Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC October 7, 1986 CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING-OCTOBER 7, 1986-AGENDA 7:30 P.M. l. Call to order 2. Resident Forum 3 . Agenda Approval 4 . Public Hearing/Delinquent Utility Bills 5 . Discussion Items a. Blaine Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses Lot Split b. Raphiel Stifter Lot Split c. Good Value Homes Rezoning d. Hidden Creek East Preliminary Plat e. Andover Community Shopping Center Replat f. T.F. James Company Amended Special Use Permit g. T.F. James Company Variance h. Watt's Garden Acres Rezoning i. Sauter & Sons Special Use Permit j. Oõöà.:rid9C Acrc..3/r ":"l~ål Flt.l.L k. Ordinance 8, Section 4.20 Amendment l. Wm. Batson Sketch Plan m. Variances/Auditor's Sub 82 Legal Descriptions n. 6. Staff, Commission, Committee Reports a. Fire Department b. Computer Specifications c. Ordinance 47 Amendment d. T.H. 47 Designation e. Street Specifications f. Adjust Connection Charges g. Review Oak Bluff Deed/Outlot I h. Final Plat Approval/Indian Meadows 2nd Addition 7. Non-Discussion Items a. Adopt Ordinance 24 b. Appoint Election Judges c. Cable Commission Vacancy d. Final paWmentsf86-1 & 86-2; 85-8 & 8B; Change Order 85-10, ater ower 8. Approval of Minutes 9 . Approval of Claims 10. Adjournment CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 7, 1986 mNUTES The Regular Bi-Month1y Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschit1 on October 7,1986,7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Counci 1men present: Ell ing, Kni ght, Lachinski, Ortte 1 Co unci 1men absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman, Don Jacobson; City Engineering Technician, Todd Haas; City Administrator/Clerk, James E. Schrantz; and others RESIDENT FORUM Terry Hauser, 3731 172nd Lane - stated the Cedar Crest pond is at the pOint where Just a Ilttle more raln wi' 1 cause it to flood over again. He felt if it is pumped now before it goes over the banks, it would be easier to do and the hoses can be put across his 'yard, understanding there has been a complaint by another resident about running the hoses across his yard. Once the pond floods, there is no way to go across his property. He has lost a lot of trees because of the flooding. The City has created the problem, and he wished the City would remedy it. He has to take off work to come to a Council meeting, and he has had to do so twice a year for the last three to four years. Because the Engineer was not available at this time, it was agreed to add this to the Agenda for further discussion. ! Tom May, 14030 Crosstown Boulevard - presented a petition from 12 residents on Crosstown to be placed on the assessment rolls for water. He asked the interest rate on the bonds. Mayor Windschit1 stated it depends on what the bonds were sold for, estimating the rate to the residents at 8.1 percent. ' f1r. May - stated it would be helpful to have an informational meeting, noting several questions asked by the residents. Two people have asked if they can pay off the assessment and buy the meter but not hook up to the service at this time. Council agreed to hold an informational meeting. They also didn't have a problem with not hooking up to the service at this time. Mr. May - stated the unanimous consensus of the residents was to assess over a flve-year period. Mayor Windschit1 stated the bonds were sold for a 10-year period but didn't think there would be a problem assessing over five years. He noted the informational meeting will be on the October 21 Agenda. I Mr. May - stated the residents would like to negotiate with contractors for installation of the water as a group, wondering if they could use the City Hall facilities to hold their meeting. Council agreed. AGENDA APPROVAL The following changes to the Agenda were suggested: Delete Item Sf, T.F. James Company Amended Special Use Permit and 5g, T. F. James Company Variance; Add Item Sf, Cedar Crest Pond;c5n, 1987 Budget Resolution; 50, EIS - Site Q; 6i, WOE Meeting; and 6j, Coon Creek Watershed Comprehensive Plan. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, to approve the Agenda with those changes. Motlon carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 2 F'LJjJL I~-1:iEAR I ~!G /J1EL I t"gLJENT LJT I L I TV B~LLS ~QTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, introducing a Resolution certifying to the County Auditor for collection, unpaid sewer- and water user charges as presented with the attached revised 1 ist as presented. (See Resolution R165-86) Motion carried unanimously. BLAINE CONGREGAnON OF JEHOVAH'S l'!llNESSES LOT SPLLI Chai rman Jacobson reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the lot split and pointed out an error in their motion. They recommended approval be contingent upon the receipt of the Certificate of Title for the East 33 feet, not the West 3~5 feet. Mr. Schrantz stated the City needs to see the certificate from the church in order to record the dedication of the street. J¿'.ffiES Torg_er-son ~ 227 157th Avenue NW, Anoka - stated there appears to be a mi>:up. When they divided the 10 acres on the east side of Goldenrod, they bui 1 t that street and gave it to the City. The City approved it. Mr. Schrantz stated because it is torrens property, the owner must provide a cer-tificate so the City can record it. At the present time, it i 5 not recordf2d right of way. ~UqE'ne PetJ:L~ª.L,--8774 Jefferson Street NE. Blaine - stated they have a copy of the ton-ens certificate for Goldenrod, but he didn't know where the original ~JOu1 d be. He didn't knov-J, but thought there may be some trouble finding the o\."Jner . s duplicate of ti tl e. Attorney Hawkins stated the court house can usually tell ~~Jh en it was checked out and ~ ho they last sent it to. I:1r. PetqJ::.§. - stated they have a lawyer working on this, assuming that ,·¡i 11 all be taken care of. ~pTIqH by Elling, Seconded by Knight, approval of a Lot split requested by the Blaine Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses for the property described as PIN 13 32 24 42 0001 as presented ~¡i th the additions and correction in the last paragraph that Certificate of Title for the East 33 feet of the southerly parcel as presented; and also receipt of a Certificate of Title or torr ens for recording purposes of the existing Goldenrod Street as laid out. (See Resolution R166-86) Motion carried unanimously. RAPHIEL STIFTER ~OT SPLIT Chair-man Jacobson r-eviewed the Planning Commission's r-ecommendation to approve the lot split r-equest of Rd.phie1 Stifter to split an 87'-foot strip of property from her parcel and attach it to Lot 1 , Block 1 , Bi rch'~ood Pond, owned by Dan Christensen. Attorney Hawkins advised it is not possible to attach a metes and bounds parcel to "' platted lot unless Lot 1 is rep1atted th,-ough the platting process. Chairman Jacobson stated the Commission was not aware of that provision. Given that, the property owners may want to reconsi dE?r. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 3 <Raphie1 Stifter Lot Split, Continued) Mayor Windschit1 felt the rep1atting could be done quickly, as it is a matter of redr a\....i n9 the hardshe11s and passing it through bolO meetings. Dan Christenson, 165 170th Avenue - is simply trying to enlar-ge his lot, but hE? ~Jondered if it was worth going through the entire platting process again. He asked if the Council had a problem conceptually with what he was tying to do. Council generally had no problem with the proposal, agreeing to continue the matter to allow Mr. Christenson time to determine whether 0,.- not to pursue the matter. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we continue the Stifter lot split request until the ne>,t regular meeting. Motion car-r-ied unanimoLlsly. GOOD VALUE HOMES REZONING Chai rmC.~n Jacobson r-evi e~Jed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the rezoning request of Good Value Homes to rezone property from GI to R-4. He noted a typographical error in the application fOF" the rezoning, that the property is to be rezoned to R-4, not R-1. !:::LOTION by Knight, Seconded by Ortte1, introducing Ordi nance No. 8HH, an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 8, known as the Zoning Ordinance of the Ci ty of Andove,- as presented. Motion carr-ied unanimoLlsly. HLºDE~~REs~gß~T PRELIMINARY PLAT Chai rman Jacobson reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the Hidden Creek East preliminary plat noting their feeling against the very small parks as being more problems than they ar-e worth. They are suggesting one larger park instead. They also have a prob 1 em ,"i th the elevations of Lots 1, -, - 4, and 5 of Block 8. And they were concerned ..::., -', about the eVf?ntual storm water elevations in the park, which is being worked by TKDA. Some storm water also drains into Outlot A on the southern portion of the plat. They have suggested the developers obtain permission in ,"r i t i ng from the DNR to allow the storm drainage to go into that wetland. John Peterson. Good Value Home'ë. - stated that is part of the overall storm drainage system agreed to "~Ii th Coon Rapids. Coon Rapids has already taken care of the entire permit process. Mayor vJindschit1 noted 134th Lane was for- the benefit of those in Watt's Garden Acres on the basis that it would be rezoned single family residential. He asked whether the cuI de sac is still desired if the property remains commercial. Don Boeke - stated he is undecided as to whether he wants his property to r-f.:?main commercial or to rezone it to residential. He wanted to know ~Jhen the sewer and water assessments would be payable on his property. Mayor Windschitl thought there was a thn~e-year deferral on it. Regular- City Council Meeting October- 7, 1986 - l'1i nutes Page 4 (Hidden Cr-eek Ea5t Pr-e1iminar-y Plat, Continued) Mr-. Peter-sgn - gLtessed they would be developing from ,"est to east in about two phases. If the area to the east remains industrial, they str-ong1y feel that that section of 134th Lane should not be in the plat. If the Council does not want that access, they ~¡ou1 d just put lots along Nightingale. They could go either- way with that r-oad. Mr-. Peterson also pr-esented an over-lay of the par-ks eliminating the two smaller parks and increasing the size of the larger- park, plus widening the .oJal kway to the nor-tho He stated the Par-k Board ¿"greed with that r-ecommendation. Council also pr-eferr-ed the lar-ger park. DiscLlssion was then on the dr-ainage within that area. Mr-. Schr-antz stated the concer-n is in Outlot A and also getting the drainage to the nor-th, "¡hi ch may f?ventuall y need to be "lOr-ked up to the Red Oaks pond. He thought that can be wor-ked out as the improvements ar-e designed. Mr-. Pe~r-son - stated one iSSUE is the county r-oad thr-ough thei r- plat and the importance of obtaining a time schedule. He thought the hangup may be nor-th of Bunker- Lake Bou1evar-d. Ther-e is a meeting on October- 20 with the DNR, County and City. He hoped a feasibility study would be done for- building the road by the City to be given to the County. He thought ther-e was a lot of momentum to the south. Mr-. Schr-antz stated the City of Coon Rapids is going to build their- section of the r-oad and the county wi 11 buy it fr-om them. Mayor- Windschit1 r-epor-ted Coon Rapids has made a for-mal request to the County to be guar-anteed the r-oad would be purchased fr-om them. The Council has asked for- a copy of that r-esolution, intending to submit a similiar resolution. l~hen that is received, it ,Ü11 be placed on an Agenda for- Council action. He also stated Coon Rapids does not intend to build the r-oad between Highway 242 and 131st in the for-eseeab1e futur-e. They ar-e talking about the ar-ea between 131st and the Andover- City limits. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by 0r-tte1, a Resolution appr-oving the pr-e1iminar-y plat of Hidden Cr-eek East as being developed by Good Value Homes in Section 34 -~ 24 contingent upon the housekeeping items of the elevation --~..::. 