Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC June 21, 1988 CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1988-AGENDA 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Public Hearing/Vacation of Service Road Easement 5. Discussion Items a. Woodland Creek 2nd Addn. Final Plat b. Heliker Sketch plan c. Saarenpaa sketch plan d. Ordinance 53 Amendment e. Crosstown Boulevard Variances f. Minnesota Intrastate Special Use Permit g. Orttel Lot Spli t h. Hidden Creek East Final Plat i. Approve Regional Ponding/Coon Creek j . Approve Development Contract/Deerwood Est. k. City Hall Sidewalk Approval 1. Bond Sale m. Tonson n. Bergeron o. Gammon Bros. Special Use Permit/Mining p. Lund MSA q. Timber Trails preliminary plat r. 6. Staff~ Committee, Commission a. Park Comprehensive Plan, Cont. b. Fox Meadows Park Access c. Approve Overnight Camping/Woodland Creek d. Council Salaries e. CDBG Joint Powers Agreement f. Ordinance 11 Amendment g. Computer Proposal -- h. Fi re Dept. Report on Junkyards & Tonson i. 7. Non-Discussion Items a. Declare Adequacy of Petition/Bent Creek b. Declare Adequacy of Petition/R. Sonsteby c. Declare Adequacy of Pet./Receive Feasibility/88-l7/Red Oaks 5th d. Final payment/86-l9; 87-6 e. Approve Plans & Specs/88-1 f. Award Bids/88-2; 88-11 g. Award Bid/Hidden Creek park parking Lot h. Approve ROW/88-l; 87-11 i. Approve Resolutions, Project 88-19, Woodland Creek phase II j . 8. Approval of Minutes 9. Approval of Claims 10. Adjournment - ~ ". (CA. CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (612) 755-5100 ., ~ ~ . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 21, 1988 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover CIty Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschltl on June 21, 1988. 7:30 p.m., at the Andover CIty Ha]], 1685 Crosstown Bou]evard NW, Andover, MInnesota. Councilmen present: Apel, EllIng, Knight, Orttel CouncIlman absent: None A]so present: City Attorney. WII]Iam G. Hawkins; TKDA EngIneer. John Rodeberg; Assistant CIty EngIneer, Todd Haas; CIty Planner, Daryl Morel': CIty AdmInIstrator, James Schrantz; and others AGENDA APPROVAL Mayor Windschitl stated he talked at length wIth Mr. Barbeau of the OffIce of PIpelIne Safety regardIng the June 16, 1988, letter from that Department on the MITS plpe]lne through Andover. Mr. Barbeau Is unable to attend tonIght's meetIng but would be wIllIng to dIscuss thIs wIth the Councl] at another meetIng. The Mayor asked whether the CouncIl wanted to contInue the Item or dIscuss It thIs evenIng. Counc i I agreed to leave It on the Agenda. It was also recommended Item 5b, Hellker Sketch Plan, be deleted. MOTION by Elling. Seconded by Apel, that we move the Agenda as amended. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Absent (Knight) vote. PUBLIC HEARING/VACATION OF SERVICE ROAD EASEMENT Mr. Schrantz advised maintaining the utIlIty easement. Counc i I didn't feel It was necessary sInce the road easement is 50 feet on either sIde of the center. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Ape], that the Public Hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte], Seconded by EllIng, directing statf to prepare a resolution vacatIng the servIce road easement from Yukon Street to 138th Avenue NW as a service road. (See ResolutIon RI26-88) Motl on carrIed unanimously. Mr. Schrantz thought the easement mal' be needed for the sanItary sewer line. No further actIon was taken at thIs meeting. - - - Regular City Council MeetIng June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 2 WOODLAND CREEK 2ND ADDITION FINAL PLAT MOTION by EllIng, Seconded by KnIght, that we approve the fInal plat of Woodland Creek 2nd as being developed by Lawrence B. Carlson, President of Woodland Development Corp, In Section 28, 29, 32 and 33, Township 32, Range 24, as presented. De]ete Item No.5 and No. 1. (See Resolution RI27-88) DI SCUSS I ON : Byron Westlund, Woodland Development, stated the Corps of Engineers permit is not needed for thIs plat. He explained a meeting was held last week with the US Fish and WIldlIfe Department and the Chicago EPA regarding the permit for the low]and. He has been informed they will have that permit no later than July 8, though that does not affect this portIon of the plat. MotIon car.led unanImously. SAARENPAA SKETCH PLAN Mr. Haas stated the property owner Is not Interested in developing the property but wants to develop metes and bounds. The Intent of NIghtengale Estates was to get 153rd Lane from the 3.d AdditIon to Nightengale Street. Counc 1 I expressed concern that there would be a road alIgnment problem If It were developed by fIve-acre metes and bounds. Betty Saarenpaa stated she originally submItted a sketch for a future plan based on splIttIng only a portion to buIld on. The Planning and ZonIng Commission stated the road must be put in all the way tht·uugh. so they abandoned the plan. For now they Just want to take a lot off either NIghtengale or 153rd. She saId they were also told they cannot buIld on 2 1/2 acres. Mr. Haas thought that was because the parcel must have 300 feet of frontage, so a road would have to be built If I t was a 2 1/2-acre parcel. Counc 1 I dIscussed the sItuatIon and felt It could be platted with only a portion of the road constructed. Ms. Saarenpaa stated they do not want to go through the expense of p]attlng at this time. Mr. Schrantz was concerned about someone gainIng access onto 153rd that did not pay for the road assessment. Attorney Hawkins advIsed the road was paid for by the developer, and the CIty has no authority to assess any other abutting properties. It was then suggested 300 feet of road be constructed from the temporary cuI de sac on 153rd. Ms. Saarenpaa could then split off 2 1/2 acres tor her buIldIng sIte and retain the rest of the property for future use. The road would have to be brought up to grade plus the dedicatIon of road easements. Regular CIty CouncIl Meeting June 21. 