HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC May 15, 1984
~ 01 ANDOVER
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 15, 1984
AGENDA
1- Call to Order - 7:30 P.M.
2. Resident Forum
3. Agenda Approval
4. Discussion Items
a. Coon Creek Watershed District CIP/Cost Allocations
b. Wrf¥itr/etrj /i M /f! I /CfJIf/r:jrf (Delete)
c. Vacation of Easement - R.. sonsteby
d. Junkyards - Licenses/Fencing
e. FPS - MSA Projects
f. Reset Public Hearing/South Coon Creek Drive Improvements
g.
5. Non-Discussion Items
a. North Central Franchise
b. Cable Television - Franchise Ordinance Amendment
c. Revised Grading Plan - Ivywood Estates
d. Temporary Mobile Home Permit/D. Horst
6. Reports of Commissions, Committees, Staff
a. Fire Department/Luvern Fire Equipment Charges
b. Administration/Pt-Time Help, LMC Conferences
c.
7. Approval of Claims
8. Approval of Minutes
e. Adjournment
~ 01 ANDOVER
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
TO: M"YOR AND COTTtTCIL
COPIES TO: ;::~"~~:;'~:":DM'N"T'~
FROM:
DA TE:
MI>.V 10, 1 qR4
REFERENCE: AGENDA COMMENTS - MAY 1'i r 1984 REGULAR MEETING
Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval
Please delete Item No. 4b (M.R. Olson-Variance) and add Item No. 5d
(Temporary Mobile Home Permit-Horst)
Item No. 4a - Coon Creek watershed District/CIP-Cost Allocations
You have been mailed information from me under the date of April 17,
covering the proposed Joint Powers Agreement for the collection of
Developer Fees. Such fees and other costs associated with the
Capital Improvement Program for the Watershed District were enclosed
with the memo and Agreement. Representatives from the Watershed
District will be at the meeting to answer your questions on the
fees, policies and assessments.
Item No. 4c - Vacation of Easement/R. Sonsteby
In reviewing the maps of previous vacations, it was found that a
portion of this easement requested to be vacated lies on the Francis
property. Mrs. Francis has objected to this vacation at previous
meetings. Mrs. Sonsteby is requesting this vacation on the basis
that the original deed of the property for easement purposes indicates
the easement will be vacated if it is not used, of which she contends
that it has not because there are large trees on it. Enclosed is the
legal description prepared by James Nielson and reviewed by our attorney.
If it is the Council's wish to approve the vacation, please direct me
to prepare a resolution to this effect, using the enclosed description;
if denial is the Council's wish, a resolution must also be prepared,
however, the reasons for such denial must be given.
Item No. 4d - Junkyards/Licensing
The licenses for Anoka Auto Wrecking, Wilber's, and Schriptek were
approved conditioned on an escrow deposit to cover the fencing
required should it not be done by May 1. Anoka Auto Wrecking has
installed the berm and fence all the way around their property, however,
when Hanson Boulevard was constructed, the roadway was raised making
it such that in order to keep the cars not visible from the roadway,
a 14-16 foot fence would have to be installed, which of course, would
not be feasible; further, their property is almost a quarter mile from
Hanson Boulevard, so there would be a question on whether they would be
Agenda Comments
May 15, 1984 Meeting
Page 2
Item No. 4d - Junkyard Fencing Requirements (continued)
under such provisions of the ordinance. Inasmuch as Hanson Boulevard
was constructed following that of the junkyard operation, the grandfather
provision may come into play (Attorney Hawkins will give us an opinion
on this). It would be my recommendation, if I am interpreting,the
ordinances correctly, that the fence be accepted and the escrow deposit
refunded. Wilber's have their fence installed pursuant to ordinance
requirements; it should be accepted and the escrow deposit refunded.
Schriptek, Inc. has not installed their fence and would like to discuss
this with the Council. Mr. Slayback and Mr. Chapman will be at the
meeting.
Item No. 4e - Final Plans & Specifications/MSA Projects
B.R.A. , Inc. will present the FPS for 1)161st Avenue and 2)South Coon
Creek Drive (Central portion). Resolutions have been prepared for
acceptance of the plans as presented.
