Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC August 19, 1986 CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING-AUGUST 19, 1986-AGENDA 7:30 P.M. l. Call to Order 2. Resident Forum 3 . Agenda Approval 4 . Discussion Items a. Continued Public Hearing/86-19/Dehn's Pond b. Indian Meadows 2nd Addition Preliminary plat c. Community Development Block Grant/'87 to '89 8:00 P.M. d. Anoka County Mediation Project/L. McCauley 8:15 P.M. e. HUD Rental/Rehabilitation program/L. Beckwell f. Petition for Improvements/Shady Knoll g. 5. Assessment Public Hearing/Woodland Terrace 1,2,3 6. Non-Discussion items a. Award Sealcoat Bid b. Right-of-Way Acquisition/B. Duerr c. Approve Specifications for Rural Street Construction d. Authority to Acquire R/W-86-3 e. Land Acquisition, Cont. f. Award Bids/$2,485,000 G.O. Bond g. Authorize Sale of 2.5 Million Bond h. Hire Engineering Secretary 7. Staff, Committee, Commission Reports a. Conroy Assessment Split b. Lower Rum River Water Management Organization Budget c. OSHA Inspection d. Budget Discussion e. Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan f. Appoint Deputy Clerk 8. Approval of Claims 9. Approval of Minutes 10. Adjournment Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 5 (Continued Public Hearing/86-19/Dehn's Pond) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, authorizing the Mayor to relate to the Clty of Anoka the City of Andover's agreement in principle of the terms relating to the installation of drainage pipe in the southwest area of the City of Andover. DISCUSSION: Councilman Elling had a problem with Item 4, thinking it was a blank check and asked that more specifics be determined. He also wanted to see the assessments per lot before proceeding with the project. Counci lman Orttel stated this is just an agreement in principle, not an ordering of the project at this time. He too felt the project should not be ordered until it can be determined that the bond can be paid for. Councilman Knight also noted Andover is solving a serious problem for the City of Anoka at no cost to them whats oever. Mayor Windschitl stated that could probably be negotiated, but the cost would increase as well. This is a negotiated number, stating those items were all discussed during the negotiations. ~?) - felt if at some point the lake does have to be lowered, this opens the oor to do that. That way a larger benefitted area could be assessed. Mayor Windschit1 again noted the lowering of the lake was never discussed, thinking the north outlet would be the best for lowering the lake. Council also noted this proposal is less per square foot than what Lary Carlson negotiated with Anoka for his Woodland Terrace Development. That amount from Mr. Carlson is in addition to this $100,000 being proposed. Motion carried unanimously. Council continued to discuss the project itself, again raising the concern of being able to pay for a bond. Both the assessment procedure and the storm drainage taxing district were discussed, noting the pros and cons of each. The critical time table was also noted. The Mayor stated the County is willing to change order in the pipe if the City can tell them what is desired. Council recessed at 9:04; reconvened at 9:18 p.m. Discussion continued on the concerns raised previously and the DNR terms of the mitigation with Anoka County. Mayor Windschitl stated this is also mitigating this side of the river crossing for County 116. The City of Anoka has given the land for that road, which he believed is about 13 acres. Ms. Sonsteby - stated she has talked to Natalie Haas-Steffen (County Commissioner), who stated they are only negotiating for the 4.1 acres. Mayor Windschit1 stated then he has been given some misinformation. He understood the mitigation is for everything this side of the Rum River for Coun~116; and the letter from the DNR, Item 1, states this mitigation also includes impact from the river crossing. Ms. Sonsteby - asked what would the Council do if they were her. Mayor Windschitl stated1fthe land were to be farmed and never developed, the water wouldn't make any difference and she probably wouldn't want to pay for it. But if she is looking to develop it, there must be an outlet for that property. Ms. Sonsteby - stated at 865 it doesn't do her any good. If the pipe were at 864, she felt she would get a little benefit. 11ayor Windschitl stated the DNR will not let their protected wetlands be drained. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the County is asking for 25.49 acres, which she is objecting to. She has agreed to the 13 acres. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 6 (Continued Public Hearing/86-19/Dehn's Pond) Council then agreed they should discuss the payment of the project at a special meeting, asking that the Engineers prepare the assessment roll under the 429 procedure, plus the cost per resident if it were done on an ad valorem taxing district. Recognizing the difficulty of obtaining a cost in the event a taxing district is established, Council asked if it would be possible to ta~e into consideration future development and incorporate that in the ad valorem tax. It was agreed to discuss these figures with the Engineers at a special next week. Council will then determine whether or not to proceed: with the project and under what method of repayment. At that point, those affected would receive written notice of the proposal. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, that we set a special meeting for August 27 to deal with the subject of Dehn's Pond. Motion carried unanimously. ANOKA COUNTY MEDICATION PROJECT/L. McCAULEY Lonnie McCaule , Task Force Member of the Anoka Count Mediation Center - reviewed t e medlatlon project as an a ternate process to e plng so ve some 0 the problems facing the City and its residents on a daily basis. It is where parties in dispute sit down with a trained mediator voluntarily and work out their problems among themselves. She reviewed the history of such mediation projects, examples of how problems are resolved, the process of establishing such a project in Anoka County, and the roa1s of the mediation project. It is a non-profit corporation and is intended to serve anyone in the county whether the cities decide to participate or n~. They will be soliciting pilot project funds for the remainder of 1986 of approximately $6,000. For 1987 they have an estimated budget of approximately $25,000, intending to seek that funding from foundations, interested cities, business and civic groups, etc. Ms. McCauley asked for the City's support of the concept overall and also to consider a fåve-cent per capita allocation to the project from Andover, which is about $600. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we give concept approval to the Anoka County Mediation Project as presented. (See Resolution R129-86) Motion carried unanimously. Council agreed to give consideration of an allocation during the budget process for 1987. HUD RENTAL/REHABILITATION PROGRAM/L. BECKWELL Lucy Beckwell - discussed the HUD Rental Rehabilitation Program. It is for rental property to be improved by the owner of the building, has to be renter occupied, is a $10,000 maximum per unit, $5,000 of which would come from the landlord. The other $5,000 is from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. One of the benefits to the tenant would be if they are income eligible, they would receive a housing voucher. The City of Andover is an eligible community but at the present time is nonparticipating. They have ,a request from three duplexes on 140th that would like to do rehab work. If the City would like to participate in the program, she would offer her services for the administration of the program at no cost to the City. The vouchers would be administered through the City of Anoka. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that the City Council of Andover approve the agreement between the City of Andover and Lucy Ann Beckwell, naming her as the administrator for the HUD Rental Rehab Program through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency as presented. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 4 (Continued Public Hearin9/86-19/Dehn's Pond) Ms. Sonsteby - asked where the 48-inch pipe is coming out next to her property from the Clty of Anoka, is Andover going to pay for that pipe to go. to the other pipe? Mayor Windschitl said Andover does not intend to become involved with her lawsuit with the City of Anoka rTOrwith the pipe dispute. The pipe that Andover is paying for is only the one to get through the high ground. (?~ - asked if the $100,000 to Anoka includes any storm water or just from De n's. Could Round Lake also be drained into that system. Mayor Windschitl stated it clearly is not intended to be an outlet for Round Lake. It encompasses all of the water that arrives into that basin at the present time. He said the hope is to cap the culvert coming out of the lake on the south side. The outlett in9 of Round Lake was never discussed in the negotiations. Mr. Schrantz stated the water from the lake would drain to the north before it would to go the south. Ms. Sonsteby - stated Andover is paying the City of Anoka to go through their land. What about from the Dehn's and Johnson's Additions where the water is running on her land to get to the drainage. Who is going to pay for that water running onto her land? Mayor Windschitl stated the intent is to assess those areas. If the water ran there naturally, it has a right to be there. The question is how to outlet it. Andover would be paying Anoka for the right to use their pipe. Ms. Sonsteby - stated there is more water fran developed property than from undeveloped property. Mayor Windschitl stated it is not more water, just the velocity increases. Discussion returned to the amount of the assessment per parcel and its impact to the property owners, especially ~1s. Sonsteby since she owns the bulk of the ·land. Mr. Oavidson suggested an assessment roll be prepared so those specifics are known before the project is ordered. He also reviewed the watershed district which was established using the County 116 report and the two-foot contour maps of the City. Ms. Sonsteby - understood the plan is to plug the area between the two ponds, to keep the water up to 867 on the pond the county is purchasing because of the diverted property out of the Coon Creek Watershed. Also, those four big pipes coming fran the south of Good Value go into that pond. She stated water will seek its own level on the other side, stating the same ground water will be in both places. She stated there is no way to stpp that; therefore, those areas from the south and east sides draining into that pond should also be assessed for this project. Mayor Windschit1 stated the desire to have that water in there is a condition of the DNR mitigation. The City has stated repeatedly that they would be willing to turn that pipe around to drain to Coon Creek. Ms. sonsteb~ - stated if they want to keep the water in that pond and continue dlvertlng t e water, that entire pond will have to be sealed. Discussion again returned to the ability to pay for the bond. Councilman Orttel felt the proposal from Anoka is the best so far;! but he suggested if it is felt an assessment cannot be sustained, the City could establish a storm drainage district and add the cost to the ad valorem., rather than an assessment. Attorney Hawkins reviewed the procedure for taxing through ad valorem versus the 429 assessment procedure. Ms. Sonsteby - stated when Good Value diverted the 90+ acres on approximately 10 or 12 acres, the City claimed that was enough land to take care of all that storm water on their property. She has 20 or 30 acres of highland and a lot more lowland, which should take care of the storm drainage for her land. It didn't make sense to her. council again stated they have repeatedly said they would be willing to take that water to the east but haven't done so at the request of the DrJR. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 3 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING/86-19/DEHN'S POND Mayor Windschit1 reported he and Mr. Schrantz spent a considerable amount of time negotiating an agreement with the City of Anoka regarding an outlet through Anoka's storm drainage system. The results are as noted in an August 18, 1986, letter from the City of Anoka: 1) Andover will pay Anoka $100,000 within one year for access; 2) Andover to install and pay for the pipe; 3) Andover to sign an agreement holding Anoka harmless for all future liability associated with the pipe and drainage areas in Andover; and 4) Andover to participate in the cost of any future replace- ment of the Rum River outlet. The Mayor explained some of the difficulties encountered in the negotiation process, noting the dollar amount equates to approximately one cent per square foot of developable property, which is twice what Andover had proposed. He felt this is the best that can be done in the negotiations. Council discussed the proposal from the Anoka City Council, questioning the meaning of the fourth item. Council wanted to know the anticipated replacement costs within the next ten years, asking what this means to Andover in terms of dollar amounts. It was also estimated that with Anoka's proposal, the costs of the project and the access charge would be approximately $687 per acre to the assessable area within Andover, though there was some confusion as to the number of acres within Andover that would be assessed. Discussion was also on the elevation of the pipe crossing Bunker Lake Boulevard. Mayor Windschit1 explained that will be determined by the DNR, but felt it would be at the 865 level or slightly above. He also noted the Anoka development of Fadlers Addition will drain through this pipe, which is worth about $8,000. Mayor Windschitl also noted the letter from the DNR regarding the mitigation with Anoka County for the County 116 realignment. The DNR is saying the ponding area should not be dug out. He thought it was still in condemnation with Ms. Sonsteby. He also thought if the proposal by Anoka is agreeable, the City should look to the the County for some participation, either compensation work or assessment, since six acres of their road is also being drained by this project. Discussion was then on the financing of the overall project, both construction costs and access costs to Anoka. Several Councilmen were concerned about whether the amount of the assessment can be sustained, and where the assessments would be collected from to support the bond. f1r. Schrantz also noted timing is critical. Anoka County will begin work on their road project as soon as they are able, which could be at any time; and the City should have their work done before the County's contractor is in there. Rosella Sonsteby - stated if the level of the pipe will remain at 865, it will not be dOlng her any good. She has property at 865 that has been dry before she received all this water. All she would be assessed for is taking the water off to keep it at 865; therefore, she stated she is not getting any benefit. She asked how much Mr. Rademacher paid for his commercial property. She stated she is the only one in that vicinity that has that type of property and is the only one getting the shaft, again. Mr. Schrantz stated the storm sewer assessment in the southwest area was approximately nine cents per square foot. Mayor Windschitl felt the numbers are cheap if one looks at the cost of storm drainage on a plat. Ms. Sonsteby - felt she had enough property so her storm water could have been left on her land. She asked about appealing an assessment. Attorney Hawkins stated there is an appea 1 ri ght. It is a technical process, recommending she talk with her attorney on that matter. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 2 (Resident Forum, Continued) Dick Schneider 1343 Andover Boulevard NW - was concerned about the Council's actlon on the Òak Bluff plat of denslty zoning with the open land being deeded to the City. The developer then doesn't have to pay any taxes on that property. Attorney Hawkins explained the City takes title to the property and would have absolute right to use the property in any way it wants. The land then reverts back to the owner when sewer and water is extended to service that plat. The rental value of 40 acres for parkland probably would far exceed the tax that is being lost. Mr. Schneider - asked if the parkland in that area is really needed given the large complex at the City Hall site. And the developer a 1so gets that land back free. Mr. Schneider felt this is showing favoritism toward one developer, or will the City be allowing this to happen in all developments from now on? Counci 1 noted the intent of reviewing the issue, possibly even placing a moratorium on develop- ment within the expanded urban service area until a better platting method can be established within that area to provide for an orderly transition to a serviced urban zone. Mr. Schneider - stated the City's mill rate is the highest it has ever been, yet the Councl I 1 s gi vi ng bi g benefits to developers. No tax money wi 11 be comi ng in off that open space, and it will be given back to the developer in the future. Mayor Windschit1 noted the City's mill rate may be the highest ever, but it is still 73rd lowest out of 95 municipalities within the metropolitan area. Mr. Schneider - asked if the entire 40 acres will now have to pay the deferred assessment off Hanson Boulevard, or just the portion actually being platted. Council discussion with the Attorney was whether just the portion being developed would be assessed since the open space cannot be developed, or whether this development opens up the entire 40 acres since that is what is needed for the density zoning. Council agreed this should be discussed again once the court case has been completed. Debbie Kieff, 2240 139th Avenue - was greatly concerned about the speed at which people drlve down 139th, fearlng some child will get killed there some day. They now have their house up for sale. There is no place for children to ride their bikes except on the street, and it is just too dangerous. Thisc is thE! only major street going into the development. She felt it would help if there were stop signs ri ght on 139th. Council acknowledged it is a serious problem, feeling it is a local problem. Should the plat to the south be developed, it would provide another outlet to Bunker Lake Boulevard. It was agreed to ask the Deputies to set up radar on that street and also to report back for the next Council meetin9 as to recommendations on the matter. AGENDA APPROVAL The following amendments to the Agenda were suggested: Delete Items 6e, Land Acquisition, and 6h, Hire Engineering Secretary; Add Item 4g, Bunker Lake Boulevard Traffic Problem; 4h, Request County to remove Designation off Crooked Lake Boulevard; 6g, Computer Demonstration; 6h, Andover Versus M. R. Olson; and 6i, Joint Meeting with Coon Rapids. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, the Agenda as amended. f10ti on carried unanimously. CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 19, 1986 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschit1 on August 19, 1986, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; TKDA Engineer, John Davidson; City Administrator/Engineer, James Schrantz; and others RES WENT FORUM Rosella sonsteb~ - asked for a correction in the August 5, 1986, Minutes, Page 6. She stated she idn't say she felt the bulk of the water was comir,g from the four large storm sewer pipes into the same pond as from the south side of Northglen. She also noted Anoka has 48 acres coming onto her property, not 40. She a lso asked that the Minutes note she mentioned the 90+ acres that is diverted from the Coon Creek Watershed, as where the bulk of the wateris"coming from. Also, on Page 3, she asked who is going to pay for the cost of putting the pipes in. Wi 11 that be in addition to the half-cent per square-foot charge to Anoka! Counci 1 noted that item will be handled under the regular agenda items. Dan" (1) ,14056 Raven Street - was concerned about the park which is 20 feet from hlS bedroom wlndow. He has been having difficulty with kids in the park from dark to sometimes 2, 3, or 4 o'clock in the morning. He's called the police, but there isn't much they can do. There is no street light there. He doesn't like the cars there and doesn't feel it is necessary to have a parking lot there. He would like to see a street light, expressing frustration on his part and that of many of his neighbors. Council discussed alternatives to solve the problem, including p1acing·a street light in the parking area. It was suggested there be increased deputy patrol, recognizing they cannot always respond on weekends when other calls are ranked a higher pri ority. Another suggestion was to close off the parking lot completely since the park is used mainly by those within walking distance. Counci 1 debated whether a light would help the situation or make it worse. It was agreed to ask the Deputies for a recommendation and report on the matter. This is to be placed on the September 2 regular agenda. Peter Rauen, 4110 147th Lane NW - has a noise problem in their neighborhood. A nelghbor test drlves race-prepared motor bikes on vacant property immediately behind him. Mr. Rauen has talked to the neighbor repeatedly to no avail, the neighbor feeling he has a right to do what he wants on his property or on property he has permission to be on. Mr. Rauen also said he called the Sheriff,! who has stated there is nothing that can be done when the noise comes from private property. He asked if there is any legal method of eliminating this noise problem. Council and Attorney discussed the noise standard of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency which has been adopted by reference and is based on a decibeù reading. Discussion was on obtaining decibel readings of the noise, with the Attorney stressing the monitoring should be done by someone with some expertise to stand up in court. Council stated the staff can look into the matter further as to whether the PCA would come out and monitor the situation. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 7 INDIAN MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT Planning and Zoning Commissioner d'Arcy Bose1l asked direction from the Council regarding the Indian Meadows plat which they are reviewing. One of the questions was that of having three or four lots. The developer would like four lots but is not in favor of having to pay an entire street assessment for the fourth lot. The Planning Commission seemed to agree if the fourth lot was allowed, it should be assessed for such at this time. Commissioner Bosell also noted on Lot 4, the Commission is intent on taking road easement for an eventual street west to Seventh Avenue, not as a drainage/utility easemen t. They feel at some point in time, 149th should go out to Seventh Avenue. The abutting property owner was not in favor of that easement; however, no property would be taken from him either. The intent would rrdtbe to construct the road at this time, but to only have the easement available in the event the road extension should occur. In viewing the site, if the developers were required to construct a cu1 de sac at the end of 149th to the property line, hugh trees would have to be removed and it would serve no real purpose. Commissioner Bosell stated the Commission also felt Lot 4 should go back to its original configuration with the angled lot line. The neighbors' concerns were in regard to Lots 1 and 2, as they do not like the long narrow lots. Those nei ghbors actua lly 1 i ve in Andover west. This is being platted as one-acre lots as it is in the MUSA boundary, though all the lots exceed the area requirements. Mayor Windschitl explained the Municipal Urban Service Area boundaries to the residents and why the recommendation was to plat this into one-acre lots rather than 2\ acres. The bulW of Andover West is outside the MUSA line and is 2\-acre lots. At some point in time there is a sewer line that will cross the Rum River and has the capacity to service that portion of Andover. (1) - was under the assumption those lots had to be 2\ acres. He stated at the Planning Commission meeting they were not told about this. He a lso asked where the exact boundary of the MUSA line is. Mayor Windschitl stated basically the 2!¡¡-acre lot requirement is correct, although the recOll1Tlendati6nu for those areas in the MUSA which will be serviced with utilities some day has been for smaller lots to lessen the assessments and facilitate lot subdivision when those utilities are available. Council also reviewed the map showing the MUSA boundary within the City. Council agreed if a fourth lot is to be platted, it should receive the street assessment as well. Terr~ Geldaker, 15028 Guarani Street - was originally concerned with the shape of the ots. In looking at Andover West, there are square or rectangular-shaped lots. They had no problem with the original three-lot development on the plat. But now the proposal is 162-600-foot lots. Their concern is the abi lity to sell the two lots, plus the asthetic value of houses being so close together compared to the surrounding area. Wayne Backman, developer - stated the east line of Lot 4 allows for a road to run to the north and subdivide the property if sewer and water does become available. (1) - asked how long it wi 11 be before sewer and water comes into that area. Council explained there is real. no way of predicting at this point when the CAB line will be available, noting the construction of that line in the past few years. There is not a great need to bring the line across at this point because there is not a lot of open areas. And development of this size should lessen the need to bring those utilities in that area. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 8 (Indian Meadows 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat, Continued) (?) - stated a comment was made at the last meeting that the one-acre lots are better management of the land. But he asked if the City really isn't just getting more revenue. He felt none of the neighbors want the proposed plan. He is concerned about the configurationcóf the lots, the looks, and the population dens ity. He realized it is just one more lot, but he referred to the difficulty of getting onto Seventh Avenue during the rush hour periods at the present time. (?j - asked if in R-1, the lots will all be divided into one-acre lots. Counci man Orttel stated no. This area is in the MUSA and the intent is to accommodate a reasonable use of the land. (?) woman - asked if they considered how the division of these lots look and asked how they