HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP March 8, 1988
-<...t,~
~
,...0' "
~' " CITY of ANDOVER
.f
~\ CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION - MARCH 8, 1988
AGENDA
7:30 P.M. l. Call to order
2. Review Pending Change Orders
3. Assessment Policy Discussion
a. Allocation of costs between subdivisions
and trunk costs
b. City costs for county roads
c. City costs of MSA streets
d. Storm sewer costs within sub-watershed
4. Schedule for assessment hearings for 1987 projects
5. Construction schedule for 1988 projects
6. Lot Standards
7. Fire Department (burning permits)
8. Adjournment
~Ø5f'¿:~
(~') CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304· (612) 755-5100
,....
,., è"
"'" <-- SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 8, 1988
'~ "..
,"~,;'.Y'
MINUTES
A Special Meeting of the AndoveL City Council was called to oLdeL by
MayoL JeLLY WindschitJ on MaLch 8, 1988, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover
C it I' Ha I I , 1685 CLosstown Boulevard NW, AndoveL, Minnesota.
Councilmen pLesent: Apel, Ell ing, Knight, OLttel
Councilmen absent: None
Also present: TKDA Engineers John Davidson and John ROdebeLg;
Bui lding Official, Dave Almgren; City
AdminlstLatoL, James Schrantz; and other's
REVIEW PENDING CHANGE ORDERS
M.. Davidson and ML. RodebeLg Leviewed theiL letter of MaLch 4, 1988,
regaLdlng six change orders for ProJects 87-3B, 87-3C. 87-7, and 87-8.
He explained the change in the stoLm seweL system fOL PLoJect 87-3B,
which provided a substantial savings to the proJect. Change OLdeL
No. 3 for that pLoJect is fOL an Increase of $36,955 fOL the Letainlng
wall along the pLoJect. Counc i I suggested some aesthetical II' pleasing
fencIng be placed on top of the Letaining wal I, thinking it mal' be a
safety hazard as it Is.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, that we appLove the Change
OLdeL fOL PLoJect 87-3B, C.O. #3, Crosstown BoulevaLd TLunk
(BaLbaLossa and Sons) in the amount of $36,955. Motion carLied on a
4-Yes, I-PLesent (Windschitl) vote.
M.. Davidson Lequested approval of the extension of the comp I eti on
date fOL PLoJect 87-3C, C.O. #1, Coon CLeek TLunk (Bonine Excavating)
fLom October 1 , 1987 to OctobeL 30, 1987 due to MPCA peLmit and
easement acquisition delays.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Apel , to so move. Motion caLLied
unanimously.
M.. Davidson explained seveLal tLees along Coon CLeek weLe
tLansplanted at a cost of $500 in ordeL to obtain waiveLs of trespass.
Also, there is an incLease of $258.75 to Lalse an inveLt on a manhole
as requested by Public Works personnel. Council advised staff to
establ Ish a policy of staff geneLating change orders, thinking this
should be kept to a minimum and should also be appLoved by the City
AdmlnistLator. M.. Davidson also noted an additional $225 is fOL Lip
Lap placed for erosion control on the storm seweL out Jet neaL the Coon
CLeek trunk crossIng.
MOTION by OLttel, Seconded by Knight, appLoval of Change OrdeL to
ProJect 87-3C for a total amount of $983.75. Motion carried
unanimously.
Special City Council Meeting
MaLch 8, 1988 - Minutes
Page 2
(Review Pending Change OLdeLs, Continued)
M.. Davidson reviewed Change OLdeL 4 for ProJect 87-7, Shady Knol I -
The Oaks ProJect. The staff recommended that all dLiveways be
extended fLom the back of the cULb to the Light-of-way line with
either bituminous or concLete, dependl ng on the existing type of
driveway.
MayoL Windschitl was conceLned with what took place with this item,
especiaJly with staff geneLating an additional cost to an alLeady
expensive project. It adds approximately $800 to the assessment fOL
each lot If it is spread evenly in the project. If the dLiveways aLe
to be extended fLom the back of the cULb to the Light-of-way line, he
thought it should be included in the oLiginal pJans.