0 Lots 1 , ? 3, 4, and 5 of Lot 8, the elimination of the two smaller par-ks -, wh one rD~~J of lots shifted down, and omitting of Lot 19, which becomes part of the par-k pr-oper-ty; confirmation fr-om the DNR that they ~Ji 11 accept drainage in Outlot A' and "~ii th 134th Lane cuI de sac to be yet deter-mined. , (See Resolution R167-86) DISCUSSION: Council agr-eed the cuI de sac t"OU 1 d be eliminated if the pr-oper-ty to the east r-emains commercial but ,·¡ou1d remain if the pr-oper-ty is rezoned to r-esidentia1. ~:ay (Jl son . 13251 Jš\.LStr-eet - o~'Jns pr-oper-ty fr-om Hanson Bou1evar-d west to Jay Str-eet. Coon Rapids ,·,i1l be taU ng their- side along ,·¡i th Andover- for- 133r-d. Mayor- ¡'Ji ndschi t1 noted the plat conforms to the stor-m water- dr-ainage plan designed by Coon Rapids. Nothing in this motion per-tains to pr-oper-ty east of Jay Str-eet. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting Octobf?t"" 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 5 ANDOVER COMMUNITY SHOPP I NG CENTEF( REPLAT MOTIO~ by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution approving the Final Plat of the rep1at of the Andover Community shopping Center-, Block 7 to be ._~ , knon as Downtown Center as prepared subject to the reviewal and approval of the City Attorney regarding 1 eg a 1 issues r-el ated to the Ta:< Increment Financing Plan for that property; and that the Attorney would advise us if ther-e are any changes needed to the Ta,·, Increment Financing Plan due to the replat; and subject to a title opinion. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by knight, to rescind the previous motion. ~Motion carried unanimously. t:10TION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, introducing a Resolution approving the preliminary plat of the rep1at of the Andover Community Shopping Center as presented with the addition of the Attorney's review of the Ta:< Increment Financing Plan and 1 ega1 opinion. (See Resolution R168-86) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, SE'conded by Lachinski, reinstating the prior motion to approve the final plat with those conditions noted previously. (See Resolution R169-86) Motion car-ried unanimously. CEDAR CR~ST POND Mr. Schrantz stated he and Mr. Stone talked about this problem which keeps reoccurring. The neighbors are saying Mr. Hauser's house should not have been built there and to leave it as it is. Mr. Hauser has tree damage, and the pond is on his property. A suggestion would be to acquire additional pondng rights and to 1 et the pond stay that high instead of spending =*:2,000 to :$3,000 each time the pond has to be pumped. The reason the storm sewer wasn't put in there in the original project is because of the hugh e}·{pense to pipe to the river. The only other choi ce ~lOu1 d be to pump. The neighbors object to the pumping because they like the pond higher. He didn't think the City could go back onto the 1 and used previously to lay the hose to pump. Mr. Hauser- - stated he has a study done for a storm sewer in that ar-ea done several years ago, and the cost ~1aS betwen $75,000 and :f81 ,000 for a permanent pump station. There is a ha1 f square mile of property that drains into that pond. There is no outlet for the pond, and it keeps filling up evey time it t-ai ns. By acquir-ing the area that floods, he would be 1 eft with only one-fourth of an acre of land. If the City would come out to pump before it actually floods, they can pump r-i ght off of his property. But if the City waits until it floods, then his property cannot be used. The last time it was pumped, the pond was lowered about four feet; and that was sufficient for quite some time. Council discussed the problem, asking the Engineers to prepare a report as to design and cost to provide a permanent outlet to the pond and to determine the cost to acquire additional ponding rights, plus what effect it would have on the immediate ar-E-:?a. It was also agreed to authorize the Engineer to pump the pond again if he feels it is necessar-y. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 6 (Cedar Crest Pond, Continued) !::1.QT I ON by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we continue this item to the ne,.,t meeting and direct the City Engineer to look at options to solve the problem and report back to the Council "¡i th some app~Dximate costs; also authorize the City Engineer to pump the pond if he deems it necessary to prevent flooding, to I'ent equipment and hose that he needs. Motion carried unanimously. IiATT ' §~ARj)EN ACR¡;;§ RE:¡;ONING Chairman Jacobson revie'~ed the Planning Commission's recommendation not to change the zoning of Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 in Watt's Garden Acres from General Industrial to R-4. He noted the public input at the public hearing, ,~i th the Commission providing E?stimated costs for assessments if the property remains commercial or changes to residential. There was a split in those for and against the rezoning, but he fe1 t there were more residents in favor- of r&.~mai ni ng commercial. In looking at the mi:.:ed reaction from the property owners and in the amount of cammer-cial property remaining in the City as a result of those commercial areas already rezoned to residential, it was the Planning Commission's r-ecommendation to leave it the way it was since it was zoned comel'"'cial only a short time ago. Mr. Schrantz stated he talked ~Ji th Jim Stanton, o\.£Jner of Lot 8. Mr. Stanton stated he would go along ,~i th t.