Item No. 4f - Reset Public Hearing/South Coon Creek Drive Improvements
In order to allow time for the Staff and Council to review the question
of the feasibility of extending municipal water to service this area,
the Public Heairng should be extended to the June 5th Meeting.
Item No. 5a - North Central Franchise Ordinance
This item was carried over from the May 1 Meeting. A motion should be
made to accept the ordinance as amended by the City.
Item No. 5b - Cable Television/Franchise Ordinance Amendment
Enclosed is a letter from the Commission Attorney outlining the proposed
amendments. These amendments are as a result of the settlement with
Group W. A motion is needed to adopt these amendments to Ordinance 59.
Item No. 5c - Revised Gradinq Plan/Ivywood Estates
Enclosed is a memo from the City Engineer requesting the Council to
approve the revised grading plan which incorporates some changes to
the drainage provisions.
Item No. 5d - Temporary Mobile Home Permit/D. Horst
Enclosed is a letter from the Horst's requesting permission to park
a trailer on their property on Constance Boulevard (Plat 65914 Parcel 5000).
A motion should be made to approve the request contingent upon the
Horst's securing their building permit for their structure and connecting
to a well and septic system.
Item No. 6a - Fire Department
Enclosed is a letter from LuVern Fire Equipment covering the charges for
labor on the repair order; and a response to the allegations made by
them.
Agenda Comments
May 15, 1984 Meeting
Page 3
Item No. 6b - Part-Time Help, LMC Conference
Pursuant to Council directive, I have requested help from M.E.E.D. and
Community Services for the accounting department and have received no
response. The request was simply for clerical help, with ability and
desire to do some figure work. In view of this, I would again like to
request that Tim Koltes be hired to work with Shirley for 8-16 hours
per week. Jim Schrantz and Frank Stone would still like to use his
services for the sewer work needed this summer.
Registration has to be sent in by June 1 for the LMC; therefore, I
will have to know the number of Councilmembers who will be attending.
Item No. 7 - Approval of Minutes
February 21, March 6, 22, 28, April 7, 1 7, May 1
Enclosures
~ 01 ANDOVER'
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 15, 1984
MINUTES
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by
Mayor Jerry Windschitl on May 15, 1984, 7:38 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota.
Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel
Councilman absent: None
A 1 so present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, James
Schrantz; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist;
and others
AGENDA APPROVAL
The following changes were suggested: Delete Item 4b, Variance - M. R. Olson; Add
Item 6c, Community School, and 6d, Police Department. Mayor Windschitl asked for a
motion to approve the Agenda as amended.
MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, to so move. Motion carried unanimously.
COON CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT CIP/COST ALLOCATIONS
The following representatives of the Coon Creek Watershed Board were present: Chairman
Mel Schulte, Willie Peterson, Al Sannerud, Ken Slyzuk, Loren Hendges, and Engineer
Harold Israelson.
Mr. Schulte explained Ditch 54 in Coon Rapids going north turns into Ditch 57 in
Andover, and it is all known as Coon Creek. It has different ditch numbers because it
was dug in different years. They had a study done, which found they should be looking
at regional ponding rather than small ponds within individual developments. A
committee was established to set ground rules as to how to assess for those regional
ponds. They are cleaning Ditch 58 right now, and at last night's meeting they began
the process for cleaning Ditch 57, though it will not be done this year. Their study
also found that all the ditches should be cleaned back to the original states. As
development occurred, they would have monies put into a ponding fund, developing a
regional pond as demand warrants. The project for Ditch 57 will be done similiar to
Ditch 54. Mr. Schulte stated if the City would care to appoint a committee of citizens
to determine which trees should be left, etc., it would be helpful to the Board. The
assessment for the cleaning of Ditch 57 will be based on a redetermination of benefit,
which will also pick up all those parcels that now drain into the Ditch that were
originally not assessed for it. Mr. Sannerud stated the normal benefit for those in
Coon Rapids was $95 per parcel, but the actual cost will be $65 to $70 per parcel. The
formula is different for the different uses of land.
Rosella Sonsteby - asked if the Watershed will allow people to drain into their ditch.
She also asked if they are allowed to drain water from their watershed area to outside
the district. Mr. Schulte stated they would have to petition, but they have a hydro-
logical boundary, and they are not allowed to drain outside their watershed district.
