Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC February 15, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 15, 1983 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3 . Agenda Approval 4. Assessment Hearing - Hanson Boulevard/CR 116 to CSAH 16 5. Discussion Items a. Variance/C. Christensen b. variance/To Christensen c. Landfill Report/Discussion d. e. 6. Non-Discussion Items a. Junkyard License-Wilber's b. Resolution-Metro Council HRA c. Ordinance Amendment/Parking d. 7. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Staff 8. Approval of Minutes 9 . Approval of Claims 10. Adjournment CITY 01 ANDOVER MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL ATTORNEY, STAFF / COPIES TO: / - FROM: CITY CLERK/A. ADMIN1STRATO , - FEBRUARY 11, 1983 _L DATE: REFERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - FEBRUARY 15, 1983 Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Item No. 4 - Assessment Hearing - Hanson Boulevard/C.R. 116 to CSAH 16 Notices have been sent to all the affected property owners. Attached is a resolution covering the adoption of the assessment roll. Item No. Sa - Variance/C. Christensen Mr. Christensen is requesting a variance to allow him to construct a home nearer the high water mark than allowed by Ordinance No.52. You will note Mr. Christensen has contacted the DNR and they are indicating not having a problem with such a variance. Attached is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for approval, along with a resolution which I have prepared. Item No. 5b - Variance/To Christensen Mr. Christensen is requesting a variance to allow him to move lot lines to allow him to make his lot more symetrical. Note: this is the lot for which a variance was granted in 1981; the variance was needed at that time because the home had been constructed in violation of the ordinance as far as location on the lot and was within the required sideyard set-back. It was for this reason, the lot lines became very irregular in order to compensate the error. Attached is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for approval. I have also prepared a resolution, citing the P&Z action. Item No. 5c - Landfill Report This item is on the agenda for an up-date on action to-date by City, County and PCA people. I am in the process of preparing a recap of all correspondence and meetings between November, 1982 and present. Agenda Information February 15, 1983 Page 2 Item No. 6a - Junkyard License-Wilber's An application has been received and their Insurance Agent has informed me that they do have active insurance and bond, however, as yet I have not received the certificates for either. Both expired on January 1, 1983. If this is not received by Tuesday, the license renewal should now be acted upon. If it is, the license can be approved subject to a review on or before June 1 , 1983 for ordinance compliance. Item No. 6b - Resolution/Metropolitan Council HRA Attached is correspondence and a sample resolution covering participation by the City in the rental rehab, Section 8 Program offered by the HRA. We have authorized Metropolitan Council to administrate this program for our City, inasmuch as we do not have the staff to handle it. Item No. 6c - Ordinance Amendment/Parking As most of you are aware, we have been having considerable problems with semi truck/trailers parking on City streets. Our present Parking Ordinance prohibits parking between the hours of 1:00 A.M. and 6: 00 A.M., however, the problems are also present during day-time hours when the vehicles are parked there all day and part of the night. Our deputy goes off-duty at 3:00A.M., so more times than not, he is not able to even check the area before he leaves. Attached is a recommended amendment for Ordinance No. 33, which would prohibit the parking of vehicles of over 24 ' in length or lT of weight from parking on City streets. Item No. 7a - Volunteer Fire Department The Fire Chief will be present to announce the results of the recent election and request Council confirmation on those elected by the Department. Item No. 8 - Approval of Minutes January 18, February 1, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 15, 1983 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on February 15, 1983, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilman absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, James Schrantz; Planning and Zoning Chairperson, d'Arcy Bosell; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; and others. RESIDENT FORUM Carroll Abbott, 2917 142nd Lane - stated several meetings ago he appeared before the Council discussing tbe:snowmobile problem in Green Acres. He didn't know what the City had done, but since then there has been very little snowmobile traffic; and he thanked the Council. AGENDA APPROVAL It was asked that the Senior Citizen Center Discussion be placed on the Agenda as Item 5d. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carr1ed unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, to suspend the rules. Motion carried unan1mously. ASSESSMENT HEARING - HANSON BOULEVARD/CR 116 TO CSAH 16 Mayor Windschtil read into the record a letter from Mr. Melvin Roth objecting to the assessment on Parcels 9000, 10, and 3600, and a letter from Mr. Walter J. Vosika stating why he is against the road and land benefit assessment. The Mayor also noted if anyone is wishing to contest the assessment, the City must receive written objection this evening. Mr. Vosika was asked if he is intending to contest the assessment. Mr. Vosika stated he talked with the County Attorney, who advised him to write down his grievances. His own attorney was not familiar with these procedures. Mayor Windschitl explained the Hearing is for the assessment of the right-of-way acquisition for that extension of Hanson Boulevard and explained the assessment policy for MSA roads and the deferment policy for unimproved land. The only objections raised were from Mr. Roth, representing Parcels 9000, 10, and 3600 with a total assessment of $26,880 out of the $38,000 total assessment, and from Mr. Vosika. Councilman Lachinski raised the question of whether or not the assessment would be deferred on the landfill parcel if it were required to access off Hanson Boulevard. The Attorney was asked to review the assessment policy and ~ake a recommenda- tion later in the meeting. Walter Vosika, 1414 Bunker Lake Boulevard - stated other cities are new to using MSA funds and that 1n Anoka they use such funds for fixing streets, landscaping, lighting, and sidewalks. He didn't believe it was ever intended to be used for taking acreage and then assessing the costs back. That just forces foreclosures. A person cannot even get a loan for anything if there is a large assessment against the property. He also related an incident of a woman in Champlin who had her assessment reduced, feeling the whole question of using and assessing MSA funds is still up in the air. Mayor Windschitl explained the use of MSA funds has been around for many years, not something Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 (Assessment Hearing - Hanson Bou1evard/CR 116 to CSAH 16, Continued) new. Mr. Vosika was paid for his land based on an appraised value. The City Council is not going to get in the position of subsidizing the development of land for developers' purposes. City tax money and MSA funds were used for acquiring the right of way for this proj ect. He stated Mr. Vosika receives a benefit from the road, as a landlocked piece of property now has a road in front of it. Mr. Vosika - felt there was a better location for the road. Mayor Windschitl stated the location was selected in a County Improvement Plan in the early 1970s, and asked that Mr. Vosika address questions specifically against his property. Previously Mr. Vosika questioned the assessment against the lowland, and the City Engineer removed that acreage from the assessment. The Mayor asked'if there were any other specific objections. Mr. Vosika - stated the Engineer removed approximately 3\ acres. But he didn't know if the area was removed that he had a pond blasted for his cattle, which has since spread out to cover a large area and is as much as six feet deep in areas. Mr. Schrantz stated he used the Anoka County soils map to determine what lowland would be removed from the assessment. He didn't look at the pond. Mr. Roth - asked for a clarification of the deferred assessment. Mayor Windschit1 briefly explained the development of the assessment policy and the deferment policy for undeveloped property. Mr. Vosika - asked if the Council was going to do anything about any of the items he ment10ned in his letter. Mayor Windschitl explained the purpose of the Hearing is to determine the adequacy of the assessment. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution adopting the Assessment tor the Improvement of Project No. 82-16, Hanson Boulevard between County Highway No. 116 and CSAH No. 16 as prepared with the change in the third paragraph, the interest rate shall read 8 percent, and should be affixed to the roll as presented this evening for a total amount of $38,941. (See Resolution R008-83) Motion carried unanimously. When discussing the proposed resolution providing for the deferment of the special assessment in the project, it was agreed to the following changes: The Clerk suggested changing the third paragraph to: "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby defer the special assessments... " The last paragraph, "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that app 1 i cat i on for such deferment must be made by the property owner..." wou ld be deleted entirely. The Attorney suggested adding a paragraph: "FURTHER RESOLVE that the City Clerk would file a certificate with the Anoka County Recorder as provided by M.S. 429.061 pertaining to legal descriptions of the affected properties and the amount deferred." It was also the Attorney's opinion that there would be no deferment on the landfill parce 1 i tse lf . The policy provides that construction or improvements are defined as activity upon the property which requires a permit from any City, County, State or Federal Agency; and there is a permit required on this parcel. If there is activity on the property, the assessment would not be deferred. Mr. Roth was asked if he intends to reopen the landfill. Mr. Roth stated the County has suspended the license and there is no activity there using the roadway extension of Hanson Boulevard onto the site. He asked on any of the parcels, if access is used from the road onto the parcel, then the assessment would kick in. Attorney Hawkins stated that is not correct. The policy provides that any improvement on the parcels triggers the payment of the assessment, and the improvement is defined by the need for a permit. There is activity and a permit on the landfill parcel; therefore, there would be no deferral on that parcel. That Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 (Assessment Hearing - Hanson Boulevard/CR 116 to CSAH 16, Continued) assessment would be paid in five equal installments at eight percent interest, first payment due in 1984. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, introducing a Resolution providing for the deferment of special assessments against undeveloped property pursuant to M.S. 429.061, Subdivision 2 and the City of Andover Resolution for Policy on State Aid Highway Improvements as prepared by the City Clerk and amended this evening by the City Attorney and the City Clerk. (See Resolution R009-83) Motion carried unanimously. Hearing closed at 8:08 p.m. VARIANCE/C. CHRISTENSEN Dan Christenson represented his brother, Carl Christensen. Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the variance request to construct a home within the 150-foot setback requirement of the Rum River as required by the Scenic River ordinance. She recommended some changes in the prepared resolution. The paragraph of the first WHEREAS should state "... construct a home within 105 feet of the ordinary high water mark..." The second WHEREAS, second line from the bottom should say "...to participate in a tree management program and to correct the river bank erosion problem." The NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED paragraph, last line: "...the required setback from the ordinary high water mark ." The major concern of Mayor Windschitl was if this would be setting a precedent for the other lots in the area as well, feeling the land is similiar in terrain. He also thought that a similiar request was denied by the Council on the lot just to the south of this one. Discussion with Chairman Bosell and Mr. Christensen was that the DNR has given preliminary approval of the request because the house will still be 30 feet back from the bluff line, that it is not felt the house would be that obvious from the river, and the property does have quite a slope to it. Mr. Christensen - stated there is such a slope on this particular lot that the only bU1ldable area is that mentioned in the DNR letter that would be inside the 150-foot setback. He has walked through many of the surrounding lots, and he didn't think the problem is as severe on those lots. The intent is to get a buildable site, and the northwest corner of the lot is basically the only buildable area without a great deal of excavation. Mr. Christensen also had pictures of the lot showing that it is heavily wooded and showing the erosion caused by the tire swing by the river that has been used for years. He stated his brother is not opposed to cleaning up that site and correcting the erosion problem. The Clerk researched the similiar variance request on the property to the south, which was denied by the City Council. But that request was due to the design of the home to be built on the lot, not due to the topography of the lot; and he did not meet any of the criteria of Ordinance 52 which deals with topography. Mr. Christensen - also stated the lot to the south has much less than a 12 percent grade and has quite a few more buildable areas on it than his brother's lot. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, a Resolution approving the variance request by C. Christensen to construct a home on the Rum River in violation of the provisions of Ordinance No. 52, Section 5.02.0. (4), with the following revisions: change the words in the first paragraph from "the high water mark" to "the ordinary high water mark" and in the second WHEREAS to add the word "and" between the words "tree management program" and "to correct the river bank"; and in the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 4 (Variance/C. Christensen, Continued) (MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, Continued) also changing "from the high water mark" to "from the ordinary high water mark." (See Resolution R010-83) DISCUSSION: was on whether or not the condition should be added to require the structures to be painted or sided in earth-tone colors which was suggested by the DNR. It was generally felt that the City did not have the authority to make such a requirement, but the screening issue is covered by Ordinance 52. Mr. Christensen stated his brother is willing to cooperate in this manner. Mot i on carr¡ ed unanimously. VARIANCE/T. CHRISTENSEN Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the variance request of Tom Christensen to redraw the east lot line of Lot 31, Block 6, Northglen. Tom Christensen, 3469 l38th Court NW - reviewed the proposal on a map, stating he would like the lot to be symmetrical so it will not create any hardship with future neighbors. Discussion noted that the resulting lots would still meet the buildability requirements. the request was originated by John Peterson of Good Value Homes, who owns the adjoining lot. Council generally felt the proposal is an improvement to the lots in that area. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, to introduce a Resolution approving a variance for T. Christensen from the provisions of Ordinance 10 for the changing of lot boundaries on Lot 31, Block 6, and Lot 30, Block 6, Northglen Addition as presented. (See Resolution ROll-83) Motion carried unanimously. LANDFILL REPORT/DISCUSSION The Clerk noted the Council received a summary of action pertaining to Waste Disposal Engineering Sanitary Landfill in Andover since August, 1982. Since the last Council meeting, she attended a meeting with the PCA and County at the PCA offices. The discussion primarily revolved around what was going to be done, who is going to pay for it, how to get funding, procedures, etc. The PCA has called the EPA in Washington about the City's question as to whether or not the City needs to do an engineering study on the costs involved for municipal water should contamination show up in the residential wells. It was the PCA's feeling that the City would definitely have to do something in that order, but they didn't know the time frame nor the complexity of the study. There have been no reports back from the wells tested two weeks ago. Councilman Elling stated he was also at that meeting and stated they were beginning to outline the procedure for acquiring the super fund money, with the thought being it would be two to three years before anything would happen. Councilman Elling stated the City could not tolerate that length of time, especially in the event a well shows contamination. Mr. Hutchinson from the County was asked at what point he would declare a health hazard, but he didn't know. Councilman Elling also raised the question if the City did the study for a municipal water system, would that money expended be eligible for part of the 10 percent matching funds. It was not definitely answered, but he under- stood that question would be brought before the EPA in Chicago. It didn't sound like the PCA or the EPA would pay for a municipal water system. He felt the City should resolve whether or not it wants to have a water study done outlining the area included and estimated costs of such a project. It could include the area that has been designated by the Health Department for special well construction, that area from Coon Creek to Hanson Boulevard and to the south boundary of the City. He also asked if there was any emergency funding from the Federal or State governments in the event the City would have to put in an emergency system if some residential wells are found to be contaminated. Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 5 (Landfill Report/Discussion, Continued) The answer was nothing is available. He asked Natalie Haas, the County Commissioner, if some County money would be available in that situation. Her first response was no, but yesterday she stated there was some grant money available for the residents. The restrictions on well construction in a portion of the City which were placed by the Health Department have doubled the cost of a well. Councilman Elling stated he has talked with a well driller, and they are not recommending siting a city well within six or seven miles of the contaminated area. Discussion noted there is no area in the City that distanc~ away. The Clerk also stated the City cannot use its CDBG funds as a possible source of matching funds for the EPA super fund money, because federal monies cannot be used to subsidized federal grants. Those funds could be used to do the study for municipal water. Mayor Windschitl explained about the hearings of the State super fund bills at the State Capitol. He also felt that in the event of an emergency, there would be some State monies available from contingency funds, etc., though there are no guarantees. Councilman Orttel stated he could not go along with the City developing a plan for city water, feeling the City should not get involved. If city water is required, he felt it is totally not the City's fault, so why should the City plan to pay for it. It was also his opinion that if the City would provide an emergency plan for water at this time when there is no evidence of contaminated residential wells, if such a problem would occur, the other governmental authorities could simply state the City had plans for municipal water anyway and so therefore would,·not participate in those costs. Another thing is he felt that only the symptoms are being dealt with now. The real problem is the pollutants already in the ground and the existing hazardous waste pit causing those problems. Councilman Elling stated the PCA wants to do another study to see how they want to clean up the problem. Councilman Orttel again stated the problem is the source, the chemicals leaking from the hazardous waste pit. And that is not being addressed. Counci lman Elling stated that issue was brought up at the last meeting, and they are in agreement that the pit must be removed, but not right now. The problem is due process to Mr. Roth; and nothing can be done until March 7, which is the deadline for Mr. Roth to submit a satisfactory remedial action plan to the PCA. If he does not respond by that date, then the PCA can legally walk in and start proceedings to take over. Attorney Hawkins reported he has done some research on the avenues open to the City in this matter. He stated there is some precedence and authority for the City to take action against the agency that is directly responsible for maintaining and supervising the control of the landfill. He also stated there is no question·the City has the authority to clean up the hazardous waste pit and declare a health hazard. The Council suggested a closed meeting with the Attorney to discuss this matter, and a motion to that effect was made later in the meeting. Bill Hu~ - talked with Mr. Kanner at the PCA office, who stated they are not sure that the pro em is with the hazardous waste pit. Mr. Hupp felt the hazardous waste pit should be removed; but the ground water is still contaminated, and how far will that go? Also, in St. Louis Park, all the testing and sampling by the City and County went toward the 10 percent matching of the Federal super fund money. He felt instead of trying to find out who is to blame, the best alternative is to aim at how the problem is going to be resolved. And any money spent would put us that much closer to getting the super fund monies. Councilman Lachinski felt the most logical thing to focus on first is the removal of the hazardous waste pit, which can be used as a test case for cleaning up the entire landfill area. A procedure should be established by the City to solve the first problem and make the proposal to the County, intending to recover from the County whatever costs the City would expend in removing the hazardous waste pit. Counc i lman .- Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 6 (Landfill Report/Discussion, Continued) Elling hoped the City could maintain a working rapport with the County in an effort to solve the problem, still realizing that the City really is on its own in this matter. Merle Prochniak - agreed with Councilman Elling about having a plan for city water, feeling if the City shows the PCA the monies needed, it may mean the City would become the number one priority in the State to have some action taken. Councilman Orttel di sagreed. The purity of the drinking water is only one result of the problem of contaminated ground. The pit is step one; the ground area is step two. He was of the opinion city water is along ways down in priority, as he felt the source of the problem should be dealt with, not just treat the symptoms. Mr. Prochniak - felt if someone's well is contamined and city water is not available, they would have to dig another well and would need funds to do so, not being able to afford $5,000 for a new well and then turnaround a few years later and pay for city water. Council agreed that they should not have to pay for it. Mayor Windschitl explained the problem of putting in a municipal water system because of the problems that could occur in digging a well of such depth in the general area of contamination and the problem of locating a well site anywhere else in the City. Discussion was also on similiar situations of well contamination in Arden Hills. Discussion was on whether:ornot a study should be done on a municipal water system, the reasons why or why not. Mayor Windschitl stated he would like to see the Council develop an outline of a contingency plan in the event there is contaminated water in residential wells, including an outline of a water system to serve the contaminated area. He felt there is a lot of history with Arden Hills and other areas that have had problems that could be used to draw up a plan for Andover as to the location of the wells, etc. Councilman Orttel stated he would have no problem with an emergency plan and to find out where the water supply would come from, but he is opposed to any detailed plan. Mayor Windschitl felt the main points to cover would be the water source, tower cost, and trunk costs. Councilman Knight was not opposed to a contingency plan, but felt absolute maximum pressure must be placed on the other governmental agencies to get this matter solved, even if it means legal action. Councilman Lachinski agreed that a contingency plan for municipal water should be set up, but he didn't feel the City was at tha t point yet. He felt the primary concern today is to get the hazardous waste pit removed. Mr. Prochniak - asked if no one does anything relatively soon, will the City take some act1 on. He also asked how can they make Andover the number one priority for hazardous waste removal on the lists. Council stated yes, the City intends to do whatever it can to get some act i on. Right now the hazardous sites in the City are in fifth and eighth positions, feeling it is a political problem at this point. Mayor Windschitl suggested if residents find a noticeable color or taste change in their water, that the City be contacted immediately. Discussion was also that the Hazardous Waste Committee should put together the contingency water plan and also setup a program for testing wells. Mr. Schrantz reported they are rewriting the Hicock report. He also explained that the testing of the well samples are only for the volatile organics, not the metals; because it is felt those won't flow as fast as the organics will. Also, they are not testing for nitrates and chloroforms, which is one of the problems in the area because of the on-site septic systems. That is the responsibility· of the homeowner, noting it is a relatively inexpensive test that can be done by the County. Discussion was also on some of the events that have taken place -- Mr. Roth's letter stating he intends to reopen the landfill, the PCA and County feeling that the City does have some liability in the matter, and the issue not receiving publicity on an official County level. Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 7 (Landfill Report/Discussion, Continued) MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council hold a Special Meeting on March 8 for the purpose of discussing the landfill and its legal options open to them. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Windschit1 recommended the following be appointed to the Hazardous Waste Committee: Councilman Mike Knight, Bill Hupp, Greg Hinton, and Merle Prochniak. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, that we accept those recommendations the Mayor has made for service on the Hazardous Waste Committee. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we set a meeting for February 22 for the Hazardous Waste Committee at 7:30 p.m. DISCUSSION: The Clerk was asked to send a written notice of the meeting to both the new and existing members of the committee. Motion carried unanimously. Recess at 9:45; reconvene at 10:00 p.m. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT/PARKING Mrs. Hagstromh 135th Avenue - explained their neighbor drives a large semi-truck and parks it on t e street, sometimes over the weekend and at times for as long as five days. Sometimes it is running all the time. Because20f where the truck is parked in relation to her driveway, it creates a real traffic hazard when backing out of her driveway and also for children in the area. She has called the police many times and citations have been issued for violation of the parking ordinance, but the fine is only $5 and it doesn't do any good. Discussion was on the problem, that the City's ordinance bans parking from 1 to 6 a.m., but the Sheriff's Deputies go off duty at 3 o'clock and often don't get back there to tag the truck, and that the Sheriff's Department has been unwilling to tow the truck away. Ms. L. Anderson, 134th and Gladiola - has a difficult time sleeping with the noise of the eng1ne runn1ng all n1ght long, and explained the problem of havìng to go around the parked truck when leaving for work in the morning, especially having to be careful of the children leaving for school. Attorney Hawkins suggested the County Sheriff's office advise him of the appearance date on the ticket, and he will appear at that and explain the problem to the judge, asking for a maximum of a petty misdeamor which is a $100 fine on every single ticket. Discussion was then on the proposed ordinance change, especially the last paragraph. The following wording was agreed to: "...at any time of any day unless such vehicle is being used for the purpose of moving goods from or to a commercial or residential location within one block from where such vehicle is located." Mayor Windschit1 asked for a motion:to amend the ordinance No. 33. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, to so move. Motion carried unanimously. JUNKYARD LICENSE - WILBER'S MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve a renewal of Junkyard License for W11bers, 13608 Jay Street NW, effective January 1, 1983, through December 31, 1983, subject to review on or before June 1, 1983, for ordinance compliance. DISCUSSION: It was agreed that in the future the addresses should be entered in the application. Motion carried unanimously. - Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 8 RESOLUTION - METRO COUNCIL HRA MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that the Council adopt the Resolution authorizing the Metropolitan Council to implement the Rental Rehabilitation Loan Program within the City of Andover as prepared. (See Resolution R012-83) Motion carried unanimously. ANDOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT/REPORT Fire Chief Frank Stone reported the following offices were elected by the general membership on January 29: Chief, Frank Stone; Assistant Chief, Bill Bush; Fire Marshall, Tom Reichert; Assistant Fire Marshalls, Joyce Noyes and John Ryan (previously there was only one Assistant Fire Marshall; the salary will be split by the two); Secretary, Joyce Noyes. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that we approve the election of the office~s by the r1re Department as presented by the Fire Chief. Motion carried unanimously. Chief Stone also reported they understand the new truck should be in by the end of March. There are 22 people on the Rescue Squad at this time. And this year lieutenants will also be running with the Chief's rig on weekends so everyone will only be on call six weekends a year. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that Robert Harris be appointed to fill the unexpired term on the Park Commission expiring December 31, 1983. Motion carried unan imous ly. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Chairman Bosell stated after the joint meeting with the P & Z and Council last week, it was realized it will take longer than anticipated to update Ordinance 8. One reason is the City is about nine months behind in the process than originally planned because of the problems getting the Comprehensive Plan approved. And secondly, because the new Commissioners will need some updating and go through a learning process. Iri talking with Bill Short about it, he stated he would send a letter to the City Council anticipating how much longer it will take and an estimated additional cost. She didn't feel the $8,900 in the contract would be sufficient. Council discussion was the contract specifically sets out the amount and there was some feeling that the consultant should be able to stay within that amount. It was suggested if the Planning Commission feels it will be some time before the ordinances can be revised that the public hearings be held as soon as possible for the reduced lot sizes in the urban area as agreed to at the meeting last week. WATERSHED BOARDS Mr. Schrantz explained the new watershed boards being proposed are not designed to replace the existing Coon Creek Watershed Board. He explained there will be a requirement to have a Watershed Management Plan by the end of the year. The City can either work together under a joint powers agreement with all the other cities affected in the water- shed district or can allow the County to take over that process. He recommended the Council appoint a Councilmember to set up'ameeting with the cities and to determine how this should be done. During discussion, the Council generally expressed the feeling that the City would have more control if a watershed board could be set up with the other affected cities rather than relinquishing control over to the County. Councilman Knight agreed to be the City's representative in this matter. Regular City Council Meeting February 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 9 (Watershed Boards, Continued) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we appoint Mike Knight as to the City Council representative to help formulate policy for the control of surface water in the City. Motion carried unanimously. ENGINEER'S REPORT Mr. Schrantz explained he will be preparing some estimates for street improvements asked for by residents in several developments. He will also be placing the four-ton load restrictions in early March. There is also a seminar on water resources in St. Louis Park on February 24 and 25. He will not be able to attend, but he felt he may try to ge t some of the information for it. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 18, and February 1, 1983: Correct as written. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Council Minutes of January 18. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we approve Minutes of February 1 Council Meeting as written. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel; PRESENT-Windschitl Motion carried. Mayor Windschit1 closed this next portion of the meeting at this time to hold a brief Closed Meeting with the City Attorney relating to the Senior Citizen Center. 10:46 p.m. The regular meeting resumed at 11 :19 p.m. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we approve the Checks 6243 through 6283 for a total of $20,619.11. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Lachinski, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:24 p.m. Respectfully submitted, '~ ---- L \ ~. ----:------,. I CL~, 0-- ~ Marc lla A. Peach Recor ng Secretary