M.. SchLantz stated he though t the oLiginal plans had included paving
to the Light-of-way line as has been done in al J otheL pLoJects.
MayoL Windschitl stated this is a significant item and did not want
this type of thing to happen again in the futuLe.
M.. RodebeLg stated the bituminous quantity in the bid covered the
bituminous laid back to the propeLty line. The additional cost is fOL
dLiveway preparation and fOL concLete fOL those who had concrete
dLiveways.
Counc i I then agreed the assessments should be spLead such that those
wi th the concrete dLlveways should pal' for the additional cost of the
concrete. The rest should be put back into the proJect at the
bituminous rate. It was also agLeed a reasonable policy would be to
include one 12-foot bituminous driveway to the propeLty line fOL
eveLyone in the pLoJect unJess there is concrete to the roadway; and
if concLete is deslLed by the PLopeLty owneL, the addi tional cost
would be assessed to that pLoperty owneL.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by OLttel, appLoval of Change OLdeL #4
for PLoject 87-7, for $10,922.70. Motion caLLied on a 4-Yes,
I-PLesent (Windschitl) vote.
MOTION by OrtteJ, Seconded by Knight, appLoval of Change OLdeL #3,
ProJect 87-8, Kensington Estates, fOL $400. Motion caLLied on a
4-Yes, 1-PLesent (Windschi t 1) vote.
MOTION by OLttel, Seconded by Knight, the Change OLder be appLoved
in the amount of $3,658 (Change OrdeL #4, ProJect 87-8, Kensington
Estates) . Motion carLied on a 4-Yes, I-PLesent (Windschitl) vote.
Special CI ty Counci I Meeting
March 8, 1988 - MInutes
Page 3
ASSESSMENT POLICY
M.. Davidson Leviewed some of theiL conceLns with the City's
Assessment Policy. FiLst. he suggested fOLmal Counc i I action be taken
to effect the change to assess on a unit basis as has been done in
many pLojects. Counc i I though t this had alLeady been done. but so
moved again.
MOTION by OLttel. Seconded by Apel, that the Counc i I di Lect Staff to
make whateveL amendments necessaLY to the GeneLa] Assessment Po]lcy to
c I aLÍ f I' the intent to allow the unit fOLm of assessment. Motion
carLied unanimously.
M.. Davidson also stated al I costs of tLunk seweL and watermain
impLovements oveL 8-inch size and 12-foot maximum depth needed to
serve aLeas outside of any specific subdivision shal I be financed from
trunk aLea and connection charges.
Counc I ] discussed the high costs of seLving those paLcels that Lequire
extra depth, debating whetheL those costs should be borne by the
benefitting parcel or by the oveLal I system because of the geneLal
benefit of health, safety and welfaLe. MayoL Windschitl stated the
assessment policy already reads as proposed by Mr. Davidson.
MOTION by OLttel. Seconded by Ape]. that the staff be dlLected
to change the policy to show that the size of pipe in Lesidential
subdivisions could go as high as 10 inches, and anything above that,
the costs would be paid fLom the tLunk cost OL fLom some otheL
subdivision i f i t is constructed to seLve that otheL subdivision or
the geneLal trunk aLea. DISCUSSION: AfteL a bLief discussion, it
was felt the motion was confusing, and it was recommended the staff
make a wLitten proposal for Counci I consideration.
Counci Imen Apel and OLtteJ WITHDREW the Second and the Motion.
ML. Davidson explained the present policy cal Is fOL any costs on
county Loads are to be paid fOL by the county. HoweveL. where theLe
is cULb and gut teL, the County Lequires the City to paLtlcipate with
50 peLcent of the cost of the cULb and gut teL, sidewalks, etc. Along
the CLosstown Lealignment pLoJect, theLe wi II be cULb and gut teL,
asking the Council to consideL adopting a policy of assessing the City
costs on such pLoJects OL financing the City's shaLe fLom otheL
internal accounts.
