Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH/SP July 13, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 13, 1983 AGENDAS 1. Call to Order - Public Hearing/Street Improvement 1983-5 7:30 P.M. 2. Items 1) , 2) , 3)A-I, Public Hearing Procedural Pamphlet, Page 3 3. Adjournment 1. Call to Order - Public Hearing/Street Improvement 1983-6 8:30 P.M. 2. Items 1) , 2) , 3)A-r, Public Hearing Procedural Pamphlet, Page 3 3. Adjournment 1. Call to Order - Special Meeting 2. Agenda Approval 3. Discussion on Re-construction of Double Bungalows/140th Lane NW 4. Adoption of Ordinance No. 64- Emergency Ordinance 5. Adoption of Resolution of Declaration of Emergency 6. 7. 8. 9. Adjournment ~ 01 ANDOVER PUBLIC HEARINGS/SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 13, 1983 MINUTES Pursuant to notice published thereof, Public Hearings for the Street Improvement Projects of 1983-5 and 1983-6 in the areas known as Nordeen's Addition and 175th Lane NW, Orchid Street, and 17-6th Lane were called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on July 13, 1983, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilmen absent: None Also present: BRA Engineer, Glen Cook; City Engineer, James Schrantz; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; and interested residents STREtT IMPROVEMENT 1983-5/NORDtEN'S ADDITION Mayor Windschitl briefly reviewed the public hearing procedure and Mr. Cook reviewed the proposed improvement tor Nordeen's Addition. The estimated cost for the project is $129,280 for an estimated unit cost of $2,500. This is assuming the project will be assessed this year so no capitalized interest would accumulate. The road would be 28 feet face to face with bituminous berm, and he reviewed the culverts that would be installed for storm drainage control. The Hearing was then open for public testimony. Bob Berndt, 15515 Kumquat - asked if the city pays the assessments for the lots they own 1n the Addit10n and why does the city own those lots. Mayor Windschitl stated the city would pay the assessment on the lots it owns. The city owns the lots because of tax forfeitures and it is the intent to try to sell them. Council discussion with the Engineers also noted that Parcel 2540 in the northeast corner of 156th Avenue is not proposed to be assessed because it exits out to 157th Avenue. Dean Carlson, 524 157th Avenue - stated his home is on the corner of Kumquat and 157th, Dut nis dr1veway comes off 157th. He owns six acres, but purchased the second three-acre parcel a year later, and that is why it is shown as two parcels. He didn't feel the second parcel was large enough to subdivide. Discussion by the Engineers is that the land is divided into two parcels and one fronts on Kumquat. It was their opinion that with some fill Mr. Carlson would be able to get a building permit for that parcel. That would need to be investigated further for the assessment hearing if this project is ordered. It was also their opinion at this time that that parcel would be too low to build on off of 156th Lane. The platting ordinance requires a 2~-acre minimum lot size, but lots of record prior to the ordinance changes are considered buildable lots in most cases. It was stated by several people in the audience that they had not had a chance to sign the petition. Councilman Orttel stated two people called him indicating their opposition to the project, but they were on the original petition as being opposed. He also stated that Mel Larson, who is shown on the petition as a Yes but who couldn't be at this meeting, called him this evening expressing opposition to the project. Discussion also noted that those individuals owning more than one lot would have a vote for each lot owned. Several people then came forward to the Engineer to indicate their vote on the project. Afterward Mr. Schrantz reported that of the 52 lots, five are owned by the City, 20 indicated in favor of the project, and 15 were opposed, with the remaining not indicating a preference. The Yes vote represents a~proximately 36~ percent of all assessable lots. Public Hearings/Special City Council Meeting July 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 (Street Improvement 1983-5/Nordeen's Addition, Continued) MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we authorize Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates to prepare final plans and specifications for the Nordeen Addition, Project 1983-5, for the improvement of public city streets and to advertise for b·ids on the project. Motion carr1ed unanimously. Because of an error in the wording of the motion, Council agreed to close the public input portion of the meeting, to rescind this motion, and to remake this motion in the correct form. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we close the public input portion of the Nordeen Addition, Project 1983-5. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we rescind the prior motion of Councilman Lachlnski. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we order Public Improvement 1983-5 for the Nordeen Addition Improvement of City Streets and authorize the firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik to prepare the plans and specifications and to advertise for bidding the proj ect. (See Resolution R063-83) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, that we close the public hearing on the 83-5 proj ect. Motion carried unanimously. Hearing closed at 8:10 p.m. Mayor Windschitl then called a brief ,Special Meeting to order prior to the convening of the 1983-6 project public hearing at 8:35. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 64 - EMERGENCY ORDINANCE MOTION by Orttel, ~econded by Knight, the City Council adopt an Ordinance prov1ding for the waiving of certain ordinance requirements during emergency situations as a result of wind, fire, flood, or other natural disasters... Motion carried unanimously. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY MOTION by Lachinski,~econded by Orttel, introducing a Resolution declaring an emergency situation as a result of severe wind damage occurring on the Third Day of July, 1983... (See Resolution R064-83) Motion carried unanimously. VOLUNTEER PAY FOR EMPLOYEES Council discussion was on the motion made at the prior meeting relative to recognition pay to several employees. Mayor Windschitl stated for anyone who worked part time for the fire department or related to the fire department, he signed the recognition pay checks. He asked the Council's interpretation of the Motion in relation to those employees who were paid for all overtime hours worked during the emergency. Council generally agreed the intent of the Motion was that the recognition pay was for the volunteer work only. It was agreed that because Ms. Volk and the three CEIA employees were paid for all overtime hours worked during the emergency, they would not receive the recognition pay. Because d'Arcy Bosell is a City Off1cial, it was also felt she would not qualify for the recognition pay. There was a question as to whether or not Ray Sowada worked for the fire department dur1ng that time. The Mayor signed the check with the understanding that Ms. Lindquist would verify his doing volunteer work during the emergency. DISCUSSION ON RECONSTRUCTION OF DOUBLE BUNGALOWS/140TH LANE NW Mayor Windschitl stated there is an opinion if the buildings were more than 50 percent destroyed, it is a nonconforming use and the City does not have to allow them to be rebuilt as double bungalows because it is subject to current ordinances. He also explained the situation is further complicated because the present ordinances specifically Public Hearings/Special ~,ty Counci I Meeting July 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 (Uiscussion on . Reonstruction of Double Bungalows/140th Lane NW, Continued) does not allow double bungalows, so a variance or special use permit could not be given. He felt the City does have a right to require a minimum of 800 square feet plus a garage. Discussion noted the lot sizes of those double bunalows destroyed on July 3 are that of a single family residence in that area and that the foundations are 24x60 feet, which as a single-family home would be quite a bit larger than the other homes in the area. Councilman Orttel felt the City should allow the doubles to be reconstructed but that they should be required to meet the existing size requirements plus a garage. Based on the Attorney's opinion last week, he didn't feel it would be a wise use of the City's money to deny the reconstruction of the doubles and possibly have to defend that action in court. Councilman Knight also noted what complicates this is that it would be changing income property because they were rental units. Ms. Lindquist stated in talking with the Attorney, it is his opinion that the City would not do very well in court, that the City would either be required to allow them to rebuild as doubles or to subsidize them for the loss of future income. Mayor Windschitl disagreed, feeling this type of thing occurs all the time in other cities. Discussion continued after the public hearing for the 1983-6 project. Mayor Windschitl then called the public hearing to order for the 1983-6 street improvement project for the 175th Lane, Orchid Street, and 176th Lane area at 8:35 p.m. Mr. Cook first addressed the 175th Lane portion of the project, noting the improvement is estimated at $51,800 for a proposed unit cost of $2,350. The Hearing was then open to public testimony. Palmer Johnson, 3401 175th Lane - was concerned with how the dra1nage ditch proposed across 175th Lane will be constructed and whether he will be able to maintain it. He lives adjacent to the proposed ditch. Discussion with the Engineers was that it will be a drainage swale at the road and an open ditch to the back. The ditch would be a little deeper nearer the road, but will become quite shallow as it goes to the back of the lot, just enough to be able to carry the water back. He would be able to mow the area. Mr. Johnson - stated the original figure was $2,625, and now it is $2,350, which is a 10.4 percent drop. But the street width changed from 32 feet wide to 28 feet, which is a 12~ percent drop. He asked why the cost figure didn't drop accordingly. Mr. Cook explained the street width of 32 feet was back to back and the 28-toot width is face to face, which amounts to only a 6~ percent decrease in width. M~~ Windschitl also explained in the event the project comes in considerably higher, the residents will be called back to see if they wish to continue with the project. Mr. Johnson - also asked why the reduction in proposed cost vary between 175th and the Orchid Street portion of the project. Mr. Cook explained one of the things that was changed from the original feasibility study is the portion of Orchid to the back of the property lines of 175th has been included with the 175th area. which raised the cost to the 175th area project. It was felt this would be the most equitable method to everyone involved. Councilman Lachinski felt a case could also be made for extending l75th up Quay to 176th for the same reasons. Mr. Schrantz stated the property of 17536 Quay faces Quay and was not included in this hearing. Mr. Johnson - asked how wide the drainage ditch will be and if the property will be condemned. Mr. Cook stated an easement will be needed through that area, ideally five feet from each side of the property line. It is hoped the easement will be donated; otherwise the cost would need to be added to the cost of the project. The attempt is to make the ditch as maintenance free as possible, and any maintenance would be the responsibility of the City. Mayor Windschitl suggested if the project is ordered that Mr. Johnson work out an arrangement with the engineers that is agreeable to everyone. Public Hearings/~pecial City Council Meeting July 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 4 (Street Improvement 1983-6, Continued) Charles Brooks, 3287 175th Lane - asked if the county taxes have gone up much