed from your tax statement, Anoka County has gone to PIN instead of Plat/Parcel identification. Inasmuch as our assessment record books are not only obsolute as far as these numbers, they (especially the older ones) are becoming very difficult to work with because of numerous lot divisions, assessment splits, etc. ; and as a result, we felt this would be a good time to have them redone. The costs for such work would be taken from the Trust Fund for each proj ect. (This is the Fund made up of 1% of Total Assessment Costs from each project--except 1975-1 and an proportionate amount for the re-doing of the books could be shown as an expense to Sewer Fund A.) A motion is needed to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to enter into an Agreement with TKDA per the attached. Item No. 4h - Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, Inc./Rate Changes Enclosed are the proposed rate increases from B.R.A. A motion is needed for approval. Item No. Sa - Resolution/Precinct Changes Attached is a resolution covering new precincts. My original thought on boundaries was as exhibit "B" attached, however, this would mean that several residents would be driving by one or two polling places just to get to their own precinct polling place; therefore, it was done per the resolution. We do run into a problem with polling places, expecially in the northerly and westerly part of the City, so the precincts as recommended are not divided equally as far as population. Agenda Information May 4, 1982 Page 3 Item No. Sb - Planning and Zoning Commission Member The Planning and Zoning Commission is still short one member since Mr. Lobb's resignation. Does the Council wish to advertise? Item No. Sc - Feasibility Report/Northglen II A motion is needed authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to enter into an Agreement with TKDA to prepare the Feasibility Report for the improvements in the Northglen II Addition at a cost not to exceed $1,000). Good Value Homes, Inc. have deposited the $1,000 with the City. Item No. 6a - Fire Department/R. Keller Mr. Keller has requested time to talk to the City Council relative to his suspension from the Fire Department. Item No. 6b - Staff/Enterprise Budgets You have received copies of the proposed Budgets. They must be reviewed and acted upon by the City Council. Item No. 7 - Approval of Minutes April 20, 1982 , , '- / REMINDER: MAY 18, 1982 MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 8:00 P.M. (School Board Election) ~ o¿ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 4, 1982 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on May 4, 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 Chairperson, d'Arcy Bosell; and others RESIDENT FORUM Rosella Sonsteby, 4151 14lst Avenue NW - stated with all the restrictions of minimum square footages on houses and requiring garages, the young people do not have a chance to own their own homes, stating that's not America any more. She wondered what is being done about that. Mayor Windschitl explained the present requirement is 960 square feet minimum plus a garage. The Planning Commission recently talked about this item. Ms. Sonsteby - also stated there are cars parked on the 33-foot easement west of Round Lake Bouelvard and no one is being tagged for it. Mayor Windschitl stated this will be called to the attention of the City Clerk. David Johnson, 2127 Quinn Drive - had a complaint about a drainage problem, with dralnage coming off the road through his yard. He has just invested a considerable amount of money to redo the yard, which was washed out in today's storm. Council directed Mr. Johnson to talk with the City Engineer on the matter. AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, adoption of the Agenda as published with the addition of 4i, Junkyards; 4j, LakeRidge Road; 4h, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, Inc. ,/Rate Changes; and Sc, Authorization / Feasibility Report/Northglen II. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, to suspend the rules. Motion carried unanlmously. VARIANCE/JEROME GAU Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the variance request of Jerome Gau to place a garage nearer the front lot line than the principle structure. Gerome Gau, 17757 Tulip Street NW - explained there is a ten-inch drop to the side of hlS house, plus three trees would have to be removed to place the garage at the same -setback as his house. He also had pictures for the Council to view of his lot and the proposed location for the new garage. The garage would be 30x36 feet and would be used for storage. It would also match the construction of the primary building. ,There were differing. opinions among the Council as to the intent of this provision in the ordinance. Councilman Peach stated he had some difficulty with this particular requirement of the ordinance as it is rather restrictive, but he felt in this instance the ordinance does not allow it. Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 2 (Variance/Jerome Gau, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that the City Council, City of Andover, disapprove a variance request by Jerome Gau, 17757 Tulip Street NW, to construct an accessory building on his property at the above address closer to the front lot line than the principle structure as set out in Ordinance 8, Section 4.0SF. Council finds no hardship is created due to the topography of the land nor the removal of three trees on the property. (See Resolution R2l-82) DISCUSSION: Councilman Lachinski felt the requirement in the ordinance may have some useful purpose in the smaller lots. But as long as the owner feels it is more desirable to have it set in front of the lot, has a large enough lot that it doesn't damage the neighboring property, and the neighbors are not complaining, he felt it is only reasonable that it is approved. Councilman Peach felt it is reasonable to discuss whether or not the requirement should be enforced on 2~-acre lots; but it presently does apply to large lots, and the Council has to address the ordinance as it exists today. Councilman Orttel stated the P & z did discuss this matter a year or so ago and no changes were made. He felt in this instance the house is 295 feet off the road, and it seems ridiculous that he wouldn't be allowed to use his front property. He also felt the existing ordinance allows enough room to cÒnsider this, in that the Council determines if the blackslope, which requires filling, is a topographical condition that creates a hardship. The ordinance requires that the garage floor be 16 or 18 inches above the street level, which would require a substantial amount of fill in this instance. Plus a one percent slope from the roadway, which would make the garage become unsightly by sticking way out of the ground. He felt the topography conditions exist that would show a hardship on the property. Councilman Jacobson didn't feel three trees was a large number to remove, nor that a 10-inch slope was that significant a change to warrant a variance. He also felt that this requirement should apply to all lots in the City, as there are many 2~- acre lots where structures could be placed in front of the principle building which may not be what the City wants. Mayor Windschitl was concerned if there is no adequate substantiation for approving it, it would be setting a precedent for all other lots in the City. The ordinance as it is has to be addressed at this time. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Lachinski, Orttel Motion carried. PRELIMINARY PLAT/WESTVIEW INDUSTRIAL PARK Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the Westview Industrial Park, noting the plat in its final form should be before the Council. Mr. Schrantz stated the Fire Marshall, the Building Inspector, and he met with the property owners of that entire 40-acre industrial center; however, a representa- tive from this particular plat was not present. There are some concerns of getting access to the entire industrial area, particularly to the back of D & E which is quite close to this area being platted. A fence is being constructed on the eastern edge of Lot 1 in the plat, which would limit the access to the back of D & E for fire fighting purposes. Mr. Schrantz explained the various proposals from the meeting and how it would apply to the plat before the Council. He felt the Fire Department would not go along with the plat as shown, noting the plat is their only tool to react, unless they can get some kind of assurance for an access as shown on drawing No.1. Discussion was on providing fire lanes or adequate access for fire protection. A suggestion was to require fire lanes in designated areas, especially along the eastern edge of Lot 1 in the plat, which would be kept open at the owner's expense. Mr. Dennis Bjornjge1d, 23556 Ko~ella Street NE, Stacy, MN - stated he did not object to provlding adequate access for flre protection. He questioned whether it is pertinent to the preliminary plat. The matter pertains to a lot of property owners in the area coming to a mutual agreement, but he didn't think it should interrupt their platting Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 3 (Preliminary Plat/Westview Industrial Park, Continued) process. Requiring an east-west road easement through their property is basically for the benefit of their neighbors only. There is a blacktop driveway proposed next to J & J Liquor going all the way to the back, which would provide direct access to the back. Why would access also be needed through their proeprty? They are already in the process of erecting a fence about two feet from their property line. He stated there is about 15 feet between the fence and the cabinet shop. Discussion also noted that if easement is required through the plat, it opens it up for public use. After discussion it was also agreed that an easement for drainage purposes must be dedicated and shown on the preliminary plat. Mr. Bjornjgeld stated there is no drainage problem there at this time. Discussion was also on the question of whether or not a service road is required or necessary along county roads. It was noted a letter from the County stated no further access to the county road will be permitted. Discussion was there is some talk of the county putting a divider at that intersection on County Road 9, which would probably require a service road at that time; that a service road should be considered if more intense' development is being planned for the area; that the right of way for a service road should be preserved if such a road will be needed in the future; but that the sewer requirements of 39,000 square feet needed per unit would limit the development of that area, which in turn would prohibit more intense development than what is being planned at this time; and that the state of the art in service roads is to have them run behind the properties. A service road was not required in the plat. Discussion returned to the question of providing fire lanes or requiring road easement to be used for access for emergencies. Mr. Bjorn~åeld stated he is not proposing a solution to the fire control problem, but he dl n't feel it should be made a stipulation of the preliminary plat. He hasn't spoken to anyone on the Fire Department, and he was unable to attend the meeting on this matter with the other property owners in the development. He again stated he felt it is unjustifiable to take their property in easement to provide fire protection for others. With all the property owners involved, he felt they should all work to resolve that problem. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Westview Industrial Park preliminary plat be tabled pending discussions with the developers and the Fire Department. DISCUSSION: It was noted the ordinance requires Council action on the plat prior to May 9. Mr. Bjornjgeld indicated an unwillingness to allow a 30-day extension for acting on the plat. Council discussion was again on methods of providing adequate fire protection in that area. Councilmen Lachinski and Peach WITHDREW the Second and the Motion. MOTION by Jacobson that the City Council, City of Andover, approve the preliminary plat known as Westview Industrial Park being developed by Semina, Inc., legally described as (per P & Z recommendation) for the following reasons: Public hearing was held and there was no opposition; Plat has been reviewed by the City Engineer and his recommendations have been taken into consideration; and reviewed by the Highway Department; and the City Council concurs with the Park Board's recommendation of cash in lieu of land in the amount of $3,800; subject to the attachment to the preliminary plat of the grading plan as of the meeting 4-27-82 as stamped by the City Engineer which shall be incorporated into the final plat; subject to drainage easement for ponding for storm water drainage in the southwest corner of the industrial park to elevation 892. Motion dies for lack of a Second. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, to disapprove the Westview Industrial Park preliminary plat for the following reasons: that the Council does not feel sufficient access for fire protection is being provided and the drainage easement is not indicated for the ponding area. DISCUSSION: Councilman Orttel was not in favor of terminating Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 4 (Preliminary Plat/Westview Industrial Park, Continued) the plat as that would require an immense amount of additional work on the part of the developer. He noted the City has never dealt with the issue of fire lanes before and that that is not a valid reason for denying the plat. Also, he stated that an easement between Lots 1 and 2 would not get the Fire Department any closer to the back of D & E's than without it. Councilman Peach stated he's not certain the easement is necessary either, but he would like the opinion of the Fire Chief and Fire Marshall first. Mr. Schrantz then showed the Council a March 4 memo from the Fire Chief and Fire Marshall as to their suggestions on this plat and of providing fire protection to the area over a 11 . He stated the meeting with the property owners in that area was in response to this memo; however, the response was not as good as they had hoped. Those that were there felt they could work with the fire lane access as shown on No.1. Attorney Hawkins didn't believe fire access lanes could be designated on a plat. It would have to be included either as a road easement or park easement or drainage and utility easement. Councilmen Peach and Lachinski WITHDREW the Second and the Motion. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, approval of the Westview Industrial Park Preliminary Plat contingent upon the following: that the developer provide for a drainage easement for the ponding area on Lot 3 to an approximate elevation 892; and also that the developer provide easement for road purposes between Lot 1 and Lot 2, a 20-foot easement for road purposes that would extend along that lot line to the back of Lot 2, the easement to be called a road, utility, and drainage easement. (See Resolution R22-82) DISCUSSION: was concern that the City is accepting an unbuilt roadway, which is something that has not been done in the past. What the City really wants is a fire lane, which is a private access for fire purposes. It was suggested it be researched what other cities are doing for fire lanes. And if it is found that this easement is not needed, it could be vacated. The Attorney advised the City could take an easement apart from the plat by separate document and not dedicate it but specifically describe the purpose. Council agreed if the question of fire protection in the area is determined prior to the filing of the final plat and this easement is not needed, the easement could be vacated. Motion carried unanimously. STORM DRAINAGE/R. SONSTEBY Rosella Sonsteby presented the Council copies of a letter dated May 4, 1982, from her, which she then read for the record indicating legal action would be taken against the City if the problems she listed relating to storm water drainage on her property are not resolved. John Peterson of Good Value Homes stated the runoff from the proposed Northglen II plat wlll be handled on their own property. The drainage from Northglen I also runs into the existing pond in Northglen II. Ms. Sonsteby indicated she had not seen the Northglen II plat. John Davidson of TKDA stated the birm along the property line of Good Value and Ms. Sonsteby was designed to hold the drainage from both Northglen I and II developments, and it should have no significant impact on the 100-year flood plain in this area. He also stated because Ms. Sonsteby has been very cooperative throughout the entire Southwest project, he felt this should be an area that is negotiated with the cooperation of the City and Ms. Sonsteby. He felt once the real facts are understood there wouldn't be a case to start with. The entire project was undertaken recognizing they were deviating from the water management plan developed in 1978 because of the flat terrain, diverting it to controlled drainage structures. All of the water is being dealt with on property owned privately by those individuals who are doing the development. He asked the Council to grant approval to meet with Ms. Sonsteby to explain the details of the design as it relates to the total project and hopefully to resolve this. Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 5 (Storm Drainge/Sonsteby, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we authorize the City Engineer, the City Attorney, the firm of TKDA to meet with Mrs. Rosella Sonsteby concerning her letter to the City Council dated May 4, 1982, and at the same meeting request that a representative from the Anoka County Highway Department be there, and also a representative from Northglen attend the meeting to discuss it and to see if there can be some reasonable resolution to the problems Mrs. Sonsteby brings out. Motion carried unanimously. Recess at 9:06; reconvene at 9:13 p.m. FINAL PLANS/SENIOR CITIZENS BUILDING Brad Lemberg of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates stated the City will be recelvlng approximately $130,000 in CDBG grants, and it is estimated the building will cost $120,000. But they are putting in several alternates for finishing the building which would increase the costs. He suggested advertising for bids beginning this week and opening the bids at 2 p.m. on Thursday, June 3. Mr. Lemberg then presented and reviewed an April 30, 1982, letter from Whitcomb and Moravek, Inc., on cost est imates for different heating systems. Councilman Jacobson stated with an off-peak electric storage unit for approximately the same price the heating costs would be well under oil or propane costs. The off-peak rates apply only to a special heat-storage furance and not a radiation system. It would have to be placed on the floor rather than on the roof. Council suggested the off-peak electric be investigated; and if it proved to be the most economical, that would be put in the plans and specs. Mr. Lemberg stated that would be put in as an alternate. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Plans and Specifications and authorize bids to be taken for the Senior Citizen Center building, and note that we would wanþ e~ctric off-peak storage heating bid as an alternate. Motion carried unanimously.' 7 MOBILE HOME CONSTRUCTION Attorney Hawkins recommended the Planning Commission immediately begin to propose width and foundation requirements on structures in areas they do not want mobile and manu- factured homes so the City can comply with the State Statute. Those homes are allowed in certain districts of the City at this time, but criteria should be set up for those districts where houses are built in conformance with the Uniform Building Code, for another district of mixed manufactured homes and regular housing, and for another district that wouldn't meet any of those criteria which would be only for mobile homes. Mayor Windschitl suggested this item be sent to the Planning Commission, and to authorize Chairman Bosell, the Building Inspector, and the City Attorney to meet prior to the Commission discussing the item so that by the meeting Chairman Bosell will be versed as to what can or cannot be done. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, to so move. Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE NO.8 AMENDMENT/BEAUTY SALONS Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt the Ordinance No.8 Amendment to allow beauty salons and barber shops as home occupations in the unsewered areas of the City, plus a recommendation setting up criteria for issuance of a Special Use Permit. The Commission learned from the PCA that all of the things Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 6 (Ordinance No.8 Amendment/Beauty Salons, Continued) used by such businesses are biodegradable and non-pollutant items and are not harmful to the ground. Council discussion was on the criteria for granting special use permits for all beauty salons and barber shops in the City. The Attorney also advised that the recommendat i on that "condi t ions of the Speci a 1 Use Permit sha 11 be on file with the title at the County" be stricken from the criteria, feeling it would be creating a lot of extra work using the county records for zoning decisions. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, An Ordinance amending Ordinance No.8, known as the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Andover. The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains: Ordinance 8 is amended as follows: Section 5.03 B. Criteria for Granting Special Use Permits 1. In-home beauty salons and barber shops shall be subject to the following: a. one-chair salon/shop only b. the hours of operation shall be approved by the City Council c. parking requirements as set out in Ordinance 8, Section 8.08 d. the salon/shop must comply with the State Cosmetology Board requirements or the State Barber Board requirements e. in non-sewered areas, the septic system must be in compliance with Ordinance #37. A beauty shop/barber shop shall be considered equivalent to one bedroom in terms of usage for use under Ordinance #37 f. the Special Use Permit shall be subject to an annual review g. the beauty/barber shop must be owner-occupied h. upon sale of the premises, termination of the Special Use Permit shall occur i. drawings detailing the salon/shop shall be submitted at the time of request of the Special Use Permit j. in non-sewered areas, an area of 39,000 square feet minimum lot size required k. in non-sewered areas, the septic system shall be inspected yearly before Special Use Permit review Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, an Ordinance amending Ordinance 8, adopted the 21st Day of January, 1971, and Ordinance No. 8M, adopted September 1, 1981, known as the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Andover as presented, which allows in residential districts beauty shops and barber shops by special use. Motion carried unanimously. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS/TKDA MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, to table the proposal on updating assessment rolls to PIN numbers to the next regularly scheduled meeting so that the City Clerk can provide the City Council with information as to the specific benefit to be derived by making the conversion and at least information as to what other cities have made similiar conversions. Motion carried unanimously. -., Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 7 AUTHORIZATION / FEASIBILITY REPORT /NORTHGLEN II MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to enter into an agreement with TKDA for the preparation of the feasibility report for the public improvements in the Northglen II Addition at a cost not to exceed $1,000; change in Item 4a: Payment for Part I, "Plans Phase" shall not exceed an amoLU1t determined in accordance with the attached curve. Motion carried unanimously. Þ -;J-¡& BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK, INC./RATE CHANGES Council noted it would be helpful to compare the existing rates with the proposed rate increase. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we move Agenda Item 4h to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion carried unanimously. JUNKYARDS Council noted they did not yet have a report of the deficiences of each of the junkyards as was observed at the May 1 special meeting. They wanted this documentation prior to public hearings to revoke licenses. MDTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, to direct the City Clerk and Attorney to prepare documentation of nonconformance of the junkyards for the Council's review at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion carried unanimously. LAKE RIDGE STUB ROAD (Because Mayor Windschitl is affected by the decisions made on this matter, he stepped down to the audience. Acting Mayor Orttel conducted this portion of the meeting.) Jerry Windschitl - explained when the road was required in Lakeside, the impression was left that the City would build the stub portion of the street in the LakeRidge plat, but there is no specific motion on it. His contractors to construct the roads through Lakeside will begin work around next week, and authorization is necessary if the City is wanting to have his contractors complete that stub street. A culvert, some fill, Class 5, and blacktop is needed for that stub street. Council discussion noted it appears to have been an oversight on the part of the ,City that the developer of LakeRidge was not required to complete that stub road to the property line and that it amounts to approximately 100 feet of road at roughly $25 per foot. The developer of LakeRidge should have been required to put in the base road of that street, though it was recognized the City has no authority to require him to do so at this time. It was also suggested that if the City constructed that portion of the road, it should be assessed to the benefitted property owners; although that would require holding public hearings, etc. Another suggestion was to ask the developer of LakeRidge to construct the base road and the City would then either pay for or assess the blacktopping of it. Discussion then was on what has been done in the past and on what course of action should be taken at this time. It was felt that the least expensive method would be to have Mr. Windschitl's contractor do the stub street in LakeRidge, with Mr. Schrantz obtaining a cost estimate from the contractor. It was also suggested that Mr. Schrantz contact the developer of LakeRidge explaining the oversight on the City's part and asking him to contribute to the cost of constructing the base road of the stub street, which was the street standard at the time the plat was finalized. Another suggestion was to have Mr. Windschitl, the developer of LakeRidge, and Mr. Schrantz meet to work out an agreement. Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 8 (LakeRidge Stub Road, Continued) MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that the City Engineer be authorized to sit down with Mr. Windschitl and Mr. Carlson and come back with a proposal for providing this road. DISCUSSION: It was felt if an agreement cannot be reached at that meeti~g, the only other alternative would be to begin the 429 assessment procedure for the construction of the stub street. It was debated as to whether or not the 429 procedure should be started this evening, it finally being agreed that if an agreement cannot be reached, a special Council meeting could be called for next week to take whatever other action is needed. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach; NOT VOTING-Windschitl as he . is directly affected by the project. Motion carried. (Mayor Windschitl chaired the remainder of the meeting.) RESOLUTION/PRECINCT CHANGES It was questioned why four precincts are needed and whether additional costs would be associated with the change. There was also some concern on the boundary lines being proposed, feeling there may be some confusion in following them. It was felt this should be discussed in more detail with the City Clerk. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, to table this matter until the next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that we advertise for the position on the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. FIRE DEPARTMENT/R. KELLER Mayor Windschitl read a letter given to him by Mr. Keller from Rich Nowariak of the Andover A1Anon Society indicating Mr. Keller's active participation in A1Anon and AA meetings since February, 1982. Ron Keller - stated he has been trying and he misses the Fire Department. He asked for an early suspension to get back on the Department. Fire Department members have told him he must come before the Council for any change. Councilman Peach stated he would exempt himself from voting on the issue; but he would state the Chief's opinion as it was stated to him. The Chief's opinion is that no change should be made at this time. Council discussion was on past action on the issue, questioning the feeling of the Fire Department on the issue at this time. Would the Department consider allowing Mr. Keller to return to the Department for training only in light of the effort he has appeared to make to control drinking? Suggestions were made to receive input from the Fire Department relative to attendance of training sessions while on suspension and on the opinion of the Department on Mr. Keller's request. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we request the Fire Department to discuss the matter of the suspension of Ron Keller. Mr. Keller has appeared before the City Council requesting a change in his status. The Council can consider keeping the suspension as passed, allowing Mr. Keller to return for training purposes only, or revoking the suspension entirely. The Council requests the Fire Department to give its opinion on these three options and/or any other that the Fire Department may consider to be valid in this case. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; PRESENT-Peach as he is a member of the Fire Department, which may present a conflict. Motion carried. Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 9 (Fire Department/R. Keller, Continued) MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, asking the Fire Department to consider modification to the Fire Department By-Laws relative to a suspended fire fighter attending training drills. Motion carried unanimously. STAFF/ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we move Item 6b, Enterprise Funds, to the next regular City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Council discussion with Chariman Bosell and Mr. Schrantz was on the need to address alleys or fire lanes in the ordinance. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Fire Department work together to develop a procedure for including the Fire Department in platting and developing land in the City, commercial, industrial, and plats. Motion carried unanimously. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, directing the City Clerk to prepare a letter of commendation to Theresa Helmstetter thanking her for the excellent job that she did on the Crooked Lake Boat Landing access project. Motion carriWunanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 20, 1982: Correct as written. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we approve the Meeting Minutes of April 20, 1982, as presented. Motion carried unanimously. APPRDVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we approve Checks 4903 through 4926, excluding 4903 which is void and 4906 which is void, and Check Number 4870 in the amount of $187.10, for total amount of $7,195.33. Motion carried unanimously MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, approval of Check 4298 in the amount of $510.43; Check 4295 in the amount of $515.83; Check Number 4299 in the amount of $299.05; Check Number 4296 in the amount of $293.65; and Check Number 4285 for $304.11. Motion carried unanimously. ENGINEERING REPORT Mr. Schrantz reported that the breaks on the 1970 were not working well when they were sweeping the streets. He received a quote to have them repaired, took the truck for repairs, and has since been told that a mistake was made in looking in the book and that the cost would be much more. Plus other work needs to be done on the truck. Council agreed to pay only up to the amount originally quoted for the repair. Mr. Schrantz also stated that Glen Cook of BRA has stated they can do the feasibility reports on the four projects designated at the April 27 special meeting for a cost of $850 each. Council felt that three of the roads already have had feasibility studies done on them and it should' cost much to update. Mr. Schrantz then presented a proposed Improvement Project process, a five-step process in which one of the first steps would be that he would meet with the residents in the neighborhood at a neighborhood meeting to discuss costs, etc., prior to a petition - -' Regular City Council Meeting May 4, 1982 - Minutes Page 10 (Engineering Report, Continued) being signed by the neighborhood. Council discussed the pros and cons of the neighborhood meetings, but generally had no problem with them if Mr. Schrantz wanted to try it. Discussion returned to the MSAH projects. Mr. Schrantz was asked to look at the existing feasibility studies for the three roads and to do a feasibility study for lS7th Avenue. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ".- r I ~ \ ,-:"L .I\ll"~_'--\ , ' . - Marcella A. Peach -- Recording Secretary - - ---