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