when such projects are put in, and also if there are county funds that could be used for this road since the county indirectly benefits by receiving more tax dollars from the residents as a result of the improvement. Discussion was such improvements are included to some degree when valuations are set, but in the past the increase has been less then the assessed cost of the improvement. There is no knowledge of any county funds available for residential street improvements. Mr. Johnson - asked if speed bumps could be put in to reduce the speed. He stated the police were out but did not spend much time there, complaining of the problem they have on 175th with high speed traffic. The Clerk stated the Sheriff's Department was given a memo about this problem but she has not gotten a report back. Mayor Windschitl asked that the Clerk get the logs to determine how much time the Deputies have spent in that area. Ted Weiss, 3248 175th - stated he has lived there tor seven years and felt the problem with speed1ng traffic is getting worse, stating there is a lot of traffic on that road from people outside the immediate neighborhood. There was some discussion on the possibility of placing a stop sign on 175th and Orchid in an attempt to slow the speed and discourage outside traffic. Mr. Weiss stated that would not bother him. Mr. Johnson - stated in the two accidents he knows of on 175th, both involved the police. Mayor Windschitl stated the item of speed control on the road could be added as a separate agenda item at some future Counci 1 meeting. Mr. Wielgosz, 3309 176th Lane - asked how many feet of road was involved for both projects (175th area and the Orchid and 176th area). Mr. Cook estimated approximately 1900 feet on 175th and 1800 feet on Orchid and 176th. Mr. Wielgosz - asked what is the reason for the difference in the price and what is the cross section of the road. Discussion noted there is about a $6,000 difference in the price between the two projects because there is more grading on 175th. Mr. Cook also explained the road bed is 4 inches of gravel, a minimum of l~-inch mat, 28 feet face to face with berm curb. Tom Landowski, 3328 175th Lane NW - asked what is done with the driveways. Mr. tõok explained a two-foot apron off the edge of the payment will be put in. There are a few driveways that are within one or two feet of that and they would probably match those driveways, but otherwise it is up to the property owner to take care of his own driveway. The contractor on the job mayor may not want to get involved with putting in driveways for property owners on an individual basis. Rick Bartell, 17610 Orchid - asked what is intended to be done with the water coming down the hill on Orch1d. He is the first big lot on the left and there is a maintenance problem there now. Discussion with the Engineers was that there will be a maintenance problem, especially if the project to the north is not done, and they will have to spread the water out as much as possible. Chuck Benolkin, 176th and Orchid - lives on the corner and stated he gets enough water coming down there as it is now whenever it rains. At times there is as much as a foot of water on his lot and in the street, feeling the paving of the portion of Orchid by 175th would create a worse problem. He showed the Council on the map where the water comes from and the problems they have had with water drainage. Mayor Windschitl asked what could be done to solve the problem. Couldn't some easements be acquired to direct the water to a low area? Public Hearings/Special City Council Meeting July 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 5 (Street Improvement 1983-6, Continued) Mr. Benolkin - stated there is a low area to the west which could be drained to, but 1t would first have to be brought through a high area. Mr. Cook stated the water in the area also drains to the north. John Thompson, 17680 Orchid - stated his field tapers to a low spot and it shouldn't be too much of a problem to cut the road so the water runs to that area. If it would help the problem, he stated the City could run the water that way. He also asked why the project is broken up into two projects. Mayor Windschitl stated the only petition they received with 35 percent of the property was from the 175th area. The Orchid Street and 176th Lane area was included just to provide the information for residents and to see what they thought about it. Plus the lot sizes in the two areas are different. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we close the public input portion of the Public Hearing for Improvement 1983-6. Motion carried unanimously. Council discussion was then on whether or not the improvement project should extend up Quay Street to 176th or at least half way up to 176th, that 176th and Quay is another maintenance problem area, that the proposal is to round the curve on 175th and Quay with this project, and that the lot on Quay that would be affected (17536 Quay) had voted against the project on the petition and was not included in this project hearing. It was suggested that portion of Quay between 175th and 176th be made an alternate on the bid to see what the costs are. Then that property owner could also be brought in for a public hearing at that time and the project would not have to be held up. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we order the public improvement Project Number 1983-6, the portion dealing with 175th Lane, and order the firm of Bonestroo, Anderlik and Rosene to prepare final plans and specifications and to advertise for bidding the project. (See Resolution R065-83) Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was then on the Orchid Street and 176th Lane portion of the 1983-6 project. The estimated cost is $45,275 for a proposed assessment of $3,775 per unit. Mayor Windschitl asked why Orchid is proposed to the property line to the north. Mr. Cook felt that if something were ever to be done with the proeprty to the north that Orchid would be extended north. The owner of that property stated his house is off Round Lake Boulevard and he has no intention of developing that property. The property owner at 17680 Orchid also stated his driveway is almost to the end of Orchid. Mayor Windschitl then stated the Council has no idea what the property owners in this area would like and asked for resident input on the proposed project. Ralph Elliott, 3208 176th - owns three lots shown on the tngineer's map but stated two of the lots shown are actually one lot. He stated he does not like this project. He received no information about this project and was not notified of tonight's hearing. He heard about it from a neighbor. A gentleman from 17648 Round Lake Boulevard also stated he did not receive a letter about this public hearing. He just moved there in April. Mr. Wielgosz - stated he had a petition from the residents of the area. He stated it is a unanimous no vote on the project because of the cost. tlut he also didn't understand the basis for dividing the two areas up (referring to the l75th area and this area). As far as he was concerned, the roads are common to everyone. He also felt the City is making a mistake by only doing the short area of Orchid with 175th Lane because there is a great deal of water off Orchid when it rains, and this will Public Hearings/Special City Council Meeting July 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 6 (Street Improvement 1983-6,Continued) make it more of an impass. There are other bad areas in there, and the grading done is not impressive. So he didn't think it was right to split up the project into two are as . By making it one large project, the cost could have been reduced to $3,OOu per unit or less, which would have been more acceptable. He also stated there are volunteer firemen on both sides of that portion of Orchid that wi 11 be done with the 175th project. Council disucssion was that if the two projects were put together, it would have had to be assessed on a front-footage basis because of the difference in lot sizes in the two areas. So the costs wou ld probably have been comparab le to what was presented this evening. Council also stated they were not aware that there are two volunteer firemen on that portion of Orchid Street, and the people in that project area were complaining about that addition because it adds to the cost of their project. .It also decreases the cost to this area should this project be ordered. Mr. Wlelgosz - asked what has been the increase in cost per year on asphalt. Mr. Cook stated since 1979 there hasn't been much of an increase, but they anticipate it wi 11 go back up again . Mr. Wielgosz - asked what can be done about the dust. Can they oil and what would it cost? And what is the cost of Class 5? Council discussion was there is no good solution to keeping the dust down, that oil creates problems Decause it tracks into the homes and develops potholes, that gravel creates more dust than the sand, that to put in Class 5 one would also need to grade the road tirst, and the grading and laying of Class 5 is about half the cost of the improvement project proposed this evening. Mr. Schrantz could determine the cost for oiling. Mr. Wielgosz - stated he would like to find some way to settle down the dust. Mr. Schrantz fe lt the drainage problems in the area shou ld be addressed first. Mayor Windschitl suggested Mr. Schrantz meet with those affected, look at the area and see what could be done to drain the water from that area. Gene Pancake, 17601 Orchid - stated about four years ago the City graded the road to make it ready for Class 5, but the gravel was never put down. No one on the Council remembered that being done, stating thfs will be investigated to see what happened. Someone suggested the road be crowned when grading. Mayor Windschitl stated they should talk with Mr. Schrantz about that as well. The property owner to the north of Orchid asked if Orchid is ever improved would he receive an assessment for abutting Orchid. Mayor Windsch1tl stated the question that would need to be answered at the time of the assessment is whether there is a buildable lot there that is being serviced. Mr. Cook stated that parcel was not included as an assessable parcel for this project. In further discussions, the residents stated the majority were in favor of the improvement but were opposed at this time because of the cost. The Council again stated the only reason this was brought to the public hearing stage was the proximity to 175th and to provide the information to the residents. Council also noted the costs for oiling the roads could be placed on the agenda tor the first meeting in August, but also noted that in the past the City has done very little oiling. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we close the public portion of the public hearing for 1983-6, 176th Lane and Orchid. Motion carried u'nanimously. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we terminate any further consideration at this time for improving l76th Lane and Orchid Street as part of the 1983-6 improvement project. (See Resolution R066-83) Motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 9:45 p.m. Public Hearings/Special City Council Meeting July 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 7 The Special City Council was then reconvened. KADALAC ADDITION PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Windschitl asked for a motion to authorize notice for a public hearing for Kadalac Addition to be published on July 22 and 29 and to set the public hearing for August 2. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, to so move. (See Resolution R067-83) Mot1on carried unanimously. DISCUSSION ON RECONSTRUCTION OF DOUBLE BUNGALOWS/140TH LANE, CONTINUED Council generally felt they did not have enough information to make a decision on this matter. The Clerk was directed to find out what other cities do in such instances. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. " RespectfullY~~ . ~CJvJ~~' < . Mar ell a A. Peach Recoruing Secretary "