1988 - MInutes Page 3 (Saarenpaa Sketch Plan, ContInued) Ms. Saarenpaa stated that was their original Intent. but the PlannIng Commission said they could not do that. The CouncIl stated yes, she can. The future plan would show that the road would come through, but she has no oblIgatIon to build It now. A lot spIlt can only be done once every three years, but she can do a 2 1/2-acre lot spIlt. Ms. Saarenpaa was agreeable to constructIng the 300 feet of road and splittIng off a 2 1/2-acre parcel for her homesite. Council also noted she would be responsible to brIng the road to her property line if there Is a gap In there. ORDINANCE 53 AMENDMENT Mr. Morey reviewed the Planning CommissIon's proposed changes to the Dog Ordinance, whIch basIcallY adds the threat ot attack to an actual attack. CouncIlman E]IIng thought exotic anImals was to be Incorporated Into thIs ordInance. Mr. Morel' stated he made that proposal, but the Planning CommIssion felt It should be a separate ordinance. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Apel, OrdInance No. 53, an ordinance repealing OrdInance No. 5, Ordinance No. 14, Ordinance No. 20, Ordinance No. 38, as presented. MotIon carrIed unanimously. (There was turther discussion on thIs ordInance later In the meeting.) CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD VARIANCES MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, a ResolutIon approving varIance requests by the CIty of Andover for front yard setback for propertIes located at PIN 33 32 24 11 0010, PIN 33 32 24 11 0009. PIN 34 32 24 22 0025, PIN 33 32 24 11 0006, and PIN 34 32 24 22 0007 as presented. (See Resolution RI28-88) Motion carrIed unanImously. MINNESOTA INTRASTATE SPECIAL USE PERMIT Mayor Wlndschltl stated because he was not at the last meeting, he would vote present on any Item pertainIng to this Issue. He summarIzed the posItion of WIlliam Barbeau, DIrector of the OffIce of PIpeline Safety, as noted In the June 16, 1988, letter. and per his phone conversatIon wIth Mr. Barbeau. The Mayor contInued that the Office of Pipeline Safety was directed to develop a model pipeline set back ordInance for munIcIpal adoptIon by August, 1989. That model suggested a mInimum setback of 150 feet from a dwellIng. RegulaL CIty CouncIl MeetIng June 21, 1988 - Minutes Page 4 <MITS Special Use PermIt. ContInued) Mayor WI ndsch I t I stated Mr. Barbeau feels the ordInance mal' not necessarIly say 150 feet, because In some cases that may be excessIve and In other cases It mal' not be enough. There mal' be a suggestIon that each of the cIties establish their own setback. He also recognIzes the CouncIls need to look at the future development as well as the present. CouncIlman Apel noted one of the Issues last tIme was that of safety, and In hIs letter, Mr. Barbeau commends MITS on their safety codes. If the Mayor Is goIng to vote present, he thought the matter wI I ] have to be carrIed over agaIn if there Is no change In the vote of the other Councl ]members. Mayor Wlndschltl didn't know If It was proper for the Counc I I to be determInIng the locatIon of the pIpe, as in thIs case It would be choosIng between one house or another. Leon KozlowskI - represented hIs mother, Sophie KozlowskI, whose property MITS has purchased for the pIpeline. He stated the the petItIon receIved by the CouncIl was from three resIdents; however, there are seven along the proposed pIpeline location, so It Is not a maJorIty petItIon. The land was desIgnated and negotIated by themselves for use of the pIpelIne, acceptIng the fact that the pIpelIne wIll come through. That area offers the least amount of damage to her property. She owns all property which the pIpelIne Is usIng; none of the pIpelIne wIll be usIng adJacent property. M.. KozlowskI stated one of the Issues has been the removal of trees. He explaIned his famIly has been farmIng the area sInce 1938, and they consIder the trees a crop, and they have the rIght to harvest that crop at any poInt In time. The people adJacent to that pIpeline locatIon have enJoyed the sItuation and, In some Instances. have abused the privileges of neIghbors and fenced over portIons of their property without permIssIon. Mr. Kozlowski stated the proposed ordInance of the Office of PIpelIne Safety is a proposal and not yet In effect; so the regulations In effect at thIs time are the ones to be enforced. He also noted a problem raised In terms of safety. He disputed that, statIng the pIpe wi] ] be built of 1/4-Inch steel and greater, wI]] meet all conformI ng standards of the TransportatIon System, and wIll be buried four feet underground. M.. KozlowskI felt people would be affected no matter whIch side the pIpelIne is ]ald, and they want to exercise theIr rIghts as landowners. He also felt the thIngs being carrIed along the railroad track pose a greater hazard to all resIdents along the track than the pipeline wI I] ever pose. M.. Kozlowski stated they have not been requested dIrectly by the three petitIoners. He was at CIty Hall on Monday, understandIng one of the petitIoners was goIng to be here to talk wIth hIm; but no one appeared. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 5 (MITS Special Use Permit, Continued) Sophie Koz]owskl - stated many years ago Mr. ReddIngton came to her house wantIng to buy her land, the entIre strip. for $200. statIng It was worthless to her. She said he Is further away from the pIpelIne than she Is, and she exp]alned some of the problems she has had wIth people abusing her land on the east side of the raIlroad tracks. She stated Mr. Reddington buIlds and sells; but she has been here a long time with her family all around the area. Garv Reddlnaton. 