would like to be living next to two bowling alley lots. Councilman Lachinski explained it is better to have the larger lots to keep the rural aspects of the area, otherwise the potential for small urban lots or further subdivision is higher. Counci 1 also noted the lawsuit against the City to provide utilities for the area southwest of Round Lake, which would bring sewer and water very close to this area. Discussion returned to the proposed plat. Mr. Backman - stated they have shown the entire 66-foot area as drainage and utl1ity easement, and they are willing to make a front setback tQthe south to make sure nothing can be built in that area. The questi on was whether or not the City needs to own that tree line at this point. Council was in agreement that the dedicated road easement should be taken for access out to Seventh Avenue. Commissioner Bosel1 asked about the lot line between Lots 3 and 4. After reviewing the proposed plat, Council felt the cul de sac needs to be surveyed to determine whether or not it touches the plat, directing the Engineers to be sure it is on City property plus a 10-foot radius. Park & Recreation Commission Chairman Stuart Kinkade stated he talked with New Generation Homes about dedicating all of the parkland adjacent to Kelsey Park at one time now rather than giving it in pieces as the area develops. Mr. Backman - stated at whatever point there will be improvements made in Kelsey Park, they would be happy to dedicate the rest of the property so it can be incorporated into the overall park. Chairman Kinkade stated they are developing a plan for a trail system through the Kelsey park area. Mr. Backman - stated they would like to see that trail system encompass that area ln question. He also stated he was willing to grant an easement for encroachment or for snowp10wing when they do the surveying of the cul de sac on 149th. Council agreed to leave the lot lines between Lots 3 and 4 straight, realizing they will require variances for lot frontage. ASSESSMENT PUBLIC HEARING/WOODLAND TERRACE 1, 2, AND 3 Mr. Davidson reviewed the proposed supplemental assessment for Woodland Terrace 1st, 2nd,-and 3rd Additions. The cost per unit would be $6,994.56. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Orttel, introducing a Resolution certifying the assessment roll for Project 85-5 and 86-8 for a project sum of $711,766.08. (See Resolution R130-86) Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 9 OSHA INSPECTION/PUBLIC WORKS Frank Stone, Public Works Supervisor, reviewed the recommendations made by OSHA inspector in the Public Works Department and City Hall, estimating a cost of approximately $3,500 for equipment to be brought into compliance. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Lachinski, to authorize Frank (Stone) to purchase the required equipment per the OSHA standards. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stone also noted the critical shortage of help in the Public Works Department with several employees out on medical leave. Council authorized Mr. Stone to hire a temporary replacement for Dale Mashuga. (A motion to that effect was made later in the evening.) PETITION FOR IMPROVEMENT/SHADY KNOLL (Because Mayor Windschitl is directly involved in the project, he stepped down to the audience. Councilman Orttel presided over this portion of the meeting.) Mayor Jerry Windschit1 - owns the bulk of the property that surrounds this development. He has told the residents that he would be willing to sign thë petition for the sewer and water if he knew what he would be assessed on. Some of the land he owns next to Shady Knoll is a tree farm with a large number of trees planted on it. He is not interested in developing that parcel but is willing to accept any reasonable assessment on combinations of properties. And there are parts he is willing to develop if it will facilitate the utilities in there. Council discussion noted the petition has 12 parcels out of 20 indicating a desire for sewer and water, but it does not represent 30 percent of the area involved. The Engineers stated they have looked at placing the sewer up the lowland and coming into the subdivision from the back, the west side, rather than continuing the line up Crosstown. That way the pipe could be a much shallower depth and would more easily provide for going across the creek with gravity flow. Also, the gradient is from the east to the west, so the entire area from the trunk coming up the west side of Shady Knoll to the area east of Crosstown could be serviced with laterals. Council and Engineers discussed the merits of moving the sewer trunk line off Crosstown to the low area to the west and the potential serviceable area. Mayor Windschitl - asked the attorney ifhe can add his name to the ptition at any tlme or does he have to do it now. Attorney Hawkins stated the signatures can be added to the petition up until the time the improvement is ordered. Mr. Davidson stated they have prepared about four different alternatives for this project, suggesting a work session on it at the special meeting on August 27 for direction as to which alternative would be used for the feasibility report. The road standards question must also be discussed at that meeting, although the Council agreed bituminous streets should be constructed. Council discussion with the Mayor was that the assessments would follow the normal assessment policy. It was also suggested the Woodridge Acres area be included in the feasibility report, recognizing there is no petition from that area, though it can be dropped from consideration if there is no interest on the part of those residents. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, to order the feasibility report for Shady Knoll Addition and Woodridge Acres Addition, and to hold a work,session on the 27th of August. (See Resolution RI31-86) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Abstain (Windschitl) vote. (Mayor Windschitl presided over the remainder of the meeting.) Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 10 PUBLIC WORKS/TEMPORARY HELP MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the temporary Public Works Employee brought in to replace Dale Mashuga would be paid up to the same rate as Dale Mashuga. Motion carried unanimously. BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD TRAFFIC PROBLEM Council noted the death of a bicyclist on Bunker Lake Boulevard, the increased traffic in that area, and the increasing development also taking place in that area, and suggested some action be taken to make the road safer for bicyclists, walkers, and drivers. It was suggested the County be asked to install turn lanes to the schools and to lower the speed limit through that area. Council also talked about the possibility of installing sidewalks or a tarred path, though those would either be assessed or a sidewalk taxing district established. No decision was made on sidewalks. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we request warrant study to reduce the speed on Bunker Lake Boulevard between Round Lake Boulevard and Xavis. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we ask Anoka County Highway Department to lnvestigate the feasibility of putting turn lanes in an area from Jonquil Street to Xavis Street along Bunker Lake Boue1vard. Motion carried unanimously. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT/1987-89 MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Orttel, that we authorize the Mayor and Clerk to slgn the Joint Cooperative Agreement for the Community Development Block Grant Program for the years 1987-89. Motion carried unanimously. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION/B. DUERR MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the right-of-way acqulsition from Mable Van Hyning in care of Barbara Duerr in the amount of $4,587 for Project 85-8. Motion carried unanimously. AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY/86-3 MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution determining the necessity for and authorizing the acquisition of certain property by proceedings in eminent domain for Project 86-3 as prepared. (See Resolution R132-86) Motion carried unanimously. AWARD BIDS/$2,485,OOO GO BOND Attorney Hawkins noted the bond rating was BAAl. He also noted the concern raised by the individual in New York assigned to handle the ratings in Minnesota on the number of bond issues the City is selling this year and the fact that the debt is getting extremely high for a city the size of Andover. He noted the issues sold thus far and those anticipated in the near future. He wanted the Council to be aware that because of the number of bond issues, the bond rating may drop to BAA, which could cost a significant amount of money in interest. Council discussion noted the large amount of development in the city at this time; that because of the low interest rates at this time, the rating difference may not make tIIatmuch of a difference; that the real issue is servicing of the funds; and on the possibility of reducing the length of the developers' bonds to five years. Regular City Council Meeting August 19, 1986 - Minutes Page 11 (Award Bids/$2,485,000 GO Bond/Continued) Mr. Hawkins then opened the bids for the bond issue: 1) Piper Jaffray & Hopwood and others, purchase price of $2,445,240; total interest cost of $1,839,705 for a net interest rate of 7.1031% 2) First Bank of St. Paul and others, purchase price of $2,440,270; total interest cost of $1,844,710 for a net interest rate of 7.1224% MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, introducing a Resolution awarding the sale of $2,485,000 General Obligation Refunding Bond Series.1986C, fixing their form and specifications, directing their execution and delivery, and providing for their payment as prepared; note that the low bidder was Piper Jaffray & Hopwood and others for a total bid price of $2,445,240. (See Resolution R133-86) Moti on carried unanimously. AUTHORIZE SALE OF 2.5 MILLION BOND MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we rescind the motion authorizing the bond issue of $2.95 million. (See Resolution R134-85) Motion carried unani[JJous ly. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the issuance of a bond issue in the amount of $2,6 million for 1986 improvements. (See Resolution R135-86) Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to approve Claims 11441 through 11518 in the amount of $195,378.08. Motion carried unanimously. The remaining Agenda items were carried to the Special Meeting on Thursday, August 21, 1986. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:53 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~iò-~~ Mar ~A. Peach Recor' Secretary