Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC October 6, 1987 CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 6, 1987- AGENDA 8:00 P.M. l. Call to order 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Public Hearing/Delinquent Utility Bills 5. Discussion Items a. Ordinance 8 Amendment b. Approve Cigarette & Non-intoxicating Liquor Licenses c. Animal Control Contract 6. Staff, Committee, Commission a. Project Change Orders/87-2; 87-3A, B & C; 87-4; 87-8 b. Storm Sewer Policy/87-11 c. Award Contract/87-3B d. Approve Plans & Specs/Commercial Park/Verdin Street e. Crosstown Boulevard/Storm Drainage f. Accept Resignation/D. Anderson g. Fire Department l. School Remibursement 2. Building Committee h. Purchase Base Station i. Woodland Terrace Service j. Lower Rum River Water Management Policy/Goals k. Commercial Park Lot Prices 7. Non-Discussion Items a. Creekside Estates Final plat b. Andover Commercial Park Final Plat c. Law Enforcement Contract d. Assessment Policy/MSA e. 8. Approval of Minutes 9. Approval of Claims 10. Adjournment A-:Ø.:::f:,~_-"" /J' '. (CA." CITY of ANDOVER ' ,;~ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (612) 755-5100 if 1). ,-: '~":iI..~":f!'-';/) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 6, 1987 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover CIty Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Wlndschitl on October 6, 1987, 8:07 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Apel, Elling, KnIght, Orttel Councilmen absent: None Also present: CIty Attorney, WI I liam G. HawkIns; TKDA EngIneers, John DavIdson and John Rodeberg; CIty Planner, Daryl Morey; City EngineerIng Technician, Todd Haas; PlannIng and Zoning ChaIrperson, Marge Perry; CIty AdmInIstrator, James Schrantz; and others RESIDENT FORUM David? and hIs wIfe . Woodland Terrace - as Andover residents and members of the Baha'I FaIth, he presented the Council wIth booklets entItled THE PROMISE OF WORLD PEACE, A Statement by The UnIversal House of Justice. He explained thIs message has been presented to over 140 different countrIes includIng PresIdent Regan. He also brieflY descrIbed the Baha'I FaIth, Its background, and the principles of world peace which must be worked toward by all communities. He also noted other communIties have passed resolutIons in support of the concept, and requested that any questIons regardIng thIs be directed to hIm. AGENDA APPROVAL It was suggested the following items be added to the Agenda: 61, Bever DIscussion; 6m, Street LightIng PolIcy, 6n, 1988 Proposed Budget; 60, Water ConnectIon Charges: 6p, Hanson Boulevard/Address Change and a Closed MeetIng wIth the Attorney/Hay. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, to approve the Agenda as amended. MotIon carrIed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING/DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by KnIght, a Resolution certIfying to the County Auditor for Collection, unpaid sewer and water user charges, as presented. (See Resolution R197-87) MotIon carried unanImously. - ,- Regular CIty CouncIl MeetIng October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 2 ORDINANCE 8 AMENDMENT Attorney HawkIns clarifIed the classifIcatIon of nonconformIng use in a district when the ordinance Is amended. The current ordInance allows the nonconformIng use to be amortized over a three-year perIod. As a practial matter, It was hIs opinIon that If It is enforced on businesses that are located outdoors but not agaInst those doIng busIness indoors, there could be some equal-protectIon problems plus it may be deemed a taking under the law. The City has not been attemptIng to enforce that portIon of the ordinance with the Junkyards. Mr. Hawkins did feel that that portion of the or-dlnance would be applicable In other- Instances such as the removal of billboards over an amortIzed period of time, whIch has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Mr. HawkIns also advised any nonconforming busIness cannot expand other than for nor-mal repair and maintenance. Also, if the busIness Is discontInued or abandoned for a period of one year, It cannot be started up again. The defInition of expansion must be made on the CouncIl's best Judgement. The addition of a buIldIng In a nonconformIng business would be consIdered an expansIon and not allowed. M. R, Olson - read Section D of Ordinance 8. Mr. HawkIns explained that section means if a nonconformIng use Is changed to a conformIng use, It cannot be changed back to the nonconforming use. Chairperson Perry reviewed the PlannIng CommIssion's recommendation to appr-ove the amendment to OrdInance 8 for the uses in the General BusIness District. The allowable uses were consIdered on the basIs of amount of traffic generated. The special uses are those of a heavIer- use or- ones which they felt the CIty would want to have more control over. SectIon 3.02 DefInitions, (G) AutomobIle