970 154th Lane NW - stated there has been some misunderstanding about meetings, as he is wl]ling to talk at any time about buying that land. He said he offered Mrs. Kozlowski $1.000 an acre for that land. He stated he is not a land developer, Intending to lIve the rest of his lIfe in that house. The land in questIon Is about 1200 feet, and there are only three houses along that 1200 feet. He though t It was Mr. Bal]ey who had the fence that may be too far over, as he doesn't have a fence. Mr. ReddIngton revIewed the letters before the CouncIl, notIng the MITS letter of June 8 askIng the Council to decide whIch sIde of the raIlroad tracks the plpe]lne should be placed and the letter from the Department ot PublIc Safety recommending the west side of the tracks to affect the least number of resIdents. He dIdn't know the exact measurement of where the pIpeline would be from Mrs. KozlowskI's house If It were on the west side of the tracks, but he dId know It would be between 50 and 125 feet from the houses on the east sIde along that 1200-foot strIp of land In question. The Counc 11 noted the June 16 letter from the OffIce of Plpe]Ine Safety Is different In that It suggests the CIty look at both the present and future affects of the lIne. Mr. Reddlnaton - stated MITS has stated they wIll need a 30-foot permanent easement and a 25-foot temporary easement. He demonstrated on a map that the wIdth of Mrs. Kozlowski's land varIes along the raIlroad track, so It wi]] be necessary to clear-cut 6 feet of his property for the Insta]]atlon of the pIpelIne. With those trees removed, he felt It defInitely lowers the property values for himself and hIs neighbors. He felt Mrs. Kozlowski has a choice of placing the pIpe on either side of the railroad tracks, and placIng It on the east side adversely affects hIs property. Mr. ReddIngton stated he woud like to meet wIth MITS and Mrs. KozlowskI to negotIate his purchasing the land on the east side and the pipeline being put on the west side. If It were on the west sIde, it could be planned for when that property is developed Councilman EllIng asked If It were possible to maintain only the 30-foot easement for constructIon through that 600-foot sectIon. Mrs. KozlowskI stated she asked if those pine trees could be left and was told they would try. Regular CIty CouncIl Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 6 (MITS Special Use PermIt, Continued) DennIs Sandbera. MITS - stated they wIll guarantee that they wIll not go on Mr. ReddIngton's property or anybody else's along that 1200- foot stretch on the east sIde of the tracks, and they would be wIllIng to condItIon the permit to that effect. In the event there are damages, they stand ready to compensate for them; but they do intend to stay only on the property acquIred from Mrs. KozlowskI through th 1 s area. Mr. Sandberg explained in order to effIcIently do the pipeline with the lowest damage and Interference with the other property owners Is to stay packed tIght by the railroad. But they have to have a route to run theIr equIpment on, and he dIdn't know If he could get the agreement from all property owners to run around the houses, etc. He stated they will try. He saId they would be very dIsappoInted If a decIsIon could not be made this evening. Mr. ReddInaton - felt hIs land value wl]1 be reduced by the fact that there Is a plpllne Just 100 teet from hIs house, and that he wl]1 not be compensated for. The same Is true for hIs neighbors. Mr. Sandbera - stated they would move the line to the west sIde If the Counc 11 InsIsts. But they have negotIated In good faIth wIth the landowner and secured an easement on the east sIde of the tracks. SInce June 8, the DNR has authorized them to Install the pIpe on either sIde of the tracks through that sectIon; as they don't feel safety would be compromIsed on either sIde. He revIewed several excerpts from the June 16 letter of the OffIce of PIpelIne Safety regarding the safety of the lIne. Mr. Sandberg went on to summarIze other Issues such as the CouncIl also lookIng at the future development along the west sIde; theIr welcomIng a restrIctIon In the SUP to complete construction by October 1 , 1989, so It wII I not be affected by the new ordInances; that the Andover lIne is a 60 percent pIpe wIth the last sIx miles beIng 50 percent. whIch means It wIll not be operated over 50 or 60 percent of what It Is desIgned to carry; that there are sIx ways they stay on top of the safety issue; and that theIr safety record over the past 26 years should gIve some comfort to the CouncIl. Mayor WlndschItl asked their polIcy of sellIng gas to munIcIpalItIes that have franchises. Mr. Sandberg stated they are a transporter of natural gas. On this lIne theIr contractual oblIgatIon for ten years Is to Minnegasco for the entIre capacIty. There would have to be some kind of exchange or agreement between MInnegasco and the munIcIpalIty. Mayor Wlndschlt] felt it was unfaIr that the gas would serve other areas rather than that which the line goes through. Bill Jordan, Attorney for MITS, explaIned there Is a Statute In place that requIres -. Regular CIty CouncIl Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 7 <HITS SpecIal Use PermIt, ContInued) every Intrastate pipelIne to provIde access to anyone along the line who wants to tap into it. The condItions are that there is capacIty on the lIne and the cost would be fully borne by that entIty. It mal' be that Mlnnegasco would contract with others before the 10-year contract wIth MITS Is over. But MITS Is not In the business of selling gas retaIl, but the opportunIty does exIst somewhere down the line to tap Into the lIne. MOTION by EllIng. Seconded by Apel, a Reso]utlon approving a Special Use Permit requested by Minnesota Intrastate TransmissIon Systems to allow placement of a natural gas pipeline on property adJacent to the Burlington Northern rIght of way from 133rd Avenue to IBlst Avenue, as presented. (See Resolution R129-86) DISCUSSION: WInslow Holasek - noticed two pIpe thIcknesses on the EQB, the 2.50 and 2.81, askIng where the 2.81 is goIng to be used. Mr. Sandberg stated both are considered heavy wall pIpe. The 2.81 wall will be the last sIx mIles because of the populatIon density and at each road crossing. AI I of the pIpe will be pressure tested to Class 3. M.. Holasek - stated the populatIon Isn't In Andover now, but It wi I I be. In anticipation of that growth, he suggested the 2.81 wall be installed at this time, thinkIng It would be a long time before they change the pipe. Mr. Sandberg stated the line Is designed with the anticipatIon of that growth. That Is why they are doing the high-pressure testing to such hIgh pressure. If for any reason the population densIty gets hIgh enough to change the pipe, they have to do It at theIr own cost and pal' all damages. After some discussion, It was not known exactly where six mIles from the terminatIon point would be, some speculatIng It would be In Andover north of Bunker Lake Boulevard. Mr. Sandberg agreed to give those specific calculations to the City Staff for Interested persons. Loretta Bovem - asked what benefit the plpe]Ine will be to the City of Andover. She felt the Installation of that line is destroying a beautlfu] cIty for no benefIt. Thousands of trees are being destroyed. She stated she Is opposed to the proJect, accusing MITS of not dealing In good faIth with herself and her neIghbors and feeling they wIll be terrIble to deal with if there Is an explosion. CouncIlman Orttel stated our gas comes through another CIty, like the powerllnes that go through Andover but do not serve Andover. It Is not a good deal for Andover. Mr. Kozlowski - stated theIr own engineers have said the plpe]Ine will be of the higher classed pIpe for the last six mIles because of the population denlsty. He thought the same engIneering standards should be applIed to Andover, whIch wIll also developed to a hIgh density In the near future. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 8 (MITS SpecIal Use Permit, ContInued) Mr. Jordan explaIned the Office of Pipeline Safety regulates whether or not theIr line Is designed, constructed and operated correctly. Mayor Wlndschltl suggested draftIng ~ letter to Mr. Barbeau InformIng him of the proposed density south of Crosstown Boulevard to Insure the highest standard of pipe Is put through that area. MOTION by Elling. Seconded by Apel, that Jim Schrantz draft a letter (to Mr. Barbeau of the Office of PIpeline Safety) with a map of that area, partlcularlly between Bunker Lake Bou]evard and Crosstown showIng what we expect to see for a density through that area. MotIon carrIed on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschltl) vote. VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION: YES-Ape I , Elling, KnIght. Orttel; PRESENT- Wlndschitl. MotIon carrIed. Council recessed at 9:08; reconvened at 9:12 P.M. HIDDEN CREEK EAST FINAL PLAT MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, a ResolutIon approvIng the final plat ot HIdden Creek East Phase I, Good Value Homes. in Sectiwl 34, Township 32, Range 24, subJect to a favorable tItle opinion being presented, and park dedication In the amount of $2,825. (See Resolution R130-88) MotIon carried unanimously. APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT/DEERWOOD ESTATES Council noted street lightIng needs to be added to the contract. Attorney HawkIns suggested adding street lIghtIng under Item e. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Knight, to approve the attached development contract (between the CIty of Andover and RIversIde Development Company) wIth that amendment. MotIon carried unanimously. CITY HALL SIDEWALK APPROVAL Building OfficIal Dave Almgren presented a handout sketching the proposed locatIon of a sidewalk along the front of the bul]dlng, which would be used as a bumper for the cars. It is about 145 feet of ]Ineal walk. They would also correct the problem by the drinking fountain. MOTION by Ortte], Seconded by EllIng, that we dIrect the Building OffIcIal to solicit bIds for City Hall Improvements per his plan for the parking Jot/side walk area and note that the sIdewalk would be proposed to be six-feet wide. MotIon carrIed unanimously. Regular CIty CouncIl MeetIng June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 9 BOND SALE Attorney HawkIns revIewed hIs June 1, 1988. recommendIng a $5.8 mIllIon bond to fInance all the proJects. He recommended the engIneers reconfIrm that the connectIon charge Income wIll be adequate for the Infrastsructure of the sewer and water systems. John Rodeberg, TKDA, stated they are already workIng on that. Mr. HawkIns also noted the amounts the county and CIty are expected to pay on the Crosstown Boulevard proJect. The CIty Is fInancIng the entIre amount, recommendIng the agreement wIth the county be tlnallzed to be assured the CIty wI]1 be reimbursed the county's share. M.. Rodeberg explaIned part of the CIty's portIon whIch Is the reconstructIon portion will come from the trunk fund, part wi I] come from the storm sewer assessment, and the curb cost wIll be from MSA funds. Mr. HawkIns stated because the maJorIty of the proJects are developments, he recommended selling three-year General Ob 11 ga t I on Temporary Improvement Bonds on the expectatIon that sUbstantIally all of those proJects wIll be completed In three years and the assessments wIll have been collected. Mr. Hawkins also explaIned that sInce the issue Is over $5 mIllion. It wIll be subJect to the rebate requIrements, and a]] earnIngs on its debt servIce Investments from the sale of the bond issue must be calculated. If arbItrage profIts are made. a rebate must be made to the federal government. It Is an accountIng functIon that the CIty Is not capable of handlIng, but the CIty's audItor has done thIs for other communItIes. He recommended meetIng wIth Greg Murphy as to what It wIll take to do thIs and what 1 t wI I I cost. Attorney HawkIns then recommended approvIng the standard ResolutIon provIdIng for the sale of $5.8 mIllIon General OblIgatIon Bonds, provIdIng for the sale on July 5. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by EllIng, to so move the ResolutIon. (See Reso]utlon RI31-88) MotIon carrIed on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschltl) vote. TONSON Counc 1 I dIdn't feel it had all the InformatIon It requested at the last meetIng. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Ape]. that we continue the Tonson TIre Issue until the fIrst regular scheduled meetIng In July. Motion carrIed unanImously. Regular City Council MeetIng June 21, 1988 - Minutes Page 10 BERGERON SPECIAL USE PERMIT Mr. Morel' explaIned the request is for a kennel ] Icense. The original request was for an 80-dog capacity dog kennel, but the PlannIng CommIssion felt that number was too large. Mr. Bergeron then proposed a capacIty of 26 dogs, notIng the proposed sIte plan. The Planning CommIssIon faIled to recommend approval on a 3-3 tIe vote. so It comes to the CouncIl without a recommendatIon. Mr. Morel' explaIned part of the problem Is the ordInance does not have a maxImum amount of dogs allowed In a kennel, and there Is no guidance as to how many dogs the other kennels In the City have. Jeff Beraeron. 