-oJhatever the neighborhood wanted. But he did not want to be an island of commercial if the surrounding area was 1'"'8sidential or vi ce versa. Council asked the feelings of those on the west side of Jay Street. Mr. t1i ste1 ski - wanted his property, Lot 7, to remain commercial. Don Boeke, Lot 6 - was undecided, asking v hen the assessments would be levied against his property. t1r. Schrantz stated that was included in Project 86-3, which has not yet been levied. And if that line is I'"'er-outed, it is possible the assessment boundary will be changed. Council noted the ProjE~ct 86-3 issue has not yet been F"esolved, though it was thought the motion for the project called for a three-year deferral of the assessments toJthis aF"ea. Because of the confusion over what was said in that motion regarding the deferral of assessments, it was agreed to research the Minutes during the recess. Hubf?rt Smith, 13251 Jay Street - preferred the parcel to be residential. ÇiJ ori a Hunt , 133~1 J2~Stre~t - preferred to see the lot residential. Kª-y__QI s..9DJ-L~25J_J~ Street - ,·¡anted to see the paF"cel residential because that is the momentum in that area. MiltQn M~rgÈu~350 HansoD Boulevard NW - wants the property residential and submitted a copy of the petition and a letter protesting the recommendation of the Zoning Board. yerry l~llilner , 13425.~~Street - preferred to remain commercial. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 7 (Watt's Garden Acr-es Rezoning, Continued) Cl_ªrenc;..e Wirk.b~_~q..t..-1£ - preferred to remain commercial. §_Lle Hursj;-<-13440 Jay Street. Lot ~ " QuI d like to be rezoned to oJ - residential. Council recessed at 9:04; reconvened at 9:14p.m. Mayor Windschit1 read the motion of the meeting at which the IP86-3 project ~..,as ordered which stated !I.. the developed residential parcels on the south end of Jay Street would be eligible for deferment of up to three years for connection char-ges for both sewer- and ~.oJater- ; however, the assessment would become effective at any time the property was developed prior to that time. II This project was not certified for the Jay Street area in 1986, so the first time it could be certified is in 1987. Mr. Eimith - questioned if the figures they ~Jere gi Yen at the Planning Commission meE~t i ng were just for the trunk, which would not be deferred. Council was not aware of what figures were provided. Several residents then indicated the figures given were for the tr-unk and ,"ou 1 d then not be deferred. Mr. Schrantz then reviewed the area and connection charges for both sewer and water for residential plus the water charges for commercial property, noting the connection charges ~¡ou1 d be eligible for deferment. Th("~ assessment on the storm sewer is for anything west of Jay Street at the present time. Ms. 01 "_on - has been told by the City of Coon Rapids that if there is any further development on the east side, they would have to put that storm drainage into Andover and then they would get assessed. She noted Mr. Stanton owns five acres in that vicinity and drainage would have to go into the designed system. She fe1 t that could happen very shortly. Mayor Windschit1 stated the City has no control over ~ hether or not the property develops. At the present time the City is looking to the present owners of the property to decide what to have done. The storm drainage assessment east of Jay Street wi 11 be inde}¡ed to that on the west si de of Jay Street at the time that storm drainage project is done. Bq.[)nie F'ear-s - asked .¡hat happens to these people after- the City puts in the i ndustri a1 park and where ar-e their ta>:es going? She thought all the par-eels not being considered for this rezoning are outlined for the industrial park. Councilman Lachinski e><p1ained the ta,·, increment district has been set up in that area; and if someone comes in, the City can assist in the financing to help them write down the costs of their proposal. Ms. Pear~ - under-stood the City has condemned the M. R. Olson property and stopped the sale of his land. Council stated that is not ture, that nothing has been authorized for condemnation. The City is considering the purchase of a parcel where a developer has E?}: pressed an interest in developing it. This assistance is available to all property owners within the ta)·~ increment district. The intent is to negotiate a purchase price if someone wants to sell or to negotiate with a property O~Jner to develop his par-eel into a higher use. Regular- City Council Meeting October- 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 8 (Watt's Gar-den Acr-es Rezoning Continued) Mr-s. !'1ar-daus - didn't agr-ee with 11r-. Jacobson that more people opposed the rezoni ng at the Commission meeting. Her- 1 et t er- also shows signatures of ever-yone involved in the pr-oposed rezoning. She asked that her- letter- be r-ead into the minutes. She stated Lot 12 has no trouble with the r-ezoning of the neighbor-ing lots. At this point Mr-. Schr-antz indicated those in favor- of a residential zoning and those in favor- of commercial zone on a map of Watt's Gar-den Acr-es. Ms. Olson - stated they have five acres on the Andover- side and five aCr-es on the Coon Rcapids side. The five acres on the Coon Rapids side will be developed r-esidentia1, and they would 1 i ke thei r- adjoining pr-oper-ty in Andover- to be r-esidentia1 as well. Mr-. LoJi r-ku"i. - feels his pr-oper-ty would better- be zoned commercial. Mr-.~'nt - was at the Planning Commission meeting and agr-eed with Mr-. Jacobson that a majority that spoke at the hear-ing wer-e not in favor of the rzoning. Mr-s. MarQ.ªJ:.ts - stated the Council now has befor-e it a petition with at least 16 signatures r-equesting the r-ezoning to r-esidentia1. If the Council can't agree on the other- parcels, she felt at least the four- pr-operties on Lot 9 and 10 should be rezoned to r-esidentia1 because they bor-der- each other- and they all have residential houses a1r-eady constructed on them. If Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 were considered for- r-ezoning, ther-e would be only one , descending vote on the undeveloped pr-oper-ty. Coon Rapids has r-ecent1y rezoned the proper-ty just south of them to residential. Hidden Cr-eek behind thE'IT! is now residential, plus the possibility of a school in the vicinity ..hich she didn't feel should be in the middle of a commercial area. I tLC..,-É'9£' k ~_.......1..