Mayor Windschitl explained the City's concern over the assessment policy for the regional
ponds. He noted there are two developments that may be coming in very soon around
Bunker Lake and Crosstown Boulevards. His understanding of the policy is that those
parcels could be assessed for the benetit today for the property and can be assessed
another assessment. Mr. Israelson explained the first is tor the repair of Ditch 57
which will be assessed against the property based on the determination of benefit for
each parce 1 . As the land is developed, there is greater usage of the ditch because of
more runotf due to more hard-surfaced areas, etc. That is where the ponding fee comes
into being, which has been established based on plats coming through the past six years
prior to 1983. They standardized a table for each type of development in which large lots
are assessed at a much lower rate than a more dense development situation.
Regular city Council Meeting
May 15, 19S4 - Minutes
Page 2
(Coon Creek Watershed District CIP/Cost Allocations, Continued)
Mayor Windschitl felt the problem is had everyone in the watershed district been
required to do this, it would not be questioned. But the vast bulk of Coon Rapids,
Blaine, etc., developed without this fee. And the feeling is that Andover and Ham Lake
are having to pay a disportionate amount of the ponding requirements. It appears to be
a penalty to those developing now and in the future. The trouble is not with the ponding
concept, but how it should be paid tor. Mr. Schulte explained it was generally felt
that the small ponds that were created through the district became unsightly and
difficult to maintain after several years, and the thought was the regional ponding
would be a better method of ponding. Those developments that put in individual ponds
had to pay for that and lots were lost as a result. Now they will pay a fee for the
regional pond. There has already been half a dozen developments in Coon Rapids who have
paid that tee. Mr. Peterson stated the costs of the individual ponds required of
developers before is close to what the regional ponding fee now being required is.
Councilman Lachinski asked in the case of the Good Value property, if the regional
pond is not on their property now, will they be able to drain right into the creek.
Mr. Schulte stated yes, but they wil I have to pay the regional ponding fee. Councilman
Orttel asked if the ponding fee is determined on total acreage or just the lot area.
Mr. Israelson stated they do reduce the size of the total area if there is parkland,
state property or county park. If lowland is designated as an outlot, the fee would be
based on the plat; and the lowland would pay whenever it develops. Councilman Orttel
felt the reason the fee and ponding concept is being enacted is to reduce increased
runoff due to new construction. His problem with the figures seem to indicate that the
small lot would pay about $95; whereas someone on a 10-acre lot with the same amount of
runorr is paying 3\ times more for the same amount of development. He didn't feel that
large an increase could be justified.
Mr. Israelson related why they feel that formula is justified, given increased driveway
length, larger yard, etc. Mr. Schulte also stated when property is platted, the
regional ponding fee would apply; but it probably wouldn't if property were just divided
by a lot split.
Mayor Windschitl felt it would be more tolerable if the costs for the regional ponds
would be divided equally among the cities rather than the vast bulk being assessed to
Andover and Ham Lake, who have the most undeveloped land at this time. He stated
Andover doesn't have a problem paying its fair share of the podning costs, but it is
troublesome ending up paying for Coon Rapids' or Blaine's portion. He felt there is
an inequity in the assessment, especially on those who are the last to develop. Mr.
Schulte felt that is not necessarily true, but that developer would have had the
expense of an individual pond. But possibly their finance committee, of which Andover's
Clerk was a member, should discuss this further. But he didn't know if it could be
made more equitable. Mr. Israelson stated they did look at different ways of handling
it, and the final formula was the simpliest way. The effect of putting it on the
general tax levy isn't necessarily equitable to the existing people, that is building
a pond to serve future developments. The idea was the cost of the ponds should be on
the shoulders of the developers who are causing that requirement for additional ponding.
Councilman Orttel stated in reading the regulations, it appears that metes ,and bounds
subdivision would be required to pay the ponding fee. Watershed Board members indicated
that would be correct on commercial property and was not meant to apply to residential
property.
Councilman Orttel didn't think the regulations read that way. He was also curious as
to how the figures were arrived at, disagreeing with the notion that a 10-acre lot
should pay 50 percent more than a 2\- or 5-acre lot. Many times the larger lots have
a lot of lowland that cannot be developed, but that would still apply toward the ponding
fee. He didn't feel it was equitable, as the more rural the area, the more they will pay.