16422 Hanson Boulevard - stated the Intent of the kennel Is for boardIng and training. There wI I] be no breedIng, but the dogs are beIng contInually turned over. He hopes thIs wIll become hIs full-time career. He has fee tItle for fIve acres and a contract for deed on 55 acres. Councl]man Apel was concerned that it is a commercIal operatIon. which Is not the Intent of the kennel ordinance. CouncIlman EI]lng asked If he had an optIon to do this in a commercIal zoned area. Mr. Beraeron - didn't know where that comment came from. He stated this type of trainIng cannot be done In a commercIal area, as there Is not enough area. CouncIlman Knight understood this type of trainIng could not be done In a commercia] area because It requires too much acreage. But he was concerned about the noIse factor with that number of dogs. Mr. Beraeron - stated the kennel wi]] be aIr-conditioned so the dogs will be kept In at nIght. There will be a sIx-foot privacy fence around the entire kennel; so when they are out durIng the day, the noise should not be a problem. Also, durIng the day the dogs will generally be wIth hIm traInIng. Mayor Wlndschltl was concerned with approvIng such a use on a fIve-acre piece, as It would set a precedent for allowing the use on al I the other five-acre pIeces In the City. He doubted whether the 55 acres under contract could be included, thinkIng the ordInance requIred him to be fee owner. Mr. Beraeron - stated he had orIgInally applIed for the use on the entire 60 acres; but because he Isn't the fee owner, he was told to change It. The land is mostly lowland, feeling there wIll be no development coming In. Councilman Orttel didn't know how the noIse would be handled, especially being concerned about the shootIng which Is used to traIn the dogs. He too was concerned about It being a commercial operation. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 11 (Bergeron Special Use PermIt, Cont I nued) Mr. Beraeron - explaIned there was a dog traIner In the area who had up to 170 dogs whIch were staked outsIde where there was no control over the noIse. There Is no one around him except the Aasness's and the Bayer's. He Is shooting blanks. wIth minimal shooting. Most of the training is on the back side of the 20, whIch Is surrounding by trees. He's not asking to hold field trIals or to hold game faIrs, only to put up the kennel and train dogs on hIs land. He's wi I lIng to have the permit on the 60 acres, but he doesn't have the cash to buy the 60 acres. Attorney HawkIns advIsed Mr. Bergeron does own 60 acres, as a contract for deed allows all the same rights of a fee owner. For a practical matter, it makes no sense to require the contract for deed seller to provide a written statement for a special use permit because they are technicallY no more than a mortgage company. He felt If the ordinance does require a statement from the fee owner, that the Counc 11 consider changI ng 1 t, teellng It Is not necessary or Justlflab]e for a specIal use permit. Mrs. Dorothv Aasness - stated she was opposed to the orIgInal request of 80 dogs, but Is wIllIng to have the smaller sIzed kennel, though she doesn't lIke the Idea of the shootIng. Councilman Orttel read a letter for the record from Mrs. Aasness statIng her approval of the smaller kennel but expressing concern over the shooting. Mr. Beraeron - exp]alned the offIce area Is 12 x 20, with 10 x 12 of It as kitchen for storage of dog food. He feeds commercial food and does no processIng. Counc i I dIscussed the pros and cons of a]lowing such a permIt. especially expressing concern over the noIse factor. It was fel t that area wi II be deve]oplng now that the new road Is going through there. thinking there should be some control over the use. They also cautIoned that with the annual review, should a problem arIse, the Counc 11 has the authority to rescInd the permit. Mr. Beraeron - stated the only place to build Is on the Bayer's or Aasness's land. There Is nothIng but sod fields around hIm, whIch he took Into consIderatIon when purchasing the land for this use. He could do his training with pIstol blanks, but hunting Is permitted on his property. Also, It's not an every day occurrence, as they do train elsewhere, such as St. Cloud, Blaine, and Coon RapIds. Mr. Bergeron also stated he is sensItIve to the people around him regardIng the noise factor and shooting. He's not aSking for a vet clInic, Just traInIng and boardIng. Councilman Knight stated it is not commercIal In the sense that there Is traffIc. It is a di fferent type of operation. Regular City CouncIl MeetIng June 21. 1988 - MInutes Page 12 (Bergeron SpecIal Use PermIt, ContInued) MOTION by EllIng, Seconded by KnIght, approval of the Special Use PermIt at 16422 Hanson Boulevard for Jeffrey and Linda Bergeron to operate a boardIng and trainIng kennel only for maxImum lImIt of 26 dogs, shootIng to be at a minImum usIng a pIstol. and specify thIs wIll be on the full 60-acre parce], and that It have 6-month review. DISCUSSION: CouncIlman Apel questIoned limItIng it to a pIstol when that area Is presently open to huntIng. Would he be In vIolatIon of the permIt If he took a dog huntIng and shot a partrIdge? Mr. Beroeron - stated generally blanks wl]1 be used, but he does need to shoot pIgeons on occasIon. CouncIlman EllIng amended the motIon to elImInate the portIon referrIng to the pIstol. Second Stands. (See ResolutIon RI32-88) DISCUSSION: Mr. Beroeron - estImated it would cost about $10,000 to $15,000 to construct the building. Mayor Wlndschltl cautIoned each CouncIl wIll have a sIx-month right of revIew. and It could present a problem for Mr. Bergeron. If the operatIon becomes offensIve and there are a lot of complaInts. he thought the permIt could be pulled. Mr. Beraeron - stated he understands what would make the situatIon offensIve, and he doesn't want it to become offensive. Attorney HawkIns advised In order to rescind the permIt and cause hIm to lose hIs Investment, there has to be some substantIal nuIsance factors to do that. Councilman Elling also cautIoned the huntIng ordinance was recently amended to move the ]Ine further north. As the populatIon grows, It Is conceIvable huntIng would not be allowed In thIs area either. MotIon carried unanImously. GAMMON BROTHERS SPECIAL USE PERMIT/MINING MOTION by EllIng, Seconded by Apel. a Reso]utlon approvIng a SpecIal Use PermIt requested by Gammon Brothers, Inc., to mIne soIl from 125 Bunker Lake Boulevard, PIN 36 32 24 13 0001 and PIN 36 32 24 12 0001, as presented, dropping the Saturday haulIng of materIal from 7 a.m. to 12 noon. (See ResolutIon RI33-88) MotIon carried unanlmous]y. LUND'S MSA STREET Mr. Schrantz stated after talkIng wIth the DNR. he'd .ecommend not doing 168th Avenue as an MSA road through JIm Lund's plat. There Is a problem wIth getting an alIgnment through to the east of VerdIn because of the DNR wetlands In the area. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1986 - MInutes Page 13 (Lund's MSA Street. Continued) Mr. Schrantz reviewed several alternatives that were looked at. Jim Lund, the developer. presented a sketch showing a 56-foot alignment goIng straight east to Verdin, noting It Is set up to go either as a city street or as an MSA street. Mr. Schrantz noted then the desIgnation Is a Jog on Verdin from 168th down to 167th, and the State Is generally not In favor of T-Intersectlons. Councl] discussion with Mr. Lund and Mr. Schrantz was on several proposals and future alignments of an east-west MSA street. It was noted there will be east-west cIty streets In the area, though they are not MSA streets. Because much of the area east ot VerdIn Is already buIlt up, It would be dIffIcult to put a street through to the east unless It goes through some wetland. Council generally agreed to allow Mr. Lund to develop 168th to city street standards according to the plat shown to the CouncIl this evenIng. The hard shells for the plat are to be slmIllar to what Is shown thIs evenIng and any varIances needed would be approved at the tIme ot the final plat. TIMBER TRAILS PRELIMINARY PLAT Council questioned why a mInIng permit is required. Mr. Schrantz stated when there Is excess materIa], he recommended establIshing the same requIrements as Is done when mining is done elsewhere to control the haulIng. hours of operation. etc. If a permit Is required and Issued as a part of this process, everyone knows that there is excess materIal that wI I] be removed. Council noted It has never been requIred In the past. generally teeling It Is not necessary because the gradIng Is controlled by a gradIng plan. Councilman Orttel noted the City of Ham Lake does not allow the removal of any dirt from the plat, that a developer must leave the natural topography and cannot bu]ldoze or clear-cut their sites. He thought Andover should have that same requirement. It was agreed the Issue of requIrIng a minIng permIt at the time of the preliminary plat should be discussed at some future work sessIon. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Elling, to approve the prellmlnmary plat of TImber TraIls as being developed by Lawrence B. Carlson, President of Woodland Development Company In SectIon 5 32 24, as presented. (See Resolution R134-88) Motion carrIed unanImously. ANDOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT MOTION by EllIng, Seconded by Apel, to authorize the Fire Department to create a Reserve Department. Motion carried unanimouslY. Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 1988 - Minutes Page 14 (AVFD, Continued) FIre ChIef Bob Palmer asked If the City can give a donation to the Red Cross, as he would like to use the monel' from the railroad as a donatIon to the Red Cross. Council dlscusssed whether or not to begin gIving donatIons to service groups. Mr. Schrantz stated the polIcy told to people who call for scho]arshlp funds. etc., Is the City does not partIcipate In such programs. CouncIlman Orttel noted the Red Cross operates onlY on donations, and they are one of the few organIzatIons that Is there to help when there Is trouble; and the CIty Is usIng theIr services. A majorIty of the Council felt if the fIrefIghters wIsh to contribute, they can do so out of theIr own organIzatIon. ChIef Palmer stated he would come back wIth a dollar amount. PARK COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Park and Recreation CommissIon Chairman Marc McMu]]en requested authorization to have Westwood Planning and EngineerIng upgrade the Park ComprehensIve Plan. Mayor Wlndschlt] felt a simple survey could be done in-house for less than $600, as most of that Information Is readily avaIlable. He also questioned the consultant, recalling there were problems when the plan was origInally done. Chairman McMullen stated Tim Erkkila presented a proposal of seven steps for a cost not to exceed $3,900, and he cautioned the Board to go s]owlY. That Is why they are recommending only two of the tasks to be done at this time. Those tasks Inc]ude a revIew of the park dedication requirements and to revIew capItal munIcipal spendIng compared to sImlliar communIties. He stated It Is their hope to be able to eventua]II' complete all seven tasks to bring the Plan up to date. Mr. Erkkila had done the last plan, and It was a logical choIce to contact him again. CouncIl thought the comparIson was done at the tIme of the bond issue, and the park dedication ordinance was Just recently changed. The staft was asked to research the fIles when the last Park Comprehensive Plan was done to determIne If there were problems wIth the consultant. Some also felt that the InformatIon for these two tasks are readIly avaIlable and could be done sImply In-house and for less cost. It was agreed the InformatIon wII] be researched by the Staff and provided to the Park Board for further consideratIon. If the Park Board stl]] wishes to proceed. the CouncIl will authorIze It at the next meetIng. Chairman McMullen asked to have a Joint meetIng of the Council and the Park Board. Council agreed. Regular City CouncIl MeetIng June 21, 1988 - Minutes Page 15 FOX MEADOWS PARK ACCESS Chairman McMu]]en understood the county Is wIlling to look at the interchange to County Road 58. Anoka County CommIssioner NatalIe Haas-Steffen didn't know whether or not there would be funds for this proJect next year because the capItal improvements plan and expanded bonding has not yet been completed. She felt thIs mal' be the last opportunity to change that IntersectIon. understandIng the land north of the Tom Thumb store Is for sale. A number of options were