Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC June 21, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1983 AGENDA 1 . Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Final Plat/Andover West, Phase II b. Special Use Permit/Anoka County Park Department c. Variance/M. Kelner d. Feasibility Reports 1 ) Nordeen Addition 2) 175th & Quay Street Area e. 138th Avenue Park f. Landfill g. Hokanson DNR Permit/Ditch h. 5. Non-Discussion Items a. Andover Auto Parts/License b. Sewer Billing Policy c. Authorize Bond Sale/Northglen II, Rosella's Addn. d. Rum River Watershed/Joint Powers Agreement e. Hanson Blvd. Acquisitions 6. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Staff a. Cable Television Progress Report/Lindquist b. Volunteer Fire Department 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9. Adjournment ~- ~- CITY 01 ANDOVER M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COPIES TO: ATTORNEY STAFF } CITY CLERK A. ADMINISTRATO --y FROM: /J .;;/- DATE: JUNE 16 , 1983 '---- ../' REFERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - JUNE 21, 1983 REGULAR MEETING Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Please add Item No. 4g - Hokanson DNR Permit/Ditch. Also, please add Item No. 5e - Hanson Blvd. Acquisitions. Item No. 4a - Final Plat/Andover West, Phase II A 3D-day extension was granted to the developer for the filing of the Final Plat. The reason for the original extension request was to permit them time to complete the improvements. Because of weather,etc., the improvements are not totally complete, in fact, it is my understanding that they are only about 75% complete. As a result, the developer has requested an additional 60-day extension for the filing. Ordinance 10 does not give any time-frames for extensions, only states that they may be granted. A motion is needed to approve an extension for Final Plat filing to September 1, 1983. Item No. 4b - Special Use Permit/Anoka County Park Department Anoka County Park Department is requesting a SUP to install buried fuel tanks at the new maintenance building on Bunker Lake Boulevard. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the request. A resolution will be prepared granting the approval and citing the p&Z recommendation. Item No. 4c - Variance/M. Kelner This item is continued from the June 7 Meeting. It was not acted upon at that meeting because the applicant was not in attendance and it was found there was not sufficient information relative to the placement of the home. Attached is a letter from the Building Inspector indicating that the house is being constructed 52.5 feet from the rear property line, thereby eliminating the need for the variance. A motion acknowledging this information will be sufficient to satisfy the requirements of Ordinance No. 8 for variance procedures. Item No. 4d - Feasibility Reports l)Nordeen Addition/IP 1983-5 2)175th & Quay Street Area/IP 1983-6 Bonestroo will be presenting the Feasbility Reports for your review. Agenda Information June 21, 1983 Page 2 Item No. 4d - Feasibility Reports (continued) Resolutions will be prepared to accept these reports, set the date of July 5 for the public hearings, and direct mailed and published notice of such hearing. Item No. 4e - 138th Avenue Park The Park Board has reviewed various locations in this area for the construction of a public park. Attached is their recommendation to use the parcel adjoining the NB section. This parcel, too, is zoned for NB, however, that could be rezoned back to M-l to fit into the park designation. Please read the PR Minutes for the June 2 Meeting. A motion is needed to direct acquisition of this parcel, and to request CDBG Funds for such acquisition. Item No. 4f - Landf ill The MPCA has forwarded to Chicago for review, the application for approval of the Cooperative Agreement between the EPA, MPCA, et aI, to commence the required studies on the landfill clean-up. All well testing since the last report have shown private wells to be negative of any contaminants; and the monitoring wells to be about the same as they were in previous reports. The Mayor and I were shown photographs taken at the time the barrels were put into the HW Pit; and for those of you, like us, who thought the barrels were stacked in some reasonable order within a straight- sided, lined pit, were not correct. The sides of the pit are very sloped, only the bottom is lined with a very irregular cover of black-top, and the barrels appear to have been just simply rolled off trucks, every which direction. Some actually appeared to be open and discharged whatever was in them--many were semi-crushed, etc. ; all of which appeared to be very conducive to leaking, etc. Item No. 4g - Hokanson DNR Permit Enclosed please find a copy of Mr. Ron Hokanson's Application for a permit from the DNR to reconstruct and clean a portion of the ditch running through his property. You will recall Mr. Hokanson discussed this with you at the time of his request for a variance for the house location on his river lot. A motion is needed to simply a statement to the effect that the permit has been reviewed by the City Council and the Council is agreeable to the issuance of same. Item No. Sa - Andover Auto Parts Junkyard License The "Yard" was visually inspected by me today; I found the following: l)Approximately half the trees are planted, and planted pursuant to ordinance requirement. 2)The fencing is completely finished across the front and approximately one-third done on the south side (there is a fence on the entire south side, however, the back two-thirds do not match the wood fencing in the front and part of the side. Agenda Information June 21, 1983 Page 3 Item No. Sa - Andover Auto Parts (continued) 3)Asphalt strips have been placed in the parking area. 4)The area outside the fence was very clean, with no II junk" vehicles in the open. 5)The front lawn (east of building toward the rOad) has been landscaped and has black dirt spread, however, it still needs sod or seed. 6)The new fencing is in compliance with the ordinance and is quite nice in appearance. The tops of the posts need trimming, however, I assume this will be done when the entire fence is finished. Item No. 5b - Sewer Billing Policy Because of the increase in accounts, it is becoming somewhat difficult to get the bills prepared and out before the 10th of each month. Attached is a resolution amending earlier resolutions, with a change the billing date to the 15th of the month, with the penalty being assessed on bills not paid by the 30th of the month instead of the 25th as it is now. Item No. 5c - Authorize Bond Sale/Northglen II, Rosella's Addn, Shirley's Attached are fee quotations from Springsted, Inc. and the City Attorney. A motion is needed to accept one of the quotations; and authorizing the Sale with direction to whomever is to handle the Sale to prepare the resolution authorizing