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 1984 - Minutes
Page 3
(Coon Creek Watershed District CIP/Cost Allocations, Continued)
Mayor Windschitl again stated the City has no problem with the regional ponding concept
but asked to have the figures looked at again as to how it affects Andover, feeling
Andover is ending up with a disportionate amount of the regional ponding costs being
paid for by future Andover residents. He again suggested assessing the taxing district
concept of spreading the costs among the four cities involved. Mr. Schulte felt their
attorney would have some problems with assessing the entire watershed district for the
regional ponding costs, because each individual ditch system works on its own dollar
assessed valuation. He again suggested the City sit down with their committee to see
if there is a better way of assessing that would be agreeable to all. But a great
deal of work and thought was given to the formula; and it was arrived at by the committee,
of which several Andover staff were members.
Councilman Orttel asked if someone had been farming 160 acres for years and paid for
the original ditch, when the property develops, will they pay the same per-acre fee as
the others. Watershed Board members stated they would, but generally those who paid for
the original creek are low and are not developable.
Councilman Orttel asked if there has been some serious thought as to where those regional
ponds would be located. Mr. Israelson stated three locations are being seriously con-
sidered, but none are currently being considered in Andover. Council noted at such time
as an area in Andover is defined, the Council should be made aware of it as soon as
possible to be able to protect the area for that use. Mr. Israelson also commented
the Watershed had hoped to work with the communities when developing the regional ponds
to make them a multi-use facility.
Councilman Orttel asked if the per-acre cost would be indexed each year. Mr. Israelson
stated it was intended that it would be reviewed each year based on the cost of ponding.
Mayor Windschitl noted on the Good Value property off Bunker Lake Boulevard there are a
number of natural low areas. If they used existing low areas for part of their drainage,
is that area backed out of the per-acre calculation for regional ponding. Mr. Israelson
statednQ; the Watershed does not give credit f'or on-site ponding. Mr. Schulte related
cases where the regional ponding fee was less costly for the developer than developing
on-site ponding.
Mayor Windschitl argued that most of the property in Andover has natural ponds on them.
And if they cannot get credit for what will be draining on site, then the program is
even more unfair to Andover. Mr. Israelson stated if all the water is being held on site,
there would be no fee, but it will be the City's concern to maintain it. But if the
ponds overflow, which most of them do, then the fee would become effective. In that
case no credit would be given for the pond because all too often the overflow occurs
at the time everything is coming through on the main channel. After some more discussion
on this policy there seemed to be a difference of opinion as to just how that policy
would work. The Mayor asked that at the next engineer's meeting, a clearer understanding
of that policy be prepared because it is a common occurrence in Andover.
VACATION OF EASEMENT - R. SONSTEBY
Attorney Hawkins reported he still has had no response from the Hagen attorney relative
to reasons for the objections raised to the vacation ot the easement. He telt if the
Council thinks it is in the best public interest to vacate the easement, it has a right
to do so. Ihe Clerk raised the issue of part of the easement being on the Francis property.
Rosella Sonsteby - stated she deeded that to Bonnie Francis by Winner's Survey and it
1S not on the easement. The Hoyem survey came up with a different survey. Ms. Sonsteby
argued Ms. Francis was deeded by the Winner's survey and does not have part of that
easement. Attorney Hawkins stated that is irrelevant. Ms. Francis abutts the easement;
and the Council can vacate the easement if it chooses to do so.
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 1984 - Minutes
Page 4
(Vacation of Easement - R. Sonsteby, Continued)
Ms. Sonsteby - read the conditions of the easement, that the easement shall cease when
no longer used for road purposes. She stated the easement has not been used for over
43 years; and therefore according to the deed, it reverts back.
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that the following described property be
vacated for road easement purposes but be kept for utility easement purposes: the
west 164 feet of the east 129 feet of the north 33 feet of the south 33 acres taken by
parellel lines from the south side of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter,
Section 29, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota. (See Resolution R035-84)
Motion carried unanimously.