Council debated whether the City's costs should be assessed OL whetheL
they should be borne by the City. M.. Schrantz stated MSA funds
accumulated fLom assessments can be used to finance the cULb and
gutter costs along CLosstown. Discussion was also on the policy of
only assessing incurLed costs on MSA Loads as is pLesently done versus
assessing something to al I parcels along MSA Loadways.
Special Ci ty Council Meet I ng
MaLch 8, 1988 - Minutes
Page 4
(Assessment Policy Discussions, Continued)
Councilman Elling suggested theLe is some benefit to those along MSA
Loads, thinking they should pal' fOL a pOLtion of it. Mayor Windschitl
aLgued the costs for condemnation and asssessment appeals under that
policy would be more expensive than pLoviding the Load if al I
easements aLe donated as is pLesently done. Plus theLe is also a
disadvantage to putting an MSA Load past a pLopeLty, especially in
Lesidential areas.
The majoLlty agreed to leave the existing MSA policy In place. Also,
it was feJt those along CLosstown BoulevaLd a]Leady have a stLeet and
the improvement does not alteL that. To be consistent with the pol icy
of not assessing MSA stLeets, it was geneLally agLeed those aJong
county Loads should not be assessed eitheL.
M.. Davidson then discussed methods of establishing a stoLm seweL aLea
charge oveL a subwateLshed, not i ng Lecen t legislation also allows the
City to develop a stoLm sewer utility with billing on a quaLteL]Y
basis. He noted the present need of storm sewer facilities needed for
Oak BJuff 2nd Addition and Winslow HII Is AddItion, an expensive system
wi th a very sma] I area ready to pal' fOL It. He also noted legIslation
al lows stoLm seweL dIstrIcts fOL ad valoLum taxes, which pays fOL
stoLm sewer on the basis of pLopeLty values ratheL than on the square
foot assessment rate. He suggested the CounciJ consideL some fOLm of
long-term fInancing to affect shoLt-teLm solutions.
Council discussion was on the pLoblems of pLoviding a stoLm seweL
system to the area north of AndoveL BoulevaLd along the Hanson
BoulevaLd cOLLidoL with only smal I aLeas of the benefitting district
being developed at thIs time. M.. Davidson also noted the potential
City I iabi I i ty fOL cLeating landlocked ponds. He was conceLned about
accepting a smalleL sized pond in the fiLst phase of Winslow Hills,
that at some point the City will need aSSULances that the rest of the
pond wi I I be available OL that the pipe wi 1 I be available down to the
creek. It wou I d be less costly to wOLk wi th the existing ditches
owned by Mr. Holasek; howeveL, M.. Holasek is concerned about his sod
lots and is opposed to it.
M.. RodebeLg felt it would be best i f the Gaughan pLopeLty between
Coon CLeek and AndoveL BoulevaLd would develop fiLst, as it is on the
downstLeam of the wateL, sanitaLY seweL, and stoLm sewer systems.
MayoL Wi ndsch it I though t the system needs to be designed at this time
fOL ultimate deve1opment. And if developers want the system before
it is economical II' feasible for the City to put i t in, the developers
should be wil ling to bear the costs. Or those projects cannot be
deve loped un ti I the City can economical II' provide the stoLm sewer
system.
Special City Counci I Meeting
March 8, 1988 - Minutes
Page 5
(Assessment Policy Discussions, Continued)
Because of the staging pLobJem of the stoLm seweL system, Counc i J
asked that the developers within that aLea be send a letter explaining
the staging and economic pLoblems of the stoLm seweL system and that
i t is the City's desire to have them come in to help solve that
problem.
SCHEDULE FOR ASSESSMENT HEARINGS FOR 1987 PROJECTS
M.. Davidson suggested the assessment hearings fOL 1987 improvement
proJects be scheduled for Tuesday, July 26, 1988.
MOTION by OLtteJ, Seconded by Knight, setting JulY 26, 1988, 7:30
p.m. , to be the assessment hearing date fOL al I pLojects constLucted
in 1987. Motion caLLied on a 4-Yes, i-PLesent (Windschitl) vote.