º1......É. - stated he nolt-J pr-eferrs to stay commercial at this time. Chairman Jacobson noted that Lot ~ the Hur-st pr-oper-ty, was not, included in ..." the notice for- public hear-ing and ther-efor-e cannot be consider-ed at this time. Ms. Hur-st - stated in the or-igina1 petition they noticed their lot ,.asn 't on it. They came to the City office and asked to have their- lot included in the process., and they were assured their- lot would be included.: They have attended both of the public hear-ings. Their- home was built on that pr-oper-ty in 1979. Attor-ney Hawkins advised that lot cannot be r-ezoned without publication, though the Council could or-der- another- public hearing for- it. Councilman Or-ttel didn't believe this area ~¡as eVer- residentiõ<l. Mr-. t-1ardaus - stated they wer-e told it was residential when they pur-chased th,? pr-oper·t y and built on it in 1979. Also, the Planning Commission told them it was z on ed commercial in 1979 or- 1980. Councilman 0r-tte1 stated there were hearings on the r-ezoning of the 1 o~~'/er por-tion of the City in 1980, but ('Jatt's Gar-den Acr-es had always be~'?n a commercial area. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 9 (Watt's Garden Acres Rezoning, Continued) ':¡oAnn Wilber - stated in 1971 they completed their house, recalling that the area had been zoned commercial at that time. Councilman Ortte1 felt that was more accurate, thinking it was zoned commercial when the ordinance took effect. Residents then questioned why they were allowed to build their houses in a commercial area and "hy they were told it was residential if it ~o, asn 't. Ms. Wilber - understood Jay Street wi 11 be a cuI de sac at the end. She questioned ho~o, it is going to be residential when there will be no other way to come into there except ",hen 133rd is constructed. She questioned ,·¡hether people would "¡ant to have to drive by all the junkyards to get to their homes. How long will it be before the City tries to make her property residential. Mayor loJindschi t1 e~·: p 1 ai ned the purpose of the hearing was to make a final determination for the zoning of the area. M~~L1ber - also objected to the fact that there was a provision for deferring assessments for those along Jay Street who are residential in use; but S~le has 1 i ved there longer than any of them and her assessments weren't deferred. Council noted that according to the public notice, Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 are the only lots that can be considered for rezoning at this hearing. Discussion was on the best zoning and use of the 1 and through that area. J Otl n Peterson - in representing the adjacent property to the west, he fe1 t all four of the sDuthern lots, Lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 should be residential. He didn't think it makes sense to have a strip of commercial between resi dental areas. Council was also concerned about a logical development pattern, feeling it is logical to have residential from the Good Value property east to Hanson Boulevard. ! MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Knight, that we rezone Lots 9 and 10 of Watt's Garden Acres to residential. DISCUSSION; Ms. Hurst, Lot 5 - asked ~·Jhat she would have to do in order to be zoned residential, citing some of the problems they have 1 i vi ng ne>:t to the junkyards. Council stated if the parcels to the south remain commercial, it is unlikely the one lot would be zoned residential and create spot zoning. However, if the parcels to the south a.F'e rezoned to residential, either she could request the rezoning or the Council could initiate it. Ms. Hurst - asked why they were told it was residential ~ hen they applied for their building permit in 1979. Her husband wanted to put an auto body shop in their garage and was told by the City he would have to petition to be 1 i ght commercial to do so. COLtnci 1 thought the problem came in because residential use is allowed in a General Industrial zone. AMENDMENT TO MOTIO~ by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, to include Lots 6, 7, and 8 loJith Lots 9 and 10 for rezoning from General Industri a1 to Residential., R-4. DISCUSSION: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 10 (l~at t 's Garden Acres Rezoning, Continued) Councilman Ortte1 felt the reason the area should be zoned residential has to do .,i th the current use of residential on several of the lots, the fact that it is surrounded on the south and west with residential and on the east with a non-commercial type usage. Mr. l.Jaqner - stated if everyone around him is r-esidential, he may want to split his parcel, but he will leave it at this time. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: Carried unanimously. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. tlOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, directing the Planning Commission to schedule a public hearing to hear the rezoning request i ni ti ated by the City on Lot 5 of Watt's Garden Acres to be rezoned from General Industrial to residential. Motion carried unanimously. ê.6JJTER ~< SONS SPEC I AL USE PERMIT Chairman Jacobson reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve an after-the-fact Special use Permit requested by Sauter and Sons to mine soil from the Meadow Creek Baptist Church property, 2937 Bunker Lake Boulevard. Mayor Windschit1 was concerned with all the mining in the City, questioning whether or not the City should prohibit the mined dirt to be taken out of the City. Because dirt is becomi ng a scarce item, he understands other cities have passed similiar resolutions. He suggested the Planning Commission look at the question of mining dirt and make some recommendations. Council briefly discussed the proposal. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, a Resolution appF'Dving a Special Us,~ Permi t requested by Sauter and Sons to mine soil from the property kno~m as the Meadow Creek Baptist Church, 2937 Bunker Lake Boulevard as prepared, but add condition No. 4 under the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED to state that the fill materi al may only be removed during the hours of 9 a.m. to3p.m., Monday through Satuday. (See Resolution R170-86) DISCUSSION: There was some concern that some material has already been removed and also that the designation of the fill material has not been sp~?ci f i ed. Councilman Jacobson stated those requesting the permit have said they do not know where the fill will be placed at this time, and that is the reason the resolution indicates they would have to notify City Hall when any future hauling is done. VOTE ON MOTI ON: YES-Knight, Lachinski, Ortte1, Windschit1; NO-Elling Motion carried. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 11 (Sauter ~, Sons Spec i a1 Use Permit, Continued) MQI~P~ by Ortte1, Seconded by Ell i ng , that we refer the question of the removal of mining material from the Ci ty to the Planning Commission to review the special use permit procedure under which those are approved; and to determine whether the remov~od materi al should only be allowed to be used in the City of Andover; and direct the City Staff, in particular the engineering, to assist them in that endeavor as far- as letting them know what is the potential for fill removal in the City and at t.'-Jhat point would it become a danger to the property. Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE ~~ECTION 4. 20 AME~JDMENT Chairman Jacobson reviewed the Commission's discussion regarding density zoning, suggested changes, etc. , and finally moved to delete Section 4.18 fr-om Or-dinance 8 to delete density zoning. That motion passed on a 4-2 vote. The Commission has not looked at a moratorium for an e:.:panded urban service area as they were waiting for the proposed area map from TfŒA. He understands that map is now at the City Hall. The Commission was told by Mr. Cook, the developer of the Oak Bluff plat, that an ordinance change would not affect him because an agreement has already been dr a~.....n up on his plat. ~1ayor ~Ji ndschi t 1 had hoped the ordinance change as proposed by the Attorney could bE? adopted so the open lot area would remain in private ownership and on the ta>( rolls, and the City would not have to take possession of that property. The proposal as originally determined for the Oak Bluff plat has not been given final approval by the Council to date. The Oak Bluff plat would be the only property affected, assuming the Planning Commission recommends a moratorium in the e>:panded urban ser-vice area. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, adopting an Ordinance change, an Ordinance amending Or"di nance No. 8, the Zoning Ordinance of the¡Cityof Andover as prepared by the City Attorney <The City Council may rE?quire all land e}{cluded from lot area to remain in private ownership, but require the owner to record restrictive covenants in favor of the City which would prohibit the devE?lopment of such pr-operty until such time as public utilities are available). Motion carried unanimou51y. I'JM.. BATSON SKETCH PLAN ill. 11 i am Batson - presented a sketch plan changing the lot lines:on three parcels to make thr-ee 1 ega1 lots along Bunker Lake Boulevard. Lot 3 would keep the junkyard in tact. TherE? is no building on the junkyard si te. Lot 1 would contain the house and two garages, and Lot 2 ~""oLtl d contain the steam bath. He also statE?d the fire lanes are open through there. The only fence that isn't up is on the back of the pl'"oposed lot 1- Council noted the proposal actually reduces the size of a licensed junkyard. Council gave conceptual approval of the plan, recommending it now proceed to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a public hearing. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 12 VARIANCES/AUDITOR'S SUB ~? LEÈ~~ESCRIPT~ONS Attorney Hawkins recommended approving a blanket variance for everyone in Auditor's Subdivision 82 that has a lot line problem. He reviewed the problem with the 1 ega1 descriptions of the lots in that subdivision. With a blanket variance, the City Administratot"" could just stamp the requested lot description changes rather than having each one come before the Council for action. Mr. Schr ¿,ntz stated the lots wi 11 remain as they are occupied; only the descriptions will change. And Rosella Sonsteby absorbed the error in her Rosella's Addition ,·¡hen it was platted. Council generally did not have a problem with a blanket variance if there is a 1 i st of requirements for revi Bt.-J of each request as it comes in to determine the effect of the change in the sur-rounding area.. t'1OTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, that we direct the Planning Commission to hold the necessary hearings on the granting of a blanket var-iance dealing ~Ji th the surveying error- in Auditor's Subdivision 8'"?· and ~, th¿-...t the City Staff prepare a list of those lots affected and a 1 ist of all necessary documentation to be used \"Jhen these variances are granted. Motion carried unanimously. BtJ'p'_º_<¿f-R <.J0LUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Chief Bob Pal me...., Assistant Chief Glen Smith, and Lieutenant Roger Noyes were present. Mr. Noyes reviewed the bids received for the equipment van, r-ecommending acceptance of the GMC bid for $26,455. He noted this is the second time it has been bid. After discussing the bids received, the Council moved the following: IjDTIDN by Ortte1, Seconded by Knight, that we authorize the purchase of a Fire Department equipment van based on the bids received and award to the low bidder, which '~as GMC Truck and Coach Operation, General Motors Corporation, for a net sa1e5 price of $26,455; and note that the other bid received from Internati ona1 at $2.,6., 332.. 