JUNKYARDS - LICENSES/FENCING
Ms. Lindquist noted Anoka Auto Wrecking has the entire fence up on the north and east
sides. The total of the bèrm and fence is 8 feet. The ordinance requires that the
fence be 8 feet above the level of the road. But in order to be 8 feet above the level
of Hanson Boulevard, which was constructed after the existence of the junkyard, a 14-
to 16-foot fence would be required. Attorney Hawkins noted Hanson Boulevard is a quarter
of a mile from the junkyard, and reasonable interpretation of the ordinance is needed.
Mayor Windschitl felt that an effort has been made and that it would be unreasonable to
require 14- to l6-foot high fences.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Urttel, that we find the fencing and berming acceptable
and we refund the escrow amount to Anoka Auto Wrecking. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, that we find the fencing and berming acceptable
and we refund the escrow amount to Wilber's. Motion carried unanimously.
Gerald Chapman, Schriptek - requested an extension on the installation of the fence on
the1r slte. He asked for a 60- to gO-day extension pending some decisions their company
will make as to what their intentions are on the Heidelberger site. They do not own
the property, and any improvements made to the site are at their expense on someone
elses property. They do not want to make these investments if they will not be there
for any period of time. The fence would be just across the front of the property and
over half of it would be the office structure.
There was a lengthy discussion with Mr. Chapman about the State law recently passed by
the legislature on the transfer tax on tires and the help Schriptek may be getting
from the State in making this operation a success. In the meantime, they are not
operating at a profit; and they need to decide whether to continue for the year or so
until those funds are available or whether to leave the site. Mr. Chapman noted that
Mr. Slayback has invested a lot of his own money to keep the business operating.
Mayor windschitl also noted that it has been learned that Schriptek's agreement with Mr.
Heidelberger is not only to pay him the fee for what is there, but also a fee for incoming
tire~. So the profit which should have been the basis to support the outgoing tires is
going to Mr. Heidelberger. Discussion was on how the State law works, how it will
potentially help the Schriptek operation. Mr. Chapman stated it is their intent to re-
negotiate a contract with Mr. Heidelberger but nothing has been done yet pending the
receipt of more information from the state.
~urther Council discussion noted the City has a check which was deposited to cover the
cost of the installation of the fence. General consensus at this time was to allow
the extension of the construction of the fence.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Lachinski, that we move extension to July 17 meeting with
escrow posted in cash. Motion carried unanimously. The Clerk was directed to deposit
the check already submitted. If it cannot be cashed, Schriptek would need to provide
the necessary cash escrow.
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 1984 - Minutes
Page 5
(Junkyards, Continued)
Attorney Hawkins reported they were in court yesterday on the Emery junkyard. for
violating the court's order restricting him to the east half of lot 3. The end resu It
as he understands it is Mr. Emery was given gO days in jail, which was stayed on the
condition that he remove all of the junk from all of the area he is currently operating
on and immediately cease his operation. He can store junk on the area he originally
had his junkyard on for a period of 30 days, and then it is all supposed to be ceased.
FINAL PLANS AND SPcCI~ICATIUNS - MSA PRUJECTS
Harlan Olson from Bonestroo, Rosene and Anderlik, reviewed the plans for the middle
portion of South Coon Creek Urive. Mr. Schrantz stated they will have the legals to
the Attorney this week. Attorney Hawkins recommended abandoning the right of way on
a particular lot with the exception of the line within the new road description. That
vacates everything outside Of that new alignment without having to describe each piece.
Mr. Kruzmark - stated she had no problem with the proposed alignment, but a neighbor has
been waiting for Mr. Schrantz to come out and talk with them about the alignment since
the stakes were put in. Apparently he felt more is belng taken from his property than
what he was lead to believe in the beginning. Mr. Schrantz stated he would be talking
with them.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, a Resolution as prepared approving Final Plans
and Specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for Project No. 84-2, South
Coon Creek Drive from the bridge to Uplander. (See Resolution R036-84)
VOTE ON MOT! ON: YES-Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel; PRESENT-Windschitl
Motion carried.
Mr. Schrantz and Mr. Olson also reviewed the plans for 161st from Tulip to Round Lake
Bou levard. Mr. Schrantz reported the County will be moving County Road 20 on the east
side of Round Lake Boulevard to the south, so they will not have to offset l6lst as
originally planned to match County Road 20. They are also proposing to go far enough
on either side of Tulip Street to take care of the drainage problem. Mr. Ulson explained
the State may want a different project number for that because Tulip is an MSA street.