talked about at a meetIng wIth several of the Andover Staff. Since the Park Board Is interested In some development In that area, she felt some decisions ought to be made about the road alignment now. Commissioner Haas-Steffen stated there Is a speed study goIng on on HIghway 58 right now, and It shows that almost half of the people goIng up Highway 58 cut across Fox Street and speed down It. She saId the County would be wIllIng to look at an entrance from the park onto HIghway 58 If It can be put In a faIrly safe place as a temporary thIng until some decIsIons can be made on Fox and HIghway 58. After further dIscussion, It was agreed to design the park such that the entrance would be on HIghway 58 on a temporary basis. The Staff was also dIrected to pursue the acquIsItIon of the property necessary to relocate the IntersectIon ot 58 and CoRd 7. Commissioner Haas- Steffen suggested the Park Board discuss the park entrance wIth Paul Ruud of the County HIghway Department so the park doesn't have to be completely redesigned. She also suggested the Staff work with the county In terms of Ideas for closing roads. realIgnment of 58, etc. COON CREEK WATERSHED BOARD/N HAAS-STEFFEN County Commissioner Haas-Steffen asked for guIdance from the Council as to whether or not they are still Interested in pursuIng an expansIon to the number of members on the Coon Creek Watershed Board. She revIewed some of the events that lead to her requesting the Watershed to look at the possibility of expandIng to at least seven members and the Board's decIsion to remain at fIve members. She asked for the Council's posItIon and what direction she should take on the matter. Winslow Holasek. Andover, stated the Watershed Board rescInded their resolutIon to remain at fIve members. The Board had the support of those who had been crItIcal of them In the past, theIr feeling that the Board would not be Improved with more members If there were five good members on to begin with. Regular City CouncIl Meeting June 21. 1988 - MInutes Page 16 (Coon Creek Watershed Board, N Haas-Steffen, Continued) After discussion, though there was some reluctance to Increasing the sIze, It was felt It could be to Andover's benefit to have another representatIve on that Board; and Commissioner Haas-Steffen was asked to have It studIed further. It was also general]y felt that a nine-member board would be too cumbersome, and the only acceptable Increase would be to a a seven-member board. If It would remain at fIve members, a suggestIon was that the chairman be a floating member rather than having two permanent representatives from Coon RapIds. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by KnIght, directIng CommIssIoner Haas-Steffen, in her next contact wIth the Watershed Board, to Instruct them to at least reconsIder theIr five-man board as a posslbl]lty of goIng to seven only. Just as a way of analyzing whether or not we can Improve on the Watershed Board. Motion carrIed unanImously. ANOKA COUNTY LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT AUTHORITY/N HAAS-STEFFEN CommIssioner Haas-Steffen reported they wIll be consIderIng a transportatIon study JointlY wIth HennepIn County that Includes lIght raIl transIt corrIdors and overall transportation and JurIsdIctIon. The cost Is about $380,000, wIth about $130,000 beIng HennepIn County's share and about $40.000 deemed to be hIghway costs In the southern part of the county where most of the roads are already in and developed. The same company would do a transportatIon study on the northern part of the county for about $29,000 whIch wIll cover three priorities. CommIssioner Haas-Steffen expressed concern that the County Board mal' not asked for proposals to have the studY done, thinking there are other fIrms that would be be able to do such a study. She was also concerned that the MetropolItan CouncIl already has about sIx or seven studies that no one Is ]ooklng at. If thIs occurs, she Is also concerned that the northern portIon of the county doesn't get short changed. There are more than three priorIties In the northern half of the county, feelIng a]1 of them should be looked at. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Ape]. that the Councl] dIrect Staff to prepare a ResolutIon in support of the treatment of all transportation Issues of the City ot Andover and the northern portIon of the county In the LRT TransportatIon Study, and the Mayor be authorized to sIgn the resolutIon after Staff prepares It. (See ResolutIon RI35-68) Motion carrIed unanImously. Regular CIty CouncIl MeetIng June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 17 REPORT/N HAAS-STEFFEN CommIssIoner Haas-Steffen stated she Is unable to attend the PCA meeting tomorrow evenIng at the CIty Hall and wi I I not be able to have technIcal people there. Also, CommIssIoner Haas-Steffen stated they are in the process of puttIng together the financIng of the capItal improvements program at the county level over five years. She hoped the CIty would let her know Its priorItIes regarding highways, lIbrarIes, parks, etc. Counc 11 agreed to provIde that dIrectIon, notIng one maJor concern being the Intersection of Round Lake and Bunker Lake Boulevards. ORDINANCE 53 AMENDMENT. CONTINUED Lvnn Maars. 16453 Aaraon - agreed with the revIsions approved this evenIng but felt there are two mIssIng elements. FIrst, she felt there are some Instances where a dog should not be gIven a second chance, recommendIng the addItIon of a vIcIous dog defInItIon to the ordInance: "Any anImal whIch has caused serIous bodIly InJury to any person or has bItten one or more persons on two or more occasions, and any anImal whIch has attacked another anIma] on two or more occasIons, or any anImal attack of another anImal, whIch Includes domestIc anImal, whIch results In the death of the attacked anImal." To her serIous bodIly InJury would be dIsfigurement, loss of the use of a 11mb, crIppled, etc., feelIng there are cIrcumstances under whIch a dog should not be a] lowed a second chance. She saId the defInItIon is sImIII ar to what Is In the Coon Rapids dog ordInance. Mr. Morel' stated the Planning CommIssion obJected to addIng a vIcIous dog defInItIon feelIng every dog should be given a second chance. After dIscussIon on the pros and cons of such a defInItIon. the Counc I I generally felt a vIcIous dog defInItIon Is reasonable. MOTION by Ortte], Seconded by EllIng. that we refer the Issue of modifyIng the Dog OrdInance to Include the destructIon of dangerous animals clause of the Coon RapIds ordinance to the CIty Attorney tor adoptIon to our ordInance. Motion carried unanImously. Ms. Maars - stated another thIng Coon RapIds does whIch she would lIke Included In the Andover ordInance Is requIre Insurance on dogs that have been desIgnated as bItIng or dangerous. She has found after an Insurance company pays out a claIm on a dog, they notIfy the owner they wIll no longer cover that dog under the liabIlIty polIcy. That would leave anyone else who was InJured unable to recoup theIr losses. DurIng the dIscussIon, CouncIl felt what this does is basically force the removal of the dog after the fIrst offense because most Insurance companIes wIll not cover such a dog. But It was agreed thIs should be researched further for dIscussIon at the next meetIng. Regu]ar CIty Council Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 18 ORTTEL LOT SPLIT (CouncIlman Ortte] stepped down to the audience for this portion of the meeting.' Mr. Ortte] stated the question of buIldabl]Ity of the second Jot would be an admInistrative one having to do with some proposed easements that the watershed claims they own but which are not recorded. The Intent is that It would not be a buildable lot, as the spilt Is sImply being done to accommodate the insurance on the mortgage. The frontage of the other lot would not have access onto Bunker Lake Boulevard because he wouldn't want anything to be built there. But It does meet all the requirements of Ordinance 40. Mr. Orttel also stated there Is a problem with the property to the west owned by Mr. Velman and to the south, owned by Mr. Davids. If some arrangement can be made to combIne that corner Into one lot. It may requIre another spilt of 65 feet off the back of hIs property to accommodate that arrangement. The ultimate Intent would be hIs property would run from Crooked Lake Boulevard to the creek and a smal I pIece In the back would go to Mr. Davids. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by KnIght, a Resolution approving the lot split as requested by Ken Orttel for property In Section 33 32 24 as presented. (See Resolution RI36-88) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 1- Present (Orttel) vote. (Councilman Orttel returned to the Council bench.) NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, approval of Items 7a, 7b. 7c. 7d, 7e, 7f, 7g, and 7i, as presented. (See the followIng Resolutions: R137-88 Declare Adequacy of PetitIon/Park Avenue East/IP88-20 R138-88 Declare Adequacy of Petitlon/Sonsteby R139-88 Dec]are Adequacy of PetitIon/Red Oaks Manor 5th Addltion/IP88-17 R140-88 Accept Feaslbllity/Waive Public HearIng/Order Improvement/Red Oaks 5th Addition R141-88 Accept Work/FInal Payment/Northglen 2nd/IP86-19 R142-88 Accept Work/FInal Payment/CommercIal Park/IP86-6 R143-88 Approve Plans & Specs/Crosstown Blvd/IP88-1 R144-88 Award Contract/BluebIrd, Yellow PIne, Ward Lake Drlve/ IP88-2 (to Forest Lake Contracting - $311.840.20) (later amended to be subJect to MSA approval) R145-88 Award Contract/Hidden Creek East Phase II/IP88-11 (to Lake Area UtIlIty - $259,441.17) Award bid to Renollett TruckIng. Inc., $2255.05. for gradIng of Hidden Creek park parking lot Regular City Councl] Meeting June 21, 1988 - MInutes Page 19 (Non-Discussion Items, Continued) R146-88 Final Plans & Spec/Woodland Creek Phase II/IP88-19 R147-88 Declare Adequacy of PetItion/Woodland Creek Phase 11/ IP88-19 R148-88 Accept Feaslblllty/Walve PublIc Hearlng/Woodland Creek Phase I I/IP88-19 R149-88 Award Contract/Woodland Creek Phase II/IP88-19 (change order to Woodland Creek Phase I to S.J. LouIs) MotIon carried unanimously. APPROVE RIGHT OF WAY/88-1: 87-11 MOTION by Orttel. Seconded by Apel. approval of Item 7h, Right of way for ProJects 88-1 and 87-11 (Per City Attorney's June 7, 1988, letter) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschltl) vote. AWARD CONTRACT/WARD LAKE DRIVE MOTION by Orttel, Seconded By Apel. make Item 7f subJect to State Aid approval. (See Resolution R144-88) Motion carried unanimously. APPROVE OVERNIGHT CAMPING/WOODLAND CREEK MOTION by Elling, Seconded by KnIght, authorIze the overnIght of guards on the Woodland constructIon proJect. MotIon carrIed unanimously. MOTION by Apel. Seconded by Elling, that In the case of construction vandalism, that the staff allow for the overnIght camping to protect the interests, and refer this problem to the P & Z to change the ordinance. MotIon carried unanImously. COUNCIL SALARIES MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Knight, that we increase the Mayor's and Council's salarIes by $600 per year. Motion carried unanimously. GDBG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT MOTION by Elling. Seconded by Knight, that we accept the Subgrantee Agreement for 1988 CDBG proJects from the county. MotIon carried unanImously. Regular City CouncIl Meeting June 21. 1968 - Minutes Page 20 ORDINANCE 11 AMENDMENT MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Apel, OrdInance No. IID as presented. Motion carrIed unanimously. COMPUTER PROPOSAL MOTION by Elling. Seconded by Apel, to accept Chapel ConsultIng's proposal for a cost not to exceed $2,500. MotIon carried unanimously. APPROVE REGIONAL PONDING/COON CREEK Counc II questioned having to approve something that is not accurate. John Rodeberg, TKDA, felt the Watershed Board is more concerned with the total acre-feet of storage then the general area I t wi I I be located. The map before the Council appears to be Just a schematic' showing generally where the ponds will go. No action was taken. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Elling. Seconded by KnIght, to approve Checks 14740 through 14819 for a total of $184,066.39. Motion carrIed on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Wlndschltl) vote. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to adJourn. Motion carrIed unanimously. MeetIng adJourned at 12:13 a.m. ,Respectfull~S~~~~~t~~. ~ \\~~eE~~ RecordIng Secretary