22 be rejected as well as a second bid from International in the amount of $23,252.98, as that was bid on a 1985 vehicle which hlas approximately two years old and of a different manufacture than the specifications required. Motion carried unanimously. tk. Smith al so r-evi e!t-Jed the quotes for bunker- pants and suspender-s. They have budgeted up to ~t-5, 000 for this item. The Clarey's Safety Equipment bid is on the Janesvil1e pant, .¡hi ch is ~ i del y used and is of excellent quality; and the bid includes the measuring of the firefighters to insure proper fit of the gear. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we authorize the Fire Department to pur-chase 25 pair of bunker pants along with suspenders from Clarey's Safety Equipment for an amount not to e,·,ceed $5,000. Motion car-ried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 13 (AVFD, Continued) Ch i £of Palmer- asked for a transfer of $2,000 for- the bill from Lavern from 42200.580 to 42200.404. Mayor Windschitl asked for a motion to that effect. t19TIOH by Knight, Seconded by Elling, to so move. Motion carried unanimously_ Chief Palmer asked for Buthol""ization to use a house on the corner of Bunker Lake Boulevard and County Road 9 for a practice burn for one week the first N8ek in November. t1~TIOU by Ortte1, Seconded by Knight, that we give the Fire Department authorization to burn what ,~i 11 be a vacant structure on the corner of County Road 9 and County Road 116 for training purposes. Motion car-ried unanimously. Chief Palmer also reported on the problem in Rum River Estates where a resident has '~ritten asking that no burn permits or recreational fires be allowed on a lot in that subdivision. He r-E'viewed the incident that brought this about. The area does not qualify for a burning permit, and the one that was issued \.-'Jas done so in e....r-OF". But there is an area sufficient for r-ecr~?atiDnal fires. Permits are not needed for a recreational fire, and it was his position that such fires ,~i 11 not be di saIl o~¡ed unless the Council chooses to restrict that. He felt that that lot should have the same rights as any other lot in the City to have a recreational fire if it is contained and meets the specifications. Council discussed the i ssLte ¡"Ji th Chief Palmer and Mr. Noyes, the officer on duty during the first incident. Council generally agreed with the position of the Department and took no action on the matter. Chief Palmer indicated many of the fire lanes in the junkyard area ar-e not sufficient. Mayor Windschit1 suggested that information be known at the time the junkyard licenses are renewed at the beginning of the year. Council also suggested the Department inform the junkyard owner-s in '~ri ti ng of the requirements beforehand. R~VIEW OAK BLUFF DEED/OUTLOT Because of the ordinance amendment adopted earlier in the evening, the outlot for Oak Bluff is no longer to be deeded to the City. Therefore, no action was taken on this item. Per the or-dinance amendment, the Attorney will redraft the restrictive covenant for the developer's signature and ~,h i ch will be recorded. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 14 FINAL PLAT APPROVAL/INDIAN MEADOWS 2ND ApDITION ~OTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Knight, a Resolution approving the Fi na1 Plat of Indian t-1eadol.-'Js 2nd Addi ti on as being developed by Programmed Land, Inc. , in Section 19 as prepared with the following condition: that the title opinion be received from the City Attorney; and that the developer pay to the City a deposit to cover all plat fees; and a deed for temporary turnaound be given the City along the southern border on Lot 3 of the plat. (See Resolution R171-8b) Motion carried unanimously.. FINAL PAYMENTS/86-1 ~~ 86-2) 85-8 g~ 85-88; CHANGE ORDER tl::;!-10, WATER TOl>JER tIDTIO~ by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, a Resolution accepting work and directing final payment to Kenko, Inc. , for Project No. 85-8 and 85-88 for improvement of water-main and sani tar-y sewer e~·:tension in the fo11m'¡ing area: Along Bunker Lake Boulevard from Round Lake 80u1evard to Raven Street, as prepared. (See Resolution R172-86) Motion carried unanimously.. Mr. Davidson reviewed the compensating change order for Project 85-8 and 85-88 where the sewer portion of the contract was terminated; and he also summarized the change orders for Project 86-1 and ,.., ~. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, that we approve change order on the contract with Kenko, Inc. , Project 85-8 and 85-88, Change Order No. 3, for a decrease of $1,811.70. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, that we approve Change Order No. 4, a compensating change order in the amount of -$157,845.30 to our contract "Ii th f<enko, Inc. , for construction of Project 85-8 and 85-88. Motion carried unanimously. ~1OTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Ell ing, a Resolution accepting work and directing final payment to Channel Construction for Project No. 86-1 for the impl'"'ovement of sani tary se\-'Jer, water-main, storm drainage, streets with concrete curb and gutter in the Creek Ridge Estates area as prepared; and along with that approve Change Order Numbers 6 and 7 -- No. 6 in the amount of $700 and No. 7 in the amount of $7,398.55. (See Resolution R173-86) Motion cê\r-ried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, a Resolution directing final payment to Channel Construction for Project No. 86-2 for the improvement of sanitary sewe....., sto.....m d.....ainage, streets "¡i th conc.....ete cu.....b and gutter in'the Smith's Green Ac.....es a.....ea. (See Resolution R174-86) Motion car.....ied unanimoLlsly. Mr-. Davidson eHp1ained the change order for Project 85-10 relates to a d.....iveway change requested by staff for better access ~ i th the snowp 1 moi ng unit. TKDA requested the paving be delayed until the painters were finished, so there is a mobilization cha.....ge included. They have not settled on liquidated damages on that contract. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Minutes Page 15 (Final Payments/Change Orders, Continued) MOTIQtl by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, that we approve a change order for Project 85-10 in the amount of $1,438 for driveway alterations. Motion carried unanimously. SONSTEBY MINING PERMIT A representative from Forest Lake Contracting stated they have reached an agreement with Ms. SOMsteby to mine additional dirt for the County Road 116 project on her property up to 100 feet back from the road bed. He estimated mning approximately 20,000 to 25,000 yards. The minimum cut on the property would be 9 1/2 feet above the high water table. Nothing they are doing ,~i 11 alter the drainage in that area. MQTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we issue a Spec i a1 Use Permit for Forest Lake Contracting for the removal of up to 30,000 yards of fill to be used on the County State Aid Highway project for County State Aid Highway 116 for a period of up to 12 months provided the contractor provide before and after profiles to our City Engineer's satisfaction; and replace the topsoil as the cut ar-eas are abandoned; the 1 ega1 description of the property is that which is immediately adjacent to the construction site, with those legals to be inserted by Staff. Motion carried unanimously. 1987 G_E::NERAL FUND BUDGET PROPOSAL MOJ_tpN by Elling, Seconded by Ortte1, a Resolution establishing the 1987 levy to be certified to the County Auditor by the City of Andover as presented ( total non-bonded indebtedness levy set at $742,537 and bonded indebtedness levy of $135,618) . (See Resolution R175-86) Motion car-ried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Ell ing, that '~e approve the 1987 budget as presented and amended in the amount of $1,479,907 for revenues and e:·'pendi tures. Motion carri ed unanimously. Mr. Schrantz noted the change made of adding $8,000 to Una110cated E~'¡pendi tures for the Lower Rum River ~Jatershed and removing that amount as special levy. SIT~ EI--Éi Councilman Elling e>:p1ained the County wants the City's response to the proposed EIS by Thursday. In looking at the document, he felt it addresses all of the City's concerns, listing sever-al items he would like to see added. Council generally agreed with the document with the changes Councilman Elling recommended.. Regular City Council Meeting Octobet- 7, 1986 - t1i nutes Page 16 l>!DE MEET I NG MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, that we set a meeting ~ i th the S~J-28 Group for 7:30 on the 15th of October at the City Hall. Motion carried unanimously. T.H. 47 DESIGNATION MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Ortte1, directing the City Administrator to dr-aw up a Resolution for signature opposing the redesignation of Hi gh..ay 47 through Andover and Oak Grove, with copies to go to the State Highway Department and the County. (See Resolution R176-86) Motion car-ried unanimously. ÇOMPUT_ER Sf'EÇIFICATIONS Councilman Lachinski stated he has almost completed writing the computer specfications, suggesting the item be put on the Ageuda for October 15. Council agreed. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT/APPRAISALS Attorney Hawkins reported the appraisal has been received for Marian Heidelberger's property. The appraisal is for $197,500, ,.h i ch includes assessments that ,.i 11 be levied against the property of appro;., i mate1 y $40,000. Council discussed the appraisal, generally agreeing if this is to be pursued, considerable soil testing must be done on the property. A suggestion was also to negotiate for two adjoining properties as ~ e11. The Engineer was asked to research the costs for those soil borings. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, that we authorize Bi 11 <Hawkins) to negotiate a price for those three parcels, Mom's Auto, Ray Ragen, and Rick Heidelberger; and bring it back to us for approval, including an appropriate escape clause for pollution. Motion carried unanimously. STREET SPEC I F I CATI ON§ tLQ.I1..Qt:! by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Street Specifications for rural residential street constr-uction, five-ton bituminous surface as presented by the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. AD}UST CQNNECTIO~ CHARGE~ tlPI rot{ by Elling, Seconded by Knight, introducing a Resolution setting rates for permits, connection fees, service, and "¡ater usage pursuant to Ot-di nance No. ~~ Section 3 and Resolution Rl01-81, as presented. (See oJ..), Resolution R177-86) Motion car-ried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 1986 - Mi n~ttes Page 17 ORDINANCE 24 t'[ÇJTI ON by Elling, Seconded by Knight, Ordinance No. 24D., an or-dinanc:e amending Ordinance No. 24 providing for the salaries of the Mayor and Councilmember-s of the Ci ty of Andover, Minnesota, as presented. Motion carried unanimously.. AF'PÇJItH ELECT I-ºl:LJJ,JJ)GE ~ Council noted the issue raised of having the Chief Judge in Precinct 1 be from Precinct 1 , noting Lois Benson has been Ch i ef Judge in that precinct for year-s but 1 i yes just outside the precinct. It was agreed to act on the proposed Resolution, but also direct that the Administrator check ,~i th the County Auditor to determi ne the 1 ega1 i t y of having i"1. pr-ec i net judge from outside the precinct. tLºTIor~ by f·:ni ght, Seconded by Elling, to adopt a Resolution appointing judges for the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November- 4, 1986, in the City of Andover as presented. (See Resolution R178-86) Motion carried uanimoLlsly. APPROVAL Of CLAIMS MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Ortte1, to approve Checks 11648 through 11730 for a total of $704,169.31. Motion car-Tied unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Ell ing, to adjourn.. ~10ti on carried unanimously. Meeting adjour-ned at 12:37 a.m. 'i RO.'~~ ~y~~ ~+ì' Peact1 .. Recording Secretary