Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH July 17, 1986 CITY of ANDOVER PUBLIC HEARINGS - JULY 17, 1986 MINUTES Pursuant to notice published thereof, Public Hearings for street improvement projects on 164th Lane and 154th Lane and continued public hearings for storm drainage projects of Red Oaks ponds, Enchanted Drive and Dehn's pond/Round Lake outlet was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschit1 on July 17, 1986, 7:33 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Ortte1 Councilmen absent: None Also present: BRA Engineer, Glenn Cook; and TKDA Engineers John Rodeberg and John Davidson 164TH LANE/IP86-7 Mr. Cook estimated the proposed improvement of a 24-foot wide bituminous residential roadway with berm curb for an estimated cost of $41,890 or $3,490 for each of the 12 lots involved. Council noted the petition received dated April 22, 1986, for the improvement included 7 yes, 2 no, and 1 undecided votes. Tom Gonier, 3020 164th Lane - initiated the petition and stated the count on the pet,tion doesn't sound correct. After re-examining the petition, Council corrected the count· to 6 yes, 3 no, and 2 undecided votes. Merlyn Johnson, 3051 164th Lane - asked if there were any culverts at the end of the road. He stated he is still opposed to the project. Mr. Cook stated there will be a culvert on Round Lake Boulevard. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to close the public input portion of the hëarTñg. Motion carried unanimously. Council questioned the number of lots to be assessed, especially Lots 19 and 17. Mr. Cook stated they both front on 164th and are proposed to be assessed. I Jim Perra, 3125 164th - stated both Lots 19 and 17 have driveways accessable to 164th. Mr. Cook stated the intent has always been to assess Lot 19 even though the house faces Round Lake Boulevard as it has access onto 164th. '-I) "^""1) " .AI'~ y~- i\ MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, introducing a Resolution to order Plans and Specifications for the improvement of Project No. 86-7 in the 164th Lane area as presented. (See Resolution R106-86) DISCUSSION: I Ed Westphal, 3060 164th Lane - asked what will be done regarding the project. r~r. Cook explained the 4-inch gravel base and 2 inches of bituminous sUrface with berm curb. I Mr. Westphal - asked how much more cement curbs would cost, thinking the berm curb would be destroyed by snowplowing, etc. Mr. Cook explained concrete' curb and gutter would be about $5 to $6 more per foot and explained the construction method for installing the berm as is done elsewhere in projects in Andover. The berm has an 8- to 10-inch base, but it will still be damaged by driving ove~ it or ripped with the snowplow. i Mr. Westphal - asked if the pavement level will be even with the driveways. ~1r. Cook stated yes, plus an apron will be placed on the driveways. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 2 (164th Lane/IP86-7, Continued) Mr. Westphal - asked where is the water going to drain. Mr. Cook stated basically the water off the street will drain to the east and also to the west into the culvert that will go under Round Lake Boulevard. On the east end it will be discharged off the end of the road. Mayor Windschit1 also explained the Council procedure of recalling the hearing if the bids exceed 5 percent of the engineer's estimate. Mr. Perra - asked about the time frame of the project and type of payback for the assessment. Mr. Cook stated the bid date would be the end of August, with a completion date around the First of November. Mayor Windschitl explained the assessment would be over a 10-year period, noting interest rates have been favorable recently. Once a project is assessed, the residents cannot be reassessed for that same project during the life of the bond issue. Luella Spohn, 16437 Round Lake Boulevard - stated her driveway goes onto 164th but her house faces CoRd 9. W,ll she be assessed just because of her driveway. Mr. Cook stated yes. Ms. S~ohn - asked if she will have to pay if she changes her driveway. Mr. Cook state that would be a policy decision made at that time. VOTE ON MOTImJ: Carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 7:46 p.m. 154TH LANE STREET CONSTRUCTION/IP86-12 Mr. Cook reviewed the proposed street construction for 154th Lane and 153rd Lane through Nightingale Estates and Nightingale Estates 2nd and 3rd Additions, noting the grading to be done in Part 1 of the project and the base work to be done by the developer in Part 2.. The estimated cost of the project is $107,200, proposed to be assessed on a front footage basis of $14.55/ff. The corner lot facing Nightingale Street is not included in the assessable footage. There was no public input. MOTION by Lachinski,.Seconded by Elling, to close the public input portion to the street improvement project in the Nightingale Estates, 2nd and 3rd Additions. Moti on carried unanimously. . . . ¡;_~ '~ !. n, , . : MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, introducing a Resolution ~cepting feasibility Ç~) report, ordering plans and specifications, and directing the engineers to request bids for the construction of Improvement Project 86-12 as being the Nightingale Estates area street improvement. (See Resolution R107-86) r~otion carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 7:50 p.m. STORM DRAINAGE/RED OAKS PONDS/IP86-16 Mayor Windschitl felt at this point those residents involved understood the project and the assessment calculations. Mr. Rodeberg explained in researching the question of assessing the Duerr property, it was found a portion of property had not been previously assessed that should be added into this project. Because of that additional property included in the project, the assessment rate for the Red Oaks ponds outlet has been lowered from 2.2 cents to 1.9 cents per square foot. Pub 1ic Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 3 (Storm Drainage/Red Oaks Ponds/IP86-16, Continued) Mr. Rodeberg also reviewed the other question of the original assessment by the Northwoods area for a portion of the pipe that will be used in this project. The pipe was oversized one size larger for a cost of approximately $13 per lot to the Northwoods area. But that area also only paid 3.2 cents per square foot for storm drainage at that time compared to 7.7 cents per square foot assessed the Red Oaks area. With the proposed assessment of 1.9 cents per square foot in this project, it is felt everyone has paid their fair share, recorrmending the assessment rates as proposed are fair. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we accept the feasibility report and order Plans and Specifications written for Project 86-16, Red Oaks ponds east and west as presented. (See Resolution R108-86) DISCUSSION: Councilman Lachinski asked where is Mr. ~1enkveld in the process of his development. ~1ayor Windschitl was not sure but noted this project would be done and assessed regardless of what Mr. ~1enkve1d does with his property. Mr. Hagen - asked the expected completion date of the project. Mayor Windschitl stated it would be done yet this year, done in connect~on with the sewer extension proj ect. Doug Foster, 13715 Xavis - heard rumors about a road going through once the Menkve1d property is developed. Council noted the only capability of extending a road from Red Oaks to Bunker Lake Boulevard would be Quinn Street, but that would be when the property to the east of r1enkveld develops. There would be no roads from Menkveld's property going into the Red Oaks Addition. Council also noted the proposal for the realignment of Crosstown Boulevard from 139th eastward and south down to Bunker Lake Boulevard and the continued rerouting of Crooked Lake Boulevard to Highway 242 east of Coon Creek. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 8 p.m. STORM DRAINAGE/ENCHANTED DRIVE/IP86-15 Mr. Rodeberg explained by reducing the project amount for the culvert under 160th, which would be paid for by the City, the proposed assessment would be $69.47 per unit based on not having to acquire easements for the property to the north. He explained Mr. Schrantz has used the assumption that the area at one time naturally drained to the north; and if the roads were not there, it would still go north. They do not plan on lowering the water very much, just to lower the elevation below the road. Mr. Rodeberg explained neither Mr. Schrantz nor Mr. Stone has been able to contact Mr. Hughes or Mr. Knolls regarding easement and maintenance agreements. Nei ther Mr. Hughes nor Mr. Knolls were in attendance this evening. Ken Schauer, 4048 Genie Drive - asked if the pond draining by 160th is considered a problem pond. He llves on Genie Drive, which is a considerable distance away, asking why that is included in this project. Council noted the problem is on the curve. Mr. Rodeberg also explained the assessment area is based on the area that drains into the pond, that area determined from topographic maps. Mr. Schauer - stated his water cannot get to that low area because of the dike and road there now, believing the water from Genie Drive is not affecting the high pond. Mr. Rodeberg explained how the cu1verting and ditching will alleviate the two pond area problems and facilitate water flow through that area. Pub 1 ic Heari ngs July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 4 (Storm Drainage/Enchanted Drive/IP86-15, Continued) Mr. Schauer - asked why a culvert wasn't put in under Enchanted Drive when the road was put in. Mr. Rodeberg stated it was originally planned to be put in, but the feeling among the residents was that it was too expensive and they didn't expect a water problem. Roger Lober~, 15830 Xenia Street - asked if this pond was going to be drained by the clty inltial ly or was lt the result of a petition. Mayor Windschitl explained the entire hearing is a result of a petition brought in. Mr. Loberg - felt the benefitted area defined is ridiculous and the people that signed the petition should pay for it. Mayor Windschit1 explained the benefitted area should be determined by engineering calculations. If there are any errors in that district, that would be determined at the assessment hearing. Normally the contour maps are relied on to provide elevations. Mr. Loberg - realized $69 isn't much, but he'd like to see fire trucks dump water onto his property to see if it actually gets down to the pond, speculating it won't. Mr. Rodeberg stated in effect any water that even goes into the ground will run to