MOl ION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, approve Final Plans and Specifications and
ordering advertising for bids for Project No. 84-1, l61st Avenue from Round Lake
Boulevard to Tulip Street for street construction. (See Resolution R037-84) Motion
carried unanimously.
Mayor Windschitl asked why the plans for 157th were not presented. Mr. Schrantz
explained they were waiting to see whether or not the west end of South Coon Creek Drive
would be ordered this year and whether there would be enough money to do all the projects.
He also noted it is time consuming to get the signatures for road easements in all these
projects. lhey have also considered bidding 157th and the west end of South Coon Creek
Drive, later this year, so the gravel could be put on in the fall and blacktop the
following spring.
Council felt the plans and specifications for 157th should be done and bids advertised
for so the bid costs would be known. They would not necessarily have to award the
project this year.
RESET PUBLIC HEARING/SOUTH COON CREEK DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that we set the public hearing for the west end of
South Coon Creek Drive for June 5 at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
On the complaint raised by the Christensons about the issuance of a building permit for a
garage closer to the road than allowed, Attorney Hawkins advised that the building did
not encroach any more on the right of way because it was an attached garage to a house
hili 1t in lQfi1.
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 1984 - Minutes
Page 6
COMMUNITY SCHOOLS - CRIME WATCH
Councilman Knight reported he talked with Jim Stewart from the District Community
Schools, whose preference was to start the Crime Watch program next January when it
is known whether or not the Andover Community School coordinator who is on leave of
absense will return in December. Mr. Stewart had said the budget is set for January.
Mayor Windschitl stated he also talked with Mr. Stewart. The budget is set aside,
but it all stems back to whether or not Mr. Struekel will come back. After having a
long conversation with Mr. Stewart, though his preference would be to start the Crime
Watch program in January, he would go along with starting July 1. Since the City has
already allocated funds for 1984, he recommended the program begin July 1, recognizing
that as of December there is a possibility of a different coordinator.
Melanie DeLuca - stated she too talked w1th Mr. Stewart, feeling he realizes there will
be a problem lf Mr. Struekel comes back. But he has some flexibility in that he decides
who is put in what position. Mr. Stewart also gave her the impression that he would
know more after the end of May.
The general consensus of the Council was to begin the program July 1 as originally
planned. Ms. DeLuca stated her vacation period is two to three weeks in August, and
hopefully she will be doing preliminary planning and start with neighborhood meetings
as soon as possible in the fall.
Ms. DeLuca also stated the Andover Newsletter will be going out next week, explaining
the problem she has had with the change of policy for sending mail rural route. They
are now getting all Andover residents on a computer mailing list.
POLICE DEPARTMENT - DISCUSSION
Councilman Knight asked the Council's opinion on which direction the Crime Prevention
Committee should take in looking into a City police force. Dayton and Greenfield have
their own pOlice department, but they are run totally on a part-time basis using
Minneapolis police officers, and it is considerably cheaper than having their own full-
time departments. He asked whether or not the Council wanted that option researched.
Council discussion was on the advantages of such a department, how it would work, and
the drawbacks. Mayor Windschitl stated the Sheriff's Department has quoted $47,000 to
add one man to serve Andover 40 hours a week. Councllman Orttel suggested funding be
considered first. He has read that Andover had one of the highest tax increases in
the metropolitan area last year, and he thought the additional $50,000 a year the City
wi 11 be receiving in State Aides could be used to keep from raising taxes in the coming
years. He didn't feel there was a real need for the City to have its own police depart-
ment at this time, not seelng any evidence of lack of protection. He also felt that
$300,000 was a more realistic figure of the cost of a city police department.
Mayor Windschitl stated the City is going to need additional police protection, noting
the inadequate number of deputies per population in the City compared to the norm in
other cities. But he felt the entire situation should be studied further, noting the
Sheriff's Department is also working on several proposals for increased police protection
in the City.