ServIces Uses: Mayor Wlndschl t I questIoned why publIc garages were removed. Cha I rperson Perry understood that there can be publIc use structures In any zone and that public garages were more of a storage-type busIness. Mr. Morey explaIned almost all uses under thIs section are allowed as permitted uses or specIal uses in the dIstrict. The deletIon of this sectIon is an attempt to bring the termInology up to date. Mayor Windschitl thought rental services had been elimInated as a use completely. Chairperson Perry stated they are now called rental busInesses as a permitted use. Mr. Morey stated there Is no definition of rental busInesses, feelIng that would be defIned by the Council. Regular CIty Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 3 (Ordinance 8 Amendment, Continued) DIscussIon was then on the recommendatIon to allow transportation termInals but to delete motor freight terminals from this zone. ChaIrperson Perry explained the exIstIng ordinance defines transportaton terminals as beIng accessory to a prIncIpal use; whereas a motor freIght termInal is a heavier use. She saId the Planning CommIssion felt a motor freIght termInal would be more approprIate in a General Industry zone, but that a transportation terminal would be a I Igher use and appropriate for the GB dIstrIct. Mr. Morey explained he is draftIng a revision of the uses for the GI district, and the P & Z will hold a publIc hearIng on that ordInance amendment. This amendment does not affect the M. R. Olson property at thIs time because he is in the GI district. But It could affect him If hIs property were rezoned to GB. Mr. Morey also thought the use of TransportatIon Services - Local could be added to the GI distrIct to Include such operations as Kottke's Bus Company, taxi companies, etc. He also clarified this amendment is only to change the defInitions under the GB district and is not a hearIng for any rezonings at this tIme. Mr. Olson - noted at the September 8, 1987, Council meeting, the MInutes reflect the Council's decIsIon to rezone the Andover CommercIal Park to GB and agreement to rezone the areas bordering Bunker Lake and Hanson Boulevards to GB and the InterIor areas to General Industry. Mr. Morey thought that was a possibilIty in the future, but that Is not what is being considered this evenIng. There was some confusion as to the zones In the entire tax increment financIng dIstrIct. Staff explained the determInation of uses in the GB dIstrict Is now beIng considered, the suggested uses In the GI zone will be forthcoming, and the specIfic boundarIes for the zones within the TIF distrIct have not yet been determined. Mr. Olson and others were notified of thIs meeting as adJoining property owners or those within the TIF distrIct because of the potentIal Impact on them. MIke ? . EKD Salvaae - asked If he would be al]owed to construct . a bul]dIng for his existIng business. Mr. HawkIns stated that would be consIdered an expansIon of a salvage yard, which is a nonconformIng use, and would not be allowed. The intent is eventually the salvage yards would go out of business. The City Is not forcing It at three years, but the City CouncIl eventually wants to have those In another locatIon. JoAnn Wilber - saId the Ordinance says nonconforming businesses can only be there for three years, so any time the CouncIl tells them they have to go, they only have three years. Attorney Hawkins believed the application of that portIon of the ordInance under certaIn Regular CIty Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - MInutes Page 4 (Ordinance 8 Amendment, ContInued) circumstances, such as an exIsting business that she has, may be extremely difficult to enforce from a legal standpoInt. As a result of that, the CIty Is not attemptIng to require the removal or elimination of auto salvage yards under that provision. Ms. Wilber - thought the ordInance should be changed to protect theIr rights so there is a clarIfIcation of that. Attorney Hawkins felt that may be a good idea. Ms. Wilber - asked how they go about gettIng that change. She also stated the amendment crossed out any vehicle repaIr or body work without a Special Use PermIt. Also, used auto parts Is not Included, whIch Is what they are doing. She felt something is not quite right about the amendment. Mayor Wlndschltl stated this amendment would not affect theIr business, as they are zoned GI. The one salvage yard that is affected is Anoka Auto Wrecking. DiscussIon also noted any change regardIng a grandfather clause would need to go through the publIc hearIng process by the PlannIng CommissIon. Council suggested Ms. Wilber discuss thIs wIth the ZonIng Administrator and Mr. Morey to begin that process. 7.03 SpecIal Uses, Drive-in businesses or businesses with a drIve-thru wIndow: Mr. Morey felt that would Include fast-food restuarants. He felt banks with a drIve-in wIndow would come under this if the exIstIng use is not being changed. Banks are allowed under FInancial InstItutions. 