the closest spot. Mr. Loberg - stated last time they were talking about surface water. Now it is ground water. If it is underground water, then the entire City should pay. ~1r. Rodeberg explained that is a concept held by some people. They are working under the theory using the topographic maps, the people at the bottom shouldn't pay for a problem that is also caused by the people on the top of a hill. Mr. LOber1 - asked who is going to prove that the water is contributing. Mayor Wlndschit stated those that are questionable, field elevations are shot prior to the assessment hearing. Geri Webster, 3920 Enchanted Drive - asked about the proposal to clean out the culvert in front of thelr house. Mr. Rodeberg stated the Utilities Director and Building Inspector are checking out what happened when that originally went in. That problem should be resolved by the City and is not a part of the cost of this project. Ms. Webster - asked if they will have to dig up their front yard to do that. Mayor Wlndschitl stated no one at this point knows just what took place. The City is trying to contact the builder of their house to find out what took place. Ms. Webster - stated it was actually the builder who built the houses on the other slde of the street. The culvert was fine until the property across the street was built on the two unbuildable lots. He asked if there is additional costs to this project because of easements, will they be notified ahead of time. Mayor Windschitl stated if the costs vary by more than 5 percent of what is estimated this evening, the residents will be notified. The easement question will be resolved before the bid is awarded. (1) - felt this is a real controversial issue. As the petitions indicate, the majority of the people are against it. It appears the Council will go ahead with it anyway, and that is why a lot of people are.upset. During Council discussion it was brought out that few people are generally in favor of such projects except those that are having the problem. Donna Turnbom, 3889 Enchanted Drive - stated the majority of the people who signed the petitlon against the proposal actually live on the swamp. They don't want anything done to it. Pub 1 i c Heari ngs July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 5 (Storm Drainage/Enchanted Drive/IP86-15, Continued) MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we close the public hearing portion of the Enchanted Drive area project. Motion carried unanimously. Council then discussed the proposal. Because the assessment district has been enlarged following the receipt of the original petition, it was felt the project would require a 4/5 vote on the Council. It was generally felt the project needs to be done, especially to relieve those who have water in their basements and to protect the road; but they also questioned whether those costs should be assessed back to the residents. It was noted culverts have been placed elsewhere in the City because of oversights, which is what also happened in this case. Councilman Orttel asked if there is still a problem. Tom watsonci 16301 Enchanted Drive - stated they have basement problems, but they have been ry for almost a month now. But it is clear with a few rains they will be pumping again. It is based on the fact that two culverts weren't put in when it was developed. He felt it is not entirely the fault of people there, but he felt everyone should have some responsibility to correcting the problem. He is strongly in favor of the project. For $60, he felt it was cheap to alleviate the problem. The highway breaking up alone is reason enough to do something as soon as possible. Councilman Lachinski thought the problems are a result of not putting in the culverts when the project was done. If that had been done, that cost would have been spread over the entire project area, which is a much larger area than what is being pro- posed here. In the case of 160th where a culvert wasn't put in because it was thought it wasn't needed, that would have been paid for entirely by the developer but is now being paid for by the City. Therefore, he felt there is a problem with asking the residents to finance this project, suggesting the Council look elsewhere for funding. Councilman Elling also thought the project should be done for the protection of the road and for the flooding basements, but questioned the residents having to pay for it. Councilman Orttel asked whether it would even be cost effective to run an assessment roll for $69 per parcel. Council noted there are no funds left in the construction fund for this area, but asked that it be researched as to whether or not there is any interest income off the funds that could be used for the storm drainage improvement. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that we direct the City Engineer to prepare a cost for the improvement of minor storm drainage in the Enchanted Drive area with City crews and to arrange for easements if necessary for the same; and present it at our first meeting in August; and determine possible financing from the original revenues from the project. DISCUSSION: Councilman Knight asked if there is an immediate need to do this. Mr. Watson - stated his next door neighbor had a complete drainage system put in hlS basement to keep the basement useable, but it costs a fair amount to keep it going. It is not absolutely an immediate problem, but it is a continuing problem. And if there are more rains, they will have problems. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we terminate the 429 Procedure on the proposed Enchanted Drive project area but that we do accept the feasibility report of the Engineers. (See Resolution R109-86) Motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 8:25 p.m. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 6 DEHN'S/ROUND LAKE OUTLET/IP86-19 Mayor Windschitl stated they have had some discussions with the City of Anoka that he felt are productive that could lead to a solution of this problem. He then made the following proposal to be offered for consideration of the Anoka City Council at their July 21 meeting: 1) To take the pipe south through the high ground of the proposed County 116 realignment. 2) To set the elevation of the pipe between 865 and 866 with the hope that the pipe would be set at the lower end. This has a material benefit to Dehn's Addition to take additional water out of that area. 3) Andover would build the pipe either under a joint powers agreement with the City of Anoka or an assessment agreement. 4) For an outlet charge to the City of Anoka, Andover would pay one-half cent per square foot for developed property up front. Undeveloped property would be charged one-half cent per square foot at such time as it develops. In addition, each City would assess its portion of the pipe costs to the developed property. 5) Andover would retain ponding either using the Chutich pond or another area behind the pipe to lessen the burden on the Anoka system. The pipe into Anoka would then function basically as an overflow system, not an on- going flow into their system. 6) Andover would work with Anoka County in their road project for excavation, etc., to help with the ponding question. Mayor Windschitl felt that if something can be worked out to drain south through the Anoka system, it is clearly the preferable way of solving the storm drainage in that area. In discussing the assessable drainage district for the Mayor's proposal, it was determined the district would remain basically the same as what was brought in for the Round Lake outlet proposal, except the north line would be lowered to just south of Lund's Round Lake Estates, with that Addition being eliminated from the project. The engineers would have to determine if there are any other parcels that should be included but were not notified for this process. Rosella Sonsteby - asked why all the property east of Round Lake Boulevard isn't in thlS drainage area. They are draining all that water to the west; why shouldn't they be included as well? She felt they should be included. Mayor Windschitl understood the DNR wants that water draining west as part of the mitigation process with the County for County 116 realignment. The City's position is that water will be redirected toward Coon Creek if necessap'Y. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the DNR is requiring 4.1 acres for that mitigation, but the County is getting approximately 10 to 12 acres. She stated the legals advertised in the paper said it was for 25.49 acres. In talking with the County Commissioners, they were not aware that the legals were for 25.49 acres. In talking with John Stine of the DNR, all they required is 4.1 acres. Ms. Sonsteby stated the County has said it is the DNR that required the 10 to 12 acres, but that is not true. She said she has agreed to the 10 or 12 acres, but she felt that still is not enough lanå for the water that is comin9 over from the Good Value property east of Round Lake Boulevard, again stating that should be in this assessment area. Mayor Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 7 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) Windschitl understood the intent is to seal the north outlet out of the pond so there is standing water in the pond. In order to get that standing water, they want the water from the Good Value to continue going in there. John Stine, DNR - explained the mitigation being discussed with Anoka County. The County lS lmpacting 4.1 acres with the realignment of the road, which needs to be replaced in equal wetland value for that amount. They looked at impouding the water within that area now being considered from Ms. Sonsteby. The intent wasn't simply to buy 4.1 acres, but to get 4.1 acres of value wetland replaced. If there is an outlet to the system, that area would be drained and would· loose its value as wetland. To retain the water at a higher elevation by building a structure to keep the water at the higher elevation would create a nice wetland and would suffice for their mitigation. The DNR suggested either the County offer to buy it from the owner (Ms. Sonsteby) or obtain an easement for water and let her retain ownership. Ms. Sonsteby - stated by keeping water in that low area, it is flooding all her lots in Rosella's Addition. Water seeks its own level, so how are they going to keep water in that pond? She wants that pond sealed to do that. Mr. Stine - stated they will look at that during the engineering detail of the project, and they would look at the impact on the rear of those lots. Those peop le that own that property would receive payment for it. Ms. Sonsteby - asked if it is fair that they bought the big lots and then have to get all this water because of water being diverted from the east side of Round Lake Boulevard. Mr. Stine - believed it could be a benefit to them in the end. Ms. Sonsteb¥ - stated she was sick of hearing benefit. Anyway, she stated the County Commlssioners are going to be getting 10 to 12 acres, which Mr. Stine said was enough to get the permit. Mr. Stine - stated the DNR hasn't said that yet. They have said 10 to 12 acres of slmi11ar valued wetland. Ms. Sonsteby - stated that is what they are getting. stating she felt it was an underhanded deal to advertise in the paper for 25.49 acres when they only wanted 10 to 12 acres. She wanted to know who did that. She again repeated her feeling that Good Value property should be included in this project because of that water being diverted to this area. Mayor Windschitl stated it cannot be both ways. Either that water must continue to go there for mitigation purposes for the County, or the City takes it out of there. This proposal is simply to get an outlet for that area. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the proposal would not help her in any way. She is just gettlng her land back to where it used to be at 866. Yet she is going to be assessed on her high land to keep that water where it was before. She wi 11 have to pay all this extra money. yet she alleged she isn't getting any benefit from it. She asked if she is being assessed for all of her lowland. Mayor Windschitl explained the proposal is to assess developed property one-half cent per square foot at this time. Any undeveloped property would be assessed at the time it is developed. That insures her of an outlet when she develops her property, that her water has some place to go. And it assures the Dehn's Addition an outlet for maintaining their water. Pub 1 i c Heari ngs July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 8 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) Jim Hiltz - asked if the people north of Dehn's are then being dropped out of the district and there is no other project being proposed that would include them. Mayor Windschit1 stated that is his proposal, that the assessable district would be south of Lund's Round Lake Estates, relying on the County study done. Steve WOOdJ 3723 145th - asked that the ditch where the lake was flowing into the Dehn's pon area be a part of this project. Mayor Windschit1 agreed, that it should be permanently closed off. Mr. Nystrom - understood that then the outlet northwest of Round Lake is then being scraped. Mayor Windschit1 stated his proposal doesn't include providing an outlet of Round Lake at all. Dan Wisen, 14821 Blackfoot - asked where the pipe would be located, the location of the drainage system, and how much relief would be provided to the Dehn's area. Mayor Windschit1 explained the location of the ditching and pipe crossing, the Chutich pond area, etc. This would give an additional one-half to three-fourth of a foot drop than the north outlet proposal. Roy Wicklund - asked if this will have any effect on Round Lake as far as its elevatlon. Will the existing ditch be used to help drain the lake? Mayor Windschitl stated he didn't know, and no one has been able to determine if there is or is not a relationship between the lake and the pond. The proposal is to seal the existing ditch, as the lake shouldn't be contributing to the Dehn's problem as it was doing for a period of time. (?) - stated the assessment would be the one-half cent per square foot plus the cost of the installation of the pipe. He asked how much is the cost of the pipe. Mayor Windschitl estimated it would be $70,000. Council noted the assessment really means an extra half-cent a square foot, the same construction cost, plus a reduced assessment district. (?) - so the cost would be higher than the northwest outlet proposal. It has been one year and one month since this was brought before the Council and nothing has been done yet, expressing skepticism that anything will be done soon. (Another åentleman - ? ) - stated the water will need to be lowered still further to 0 any good, as there will still be water on his lawn. Mayor Windschitl didn't think they could get permission to go much lower because of the wetland consideration. Also, there is a consideration on the affect on the Anoka sys tem as we 11. Mr. Wood - stated that's about the same amount of i1TqJrovement as the project to lower Round Lake. Mayor Windschitl stated this proposal would lower it about a half foot more than the north outlet of Round Lake. Mr. Wood - stated then this would be a reduction of more than a foot to the Dehn's pond area, feeling that would be a significant improvement. Mayor Windschitl stated Ms. Sonsteby, as well as the City, had water quality studies done, which enters into this. The City studies indicate a very high concentration of fecal ch1oriform bacterial count in the ditch by the lake. Mr. Davidson stated that sample came from the ditch right by the lake, not Dehn's pond area. It is thought that may be because of animal habitat near the lake. Otherwise the tests indicate the water quality between the pond and the lake to be very similiar. Ms. Sonsteb~ - stated she had the water tested by her several times from the City of Anoka. he has 59. mg for grease, nitrate and phosphate, which is terrible. She has had the water tested again now. She also has pictures taken showing the Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 9 (Dehn's/Round Lake Out1et/IP86-19, Continued) grease and oil allover her land. She stated she has also been before the City of Anoka many times, and they won't even check on it. Mr. Wicklund - asked whose land would the ponding be on. Mayor Windschitl stated the Chutlch pond is city owned. It needs to be determined yet what is needed behind the pipe. Mr. Davidson explained the procedure of working with the DNR in establishing a control elevation. The pipe will be sized so it does not impact downstream in Anoka, also making use of all ponding available within Andover before discharging into Anoka. There would be inlet control so the surface water elevation could be controlled. Once the design criteria is determined, they can prepare an estimated cost of the proposal. (1), 147th - asked if another public hearing is to be called to rediscuss this. He stated the focus of the project has changed completely; only the end result is the same. Mayor Windschit1 stated the continuation of the hearing would be to inform the residents of the cost of the option. This proposal was the original preferable proposal, but the cities were unable to reach an agreement prior to this. That is why the northwest outlet to Round Lake option was proposed. (1) - still thought this changes the scope, thinking there should be a new public hearing based on that new scope. The only problem with having the continued public hearing is about one-third of the people that were here last time are here tonight; and next time it will be even less. He didn't think this was even the same project. Mr. Wicklund - was confused as to who would be dropped out of the assessment area. Council indlcated at this point no one will be dropped out until an agreement can be reached with Anoka regarding the proposal made this evening. If the boundaries change significantly, then it's a different project and another public hearing will need to be called. If the southern outlet proposal is agreed to, then the Lund's Round Lake Estates area would be dropped out of the project area. Jim Haase, 14651 Guarani - stated he is concerned. He doesn't have any basement problem or any ill effects on his property from the Dehn's pond problem. F~ himself and his neighbors, the overwhelming issue is personal costs. As best he can understand it, the proposal brought forward tonight would be about twice the expense personally as the proposal brought forward in June. He was concerned that he and some of his neighbors who were here last time but not this evening have that made very clear to them. Their preference is for the zero cost option; but if something has to be done, they'd prefer the lowest cost option. Ms. Sonsteby - stated if the water is controlled, her land will still be used as a controlling pond. Mayor Windschit1 stated those amounts of her land would be in the wetland. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the wetland was only a small portion until the City ran water back there. Mr. Stine - explained the protected wetland on Ms. Sonsteby's property was determined by deflnltion of the law of ordinary high water level. That is defined by a point on the ground where it is evident that water has been a sufficient number of times to leave evidence. They have not yet established an ordinary high water mark on the Dehn's pond area, but they will be looking at 865± for a control elevation. Field investigations will need to be done to more accurately define that. Mr. Stine also advised the Council to let him know as soon as possible how they want him to handle the permit application to go out the north end of the lake. Pub 1 i c Heari ngs July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 10 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) Mayor Windschit1 thought it should be known within a week. Steve Halse~, Anoka City Councilman - didn't think the final agreement could be completed wlthin a week, but the concept should be known. He felt a crutial point is the County is going ahead with their project no matter what the cities do. He stated it is a benefit to both cities to reach an agreement or else there will be substantially more costs to do the project once the road is in. He also felt it would be helpful to have a representative from Andover City Council meeting Monday evening. He didn't know how quickly their city staff could work on this as their city engineer has been ill. Mr. Wood - stated there has only been secondhand information presented at meetings that lowering the level of the lake would benefit the lake. The lake property owners do not want the water level lowered. Lloyd Knudson, ONR Wildlife Mana~er - stated from a wildlife standpoint, it was hlS fee11ng that lowering the 1a e a small amount probably would have some beneficial effects to the wildlife resources. It will put more shallow water in that lake which probably means more vegetation. He felt both emerged and submerged vegetation would respond more positively to the lower lake level. An ideal pond for wildlife is about 50 percent of that water body being in emerged vegetation. Loweri ng to that level would also probably increase the wildlife value for a number of species. But that would have a negative impact on the fishery resource management. It was his opinion that the 50-50 level could not be achieved in Round Lake by just lowering it one foot. Mr. Wood - stated a few years ago they had a high population' of panfish, which froze out in the first hard winter due, he felt, to oxygen depletion. Last year there was also a population of fish which survived even though it too was a hard wi nter. He attributed that to the high water level of the lake. Mr. Knudson - guessed Mr. Wood correctly identified why that happened. They would have to look at the differences in winters; but it is true the more water, the more oxygen available. But one body of water cannot be both ideal for fishery management and wildlife management. Mr. Wood - said some statements were made that the high water level had flooded out some natural habitat for the animals that were there already, asking if Mr. Knudson felt that is true. r10st of the vegetati on is f1 oating bog. Mr. Knudson - stated for some species, that is true. But in the meantime other species come in; so there is usually a trade off. Unusually high water could have some impact on mallards, their food supply and nesting sites. Again, to design a wetland for the greatest number of species, it would be designed interspersed with emerged and submerged aquatic vegetation in the area of 50-50. Obviously, they do not have the abi 1ity to do that in every pond. Mr. Nystrom - asked why they are talking about wildlife. Council indicated it is a questlon that has been raised at many of the previous meetings regarding the lowering of Round Lake. Mr. Nystrom - reinforced that most of the people and major landowners are against dOlng anything to lower it regardless of the impact on the wildlife. Mr. Knudson - stated they are aware of that, and the other factors such as aesthetlcs must also be considered. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 11 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) à7) - felt the entire project was to lower Dehn's pond. Last month they wante to outlet the lake on the north side. It sounded to him that that would be beneficial for everybody. It benefits the wildlife and helps those on the north side of the lake. The only question was how would it be paid for. Now the entire scope of the project has been changed to block off the lake at the same level. Now the people on the north side will have water problems and it will cost more money. He recommended going back to the original proposal of lowering the lake and expand on the assessment basis. Councilman Lachinski stated people are saying they don't have a problem right now, but it doesn't preclude the fact of doing both projects. (7) - whose to say then that he couldn't be charged again. Council noted he would only be in one drainage district and would not be charged again. Mayor Windschitl again reviewed the original proposal of the southern outlet done as a part of the Anoka County road project. (7) - heard there was a question of water quality that would enter Round Lake for the northern proposal. Mayor Windschitl stated on the water quality report commissioned by the City, one of the counts is not good. Councilman Elling asked Mr. Stine about the DNR statement of having to acquire easements around the lake because of the high water. Mr. Stine - explained the legal opinion is if nothing is done to the lake, no easements would be required because the system is not altered in any way. If, however, a permit was granted to alter the lake to any degree, such as an outlet project, and the decision was to lower it less than to the ordinary high water mark, easements would be required for anything above the normal lake level. Mr. Wicklund - stated comments from previous meetings were to leave the lake the way it is because the wildlife is great and any change would ruin it. But just the opposite has been said this evening. He felt the Council should look at including the lowering of Round Lake at least somewhat in this project; and if necessary, assess the people on Round Lake if it will be a benefit. He stated they can't just leave the lake sit there when water will be coming in and no place for it to go. (7~ - asked if the lowering of the lake could be incorporated in tonight's proposa by running the lake into Dehn's pond and out. Council noted the petition from those on the lake where the majority didn't want the lake lowered at all. Ms. Sonsteby - asked Mr. Stine what is the purpose of wanting more lowland than the 4.1 acres when that is all that is needed. Mr. Stine - stated it is necessary to mitigate 4.1 acres which has equal value from a wetland value, not from a real estate standpoint. He suggested he talk with Ms. Sonsteby about this privately. Councilman Orttel asked the DNR's position on groundwater heatpumps dumping into the lake and its impact on the lake. Mr. Stine - stated taking water from any source for anything other than domestic supply or livestock requires a permit if more than 10,000 gallons are pumped in one day or one million gallons in a year. The hearing units that take water from the ground and pump it into the lake obviously do add something to the lake. There have been a number of complaints about systems in that vicinity. The DNR will attempt to get all systems on permit that require a permit if the City can Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 12 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) advise them who has that type of system. He requested that information in May and has not yet received a response. Mayor Windschitl stated that information will be provided for him. Mr. Stine - stated the amount contributed to the lake can be material depending how the system is used. Generally speaking, if the system is used as a supplemental form of heating or cooling, it is a relatively insignificant volume of water. If it is the sole source of heating or cooling, it can be significant. A single system can produce in the order of 900,000 gallons in one year; though generally that is not the case. In looking at that volume of the water on Round Lake, it is quite insignificant. If someone has a system and it is under one million gallons a year, the DNR has no jurisdiction. Mr. Wicklund - disagreed with Mr. Stine's facts, stating installers have told him a geothermal system can go through two to three million gallons of water in a year. If these systems can't be shut down and they are adding to the lake, then an outlet is needed for the lake. He stated they just can't put water into the lake and not have an outl et. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Mayor and the City Engineer present the following possible solution to the high water problem in the southwest corner of Andover and the northeast corner of Anoka to the Anoka City Council at their scheduled meeting on 7-21-86: That Andover be allowed to buy into the existing Anoka storm sewer system at a cost of one-half cent per square foot of buildable benefitted area, that area to be determined jointly by the respective city engineers, and that the Andover vacant property would be assessed at such time as they developed; and that the City of Andover and the City of Anoka share in the cost of additional piping as required along the new County Road 116 right of way in proportion to their respective benefit; and that the pipe be at the lowest possible elevation; and that the City of Andover make maximum use of existing wet areas in Andover to control flow into the Anoka system to an acceptable level; and if the cities cannot come to an acceptable agreement in a reasonable period of time, that the City of Andover will reconvene the public hearing dealing with the northwest drainage option. (See Resolution R110-86) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, TKDA be asked to complete the drainage district for this project in conjunction with the City of Anoka engineer. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we continue the public hearing to the 5th of August; and that we send letters to the affected property owners in the new drainage area. Motion carried unanimously. Council asked that the approximately costs to the residents be included in that l~tter. If there are any areas that need to be brought into this process, it wlll be done so at a later date at a supplemental hearing to meet the 429 requirements. Hearing continued to August 5, 1986. 9:45 p.m. Council recessed; reconvened at 10:06 p.m. TUBING DISCUSSION/DNR/STINE ~r. Stine - agreed to be at the County Board hearing on July 22 regarding the Northstar tubing operation on the Rum River. His suggestion would be to set up a group that will have representation on an on-going basis to try to resolve CITY of ANDOVER PUBLIC HEARINGS - JULY 17, 1986 MINUTES Pursuant to notice published thereof, Public Hearings for street improvement projects on 164th Lane and 154th Lane and continued public hearings for storm drainage projects of Red Oaks ponds, Enchanted Drive and Dehn's pond/Round Lake outlet was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on July 17, 1986, 7:33 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Ortte1 Councilmen absent: None Also present: BRA Engineer, Glenn Cook; and TKDA Engineers John Rodeberg and John Davidson 164TH LANE/IP86-7 Mr. Cook estimated the proposed improvement of a 24-foot wide bituminous residential roadway with berm curb for an estimated cost of $41,890 or $3,490 for each of the 12 lots involved. Council noted the petition received dated April 22, 1986, for the improvement included 7 yes, 2 no, and 1 undecided votes. I Tom Gonier, 3020 164th Lane - initiated the petition and stated the count on the petltion doesn't sound correct. After re-examining the petition, Council corrected the count to 6 yes, 3 no, and 2 undecided votes. I I Mer1yn Johnson, 3051 164th Lane - asked if there were any culverts at the end of the road. He stated he is still opposed to the project. Mr. Cook stated there will be a culvert on Round Lake Boulevard. i I MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Elling, to close the public input portion of the ñëarTñg. Motion carried unanimously. Council questioned the number of lots to be assessed, especially Lots 19 and 17. Mr. Cook stated they both front on 164th and are proposed to be assess,ed. Jim Perra, 3125 164th - stated both Lots 19 and 17 have driveways acce'ssable to 164th. Mr. Cook stated the intent has always been to assess Lot 19 even though the house faces Round Lake Boulevard as it has access onto 164th. '~I «J'~l) t,l, I)/" , '-..-- MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, introducing a Resolution to order Plans and Specifications for the improvement of Project No. 86-7 in the 164th Lane area as presented. (See Resolution R106-86) DISCUSSION: I Ed Westphal, 3060 164th Lane - asked what will be done regarding the project. Mr. Cook exp1alned the 4-inch gravel base and 2 inches of bituminous surface with berm curb. i Mr. Westphal - asked how much more cement curbs would cost, thinking the berm curb would be destroyed by snowp10wing, etc. Mr. Cook explained concrete curb and gutter would be about $5 to $6 more per foot and explained the construction method for installing the berm as is done elsewhere in projects in Andover. The berm has an 8- to 10-inch base, but it will still be damaged by driving over it or ripped with the snowplow. Mr. Westphal - asked if the pavement level will be even with the driveways. ~lr. Cook stated yes, plus an apron will be placed on the driveways. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 2 (l64th Lane/IP86-7, Continued) Mr. Westphal - asked where is the water going to drain. Mr. Cook stated basically the water off the street will drain to the east and also to the west into the culvert that will go under Round Lake Boulevard. On the east end it will be discharged off the end of the road. Mayor Windschitl also explained the Council procedure of recalling the hearing if the bids exceed 5 percent of the engineer's estimate. Mr. Perra - asked about the time frame of the project and type of payback for the assessment. Mr. Cook stated the bid date would be the end of August, with a completion date around the First of November. Mayor Windschit1 explained the assessment would be over a 10-year period, noting interest rates have been favorable recently. Once a project is assessed, the residents cannot be reassessed for that same project during the life of the bond issue. Luella S ohn, 16437 Round Lake Boulevard - stated her driveway goes onto 164th but er ouse aces 0 1 S e e assessed just because of her driveway. Mr. Cook stated yes. Ms. S~ohn - asked if she will have to pay if she changes her driveway. Mr. Cook state that would be a policy decision made at that time. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 7:46 p.m. 154TH LANE STREET CONSTRUCTION/IP86-12 Mr. Cook reviewed the proposed street construction for 154th Lane and 153rd Lane through Nightingale Estates and Nightingale Estates 2nd and 3rd Additions, noting the grading to be done in Part 1 of the project and the base work to be done by the developer in Part 2., The estimated cost of the project is $107,200, proposed to be assessed on a front footage basis of $14.55/ff. The corner lot facing Nightingale Street is not included in the assessable footage. There was no public input. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Elling, to close the public input portion to the street improvement project in the Nightingale Estates, 2nd and 3rd Additions. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, introducing a Resolution aC¿é~~ti~~ feasibility ~)report, ordering plans and specifications, and directing the engineers to request bids for the construction of Improvement Project 86-12 as being the Nightingale Estates area street improvement. (See Resolution R107-86) Motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 7:50 p.m. STORM DRAINAGE/RED OAKS PONDS/IP86-16 Mayor Windschitl felt at this point those residents involved understood the project and the assessment calculations. Mr. Rodeberg explained in researching the question of assessing the Duerr property, it was found a portion of property had not been previously assessed that should be added into this project. Because of that additional property included in the project, the assessment rate for the Red Oaks ponds outlet has been lowered from 2.2 cents to 1.9 cents per square foot. Pub lic Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 3 (Storm Drainage/Rèd Oaks Ponds/IP86-16, Continued) Mr. Rodeberg also reviewed the other question of the original assessment by the Northwoods area for a portion of the pipe that will be used in this project. The pipe was oversized one size larger for a cost of approximately $13 per lot to the Northwoods area. But that area also only paid 3.2 cents per square foot for storm drainage at that time compared to 7.7 cents per square foot assessed the Red Oaks area. With the proposed assessment of 1.9 cents per square foot in this project, it is felt everyone has paid their fair share. recorrmending the assessment rates as proposed are fair. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski. that we accept the feasibility report and order Plans and Specifications written for Project 86-16, Red Oaks ponds east and west as presented. (See Resolution R108-86) DISCUSSION: Councilman Lachinski asked where is Mr. Menkveld in the process of his development. Mayor Windschitl was not sure but noted this project would be done and assessed regardless of what Mr. ~1enkveld does with his property. Mr. Hagen - asked the expected completion date of the project. Mayor Windschitl stated it would be done yet this year, done in connect~on with the sewer extension project. Doug Foster, 13715 Xavis - heard rumors about a road going through once the Menkveld property is developed. Council noted the only capability of extending a road from Red Oaks to Bunker Lake Boulevard would be Quinn Street, but that would be when the property to the east of f1enkveld develops. There would be no roads from Menkveld's property going into the Red Oaks Addition. Council also noted the proposal for the realignment of Crosstown Boulevard from 139th eastward and south down to Bunker Lake Boulevard and the continued rerouting of Crooked Lake Boulevard to Highway 242 east of Coon Creek. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 8 p.m. STORM DRAINAGE/ENCHANTED DRIVE/IP86-15 Mr. Rodeberg explained by reducing the project amount for the culvert under 160th, which would be paid for by the City, the proposed assessment would be'$69.47 per unit based on not having to acquire easements for the property to the north. He explained Mr. Schrantz has used the assumption that the area at one time naturally drained to the north; and if the roads were not there, it would still go north. They do not plan on lowering the water very much, just to lower the elevation below the road. Mr. Rodeberg explained neither Mr. Schrantz nor Mr. Stone has been able to contact Mr. Hughes or Mr. Knolls regarding easement and maintenance agreements. Nei ther Mr. Hughes nor Mr. Knolls were in attendance this evening. Ken Schauer, 4048 Genie Drive - asked if the pond draining by 160th is considered a problem pond. He 11ves on Genie Drive, which is a considerable distance away, asking why that is included in this project. Council noted the problem is on the curve. Mr. Rodeberg also explained the assessment area is based on the area that drains into the pond, that area determined from topographic maps, Mr. Schauer - stated his water cannot get to that low area because of the dike and road there now, believing the water from Genie Drive is not affecting the high pond. Mr. Rodeberg explained how the culverting and ditching will alleviate the two pond area problems and facilitate water flow through that area. Pub 1 ic Heari ngs July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 4 (Storm Drainage/Enchanted Drive/IP86-15, Continued) Hr. Schauer - asked why a cu 1 vert wasn't put in under Enchanted Dri ve when the road was put in. Mr. Rodeberg stated it was originally planned to be put in, but the feeling among the residents was that it was too expensive and they didn't expect a water problem. Roger Lober~, 15830 Xenia Street - asked if this pond was going to be drained by the Clty inltia11y or was it the result of a petition. Mayor Windschitl explained the entire hearing is a result of a petition brought in. Mr. Loberg - felt the benefitted area defined is ridiculous and the people that signed the petition should pay for it. Mayor Windschitl explained.. the benefitted area should be determined by engineering calculations. If there are any errors in that district, that would be determined at the assessment hearing. Norma lly the contour maps are relied on to provide elevations. Mr. Loberg - realized $69 isn't much, but he'd like to see fire trucks dump water onto his property to see if it actually gets down to the pond, speculating it won't. Mr. Rodeberg stated in effect any water that even goes into the ground will run to the closest spot. Mr. Loberg - stated last time they were talking about surface water. Now it is ground water. If it is underground water, then the entire City should pay. ~1r. Rodeberg explained that is a concept held by some people. They are working under the theory using the topographic maps, the people at the bottom shouldn't pay for a problem that is also caused by the people on the top of a hill. Mr. LOber1 - asked who is going to prove that the water is contributing. r1ayor Wlndschit stated those that are questionable, field elevations are shot prior to the assessment hearing. Geri Webster, 3920 Enchanted Drive - asked about the proposal to clean out the culvert in front of their house. Mr. Rodeberg stated the Utilities Director and Building Inspector are checking out what happened when that originally went in. That problem should be resolved by the City and is not a part of the cost of this project. Ms. Webster - asked if they will have to dig up their front yard to do that. Mayor Wlndschitl stated no one at this point knows just what took place. The City is trying to contact the builder of their house to find out what took place. Hs. Webster - stated it was actually the builder who built the houses on the other slde of the street. The culvert was fine until the property across the street was built on the two unbuildable lots. He asked if there is additional costs to this project because of easements, will they be notified ahead of time. Mayor Windschitl stated if the costs vary by more than 5 percent of what is,estimated this evening, the residents will be notified. The easement question will be resolved before the bid is awarded. (1) - felt this is a real controversial issue. As the petitions indlcate, the majority of the people are against it. It appears the Council will go ahead with it anyway, and that is why a lot of people are :.µpset. During Council discussion it was brought out that few people are generally in favor of such projects except those that are having the problem. Donna Turnbom, 3889 Enchanted Drive - stated the majority of the people who signed the petitlon agalnst the proposal actually live on the swamp. They don't want anything done to it. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 5 (Storm Drainage/Enchanted Drive/IP86-15, Continued) MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we close the public hearing portion of the Enchanted Dri ve area proj ect. Motion carried unanimously. Council then discussed the proposal. Because the assessment district has been enlarged following the receipt of the original petition, it was felt the project would require a 4/5 vote on the Council. It was generally felt the project needs to be done. especially to relieve those who have water in their basements and to protect the road; but they also questioned whether those costs should be assessed back to the residents. It was noted culverts have been placed elsewhere in the City because of oversights, which is what also happened in this case. Councilman Orttel asked if there is still a problem. Tom Watson, 16301 Enchanted Drive - stated they have basement problems, but they have been dry for almost a month now. But it is clear with a few rains they will be pumping again. It is based on the fact that two culverts weren't put in when it was developed. He felt it is not entirely the fault of people there, but he felt everyone should have some responsibility to correcting the problem. He is strongly in favor of the project. For $60, he felt it was cheap to alleviate the problem. The highway breaking up alone is reason enough to do something as soon as possible. Councilman Lachinski thought the problems are a result of not putting in the culverts when the project was done. If that had been done, that cost would have been spread over the entire project area, which is a much larger area than what is being pro- posed here. In the case of 160th where a culvert wasn't put in because it was thought it wasn't needed, that would have been paid for entirely by the developer but is now being paid for by the City. Therefore, he felt there is a problem with asking the residents to finance this project, suggesting the Council look elsewhere for funding. Councilman Elling also thought the project should be done for the protection of the road and for the flooding basements, but questioned the residents having to pay for it. Councilman Ortte1 asked whether it would even be cost effective to run an assessment roll for $69 per parcel. Council noted there are no funds left in the construction fund for this area, but asked that it be researched as to whether or not there is any interest income off the funds that could be used for the storm drainage improvement. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that we direct the City Engineer to prepare a cost for the improvement of minor storm drainage in the Enchanted Drive area with City crews and to arrange for easements if necessary for the same; and present it at our first meeting in August; and determine possible financing from the original revenues from the project. DISCUSSION: Councilman Knight asked if there is an immediate need to do this. Mr. Watson - stated his next door neighbor had a complete drainage system put in hlS basement to keep the basement useable. but it costs a fair amount to keep it going. It is not absolutely an immediate problem, but it is a continuing problem. And if there are more rains, they will have problems. VOTE ON MOTION: Carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we terminate the 429 Procedure on the proposed Enchanted Drive project area but that we do accept the feasibility report of the Engi neers. (See Resolution RI09-86) Motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing closed at 8:25 p.m. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 6 DEHN'S/ROUND LAKE OUTLET/IP86-19 Mayor Windschitl stated they have had some discussions with the City of Anoka that he felt are productive that could lead to a solution of this problem. He then made the following proposal to be offered for consideration of the Anoka City Council at their July 21 meeting: 1) To take the pipe south through the high ground of the proposed County 116 realignment. 2) To set the elevation of the pipe between 865 and 866 with the hope that the pipe would be set at the lower end. This has a material benefit to Dehn's Addition to take additional water out of that area. 3) Andover would build the pipe either under a joint powers agreement with the City of Anoka or an assessment agreement. 4) For an outlet charge to the City of Anoka, Andover would pay one-half cent per square foot for developed property up front. Undeveloped property would be charged one-half cent per square foot at such time as it develops. In addition, each City would assess its portion of the pipe costs to the developed property. 5) Andover would retain ponding either using the Chutich pond or another area behind the pipe to lessen the burden on the Anoka system. The pipe into Anoka would then function basically as an overflow system, not an on- going flow into their system. 6) Andover would work with Anoka County in their road project for excavation, etc., to help with the ponding question. Mayor Windschitl felt that if something can be worked out to drain south through the Anoka system, it is clearly the preferable way of solving the storm drainage in that area. In discussing the assessable drainage district for the Mayor's proposal, it was determined the district would remain basically the same as what was brought in for the Round Lake outlet proposal, except the north line would be lowered to just south of Lund's Round Lake Estates, with that Addition being eliminated from the project. The engineers would have to determine if there are any other parcels that should be included but were not notified for this process. Rosella Sonsteby - asked why all the property east of Round Lake Boulevard isn't in this drainage area. They are draining all that water to the west; why shouldn't they be included as well? She felt they should be included. Mayor Windschitl understood the DNR wants that water draining west as part of the mitigation process with the County for County 116 reali9nment. The City's position is that water will be redirected toward Coon Creek if necessar¡y. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the DNR is requiring 4.1 acres for that mitigation, but the County is getting approximately 10 to 12 acres. She stated the legals advertised in the paper said it was for 25.49 acres. In talking with the County Commissioners, they were not aware that the legals were for 25.49 acres. In talking with John Stine of the DNR, all they required is 4.1 acres. Ms. Sonsteby stated the County has said it is the DNR that required the 10 to 12 acres, but that is not true. She said she has agreed to the 10 or 12 acres, but she felt that still is not enough land for the water that is coming over from the Good Value property east of Round Lake Boulevard, again stating that should be in this assessment area. Mayor Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 7 (Dehn's/Round Lake Out1et/IP86-19, Continued) Windschit1 understood the intent is to seal the north outlet out of the pond so there is standing water in the pond. In order to get that standing water, they want the water from the Good Value to continue going in there. John Stine, DNR - explained the mitigation being discussed with Anoka County. Ihe County lS lmpacting 4.1 acres with the realignment of the road, which needs to be replaced in equal wetland value for that amount. They looked at impouding the water within that area now being considered from Ms. Sonsteby. The intent wasn't simply to buy 4.1 acres, but to get 4.1 acres of value wetland replaced. If there is an outlet to the system, that area would be drained and would .. loose its value as wetland. To retain the water at a higher elevation by building a structure to keep the water at the higher elevation would create a nice wetland and would suffice for their mitigation. The DNR suggested either the County offer to buy it from the owner (Ms. Sonsteby) or obtain an easement for water and let her retain ownership. Ms. Sonsteby - stated by keeping water in that low area, it is flooding all her lots ln Rosella's Addition. Water seeks its own level, so how are they going to keep water in that pond? She wants that pond sealed to do that. Mr. Stine - stated they will look at that during the engineering detail of the project, and they would look at the impact on the rear of those lots. Those peop le that own that property would receive payment for it. Ms. Sonsteby - asked if it is fair that they bought the big lots and then have to get all this water because of water being diverted from the east side of Round Lake Boul evard. Mr. Stine - believed it could be a benefit to them in the end. Ms. Sonsteb~ - stated she was sick of hearing benefit. Anyway, she stated the County Commlssioners are going to be getting 10 to 12 acres, which Mr. Stine said was enough to get the permit. Mr. Stine - stated the DNR hasn't said that yet. They have said 10 to 12 acres of slmlllar valued wetland. Ms. Sonsteby - stated that is what they are getting, stating she felt it was an underhanded deal to advertise in the paper for 25.49 acres when they only wanted 10 to 12 acres. She wanted to know who did that. She again repeated her feeling that Good Value property should be included in this project because of that water being diverted to this area. Mayor Windschit1 stated it cannot be both ways. Either that water must continue to go there for mitigation purposes for the County, or the City takes it out of there. This proposal is simply to get an outlet for that area. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the proposal would not help her in any way. She is just gettlng her land back to where it used to be at 866. Yet she is going to be assessed on her high land to keep that water where it was before. She wi 11 have to pay all this extra money, yet she alleged she isn't getting any benefit from it. She asked if she is being assessed for all of her lowland. Mayor Windschitl explained the proposal is to assess developed property one-half cent per square foot at this time. Any undeveloped property would be assessed at the time it is developed. That insures her of an outlet when she develops her property, that her water has some place to go. And it assures the Dehn's Addition an outlet for maintaining their water. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 8 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) Jim Hiltz - asked if the people north of Dehn's are then being dropped out of the district and there is no other project being proposed that would include them. Mayor Windschitl stated that is his proposal, that the assessable district would be south of Lund's Round Lake Estates, relying on the County study done. Steve Wood, 3723 145th - asked that the ditch where the lake was flowing into the Dehn's pond area be a part of this project. Mayor Windschit1 agreed, that it should be permanently closed off. Mr. Nystrom - understood that then the outlet northwest of Round Lake is then being scraped. Mayor Windschit1 stated his proposal doesn't include providing an outlet of Round Lake at all. Dan Wisen, 14821 Blackfoot - asked where the pipe would be located, the location of the drainage system, and how much relief would be provided to the Dehn's area. Mayor Windschit1 explained the location of the ditching and pipe crossing, the Chutich pond area, etc. This would give an additional one-half to three-fourth of a foot drop than the north outlet proposal. Roy Wicklund - asked if this will have any effect on Round Lake as far as its e1evatlon. Will the existing ditch be used to help drain the lake? Mayor Windschitl stated he didn't know, and no one has been able to determine if there is or is not a relationship between the lake and the pond. The proposal is to seal the existing ditch, as the lake shouldn't be contributing to the Dehn's problem as it was doing for a period of time. (?) - stated the assessment would be the one-half cent per square foot plus the cost of the installation of the pipe. He asked how much is the cost of the pipe. Mayor Windschitl estimated it would be $70,000. Council noted the assessment really means an extra half-cent a square foot, the same construction cost, plus a reduced assessment district. (?) - so the cost would be higher than the northwest outlet proposal. It has been one year and one month since this was brought before the Council and nothing has been done yet, expressing skepticism that anything will be done soon. (Another åentleman - ? ) - stated the water will need to be lowered still further to 0 any good, as there will still be water on his lawn. Mayor Windschitl didn't think they could get permission to go much lower because of the wetland consideration. Also, there is a consideration on the affect on the Anoka system as well. Mr. Wood - stated that's about the same amount of improvement as the project to lower Round Lake. Mayor Windschitl stated this proposal would lower it about a half foot more than the north outlet of Round Lake. Mr. Wood - stated then this would be a reduction of more than a foot to the Dehn's pond area, feeling that would be a significant improvement. Mayor Windschitl stated Ms. Sonsteby, as well as the City, had water quality studies done, which enters into this. The City studies indicate a very high concentration of fecal chloriform bacterial count in the ditch by the lake. Mr. Davidson stated that sample came from the ditch right by the lake, not Dehn's pond area. It is thought that may be because of animal habitat near the lake. Otherwise the tests indicate the water quality between the pond and the lake to be very similiar. Ms. Sonsteb~ - stated she had the water tested by her several times from the City of Anoka. he has 59. mg for grease, nitrate and phosphate, which is terrible. She has had the water tested again now. She also has pictures taken showing the Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 9 (Dehn's/Round Lake Out1et/IP86-19, Continued) grease and oil allover her land. She stated she has also been before the City of Anoka many times, and they won't even check on it. Mr. Wicklund - asked whose land would the ponding be on. Mayor Windschitl stated the Chutich pond is city owned. It needs to be determined yet what is needed behind the pipe. Mr. Davidson explained the procedure of working with the DNR in establishing a control elevation. The pipe will be sized so it does not impact downstream in Anoka, also making use of all ponding available within Andover before discharging into Anoka. There would be inlet control so the surface water elevation could be controlled. Once the design criteria is determined, they can prepare an estimated cost of the proposal. (1), 147th - asked if another public hearing is to be called to rediscuss this. He stated the focus of the project has changed completely; only the end result is the same. Mayor Windschitl stated the continuation of the hearing would be to inform the residents of the cost of the option. This proposal was the original preferable proposal, but the cities were unable to reach an agreement prior to this. That is why the northwest outlet to Round Lake option was proposed. (1) - still thought this changes the scope, thinking there should be a new public hearing based on that new scope. The only problem with having the continued public hearing is about one-third of the people that were here last time are here tonight; and next time it will be even less. He didn't think this was even the same project. Mr. Wicklund - was confused as to who would be dropped out of the assessment area. Council indlcated at this point no one will be dropped out until an agreement can be reached with Anoka regarding the proposal made this evening. If the boundaries change significantly, then it's a different project and another public hearing will need to be called. If the southern outlet proposal is agreed to, then the Lund's Round Lake Estates area would be dropped out of the project area. Jim Haase, 14651 Guarani - stated he is concerned. He doesn't have any basement problem or any ill effects on his property from the Dehn's pond problem. For himself and his neighbors, the overwhelming issue is personal costs. As best he can understand it, the proposal brought forward tonight would be about twice the expense personally as the proposal brought forward in June. He was concerned that he and some of his neighbors who were here last time but not this evening have that made very clear to them. Their preference is for the zero cost option; but if something has to be done, they'd prefer the lowest cost option. Ms. Sonsteby - stated if the water is controlled, her land will still be used as a controlling pond. Mayor Windschitl stated those amounts of her land would be in the wetland. Ms. Sonsteby - stated the wetland was only a small portion until the City ran water back there. Mr. Stine - explained the protected wetland on Ms. Sonsteby's property was determined by deflnltion of the law of ordinary high water level. That is defined by a point on the ground where it is evident that water has been a sufficient number of times to leave evidence. They have not yet established an ordinary high water mark on the Dehn's pond area, but they will be looking at 865± for a control elevation. Field investigations will need to be done to more accurately define that. Mr. Stine also advised the Council to let him know as soon as possible how they want him to handle the permit application to go out the north end of the lake. Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 10 (Dehn's/Round Lake Out1et/IP86-19, Continued) Mayor Windschitl thought it should be known within a week. Steve Halse¥, Anoka City Councilman - didn't think the final agreement could be completed wlthln a week, but the concept should be known. He felt a crutial point is the County is going ahead with their project no matter what the cities do. He stated it is a benefit to both cities to reach an agreement or else there will be substantially more costs to do the project once the road is in. He also felt it would be helpful to have a representative from Andover City Council meeting Monday evening. He didn't know how quickly their city staff could work on this as their city engineer has been ill. Mr. Wood - stated there has only been secondhand information presented at meetings that lowering the level of the lake would benefit the lake. The lake property owners do not want the water level lowered. Lloyd Knudson, DNR Wildlife Mana~er - stated from a wildlife standpoint, it was hlS feeling that lowering the 1a e a small amount probably would have some beneficial effects to the wildlife resources. It will put more shallow water in that lake which probably means more vegetation. He felt both emerged and submerged vegetation would respond more positively to the lower lake level. An ideal pond for wildlife is about 50 percent of that water body being in emerged vegetation. Lowering to that level would also probably increase the wildlife value for a number of species. But that would have a negative impact on the fishery resource management. It was his opinion that the 50-50 level could not be achieved in Round Lake by just lowering it one foot. Mr. Wood - stated a few years ago they had a high population' of panfish, which froze out in the first hard winter due, he felt, to oxygen depletion. Last year there was also a population of fish which survived even though it too was a hard winter. He attributed that to the high water level of the lake. Mr. Knudson - guessed Mr. Wood correctly identified why that happened. They would have to look at the differences in winters; but it is true the more water, the more oxygen available. But one body of water cannot be both ideal for fishery management and wildlife management. Mr. Wood - said some statements were made that the high water level had flooded out some natural habitat for the animals that were there already, asking if Mr. Knudson felt that is true. r10st of the vegetation is floating bog. Mr. Knudson - stated for some species, that is true. But in the meantime other speCles come in; so there is usually a trade off. Unusually high water could have some impact on mallards, their food supply and nesting sites. Again, to design a wetland for the greatest number of species, it would be designed interspersed with emerged and submerged aquatic vegetation in the area of 50-50. Obviously, they do not have the ability to do that in every pond. Mr. Nystrom - asked why they are talking about wildlife. Council indicated it is a question that has been raised at many of the previous meetings regarding the lowering of Round Lake. Mr. Nystrom - reinforced that most of the people and major landowners are against dOlng anything to lower it regardless of the impact on the wildlife. Mr. Knudson - stated they are aware of that, and the other factors such as aesthetics must also be considered. Pub 1 i c Heari ngs July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 11 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-19, Continued) à1) - felt the entire project was to lower Dehn's pond. Last month they wante to outlet the lake on the north side. It sounded to him that that would be beneficial for everybody. It benefits the wildlife and helps those on the north side of the lake. The only question was how would it be paid for. Now the entire scope of the project has been changed to block off the lake at the same level. Now the people on the north side will have water problems and it will cost more money. He recommended going back to the original proposal of lowering the lake and expand on the assessment basis. Councilman Lachinski stated people are saying they don't have a problem right now, but it doesn't preclude the fact of doing both projects. (1) - whose to say then that he couldn't be charged again. Council noted he would only be in one drainage district and would not be charged again. Mayor Windschitl again reviewed the original proposal of the southern outlet done as a part of the Anoka County road project. (1) - heard there was a question of water quality that would enter Round Lake for the northern proposal. Mayor Windschitl stated on the water quality report commissioned by the City, one of the counts is not good. Councilman Elling asked Mr. Stine about the DNR statement of having to acquire easements around the lake because of the high water. Mr. Stine - explained the legal opinion is if nothing is done to the lake, no easements would be required because the system is not altered in any way. If, however, a permit was granted to alter the lake to any degree, such as an outlet project, and the decision was to lower it less than to the ordinary high water mark, easements would be required for anything above the normal lake level. Mr. Wicklund - stated comments from previous meetings were to leave the lake the way lt is because the wildlife is great and any change would ruin it. But just the opposite has been said this evening. He felt the Council should look at including the lowering of Round Lake at least somewhat in this project; and if necessary, assess the people on Round Lake if it will be a benefit. He stated they can't just leave the lake sit there when water will be coming in and no place for it to go. (1~ - asked if the lowering of the lake could be incorporated in tonight's proposa by running the lake into Oehn's pond and out. Council noted the petition from those on the lake where the majority didn't want the lake lowered at all. Ms. Sonsteby - asked Mr. Stine what is the purpose of wanting more lowland than the 4.1 acres when that is all that is needed. Mr. Stine - stated it is necessary to mitigate 4.1 acres which has equal value from a wetland value, not from a real estate standpoint. He suggested he talk with Ms. Sonsteby about this privately. Councilman Orttel asked the DNR's position on groundwater heatpumps dumping into the lake and its impact on the lake. Mr. Stine - stated taking water from any source for anything other than domestic supply or livestock requires a permit if more than 10,000 gallons are pumped in one day or one million gallons in a year. The hearing units that take water from the ground and pump it into the lake obviously do add something to the lake. There have been a number of complaints about systems in that vicinity. The DNR will attempt to get all systems on permit that require a permit if the City can Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 12 (Dehn's/Round Lake Outlet/IP86-1g, Continued) advise them who has that type of system. He requested that information in May and has not yet received a response. Mayor Windschitl stated that information will be provided for him. Mr. Stine - stated the amount contributed to the lake can be material depending how the system is used. Generally speaking, if the system is used as a supplemental form of heating or cooling, it is a relatively insignificant volume of water. If it is the sole source of heating or cooling, it can be significant. A single system can produce in the order of 900,000 gallons in one year; though generally that is not the case. In looking at that volume of the water on Round Lake, it is quite insignificant. If someone has a system and it is under one million gallons a year, the DNR has no jurisdiction. Mr. Wicklund - disagreed with Mr. Stine's facts, stating installers have told him a geothermal system can go through two to three million gallons of water in a year. If these systems can't be shut down and they are adding to the lake, then an outlet is needed for the lake. He stated they just can't put water into the lake and not have an out1 et. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Mayor and the City Engineer present the following possible solution to the high water problem in the southwest corner of Andover and the northeast corner of Anoka to the Anoka City Council at their scheduled meeting on 7-21-86: That Andover be allowed to buy into the existing Anoka storm sewer system at a cost of one-half cent per square foot of buildable benefitted area, that area to be determined jointly by the respective city engineers, and that the Andover vacant property would be assessed at such time as they developed; and that the City of Andover and the City of Anoka share in the cost of additional piping as required along the new County Road 116 right of way in proportion to their respective benefit; and that the pipe be at the lowest possible elevation; and that the City of Andover make maximum use of existing wet areas in Andover to control flow into the Anoka system to an acceptable level; and if the cities cannot come to an acceptable agreement in a reasonable period of time, that the City of Andover will reconvene the public hearing dealing with the northwest drainage option. (See Resolution R110-86) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, TKDA be asked to complete the drainage dlstrlct for this project in conjunction with the City of Anoka engineer. Moti on carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we continue the public hearing to the 5th of August; and that we send letters to the affected property owners in the new drainage area. Motion carried unanimously. Council asked that the approximately costs to the residents be included in that letter. If there are any areas that need to be brought into this process, it will be done so at a later date at a supplemental hearing to meet the 42g requirements. Hearing continued to August 5, 1986. 9:45 p.m. Council recessed; reconvened at 10:06 p.m. TUBING DISCUSSION/DNR/STINE Mr. Stine - agreed to be at the County Board hearing on July 22 regarding the Ñorthstar tubing operation on the Rum River. His suggestion would be to set up a group that will have representation on an on-going basis to try to resolve Public Hearings July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 13 (Tubing Discussion/DNR/Stine, Continued) problems. If this is going to occur, he wants to make sure everyone's concerns get addressed. He'd be asking for someone from the Councilor the City to represent the city at regular meetings. Mayor Windschitl suggested Councilman Knight would best represent the City in this matter. He said the most troublesome part of this is the irregularity in understanding or enforcement of rules and regulations that go along with the scenic river district. He felt everyone should follow the same rules. Mr. Stine - stated all the units of government involved need to agree to the issuance of permits and restrictions on these activities. Several Councilmen also indicated they would be in attendance at the County hearing on this matter. LEAGUE BONDING POOL MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, introducing a Resolution approving and authorizing Minnesota Cities Infrastructure Financing Program Joint Powers Agreement and Execution of Participation Agreement with respect thereto. (See Resolution R111-86) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Joint Powers Agreement creating the Minnesota Cities Infrastructure Financing Program as presented. Motion carried unanimously. WATER TOWER COMPLETION DATE Mr. Davidson explained the Collins Electric completion date on the water tower telemetering system was July 15. They have substantially completed the te1emetering system,. but they can't check it until the tank can be filled. The tank cannot be filled because the painting crews are painting inside the tower at this time. He estimated it would be another two to three weeks before the painting is completed and dried. The tower contractor is on liquidated damages of $250 per day. Mr. Davidson didn't think it was fair to penalize Collins because of something they have no control over, suggesting Collins be allowed to test after their completion date. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, that Collins Electric be released from potential for liquidated damages due to the fact that they have substantially completed their contract and are waiting for another contractor to arrange for full completion. Motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL SALARIES MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we increase the salaries for the City Council for the 1987-88 to $3,000 and the increase in Mayor's salary for 1987-88 to $3,600. Motion carried:unanimous1y. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 1, May 20, June 17, and July 1, 1986: Correct as written. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, those Minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing July 17, 1986 - Minutes Page 14 (Approval of Minutes, Continued) June 25, 1986: Correct as written. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Minutes of June 25. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Knight) vote. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:23 p.m. Respectfully submitted, \\~~ Mar la A. Peach Record . Secretary