Jack McElvy - explained Dayton is run by one full-time retired Minneapolis police
officer, and the rest of the officers and the Chief are part-time. He thought Greenfield's
department just works on the weekends. Dayton works with a 12-hour shift and an 8-hour
shift on Saturdays and Sundays. The wages he quoted were based on Dayton's wages. He
felt the advantages of having its own department is the department is much more
responsive to the people and to the Council and are much more conscious of the problems.
He stated the cars he could get from the Minneapolis department were, in his opinion,
good cars, though some of the men do not like them because they are a smaller car. He
also noted the problem there was with the lower wage scale in Dayton, stating the reason
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 19S4 - Minutes
Page 7
(Police Department - Discussion, Continued)
he set the wages like he did was to get competent men from the area who would then stay
with the City and would be able to handle the situations that would arise in the City.
He also noted that one of the main jobs in Dayton was to make a round of the businesses
at closing to make sure everything was okay, which he didn't believe is being done in
Andover now.
Council noted that it will not be possible to make any definite decisions before the
June 10 deadline to acquire the cars from Minneapolis. Some of the Councilmen felt it
would be more beneficial to have a full-time City department with part-time supplemental
help rather than a purely part-time help situation, but the Committee should be free to
take whatever direction they think is appropriate for police protection in the City.
ANUOVtR VULUNTEER FIRE UEPARTMENT REPORT
Flre Chief Frank Stone reviewed the letter from Lavern Fire Equipment and their defense
and charges relative to the billing for the repair of the Fire Department tanker. Chief
Stone explained that he has been negotiating with Lavern, and the person he was originally
dealing with has been fired from the company. He reviewed the status of the charges to
date, noting they are still negotiating several points. The $253 charge should have
been $61.40. The $108 charge for service charge for taking the pump to Darley has been
deleted. There is a debate over the time for the driver of the truck -- they are
claiming 3~ hours and our driver is saying it was only l~ hours. Andover asked for the
buzzer on the truck for $9.77. The charge was for g~ hours to install it, and that is
still being negotiated. The bid item is being deducted because it was supposed to have
been taken care of originally. They are also still debating the 6-inch safety walk, as
the Department is not satisfied with the jOb that was done. -¡here will be no charge for
the metal of the safety shield placed over èhe exhausè system, but they are still de-
bating the amount of time it took for installation. It was the Chief's position that
that shield should have been placed over the exhaust system originally and that the
Department should not have to pay for that at all.
Chief Stone also stated the truck was at Boyer Ford today to check the frame because
when the truck was built some notches were cut into the frame which was thought to cause
weakness to the frame. The mechanics at Ford stated it did not weaken the frame, and
a letter will be sent to this effect. One other thing is that Lavern still has not been
able to reach 300 gam and 150 psi on the pump to meet the certification of the specs.
Lavern is charging the engine of the truck will not raise the rpm of the truck. And
Ford said again today they will not raise the rpm of the engine because it is certified
for a certain rpm. The truck simply is not doing the job. The Chief also stated the
item of the Actron Fire Monitor has been deleted. The total bill was $2,400, and so
far through negotiations it has been reduced to $1,400. Also, Darley is sending a full
report on the work done on the pump.
Firefighter Bob Dillon reported the problem with the pump not being able to reach the
pumping specifications, on the confusion of the pump tests run by Lavern, the problem of
the size of hose and fittings versus what was asked for in the specs and which are also
affecting the water pressure, and the length Of time it takes to fill the tank, though
in this instance the specs were not very clear.
Council suggested the Uepartment get the spec sheet on the pump itself or an operators
manual to find out if Darley rates the pump to do what the Department wants it to do.
Chief ~tone felt he may be able to have a pump test done from an independent source.
rirefighter Roger Noyes stated he talked to Darley in Chicago today and was told the
pump will dO what it is speced for. Mayor Windschitl stated the problem may be a
mismatch of the gearcase.
Chief Stone stated he will be talking with Lavern tomrrow relative to a reduction on the
hours in the statement. He also noted that Lavern has asked that the Department show the
truck at the University of Minnesota fire school on Friday.
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 1984 - Minutes
Page 8
(AVFD Report, Continued)
Firefighter Tim Howe presented the proposal for a substation on l57th and County Road 7.
The proposal is for a four-bay unit, one-unit deep located on one acre of ¡and, 45
feet deep by 90 feet wide with a turn~out gear room, meetlng room, two bathr'ooms,
raúiant-type heat with some type of vehicle exhaust system. They ar'e also discussing
some type of water storage at tne station, thinking the cistern would be the best
method. Mayor Windschitl noted Larry Carlson is willing to give fee title to a parcel
in that area.
Mr. Howe also stated they are looking at alternative financing methods, checking on
grant monies and bonding. Discussion noted there is five years left on the bonds for
the existing firestation. Mr. Howe stated they would like a Council representative on
their committee to research the substation proposal further. Councilman Lachinski
volunteered to serve on the committee.
Discussion was on the proposal to install a hydrant on the Ed Fields property so the
Fire Department would be able to pump water from his well. Council and Attorney Hawkins
felt that some agreement should be signed by Mr. Fields relative to the City's ability
to use the hydrant, who will be responsible for keeping that area clear and plowed, etc.
There was also some discussion on whether this hydrant is necessary given its location
to existing water supplies. Chief Stone stated he will talk with Mr. Fields about such
an agreement prior to Council action on the matter.
TEMPORARY MOBILE HOME PERMIT/D. HORST
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that we approve a Mobile Home Permit for David
Horst on Constance Boulevard, 161st Avenue, subject to it being hooked to proper sewage
and water facilities. Motion carried unanimously.
REVISED GRADING PLAN - IVYWOOD ESTATES
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, that we approve the revised grading plans for
Ivywood Estates as per the Engineer's recommendations. DISCUSSION: Mr. Schrantz
reviewed the plans and changes made. Council's concern was that the revised plans
allow drainage to the properties south of the plat, stating the developer must first
get permission to drain the water there since it is outside of the plat. It was agreed
that the revised grading plan should not be acted upon until that permission is received.
Councilmen Knight and Lachinski WITHDREW the Second and the Motion.
LMC CONFERENCE
The Clerk asked that anyone wishing to attend the LMC Conference in Duluth should let
her know by May 30.
JOINT MEETING WITH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Because of the length of the P & Z Agenda for May 22, it was agreed a special meeting
should be scheduled to review the revisions to Ordinance 8. Mayor Windschitl asked for
a motion to have a joint meeting with the P & Z on June 21, 7:30 p.m.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to so move. Motion carried unanimously.
SOUTH COON CREEK DRIVE/ROAD ALIGNMENT ON WEST END
Mr. Schrantz reviewed his understanding and proposal of the road alignment on the west
end of South Coon Creek Drive. On the Christenson property, it will not be necessary
to acquire right of way but the road would come within 5 to 7 feet from the property
line. That moves away from the gray house, but it would cut the corner of the Christenson
Regular City Council Meeting
May 15, 1984 - Minutes
Page g
(South Coon Creek Drive/Road Alignment on West End, Continued)
lot, so that would get possibly as close as 5 feet to the property line on one corner.
On the other end, about the third lot back it comes to about one foot on one end and
seven feet on the other end, with the road curving somewhat to provide a 30-foot set-
back to the house on the south that is closest to the existing roadway.
Mayor Windschitl was concerned that cutting into the yard of the second lot from Round
Lake Boulevard on the north side could have an adverse affect on the yard. Council
discussion was also on whethe~or not it is a valid argument to move the road to a
normal setback for those properties that are now less than the required setback from
the road, or in effect increasing someone's property at the expense of the lot across
the street. Two such houses are involved in this project. Mr. Schrantz argued that
now the City has the opportunity to provide a minimum setback for all properties within
the project area. Councilman Lachinski felt that the two parcels would really be
benefitting if the road were moved to compensate for the lack of setback and that those
individuals should be willing to pay for the additional cost and loss of land to the
parcels across the street.
After further discussion, the Engineer was directed to assume the City has a 60-foot
right of way from the north easement line (the remaining six feet would be placed on
the south side of the road), and center the road within that 60-foot easement. If
it is agreeable to the person on the west end, the road could be moved closer to the
north line within that right of way. Or move it further north if the person who is
benefitting the most would be willing to compensate for the additional easement needed
to move the road further from his house. So basically the center line of the road would
be 30 feet south of the north right-of-way line.
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to pay Claims Checks 7881 through 7917 for a
total of $27,158.08. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 12:20 a.m.