7.03 Special Uses, PublIc utility structures: Mr. Morey felt that would include utIlity boxes, repair stations, storage buildings, etc., of utIlItIes. 7.01 PermItted Uses, deletIon of Urban AgrIcultural Uses: Mr. Morey explained thIs defInitIon does not include greenhouses, and it was felt this use is less Intense and does not belong In the GB district, which is more intense. Bob Pears - stated for years they have paid $500 for theIr special use permits, asking If all permIts cost that much. Council explained the $500 is for theIr Junkyard licenses and was raIsed several years ago to reflect the City's increased costs of enforcement. Mr. Pears - stated when they started In the wrecking business the cIty wanted fences put up, then trees planted, and then larger trees planted. He also felt there Is nothing In the ordInance to protect them as landowners, and many of them were there sInce It was Grow Township. He had understood they were grandfathered In, but that Is not In writing In the ordinance. There also Is nothing In the Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 5 (Ordinance 8 Amendment, Continued) ordinance that would allow him to get rid of his acreage and sell used or rebuilt auto parts inside of a building. Councilman Orttel felt that has been the intent and any ordinance change will not allow the sale of used auto parts. He also noted this amendment does not affect him because he Is zoned GI. Several in the audience stated there is the potential of affectIng them because of the decision to rezone portions of the TIF district to GB, and that Is why they are present this evening. Council thought the GI zone would allow the sale of used auto parts Inside of a buildIng. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Apel, that we table this and hold a Joint meeting with staff regarding this because there is apparently some differences of opinion; suggesting Thursday evening after the budget meeting. DISCUSSION: Mayor Windschitl thought there was a majorIty wishing to cancel Thursday's special meeting. He also thought this should be on a published agenda 50 everyone is aware of it. Mr. Schrantz Suggested Mr. Morey continue working on the revisions of the GI zone, When that is approved, consideration should be given to where those zones should be placed in the TIF district. Mr. Morey understood any change in zones would be handled as an individual redevelops his property, that the rezoning would be in conjunction with the plat. Mr. Schrantz also suggested establishing an overall plan for the TIF district to which the properties would be encouraged to adhere to during redevelopment. CecIl Heidelberqer - noted the property would have to be developed the way the City wants it, not the way the individuals want it. He didn't feel the sale of individual parcels would occur as fast as what the Council thinks. Councilman Orttel explained there are properties that have more potential for retail use than others. The Council has the right to rezone those parcels, or it can encourage the property owners to do what is desired. He also noted the City will probably be contributing 50 percent to the cost of development in that area and therefore should have some say in that development. Discussion was then on the use of transportation terminal and motor freight terminal. Chairperson Perry reviewed the Planning Commission's reasoning for includIng a transporation terminal but excluding motor freight terminal from the GB district. She also noted the definitions of those two uses are already included in Ordinance 8. There was general agreement with the two-zoning classifications in the TIF district -- General Business and General Industry. General consensus was that the motor freIght terminal would remain in the GI district. Council also generally agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendation and made no change to the proposed amendment. Regular City CouncIl Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 6 (Ordinance e Amendment, Continued) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Elling, NO-Apel, Knight, Orttel, Windschltl. Motion failed. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Orttel, that the City Council adopt the amendment to Ordinance e as presented by the Planning and Zoning Commission with no changes. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hawkins didn't feel an existing use which is made a special use by this amendment can be required to apply for for a special use permit. Discussion was then on whether or not the City will force a rezoning of the strips of property along Bunker Lake and Hanson Boulevards to GB. Mayor Wlndschitl noted coming down Bunker Lake Boulevard, the CIty Commercial Park will provide the buffer to the end of the 40 where there is developable property. Other parts north of Bunker Lake Boulevard are zoned LI, asking how far the Council would want to carry the GB on the south side of the road. Councilman Orttel expected there would be less intensive and less offensIve-type businesses along the road, such as retail, Including those that might be currently allowed or more retail that are allowed under GB. He felt without a forced rezonIng, which he Is not In favor of, the only option Is to work with the owners as they come in to redevelop their property. Councilman Knight questioned whether that would then amount to spot zoning, which he is not in favor of. Councilman Apel stated he was not in favor of rezoning but felt many of the uses under GI are less offensive which should be located along the road. Mr. Morey noted there are many simlliar uses In the GI and GB districts. It was generally agreed the CIty would encourage the less Intensive and less offensive-type businesses along the roadways as the property Is redeveloped through the tax Increment financing rather than rezone a strip along the roads to GB at this time. Certain lots can be designated for certain types of uses during the platting process or the fInancing process. Motion carried unanimously. WOODLAND TERRACE SERVICE Mr. Schrantz reviewed his findings on the request by Sandra Benson for the City to pay the higher cost of connecting their sewer from 133rd Avenue where the stub Is compared to the cost if the stub would have been on Narcissus Street. He didn't know If the 120 feet of extra service Is correct, but he felt the price per foot is reasonable. One of his concerns was the claim was made after the fact and apparently there was no consideration to the service location before the house was constructed or planned. If he had been made aware of the situation beforehand, he would have looked at alternative ways to put the service In or participate in the extra cost. .--- . Regular City CouncIl MeetIng October 6, 1987 - MInutes Page 7 (Woodland Terrace ServIce, ContInued) Mr. DavIdson stated they put a service from the main for the convenIence to the owner. Where on the lot the service is located many times is related to the depth of the sewer. On most corner lots, it really doesn't make any difference whether it is a side lot or front lot. Normally a garage Is not allowed close to the corner, and they cannot predIct where the house will be located on the house. They have recently been told there are specIfIc directIons that are enforced, and they wi II be workIng more closely wIth the BuIldIng Inspector in terms of plan review in the future. They were not made aware of the problem untIl after the fact. Mrs. Benson - stated they were told the house had to be placed in that dIrection. She called Todd Haas ImmedIately after the decIsIon had been made on the situation, feeling if she had waIted for a decIsIon from the City, they st! II wouldn't be in theIr house. Mr. Benson - stated they also paId $240 to a surveyor to put the house on the lot correctly so no mIstakes would be made. The plumber put the servIce out front because such servIce is always out the front. Mrs. Benson stated the BuIldIng Inspector also looked at It, so they dIdn't come In after the fact. The engIneering company didn't know they had to face their house on NarcIssus. A mistake was made and it was a costly mIstake. They are askIng only for the extra cost over the 55 feet, which is $845. Dave Almgren, BuIlding OffIcIal, stated If the house had been constructed wIth the garage on the south side, the length of servIce would have been the same either from 133rd or Narcissus, about 55 feet. WIth thIs particular design of the house, It happens to be a long run. It was agreed that the Bensons cannot be blamed for the type of house constructed and they had assumed the service out front, whIch then would not have made any difference. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by KnIght, that we approve a payment of $845 to Kenneth Benson at 13337 NarcIssus Street for sewer and water, the additional amount to be charged to that project. MotIon carried unanimously. CREEKSIDE ESTATES FINAL PLAT Paul Genaler. 14440 Crosstown Boulevard - found an error on the plat on an easement he gave to the City fIve or sIx years ago regardIng drainage from across Osage through hIs property. That easement wll I not be necessary when Osage Is Improved this fall. The attorney has recommended he get a release from the City on that easement. Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - MInutes Page 8 MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, a Resolution authorlzng the attorney to release the easement that goes across the road onto his (Mr. Gengler's) property. (See Resolution R198-87) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, l-Present (Wlndschitl) vote. Mayor Windschtil was concerned about the 100-foot easement bordering Coon Creek. He felt It Is unnecessary, as It is not needed for City purposes; It is for the watershed. He feared the designation of an easement would allow for the potential of clear-cutting 100 feet back from the creek, which Is generally not what property owners want. The Mayor felt any City drainage easement should only reflect what the City needs for drainage. Mr. Schrantz said that area is the floodway and is shown so the new property owner is made aware of that floodway. A floodway cannot be shown on the final plat, so they have shown It as an easement. The floodplain Is indicated on the preliminary plat. After further discussion, the Counc II generally agreed not to Indicate the 100-foot drainage easement along the creek. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Orttel, a Resolution approving the fInal plat of Creekside Estates as being developed by Paul Gengler and Richard Erickson In Section 27: when they file the final plat, It Is recommended that they remove the 100-foot drainage easement that Is sh ow.n . (See Resolution R199-87) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, l-Present (Windschltl) vote. BEVER DISCUSSION Attorney Hawkins reviewed the Council's directive to purchase the Bever property for the appraised value of $90,400. In preparl ng the purchase agreement, Mr. Bever has indicated he understood the purchase price would be $90,400 plus the special assessments, which is more than the appraised value. The appraised value did Include the special assessments. Mr. Bever - stated the appraised value is for only $11,000 per lot. He estimated the assessments are about $7,000 to $8,000 per lot, then questioning why the value of the lots is so low. Counc II asked that they be supplied the figures on the amount of assessments against the Bever property and the breakdown of the appraised value on the property done by the appraiser. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Orttel, to table this until we get all the facts as regards to the special assessments and make a decision at that tIme. MotIon carrIed unanImously. .- Regular CIty CouncIl MeetIng October 6, 1987 - MInutes Page 9 PROJECT CHANGE ORDERS/87-21 87-3A. B & C; 87-4: 87-8 Mr. Davidson reviewed his October 2, 1987, letter on the progress of the various projects in the CIty, includIng proposed extensIons of completion dates. Mayor Wlndschltl was reluctant to extend completion date for any of the projects until they are fInIshed, thinking the Council then looses its leverage with the contractor. He especIally questioned any extensIon in the Woodridge Acres project, noting the frustrations for the late start on the project. Mr. DavIdson stated It stIlI puts the burden on the contractor to complete the project In a reasonable period of tIme. A formal extension also provIdes some assurance to the contractor that liquId damages will not be assessed against hIm if he takes on additional work and goes beyond the completion date. TKDA Engineers noted the change In the Woodrldge Contract because of the addition of the CreeksIde Estates plat, the two- to three-week delay waiting for MPCA permits, and the Crosstown Project had not proceeded to the point where he was supposed to start. It was also noted that the work has begun in that project, wIth Mr. Davidson feeling confIdent It wI!! be completed by the November 10 proposed completion date. Bruce Mann. QuInn Drive - asked If there are monetary penalties levied agaInst the contractor If the contract Is not extended. Mr. Davidson stated liquidated damages can be levIed, whIch are those costs that the City bears followIng the completIon date. Those damages are withheld from the final payment. Mr. Mann - believed the beginnIng date on that contract was June 15, but they only started thIs past week. Mr. Rodeberg again stated he felt the extension of three weeks for the completion date is legitimate and reasonable because of the three reasons noted. Mr. Mann - saw other problems because the Crosstown project is only to South Coon Creek Drive. If this extension Is granted, would that slow down the Crosstown project because of an access needed to Osage and Quinn? Mr. Davidson explaIned the Crosstown project will be proceedIng more quickly now because they are working at a lesser depth. By thIs weekend, they plan to have sewer laid past Quinn Drive. Council agreed to wait until the October 20 meeting before considering an extension of the Woodridge Acres project completIon date. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Orttel, to table to the October 20 meeting, and at that time get a further report on hIs progress and determine then If we want to gIve an officIal extensIon. (AmerIcan Contracting, Project 87-28, Woodrldge Acres and Creekside Estates) Motion carrIed on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschltl) vote. Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 10 (Project Change Orders, continued> Fire Chief Bob Palmer asked if there will always be access through that area. Mr. Davidson stated yes, that they will be maintaining one lane open. He stated emergency vehicles will always be able to serve the Woodridge Acres area. Counc il recessed at 10:44; reconvened at 10:53 p.m. Mr, Davidson continued to review his letter on project change orders noting the reasons for any proposed change. Counc II also discus..ed ways of avoiding the problems that have occured this year of not meeting completion dates. One suggestion was to begin the eminent domain process for easement acquisition as soon as a project is ordered. Another was to schedule all projects in the City for the same time, beginnIng with petItions and pUblic hearings in the fall, plans and specs done during the winter, and bId and award the contract in the early sprIng. There was also some concern of preparing plans and specificatIons to extend utilities to the new school site through unplatted property until It is known how that property will be platted. Mr. Schrantz stated the affected property owners have been asked and have agreed to bring in proposals for the development of theIr propertIes. (Mayor Windschltl stepped down to the audience; Acting Mayor Orttel conducted this portion of the meeting.> MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, approve Change Order No. 2 to Channel Construction for Kensington Estates Project 87-8 for an amount of $727. DISCUSSION: Jerrv Windschitl. developer - stated he asked that an alternate be put in his bid to give the contractor a bonus if the contract is completed by September 10, Just prior to the Parade of Homes. He stated if anyone had told him that adding the second phase to the contract would change the completion date, it would not have been done or would have been done on a different basis. He understood they were going to trade off the back part of the project for the front part, which was the addition. Mr. Windschitl said they got hurt on the Parade of Homes because of the roads and not having the project done by the 10th, stating they are doing a cost analysis of Just how much was lost. And the project is sti II a week or two away from being finished. Mr. Windschitl was surpirsed about the change order, thinking this was goIng to be solved between the two contractors and that he wouldn't be involved. The one piece to the change order deals with a broken valve. The contractor doing the dirt work for him doesn't know if he hit the value or not but was willing to pay Channel for it. But now Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 11 (Project Change Orders, continued) it is in the change order. Part of the additional loader work mayor may not be attributable to the work, as there was an elevation problem with the staking on one of the cuI de sacs. He also thought this was going to be worked out by the two contractors. Mr. Davidson stated they don't have any authority over anyone but the City's contractor. The other problem Is there were other contractors working in the subdivision besides the City's and its subcontractors such as those building houses, cement and lumber trucks, etc. It Is true It Is not known who broke the valve, but the City's contractor placed It In the street and it was not broken when they last saw It. If the City's contractor is to replace It, he felt It is a legitimate addi tl ona I item. He doesn't have a problem deleting it from the change order If It is being taken care of by the contractors, but he wasn't aware of that, Mr. Rodeberg stated Channel Construction has Indicated he did not want to deal directly with the developer's grading contractor. He also stated the staking was not incorrectly done but was changed In the field to save material in the cuI de sac. He believed it is a legitimate claIm, as the contractor sent TKDA an invoice relating to this change order. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Apel, Elling, Knight, Orttel ABSTAIN-Windschitl Motion carried. (Mayor Wlndschitl chaired the remainder of the meeting.) MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we authorize Change Order No. 3 for Kenko, Inc. . Hills of Bunker Lake, Project 87-2, for the amount of $45,302.50. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by EllIng, approve Change Order No. 1 to Marvin Excavating at no change in cost. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, Change Order No.2 to Barberossa and Sons at no change in cost as specified. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschitl) vote. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, Change Order No.2 to Austin Keller Construction Company at no change in cost, Motion carrIed unanimously. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, Change Order No.2 for Channel Construction for ShadY Knoll, Project 87-7, for total of $20,795.75. DISCUSSION: Mayor Wlndschltl understood there Is an arrangement wIth a property owner for additional sod, asking If that will be put into the cost of the project. Regular CIty Council Meeting Octobe~ 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 12 (Project Change O~de~s, contInued) M~. Rodebe~g stated the no~mal soddIng of the boulevards a~e called for In the cont~act, but the cont~actor Is not expectIng the City to pick up any additIonal amount. If the cont~acto~ negotIated wIth a p~lvate landowne~ to stockpile the di~t and ag~eed to sod the lot fo~ that pu~pose, that is not the CIty's responsibility. He stated the price of the cubic ya~ds of dirt In this change orde~ is about half and they haven't negotiated anything wIth the cont~actor regarding sod. Dan Llzakowski - explained the fo~eman asked him to put the dirt on his lot. He saId It was okay but anything that Is distu~bed Is to be sodded. At first the foreman said no; but about fIve days later the offer was accepted and they shook hands on those terms. It was hIs unde~standing that the sod would not be paid for by the City. If he thought the City would have to pay for it, he would not have entered Into the deal. Mr. Davidson stated the contracto~ may have done that, but that Is not part of the CIty's contract and it wIll not be paId for. The City's intent is to sod the boulevards and blackslopes and any a~~angement with M~, LIzakowskI is outside the limIts of the p~oJect. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Apel, Elling, Knight, O~ttel; PRESENT-Wlndschitl MotIon ca~~led, AWARD CONTRACT/87-3B MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Apel, a Resolution acceptIng and awardIng cont~act fo~ the improvement of Project No. 87-3B fo~ street constructIon in the area along Crosstown Bouleva~d as prepa~ed, and note that the contract be awarded to Barbe~ossa and Sons In the amount of $510,895.89. DISCUSSION: Councilman Orttel was concerned that the Joint powers agreement with the county has not yet been signed. WIthout that ag~eement, the CIty has no guarantee as to where the money would come from to make the bond payments. He asked if thIs Is even in the county's budget, and how will the CIty fund It if the county cannot. He feit it was unwIse to award the contract wIthout knowing how the bond payments will be made. DiscussIon was that the ag~eement would be similla~ to the agreement between the county and Coon Rapids on the southern end of the roadway. There were several conce~ns ~aised about the Inte~est payments, when this Is in the county budget, and over how many yea~s the payments would be made. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Ape I ; NO-Orttel; PRESENT-Elling, Knight, Windschltl. MotIon faIled. Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 13 (Award Contract/87-3B. Continued) MOTION by Elling. Seconded by Knight, reintroducing the Resolution accepting and awarding contract for the improvement of Project No. 87-3B for street construction in the area along Crosstown Boulevard as presented with the signed agreement with the County for their fair share of this in the first year. DISCUSSION: It was determined the county's share for the first year would be $20,000. Mayor Windschitl didn't think there was any disagreement on the part of the county to pay for their share of the road, but he didn't think they would pay for the first year. He also felt if the City needed to carry It for a year-, the funds could come from the excess In the utilIty funds, Councilmen Knight and Elling then WITHDREW the Second and the Motion. MOTION by By Elling, Seconded by KnIght, introducing a Resolution accepting and awarding contract for the Improvement of Project No. 87-3B for street construction in the area along Crosstown Boulevard as presented. (See Resolution R200-87) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Apel, Elling, Knight; NO-Orttel as he felt it Is a dangerous precedent because the City has never awarded any type of contract without assurances of how it will be paid for; PRESENT- Wi ndsch i t I . Motion carried. Mr. Schrantz was asked to get an update from the county for the next meeting relating to a joint powers agreement on this proJect. APPROVE PLANS & SPECS/COMMERCIAL PARK/VERDIN STREET MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, a Resolution waiving the public hearing for Project 87-6 Commercial Park. (See Resol ut i on R201-87) Motion carrIed unanimously. MOTION by Elling. Seconded by Knight, a Resolution approving final plans and specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for Project No. 87-6, for watermain, sanitary sewer, storm drain. and street construction. as presented. (See ResolutIon R202-87) DISCUSSION: Mr. Schrantz stated the City has already entered into a Joint powers agreement with the County regarding the Verdin Street project. Motion carried unanimously. FIRE DEPARTMENT - SCHOOL REIMBURSEMENT MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight. that the Counc i I author! ze the expenditure of up to $45 per day for reimbursable expenses for the fire fighters that are out of town attending schools; and allow mileage at the rate of 21 cents per mile paid to the actual driver. This would allow one school and/or seminar per member per year for reimbursement would be allowed. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - MInutes Page 14 FIRE DEPARTMENT - BUILDING COMMITTEE CouncIl dIscussed the recommendations of the FIre Department Building CommIttee with Fire ChIef Bob Palmer, Firefighter Bob Dillon, and others. Councilman Elling felt at this poInt a date should be set for a bond electIon and costs be establIshed if that is what the Council wIshes to do, as this Is a repeat of what was before the CouncIl previously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that the CouncIl agrees wIth the Fire Department on the search areas lIsted, beIng Bunker and Crosstown, the IntersectIon of Co. Rd 7, 20 and 50 area, and the present station untIl the northeast area development can be analyzed. MotIon carrIed on a 4-Yes, I-No (EllIng, feeling the Bunker & Crosstown area is already commItted to 139th and Crosstown and that the Co. Rd 7 area should be the city property suggested at the Intersection of Co. Rd. 7 and 159th). Motion carried. The Fire Department agreed to look at the CIty-owned property on Co. Rd. 7 and 159th and make a recommendation for suitability as a fire station site. Attorney Hawkins estimated about $10,000 for land acquIsItIon and about $15,000 for fees for the bond. Mr. DIllon stated BRA has quoted $7,500 for a feasIbilIty, which will put the information relatIng to the buildIng and bonding in a formal manner. One-thIrd of that cost would be put toward the architectural fees of the fire stations. CouncIl thought the FIre Department may want to seek quotes from other archItectural firms. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by EllIng, that the Council authorize up to $7,500 for a feasibilly report on the proposed fIre statIons to be obtaIned from BRA and Associates or any other architectural firm for whom a bId Is solicited by the Fire Department, subject to beIng accepted by the CIty Council. MotIon carrIed unanImously. ACCEPT RESIGNATION/D. ANDERSON MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we accept the resignation of Don Anderson as BuIldIng Inspector effectIve October 14, 1987. Motion carried unanImously. Regular City Council Meeting October 6, 1987 - Minutes Page 15 PURCHASE BASE STATION Dave Almgren, Building Official, reviewed the bid to Install a new base station, noting the problems with the existing one. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, that we authorize the Building Department to purchase a new Motorola Base Station for a cost not to exceed $3,500; and for the next meeting present the line Items as to where the money will come from and how It will be split amont the departments. Motion carried unanimously. ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Apel, accept for one year contract for $725 per month, submittal by Animal Control and Management, Inc., 10911 Radlsson Road NE. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVE CIAGARETTE & NON-INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, approval of Clgaratte and Non-Intoxicating Liquor Licenses for Merwin Drug; Clgaratte License for Festival Foods; and Cigaratte and Non-Intoxicating Liquor Licenses for SuperAmerica, effective for the remainder of 1987. Motion carried unanimously. 1988 PROPOSED BUDGET MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, a Resolution establishing the 1988 levy to be certified to the County Auditor by the City of Andover as presented, note that the levy Is set at $860,244, and the bonded Indebtedness levy is set at $134,870.40. Motion carried unanimously. HANSON BOULEVARD/ADDRESS CHANGES The Building Official was directed to provide addresses to those whose access will be directly off the newly constructed Hanson Boulevard north of County Road 20, recognizing that the mailboxes will remain on County Road 20 until Hanson is completed. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Apel, that we approve Claims Number 13366 through 13452 with the exception of 13400 and 13401 in the total amount of $1,112,019.19 less the following two amounts: $18,712.15 and $140,876.78. Motion carried unanimously. '. Regular CIty CouncIl Meeting October 6, 1987 - MInutes Page 16 (Approval of Claims, Continued) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Apel, approve Claims Number 13400 in the amount of $18,712.15 and Check 13401 in the amount of $140.876.78. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschitl) vote. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to adjourn. Motion carrIed unanimously. MeetIng adjourned at 1:07 a.m. Respectffully submitted, Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary