HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP June 21, 1984
~ 01 ANDOVER
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1984
AGENDA
1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M.
2. Agenda Approval
3. Authorize Signatures/Resolution No. 45
4. Approve Letter to Sheriff
5. Purchase Agreements/Tot Lot
6.
7. Joint Meeting - Council/P&Z - Ordinance 8 Revisions
8. Approval of Minutes
9.
10.
11- Adjournment
~ 01 ANDOVER
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1984
MINUTES
The Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry
Windschitl on June 21, 1984, 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: Building Inspector, Dave Almgren; Planning Commission
Members, Glen Rogers and Marjorie Perry; and City Clerk/
A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist
AGENDA APPROVAL
Mayor Windschitl suggested the following changes to the Agenda: Item 6, Equipment/
Tot Lot; 7, MSA Resoltuion; 8, Access Agreement/Landfill; 9, Appointment to Traffic
Study; 10, Joint Meeting - Council/P & Z - Ordinance 8 Revisions; 11, Approval of
Minutes; 12, Adjournment.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that we approve the Agenda as amended. Motion
carr1ed unanimously.
AUTHORIZE SIGNATURES/RESOLUTION NO. 45
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that we authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign
the Resolution approving the position statement by the City of Andover on the proposed
boundary change for the Anoka High School. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE LETTER TO SHERIFF
Council felt the letter should be restated in Resolution form.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that the City adopt a Rèsolution to the Sheriff's
Department regarding the law enforcement officials and equipment leaving the City to
attend emergencies in other cities as presented in the letter of June 20, 1984, to the
Sheriff's Department and with the addition of requesting a monthly accounting of all
emergency calls where the vehicle left the City. (See Resolution R053-84) Mot i on
carried unanimously.
EQUIPMENT/TOT LOT
The Clerk explained she has the abstracts for the property to be purchased for the tot
lot off l38th. The agreements have been for $5,500 for the property from Mr. Norling
and $3,000 from Mr. Menkveld. The closing is set for approximately July 13.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to authorize up to $6,000 for equipment for the
tot lot on the 138th Avenue park. DISCUSSION: The Clerk was directed to research
the cost of installing two lights in the park and for paving the walkway. Motion
carried unanimously.
ACCESS AGREEMENT/LANDFILL
Discussion was that apparently a portion of the landfill has extended into the park in
Red Oaks Manor, and those involved with the testing in the landfill have requested the
right to go on the City property to fence around the landfill.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that we authorize the right of access to the City
property affected by the landfill and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign it, including
the erection of a fence on those properties. Motion carried unanimously.
APPOINTMENT TO, TRAFFIC STUDY
Mayor Windschitl reported the City has been asked if it wishes to appoint an elected
official to the committee which will be doing a traffic study for solution sto alleviate
Special City Council Meeting
June 21, 1984 - Minutes
Page 2
(Appointment to Traffic Study, Continued)
the congestion on Ferry Street in Anoka and across the Mississippi River. One thought
has been the extension of Round Lake Boulevard south with another bridge across the
Mississippi.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we appoint Mike Knight to the Bridge Study
Commission representing the City on the North Mississippi River Crossing. Motion
carried unanimously.
PURCHASE AGREEMENT/TOT LOT
MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we authorize the Mayor and Clerk to enter
1nto a contract to purchase property from affected property owners for the park at 138th
and Bunker Lake Boulevard not to exceed $8,500 -- $3,000 to Menkveld and $5,500 to David
R. Norling. Motion carried unanimously.
MSA RESOLUTIONS
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution revoking Municipal
State Aid Street designation for South Coon Creek Drive. (See Resolution R054-84)
Motion carried on a 4-Yes, l-Present (Windschitl) vote.
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution establishing a
Municipal State Aid Street, County Road 18 from the intersection of County State Aid 16
from South Coon Creek Drive, from South Coon Creek Drive from County Road 18 to Verdin
Street grid. (See Resolution R055-84) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, l-Present
(Windschitl) vote.
JOINT MEETING - COUNCIL/P&Z - ORDINANCE 8 REVISIONS
Ms. Perry noted the noise ordinaoee and fencing ordinance are not yet covered under the
revisions. She also stated they used the Blaine ordinance as far as format is concerned,
but she was not aware of using any of the provisions from their ordinance. She did not
know if any other provisions of the current Ordinance 8 have been excluded in the
revisions, but stated a thorough comparison of the current and revised ordinances will
need to be done to be sure all provisions are covered.
Council discussed the concept of flexible zoning, how it works in other cities, and how
it could be applied in Andover. Ms. Perry noted the Commission felt the City was not
ready for flexible zoning because of the limited staff and the time it would take to
administer that type of zoning. Council thought it would be advantageous to have some
flexibility in front footages of lots, suggesting a lot would still have to meet
average minimum square footage sizes but might be allowed to vary by not more than 10
percent on anyone item. No specific direction was given by the Council in this matter
at this time.
Council discussion also noted what appears to be an inequity in the ordinance on park
dedication between land dedication and cash in lieu of land. An idea was the possibility
of looking at accepting only cash with the assumption the City has all the park area
it needs or with the idea of the City using that money to acquire the parkland it desires.
Or at the begining of each year the City could establish a set dollar amount per acre
which will be collected from all developers for park dedication, rather than the
varying amounts per acre currently used. It was also suggested the City consider having
more passive-type parks, nature areas, etc., rather than accepting only high, developable
land for parks. Council also noted that the City should look at demanding fee title
to property for parks rather than park dedication so the City would be able to sell such
property if it is found to be unfeasible for park purposes. No specific direction was
given by the Council in this matter at this time.
Special City Council Meeting
June 21, 1984 - Minutes
Page 3
(Ordinance 8 Revisions, Continued)
Discussion was then on the revisions of Ordinance 8. Ms. Perry noted the Commission
tried to progress with some logical order in the business district. Neighborhood
Business is the smallest zone in terms of land size and density and intensity of use.
They also attempted to work through each zone, keeping each section as self-contained
as possible. Section 5 has many changes of significance, and the variance provision
has been rewritten, as they did not include the language about topography in dealing
with variances. Ms. Perry again noted that the revisions need to be cross referenced
with the current ordinance to be sure all points are covered, and it also needs to
be reviewed by the City's legal counsel.
Council discussion was on the proposal to condense the residential zoning into rural
and urban only, eliminating the R-2 and R-3 designations. The greatest concern was on
being sure the minimum square footage requirements in the current R-3 zones are
maintained and that somehow that language be incorporated into the ordinance. It was
also felt some language should be incorporated that would restrict usages, such as
dog kennels, to specific-sized lots so the City doesn't end up allowing those usages
on the existing smaller R-2 and R-3 lots. If those two concerns can be adequately
written into the ordinance, the Council generally had no problem going with two
residential zoning districts as proposed by the Planning Commission.
Council discussion was also on the suggestion of adding another commercial zone, a
rural business district, something between an NB and SC classification. The uses in a
Neighborhood Business zone has been greatly reduced, but the acreage remains quite
large, 2~ acres, for an urban area. The concern was that it becomes quite restrictive,
especially in the urban area. Council generally agreed and discussed this item further
later in the meeting.
Section 4.16, Setbacks along Thoroughfares: Mayor Windschitl suggested the setback
for thoroughfares be off the center line rather than off the prop~rty line. After
some discussion on the item, it was agreed the wording "50 feet beyond the planned
right of way" accomplishes the same thing. But it was fe lt the word "MSA" needs to
be deleted from this section.
4-2, E: Council felt the wording is confusing and agreed the language from the current
ordlnance should be used instead.
3-4, K, Basement: Wording should be changed to: "...portion of the building located
partlally underground but having ~ than half its floor..."
M-l Zone, Page 6.06-1: Council generally had no problem with the density factor, but
questioned the meanlng of Item H, the front of each extericr surface must be equivalent.
This item should be clarified. There was some question abo~t the 500-square-foot
efficiency apartment, feeling that is extremely small; however, no change was suggested
by the Counci 1.
pa~e 6.04 - 3, Item J: Council noted the wording literally means no development can
ta e place in the urban area without sanitary sewer; and it was felt that the 39,000-
square-foot provision needs to be added. There was a great deal of discussion as to how to
approach this problem, how to provide for urban development without sanitary sewer but
not preclude the further extension of the sanitary sewer line. One suggestion was
to allow the platting on an urban-lot basis but require buildings only on every third
lot until sanitary sewer is available. Or write the ordinance such as to not allow
development over 39,OOO square feet in the urban area to allow for future subdivision
when utilities are available. Or require the developer to escrow for the sewer trunk
line prior to the development for the density of that zone. Several Councilmen felt
the most workable would be to allow development to the urban-lot size but build on
every third one until such time as the sewer becomes available. And put an upper limit
- -
Special City Council Meeting
June 21, 1984 - Minutes
Page 4
(Ordinance 8 Revisions, Continued)
on the size of lots that would be allowed in the urban area to preclude the extension
of the sewer line. Another approach would be to set up and follow a five-year plan
for the installation of sanitary sewer. Any property developing within the area of
the five-year plan could develop to the urban-lot size but build on every third lot
knowing they will be getting utilities within the next five-year period. Council agreed
additional work needs to be done on this item.
R-3, Manufactured Homes, 6.05-2: After some discussion, it was generally felt that
garages should be required in manufactured home parks just as one is required for all
other residential developments in the City. It was suggested that at least one garage
per unit be required, possibly row garages as is done for apartment buildings. It was
also felt off-street parking should be required as well.
Neighborhood Business: Council generally felt the size and uses are now too restrictive
and that thlS zone should be reviewed further by the Planning Commission. It was noted
a meat shop, drug store, or dime store probably would not be allowed in the NB zone
under these definitions. And it was felt small engine repair does not belong in the
NB zone. It was also thought that "Specialty Shops" is vague and possibly should be
defined further. Also, 2~ acres in the urban area is too large. Council also agreed
another zone between NB and SC should be created. A suggestion was to change the name
of the Light Business Zone and enlarge its uses, adding retail businesses as a permited
use, and that could become the additional zone between NB and SC, possibly called an
- Urban Retai 1 zone. Council also asked to have written in the ordinances the requirement
of site plans for both conditional and permitted uses in commercial areas.
6.10-4, Conditional Use, Item 8: Council noted the other ordinances do not allow bars
unless food is served, but bars are allowed with non-intoxicating malt liquor. It was
felt this needs further clarification.
General Business, paTes 6.~1-3, 6.11-4: Towing is included in one but not the other.
Council felt 1t shou d be the same 1n both sections, and had no problem with including
towing in both sections.
Light Industry - There was some discussion on the parking requirements, it being mentioned
that some stores appear to have a lot of excess parking area. There was also a question
on the size of the LI district.
5.03-1, Rezoning, Page 5.2: The wording is confusing, noting the rezoning should deal
w1th future use or it should be deleted.
The Clerk noted a definition is needed for farm.
Further discussion noted this now deals with the basic phi.losophical questions of the
of the ordinance revisions, and the Council was generally satisfied with the format
presented. Another suggestion was to look at incorporating Ordinance 5 into this
ordinance. It was felt the sign ordinance should be 32 square feet for convenience
of using 4x8' pieces of wood. The Planning Commission should now review those items
discussed and have the cross-reference done with the current ordinance. Once the
Planning Commission has finalized the revisions, the Council and Commission will review
it once again.
MOTION by Urttel, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:31 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
, \\ C~~~(:L
Marce a A. Peach
Recordi g Secretary
-