such Sale. Item No. 5d - Rum River Watershed Joint Powers Agreement After your review, a motion is needed to enter into the Agreement and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign. Item No. 5e - Hanson Boulevard Acquisitions Attorney Hawkins has some proposals and settlements which he would like to discuss with the Council in Closed Session. The Regular Meeting (by motion) will have to be continued until adjournment of the Closed Session. Item No. 6a - Cable Television Progress Report Don Jacobson and I would like to discuss with the City Council the progress to-date on the Cable installation. This will enable you to answer the many questions you, no doubt, have been receiving from residents. Maps of service areas will be available. Item No. 6b - Volunteer Fire Department To-Date no information has been received. Item No. 6c - Kelsey Park Inasmuch as the Park Board has not acted upon the intent for the disposition of the open property owned by Mr. Windschitl; this item will appear on the July 19 Meeting. Item No. 7 - Approval of Minutes May 3, 5, 17, June 7, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1983 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on June 21, 1983, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, James Schrantz; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; and others RESIDENT FORUM Steve Halsey, Anoka City Councilman - stated he was directed by their Council to present a copy of a resolut1on they passed last evening, #83-63, dealing with the proposed plat of Northglen II Addition, Phase II. There are a number of residents in their city who are disturbed about the extension of County Road 116 going through their back yards with the proposed Outlot B shown on the proposed plat. The purpose ot the resolution is to indicate to the Andover Council that the City of Anoka is opposed to the siting of the county road through that Outlot B, that they and their residents would prefer that there would be a siting of the road first of all in a direct east-west route along the northern border of their city directly to Round Lake Bou levard. If that is determined not to be feasible, the better alternative would be a diagonal route through the swamp land. He stated the City of Anoka is willing to discuss extending water and sewer services to the severed parcel that such a route wou ld create. Mayor Windschitl stated he will ask if the Council wishes to add the item to the Agenda for further discussion, noting the Council will be acting on the matter on July 5 unless Good Value Homes waives the time requirement. AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, to approve the published Agenda with the Add1t1on of Item 4g, Hokanson DNR Permit/Ditch; Item 5e, Hanson Boulevard Acquisitions; and Item 4h, Anoka Resolution. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, to suspend the rules. Motion carried unanimously. FINAL PLAT/ANDOVER WEST, PHASE II MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council direct the City Clerk to prepare a Resolution providing for a 60-day extension for the filing of the final plat of Andover West Phase II. (See Resolution R051-83) Motion carried unanimously. SPECIAL USE PERMIT/ANOKA COUNTY PARK DEPARTMENT Ronald Cox, Anoka County Park Department, was present. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, that we approve the Anoka County Parks Department Special Use Permit for the location of fuel tanks at the requested location. (See Resolution R052-83) Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE/M. KELNER MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that the Council recognize the withdrawal of the request for a variance for Michael Kelner and authorize the City Clerk to refund any unused portion of the monies paid in application for the variance. Motion carried unanimous ly. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 FEASIBILITY REPORTS - NORDEEN ADDITION Otto Bonestroo from the consulting engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc., reviewed the feasibility report for street improvements in the Nordeen Addition, Project No. 83-6. He explained the feasibility report of $153,150 for the entire project or approximately $2,890 per lot is based on a 32-foot street standard. But the Council may elect to go with a 28-foot wide bituminous surface -with a bituminous shoe berm curb be constructed as requested by the petitioners. With that reduction, and if the project were assessed this year to reduce the capitalized interest cost, he felt comfortable with an estimated per-lot cost of $2,500 to $2,700. It is expected the project will be completed by November 1. Discussion was on the road standard, the 28-foot versus 32-foot width and the shoe berm, with some Councilmen feeling the City's standard of 28 feet with no berms should be applied in this instance. Mr. Bonestroo felt a good part of the project would have the shoe berm and it would be used to convey water to the low spots. They will be able to concentrate the water to the locations where the City owns the lots and to the back of those lots. Easements would be required from the City to convey the water back to the low areas. Mr. Schrantz also noted two of the lots owned by the City are high lots, and the excess material from this project could be used to improve two other City-owned lots. Mr. Schrantz also noted the areas that have drainage problems in the development that would need to be addressed and explained the proposal is for a small shoe berm on the edge of the blacktop. Chet Conger, 450 156th Avenue - stated it was his idea to go with a berm curb because they have greater than normal grades on their streets which would cause washing of the shoulder area and deterioration of the asphalt. It would be easy to construct, and he felt it retains the yards better, helping to prevent erosion and sand burrs. He estimated the entire cost of the project at 78 tons of asphalt, or approximately ~250 for the addition of the bituminous berm. His problem with the feasibility report 1S with the 10 percent capitalized interest charge, wanting the project to go this year to reduce that cost, and feeling the costs generally are about 20 percent high. Mr. Schrantz stated if the Council approves the 28-foot street section and to assess this year, they could revise the quantities and estimates for the public hearing. Mr. con,er - also stated that the 28-foot width without curb is the standard in the metropo 1tan area. He stated a 32-foot street is not really necessary unless there is concrete curb and gutter. Council generally agreed that the project, it ordered, should be assessed this year to avoid the 10-percent capitalized interest charge. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that the Nordeen Addition project, if constructed, be constructed with a 28-foot width street. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was then on the question of the shoe berm on the project. Mayor Windschitl stated if the residents want it and feel it will finish off the neighborhood better, he had no trouble with it. Councilman Lachinski felt it should be made an alternative, feeling the residents should be made more aware of what the berm entails, the cost and what it will look like. Councilman Orttel felt that the addition of the berm is adding 12 to 15 percent to the project costs, that the soils are sandy and will absorb the runoff so the water doesn't have to be channeled to a specific location, and that from a maintenance standpoint, the Council has always been told bituminous berms are undesirable. Mr. Schrantz stated the shoe berm does create somewhat of a problem for snow plowing, but it is better than having the problem of eroding shoulders. It was generally agreed that the shoe berm should be shown as a separate item to allow the residents to see the costs and the appearance of such a berm and to allow the engineers to place the berm where necessary to control water drainage, which is the existing standard. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 (Feasibility Reports - Nordeen Addition, Continued) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution accepting the Feasibility Keport tor the area known as the Nordeen Addition and order public hearing to be heard at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall on July 13. (See Resolution RO~3-83) Motion carried unan imous ly. FEASIBILITY REPORTS - 175TH AND QUAY STREET AREA Mr. Bonestroo reviewed the feasibility for street improvement for the 175th and Quay Street area noting the project is being broken down into three parts: 1) Project A 1 consisting of 175th from Round Lake Boulevard to Quay for an estimated cost of $57,730 or $2,625 per lot; 2) Project A2 consisting of Orchid and 176th for an estimated cost of $59,200 or $4,930 per lot; and 3) Project A3 consisting of Quay, 178th, and 176th for an estimated cost of $109,D70 or a unit cost of $5,450. It was again noted the costs are estimated on a 32-foot wide surface and placing a shoe curb where necessary to convey water in specific areas. He felt the estimates are high and could be reduced by approximately 10 percent if the project is assessed this year to reduce the capitalized interest cost. Council discussion again noted the street standard for the rural section is a 28-foot wide street without berm. The per-unit cost on the three projects were also discussed. Mr. Schrantz explained on Project A3, when 176th and 178th were added, it provided five or six additional units to be assessed, but it doubled the length of the street. He noted there is a real problem when doing the A3 area, but he did not know of any way to lower the per-unit costs in that area. Rich Larson, 3311 175th Lane - asked if the road would be 32 or 28 feet wide. D1Scussion was the Counc1l will have to set the street width, generally feeling it will be 28 feet wide, though the estimate given is based on a 32-foot width. Mr. Larson - stated he would like to see the berm to eliminate erosion and to have the 28-foot w1dth as most people have long enough driveways to park oft the street. Palmer Johnson, 3401 175th - asked if there is any chance of having speed bumps put in, noting the high speed traffic through the area. He has had the Deputies out, but it doesn't alleviate the problem. Council noted this problem will be brought to the attention of the Sheriff's Department. There was no one present to comment on the Project A2 area, with Mr. Schrantz not1ng those residents had not yet been informed of the proposed proJect. Inez Oanes, 17559 ua Street - stated the Council received a pet1tion; and based on ,5 0 to ,800 per ot, t ere wasn't even enough to have a feasibility study done. At the rates proposed, she felt no one is going to be in favor, noting the petitions from 176th and 178th were 10U percent against. Tom Aker, 178th - if 178th is paved, how would the existing water problem be taken care ofl Mr. Bonestroo stated an equalization culvert would be installed. Mr. Aker - stated the water from the county road is already coming onto 178th and cuts away the area, and he didn't understand what is going to keep the water from cutting away the side of the road if it is paved. Mr. Schrantz stated they would have to put . in a spillway to dump the water into and the equalizer culvert to allow the water to run back and forth. Jim Stuffmeher, l762U Quay - asked if the road wi 11 not be paved, is the City going to do anything about the road, as he is tired of the water. D1SCUSS1on was the City has not done any major improvements in this area, but possibly that could be looked at as a special maintenance project. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 19B3 - Minutes Page 4 (Feasibility Reports - 175th and Quay Street Area, Continued) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that the Counc1l accept the feas1bility report tor 175th Lane, Ruund Lake Boulevard to Quay Street, shown as Project 1 in the feasibility report itself, and tnat we schedule a public hearing for July 13 at 8:30 p.m. at the City Hall, City of Andover. (See ResoluLion R054-83) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by ~lling, Seconded by Knight, that we include Project 2 tor public hearing. (~ee Resolution R055-83) VOTE" ON MOTION: YE~-Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Windschitl; NO-Orttel Motion carried. Discussion was on Project A3, noting there is very little interest except on ~uay Street, that the estimated costs are quite high, that there is $2,800 set aside for maintenance on 178th and Quay should this project be voted down. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Kn1ght, that we terminate Project 3 from the feasibility study. (See Resolut1on R056-83) Motion carried unanimously. The Engineers were directed to present the revised estimates at the pUblic hearing based on a Z8-toot street width and assuming tne project wi 11 be assessed in 1983. The berm is to be bid as a separate item. 138TH AV~NUE PARK Council discussion was on the proposed l38th Avenue park and the Park Commission's recommendation to purchase and develop Parcel 1670 using CDBG funds. The 'Louncil again expressed the desire to develop the park on one of the C1ty-owned parcels rather than Parcel 1670, feeling that parcel is too close to the highly traveled Cros,town Boulevard, the disadvantage uf being adjacent to a commercial area, plus questioning whether the parcel would be large enough. Herb Moore - stated the neighborbood is relatively quiet. He felt a park would be 1deal, excepting the further back from their property, the happ.jér they wi 11 be so that the noise would be abated as much as possible. He agreed something is needed for toddlers in that neighborhood. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that we schedule a Special City Council meeting to d1SCUSS the issue of a park in the 138th Avenue area for 7 o'clock on June 22. Motion carried unanimously. Council agreed to hold the special meet1ng with the Park Commission tomorl"owevening meeting on site at B8th and Crosstown. HOKANSON DNR P~RMIT/DITCH MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that the Council recommend approval for a permit be1ng required from the Department of Natural Resources for Roger Hokanson for Lot 8, Block 1, Rum River Forest, for the cleaning out and restoration Of the ditch that crosses that property into the Rum River. Motion carried unanimously. CITY OF ANOKA RESOLUTION Mayor Windschitl explained if no county right of way for the proposed extension of County Highway 116 were allowed for in the Northglen Second Addition plat, 1~5 lots could be platted. With Outlot B being proposed, the number of lots is reduced by 12. If the diagonal route for 116 is used and no provisions are made for the severed parcel, it removes 26 lots out of the plat. Using Outlot B, the total number of lots that are directly affected is six. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 5 (City of Anoka Kesolution, Continued) Councilman Halsey - reviewed their Council meeting of last evening where a number of residents expressed concern of being directly affected by the proposed Outlot B in the Northglen II plat in Andover. Their resolution is simply to indicate that the city of Anoka is opposed to Outlot tl and also to indicate that they are will1ng to work out the problems that might arise if some of the lots are cut off by a diagonal route as far as the City ot Anoka extending sewer and water service into that area. Mayor Windschitl reviewed the problem of extending 116 in an east-west route because of the approved plats along Round Lake Boulevard, that the only alternative is a route that would come down from the north to meet the existing 116, and that on July 5, unless Good Value waives the time requirement again, the Council must address the plat of Phase II or it will automatically be deemed approved. Wayne Melby, 10th Lane, Anoka - asked if it 1S standard operating procedure for a contractor to start construction with only preliminary plat approval, stating construc- tion has already started in Phase II. His concern is if that is standard operating procedure, the options are limited. Mayor Windschitl stated the Council has given approval to the preliminary plat of Phase I of Northglen Second Addition. Any work being done by the City is only being done for Phase I at this time. John Peterson, Good Value Homes - stated it is normal procedure that when a preliminary plat is approved, which is the case here, one bui Iding permit can be issued and grading and the installation of utilities will begin. Mayor Windschitl emphasized that it is in the Phase I portion of the plat. What Good Value does on their own property in the other area is not something the Council can control unless permits are needed. Dick Nybeck, 39b4 loth Lane, Anoka - purchased the last lot in the area in 1977, and most people who purchased the1r lots built with the idea that some day there would be homes behind them, which would be acceptable. But the thought of putting a 150-foot roadway immediately adjacent to their property and behind certainly decreases the value of their property. They love what is behind them and thanked the City for allowing them to use the woods. They are hoping the Andover Council will give them consideration, and hopetully the cities of Anoka and Andover can cooperate to serve the triangular piece of property that would remain with a diagonal route of County 116. Mr. Peterson - noted when they purchased the parcel in 1978 it was zoned for a mobile home court, and they asked that zoning to be changed to single tamily. In developing this property, they would prefer not to have the 116 alignment through the property. If the diagonal alignment is selected, they expect reasonable compensation; and from a development point of view, the easiest way to develop the parcel is with Outlot B. He stated there has been a lot of communication since the last meeting, but he felt they really are not any closer to a decision than when it was started. He felt it will ultimately be the Andover Council that makes a decision when acting on their plat. He feels comfortable with either alignment, assuming adequate and fair compensation for damages and land acquisition. Jane Crawford, 3860 10th Avenue, Anoka - stated when they purchased their land ten years ago they were practically guaranteed by the real estate agent that it was a private lot owned by a man who would never build on it. So the mobi Ie home zoning is new to them. But if 116 is built on Outlot B, would some barriers be put up? Bud Redepenning, Anoka County Highway Engineering Department - Outlot B on the proposed plat is a 150 feet wide to build the roadway. he road would be offset further to the east, away from the City of Anoka homeS, to allow tor a berm section. The berm would be earth with trees about five feet tall, with the roadway on the Andover side of the be,·m section being depressed two to three feet. He explained they should not be able to see the top of any cars from their yards. The urban section would not have a ditch, and a rural section would have ditches. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 6 (City of Anoka Resolution, Continued) Mr. Nybeck - didn't feel the berm would do any good in the low area. Mr. Redepennin, - stated if they are now looking out to a low area, the road would have to be bui t above it by a minimum of two feet, and it would be very hard to construct a berm in that area. He was talking about the wooded area where the earth berm would be constructed, and he reviewed where the proposed alignment of 115 would meet the existing llb to the south in both the Outlot B proposal and the diagonal proposal. Mr. Nybeck - stated it is apparent the issue is being forced on July ~ by Mr. Peterson, as several weeks ago at a Planning Commission meeting he was asked when Phase II would be presented. At that time Mr. Peterson said it would depend upon the economy and sale of homes, but it certainly w1ll be six months or more. Mr. Peterson - didn't know if he said "certainly", but rather said "probably". Mr. Nybeck - questioned why they are now moving ahead so quickly. Is it simply because the residents are stating they do not like this road or is it because things are changing so quickly. Mr. Peterson - stated it is a change in the policy of their company. They have been talking about this problem for a very long time and nothing has happened. They now feel it is time to bring this to a head, foreseeing the possibi ity of some legal process occurring. It isn't that they need the lots for tomorrow; but they do need them for next spring, and they do want it resolved. Another factor is that they need to know the alignment for the grading even of Phase I, which will begin next week. Council discussion noted that whatever alignment Good Value Homes presents on the preliminary plat of Phase II, there would need to be some specific reason for the Council to deny the plat based on the City's ordinances. Councilman Lachinski felt that such a decision would need to be based on costs prepared by the Anoka County Highway Department as to the costs of both alignments, including the cost of compensation. Mayor Windschitl stated the Anoka County Highway Uepartment is develoµing those costs for the County Board. The difficulty in doing this is they need to draw a plat of the triangular piece. Mr. Redepenninr - without doing any surveying, from what they can see there will be .very little di ference in costs ot actually building the road with either alignment because there isn't that much difference in soils. So they are looking at the difference in cost of right of way and if it is possible to plat the triangle that would be severed by the diagonal route. The only real problem he sees is the time element. Councilman Orttel has seen this issue for the past five years. First of all, he didn't know if the City had the right to ask Good Value Homes to change the alignment because no compensation is involved. Barring the County going in to acquire the right of way to resolve the issue, he stated the City really has no choice but to approve the plat with the proposed Outlot B, assuming all the City's or'dinances are met. The City is in no position to compensate Good Value and is not in the position to reserve that corridor for the County. Councilman knight stated one alternative would be to have ~OOd Value waive the time unti I the information is forthcoming from the County. Donna_Melby, 3931 10th Lane, Anoka - understood that Good Value purchased the property knowing the county road might go through there. She felt it was logical to have the county designate where the road would go and then plat the area. Was an east-west route considered before the Sonsteby and Good Value plats were approved? Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1~83 - Minutes Page 7 (City of Anoka Resolution, Continued) County Commissioner Natalie Haas - stated the previous County Board ruled out an east- west real1gnment of 116 because it doesn't solve the traffic flow problem off Seventh and County Road 9. Also, for all practical purposes, the location ot the Rum River bridge was not established until 1981. Although, whether the bridge is ever built or not, they are already beginning to experience some problem on ~eventn Avenue and there has to be some way to take some traffic off of it. Mayor Windschitl also noted that to his knowledge, the City has never been asked to consider a direct east-west route of 116. He reviewed some of the potential traffic problems with increased development in the area, and reviewed the sequence Of events that have taken place relative to negotiating an acceptable alignment to Andover, to Good Value Homes, and to the County, noting the problems with the diagonal route and the inability to provide city services to the severed parcel that would result. The only way the City can provide sanitary sewer to the Good Value property is with the Outlot B alignment of 116. Mr. Nybeck - stated it was by chance that he learned about the ~roposed realignment of 116 behind their property. He has realized there w1ll be a road through there, and had come to accept the diagonal route. But now it is a north-south lot adjacent to his lot. He stated if he was Mr. Peterson, he would favor Outlot B. But as citizens, they would like to see a common-sense approach to that diagonal road rather than it being based on a builders concept. It bothers him that tne builders may be determining where the major roads are being placed in the county. Mayor Windschitl didn't think it was the case Of the builder determining where the road goes. The County or City has the right of eminent domain and can place an alignment where it feels is necessary. The question here is it is in a limbo state, no funds have been provided to acquire the property, and no proposal has been made for eminent domain or a negotiated settle- ment on the property. He felt from an economic standpoint, Good Value's stand would be not to put the road in at all. Councilman Halsey - stated as a practical matter the decision is going to be made when Andover accepts the plat, feeling the County will go with .he route that is easiest and cheapest to them, that of the Outlot provided in the plat. Mayor Windschitl again clarified the reason the alignment is shown on the western line is because Andover could not provide service to the severed property with the diagonal route. And the City of Andover could not afford to leave an island without service to it. He and others tried to get service to that property but were not successful. Tt amounts to approximately one million dollars in assessed valuation to Andover. Mr. Peterson - again stated if the angular route is chosen, they would expect reasonable compensation. But from their point of view, it really does not make that mUCh difference which alignment is chosen. Paula Guy, 4034 10th Lane, Anoka - did live on County Road 116 and sold it to live ill their present home. ~he wlshed the Council would drive through their neighborhood, noting some of the pleasant amenities they now enjoy, thinking all the people moved into that neighborhood for its quality. But the people who buy in the Good Value ne1ghborhood will know what they are getting relative to the county road. They are getting punished or will suffer if the county road is put in their back yards. Valuation will go down, thinking they should have damages for deterioration. Mayor windschitl stated the Council understands their objections to the road, but the real question is this has gotten so far down the process without what appears to be an alternative with it. Charlie Levan, 3850 lOth Avenue, Anoka - felt there isn't enough time to evaluate the Anoka resolution and to listen to the input from the County. 1he ordinance is runn1ng the time clock, but Mr. Peterson has control over that and could waive the time require- ment for 30 days or six months to allow for more thorough consideration of the alternatives. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 8 (City of Anoka Resolution, Continued) Councilman Lachinski felt that would be the only option he can see at this point. Councilman Orttel stated the County has said either alignment is acceptable and the cost would be about the same. Mr. Redepennin6 - clarified that both alignments are buildable but the diagonal route is the prefera le one because that seems to best fit the type of alignment they want to see and has been shown for several years. And partly because the Outlot B proposal would mean building up against in-place houses. Mayor Windschilt again reviewed the sequence of events in trying to solve this issue and why the Outlot ti location was eventually proposed. Councilman Halsey - stated it has been an unstated pOlicy of their staff that the City owuld not extend sewer outside the City of Anoka. Tî1ey are now saying they are willing to discuss doing that to alleviate the situation for Andover. They have not looked at any cost figures involved. Councilman Orttel questioned whether the policy was unstated or informal, stating he has a letter dated Apri I 16, 1978, from the Anoka City Manager on behalf of the City Counc1l denying Andover any reciprocal type arrangements for utilities. Commissioner Haas - stated whether it is stated or unstated policy, cities and counties do change policies all the time. Another comment was in addition to looking at what it costs to build the road, they are also going to have to look at the cost of compensa- tion to Good Value Homes whether it is the diagonal route or using Uutlot B. She hoped it wouldn't get down to dollars and cents; but if there is a considerable difference, she stated it will affect how she is going to vote on the road alignment. She hoped when the committee meets to act on this on the morning of July ~ that they have some- thing concrete to deal with as it relates to the triangle. She also reminded the attorneys that there has been a Supreme Court ruling dealing with compensation as to whether property is platted. Mr. Peterson - stated the property also has approximatley 10 acres of beautiful woods that they asked the City of Anoka to serv1ce, but Anoka said no. That has now been dedicated as park, expressing disappointment over the inability to work with the City of Anoka on this plat. He asked the Council if the 7.7-acre parcel left on the Anoka side was not developable, would the City still agree to the diagonal route and take that land off the tax rolls of the City. Mayor Windschitl stated clearly the City would not want a parcel that couldn't be developed. Mr. Peterson - stated there are two problems with that parcel. One is service of utilities, which he felt now Anoka would be willing to agree to service. The second question is how to develop that parcel. Normally on that sized lot they would get between 14 and 21 units. In this instance, they probably couldn't get more than between 7 to 9 lots with the large point of the triangle being undevelopable. There is clearly a loss in the value and in how it is going to be developed. If the County is willing to pay fair and reasonable value for damages to the land, he didn't think there was a problem. Is the City willing to accept that that land will not be developable or at laast not to its full potential, and probably not by Good Valuet Councilman Lachinski felt that to deny the plat, the City would have to compensate Good Value Homes. And the City is not in any position to do that. He stated the City has an opportunity to accommodate the City of Anoka and it should be done if possible. ~t the City of Anoka and/or Anoka County should be looking at how they will help Andover compensate the developer in the time frame there is. Jerry Lerom, 3951 10th Lane, Anoka - stated several weeks ago the suggestion was made to have a 200-foot corridor for Outlot B. Is that still possible? Mr. Peterson - stated with adequate compensation and assuming it is agreeable to the Council, the answer is yes. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 9 (City of Anoka Resolution, Continued) One woman asked if the triangular piece could be developed as a park. Council noted Andover would not do that because it is across a major thoroughfare and would just, in effect, be providing a park for the City of Anoka. But Anoka could purchase the land for a park. Mr. Peterson - stated if the City of Andover is not interested in having the trinagular piece ot land on that side of the proposed 116, then there is no reason for a delay on Phase II of their plat. If the City is willing to accept the parcel with the angular route, then they might consider a short delay in the plat. Legally, they could have platted the propery without any alignment for 116, but they did so because they knew the County was interested. There have been developers who platted outlots for major corridors but for six years held it, paid taxes on it, etc., until the county acquired it. They are running some risk at platting the corridor hoping the county will acquire the right of way in the future. Discussion continued on questions of this issue as to who compensates Good Value for any loss and the City's legal obligation to act on the plat. Council asked Mr. Peterson if he would be willing to postpone the item for 30 days. Mr. Peterson stated he couldn't answer this evening but would have a letter to the City by the end of the weeK on that question. Recess at 10:03; reconvene at 10:21 p.m. LANDFILL Mayor Windschitl stated several County representatives looked at the landfill, and it was discovered a considerable amount of work has been done to coverthe,Jandfill. Most of it has been covered with lime sludge. Commissioner Haas - reported in a telephone conversation, Rehbein committed to continue to haul the lime sludge, saying by the 31st of July he will have the required lime sludge hauled there. She expected a written confirmation of that will be forthcoming. She also reported the problem with the ordinance regarding the terminal cover in that topsoil is not defined. There is going to be a number of tons Of peat available from the extension of Hanson Boulevard, and she has suggested to the County that they consider acquiring the peat and using it mixed with equal parts of sand and with another third of lime sludge to terminally cover the landfill for seeding. She also stated that it is lime sludge from water, not from sewage. Discussion was also that Rehbein is using Crosstown Boulevard to haul lime sludge into the landfill. Mayor Windschitl stated they are doing that because the area they are trying to cover cannot be reached from Hanson Boulevard. Council felt that there should be a plan to maintain Crosstown Boulevard if it is going to be used, either by the County or by the operator. The preference would be a temporary access off Hanson Boulevard if that could be made workable. Discussion returned to the topsoil for terminal cover. Commissioner Haas stated the obvious preference would be to have the operator pay for hauling the peat to the site; but right now she is thinking in terms of dipping into the half million dollars set aside by the County for solid waste problems to get that peat stockpi led. Commissioner Haas also reported they have a meeting tomorrow to find out what has taken place relative to the cooperative agreement on the landfill. Whe changes that have been made in the agreement appear to mean they may actually get to the barrels four or five months sooner than originally anticipated. Mayor Windschitl also reported ot a meeting being held by Representative Gerry Sikorski on July 7 at 2 o'clock at the Bunker Hills Activity Center to discuss waste problems. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 10 CABLt TELEVISION PKOGKESS REPORT Don Jacobson - reviewed the map of the service area and explained the original proposal was to service 40 homes per caDle mile. The concessions for being allowed an extra three months to construct the system was to serve areas that would not other- wise have been served, which is reflected by the gray areas. That adds about 600 to 700 more people that can now be serviced in the City. Those outside the service area will be able to apply for and receive cable television at a minimal cost. The cable company will contribute $400 per home toward that construction and the homeowner will pay the remaining cost of construction. But as additional homes are built in the area or additional people petition for cable service, that first property owner will receive a rebate every time someone else hooks up, so eventually it will cost those outisde the initial service area the same cost as it is in the southern portion of the City. Those rebates and construction costs are all done by the cable company. Council discussion was on the areas proposed for initial service and why other areas were not included at this time, that cable mile and street mile are not necessarily the same, that there are engineering decisions made into designing the system and which areas will be serviced, and tha. Group W will measure and provide costs tor those making that inquiry. Mr. Jacobson also reported that they are changing some of their equipment and are putting in better equipment than originally bid. The system will be turned on in Anoka sometime in July, in Champlin toward the end of July, and in Andover and Ramsey on September 11. They have ten days from the date of the request to provide service to the home. He also suggested when a developer comes in with a plat in an area that could be serviced that they be advised to contact Group W so underground cable can be installed at the time the other utilities are put in. No Council action was necessary. ANDOVER AUTO PARTS/LICENSE The Clerk reported that not all the work is finished, but they are working on it and it looks considerably better than before. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we continue the Andover Auto Parts Junkyard License application to the next regular scheduled meeting. Motion carried unanimously. SEWtR BILLING POLICY MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, a Resolution amending Resolution No. 14-76 and No. 88-77... (See Resolution R057-83) Motion carried unanimously. 138TH AVENUE FENCING Attorney Hawkins advised that after viewing the ponding area and the back yards of the multiples, he didn't feel there was a hazard there that would authorize the City to do anything. He didn't think it was any different than hundreds of other areas in the City. The grade is so minimal he didn't feel a hazard existed. Council agreed to view that area at tomorrow night's meeting also. AUTHORIZE BOND SALE/NORTHGLEN II, ROSELLA'S ADDITIONS Council reviewed the bids by Springsted Incorporated and by Attorney Hawkins. Mr. Hawkins stated the total amount of the bond issue will not be determined until the City decides whether the other street projects will be ordered, and no money will be needed before September. His quote does not include the registration, as that will be contracted by one of the banks to act as the agent for the purpose of registering the bonds and transferring them. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 11 (Authorize Bond Sale/Northglen II, Rosella's Additions, Continued) Mayor Windschitl stated Springsted called him today about this issue asking that the Council be sure the quotes are comparable. Their quote of $9,100 includes the registra- tion. Attorney Hawkins' quote is ~7,250 plus the bank costs. Mr. Hawkins stated Springsted's fees do not include the bank's fee for transfer. He stated he would provide the same services as Springsted would and the fees for bond counsel would be the same under either proposal. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we accept the proposal from the City Attorney with respect to the sale of bonds for the Northglen II and Rosella's Addition and Shirley's Additiun. Motion carried unanimously. RUM RIVER WATERSHED/JOINT pOW~RS AGRtEMENT Council felt if the City starts housing another governmental body that the costs should be recorded and recovered. The following correction was agreed to: Page 7, second to last line, change dates to correlate with the County's tax collection and disbursement period. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, to approve the Rum River Watershed Joint Powers Agreement as presented tonight with the amended and corrected dates to be determined on Page 7 of the document to correspond with the County's tax collection, and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign. Motion carried unanimously. COUNTY HIGHWAY 116 ROAD ALIGNMENT, CONTINUED DISCUSSION Referencing the disucssion earlier this evening on the City of Anoka Resolution, Attorney Hawkins stated if the City requires Good Value to go with the diagonal alignment, Good Value has said they would do it; but there's probably enough of a loss if they can't develop those lots to justify compensation, and they are entitled to that. ' Quite frankly, they are entitled to compensation on the Outlot B they are proposing now. The City has no authority to set aside property for a highway without acquiring it. The question is at what point does it become such an economic hardship that they will have to force somebody to acquire it. He felt the City could end up on the short end there, possibly requiring the City to acquire the property and pay damages for any severence problems on the triangular piece. He is assuming Good Value will not force the issue; but it has been stated several times if the diagonal alignment is required, they will insist on compensation. Even if those lots were served by the City of Anoka, there's the question of whether or not they are less marketable, a contract with Anoka for services would be required, othe, feasibilies required, etc., extra costs involved for which they will want to be compensated. The worst case is they would bring an inverse condemnation against the City claiming the City required them to set this land aside and have taken property without just compensation. And the City would have to pay the damages, the land costs, plus all court costs. The County hasn't said one way or the other; and even if they did say they wanted the diagonal route, then who is the one that ends up in the lawsuit because Of the severed parcel possibly being unbuidable1 Council discussion was the frustration over the position the City is being placed in, that the County is not but should be acquiring the right of way for whichever route they want, that an alternative would be that the residents in the City of Anoka reach an agreement with Good Value Homes not to develop that property, that an urban section of the proposed 116 with reduced speed limit would lessen the impact to the Anoka residents, that even Outlot B means a loss of $840,000 of assessed valuation to the City every year, that with the diagonal route, the potential loss of assessed valuation to the City every year of 21 lots is $1.8 million, and that Good Value Homes gave up a mobile home permit for that area. A suggestion was to allow the diagonal route of 116, Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 12 (County Highway 116 Road Alignment, Continued Discussion) have it constructed with an urban section but require service roads on both sides. Another suggestion was to move the Outlot B easterly one row of lots so the residents in Anqj<,i- w~lð1 have houses behind them, but the road would still be going in a north- south ec f\;hough the City ot· Anoka wou ld st ill have to servi ce that one row Of' lots west of the proposed 116 and a service road may be needed. Still another option is to tell the County to either acquire the right of way they want or the property will be platted without any 116 designation. Discussion continued on the position the City finds itself in, on the options available, on the City of Anoka resolution and past experiences in working with them and noting the road is not to benefit Andover but for the City of Anoka and the County. No action was taken at this time. At this time Mayor Windschitl closed this meeting to conduct a special Closed Meeting with the City Attorney on Hanson Boulevard Acquisitions. 11 :28 p.m. This meeting was reconvened at 12:04 a.m. REVENUE SHARING AUDIf MOIION by Elling, Seconded by Orttel, that we approve the sum of ~650 for revenue sharing audit for George M. Hanson and Company. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we approve Checks Numbered 6607 through 6661 for a sum total of ~70,264.88. Motion carried unanimously. MOIION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at lZ:26 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~\~ Mar lla A. Peach Recording Secretary ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CLOSED CITY COUNcIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1983 MINUTES The Closed Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on June 21, 1983, 11:28 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota, to discuss easement acquisitions for Hanson Boulevard project with the City Attorney. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, James Schrantz; and City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist Attorney Hawkins reported he has negotiated a settlement with two parcels that he wishes the Council to act on tonight. There are three parcels remaining that are unsettled -- Holasek, Hamilton, and Santa's Tree Farm -- which will be heard next Tuesday. So the City will be able to take possession the week after next. The two settlements he negotiated were not for the amounts made by the City's appraiser. The first one is tor Walter Laptuda. 1he City's appraiser appraised the property at $2,200, and his appraiser appraised it at $2,800. In speaking with the City's appraiser, he felt the appraisals were within the range of reason. And normally in such instances the Commissioners will make the award equal to the difference of the two appraisals. To go through the hearings it costs the City in excess Of $700 per day. So it was decided to settle this at $2,600 for 2.927 acres. Attorney Hawkins also reported on the settlement with Maynard Apel. The City's appraiser appraised the property at $1,880, and their appraiser estimated $2,820. Using the same logic, they agreed to a settlement of $2,500 for 3.759 acres, which is mainly swampland under an easement. When talking about figures that close, economically it is to the City's advantage to settle the matter. Council discussion was on the proposed settlements. Mayor Windschitl was concerned that the reason for the condemnation procedure to begin with was to avoid these types of settlements. Also, the attorney that represents these two individuals also represents the three parcels which have not yet settled, questioning if Council action could be used as leverage in that case. He was also concerned that those who settled voluntari Iy did not receive as much as those who held out. Attorney Hawkins didn't feel the Council's action would be used as leverage in the rem~i.ning cases because the appraiser in the other three instances came in substantially higher than in these two cases. He stated the net result is those people will not receive as much as those who settled initially because of the extra expeses they incurred for lawyers, time, etc. It should also be noted if these went to court, the overall costs for acquisition would be higher because of the court costs that wou Id accrue which would be more than these settlements. Mayor Windschitl still stated he had a problem with this, hoping the City could get away from negotiated settlements and treat everyone equally. He'd even feel better if it was an even split in the Apel case. Attorney Hawkins stated most cities start the condemnation procedure to eliminate all the haggling and felt the City would be taking an unreasonaple stance by saying in every instance the City's appraiser is 100 percent correct. He felt there must be some flexibility. Councilman Orttel stated by relying on what the Attorney has said, these two instances would probably be split by the Commissioners. And on that basis, it would cost more to the people on the project if the City does not accept these negotiated settlements. Attorney Hawkins stated he too gave considerable thought to this, noting the same concerns that the Mayor has. But it comes down to the question of economics. r- Special Closed City Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 Mayor Windschitl did not want the City to get the reputation of granting more money to those who will not settle but will wait until the end, but reluctantly agreed to the sett lement. Council also felt that when negotiating, people should be made aware of the $300 that can be used to obtain their own appraisal. MOTION by Urttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the City Council authorize payments to property owners for Hanson Boulevard· acquisition as presented by the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting closed at 12:04 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~L Marce la A. Peach Recording Secretary