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE FOR 1988 PROJECTS
M.. Davidson then Leviewed the constLuction schedule fOL 1988
impLovement proJects.
Council Lecessed at 9:12; reconvened at 9:17 p.m.
SIGNS
Mayor WindschitJ stated he contacted two banks about the possibility
of providing funding for two lIghted signs In the City to post
announcements, and they would be al lowed peLmanent adveLtising on
those signs. One sign would be at City Hal I. the otheL at Crooked
Lake Schoo I ; and he mentioned a cost of about $6,000. One bank said
yes. asking fOL more specific details.
Jack McKelvy pLesented a sketch of a 4 x 8' sign for $2,350 plus $675
fOL matching bLick facing. Counc i I discussion noted the City would
beaL the costs of the lighting. Counc i I aJso asked ML. McKelvy to
LeseaLch the costs if the base weLe extended about 6 feet, feeling an
elevated sign would improve the Leadability.
LOT STANDARDS
M.. Almgren asked the Council to consideL a policy on house pads. On
all lots constLucted fOL houses, the pad would be a minimum of 100
feet in depth, would extend fLom the side lot I ine to side lot line,
and would be a minimum of 18 inches above cULb gLade. This wou]d
appiy only to lots in new plats in the urban aLea.
Special City Council Meeting
March 8, 1988 - Minutes
Page 6
(Lot StandaLds, Continued)
M.. AlmgLen fel t this will prevent pLoblems such as those whIch have
occuLLed In Creekridge and In otheL areas wheLe the house pad is not
laLge enough. He said this would be a standard to wOLk from, but
theLe would be flexibiJity to accommodate diffeLent style houses.
Councilman Orttel thought this would mean developeLs would have to
remove most of the tLees on the smaJJ wooded Jots, which destroys the
value of the lots and would be unsightly to the entiLe plat. He
suggested if a plat LequiLes maJoL filling or cutting, they should be
made to show what those lots wI J I look like or requiLe that the
fillIng needed be on site.
Councilman EJ Jlng suggested the house pad be a ceLtain peLcentage of
the squaLe feet of the house, such as thLee times the squaLe feet of
the house. Councilman Knight asked if it would be possible to LequiLe
the house pad to be so many feet out fLom the house.
It was agreed to give fULtheL thought to this issue and add it to the
MaLch 15 Agenda.
FIRE DEPARTMENT - BURNING PERMITS
FiLe Chief Bob PalmeL asked fOL guidance in handling the bULning
peLmlts. TheLe had been some pLoblems In Councilman Elling's aLea,
and now in the HII Is of Bunker Lake aLea wheLe theLe weLe thLee
illegal burns with no one in attendance. They put some stipulations
on last bULning peLmit issued to The Hills. The deputies have stated
the owneL cannot be tagged fOL I I legal bULns unless there is pLoof he
set the fire. The Chief's conceLn is if the PCA rules aLe not
fol lowed, the City can be fined.
Councilman Elling also thought theLe was an administLatlve problem
wi th the Issuing of the bULning peLmit, as theLe is no form issuing
that peLmi t. He noted the PCA bULning Lules only apply within the
seven county area. Fire Marsha] Ray Sowada also repoLted the pLoblem
of building mateLials being bULned, though the Legulations
specifical II' al low wood pLoducts only.
It was the Council's opinion that eveLyone must compJy with the Lules,
not wanting to be put in the position of being fined. It was a I so
agreed to ask for the attoLney's opinion LegaLding the tagging of
violatoLs. This item is to be on the MaLch 15 agenda fOL fULtheL
consideLation.
Special Ci ty Councl I Meeti ng
March 8, 1988 - Minutes
Page 7
BARRICADE SERVICE ROAD ALONG CREEK
MayoL Wlndschi tl noted the pLobJem of fouL-wheel motor vehicles, etc. ,
dLiving up and down the service Jane along Coon Creek. He asked that
PubJic WOLks find a way to peLmanently block the Load so such vehicles
cannot access it.
APPROVAL OF CLAIM
MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by ApeJ, that we appLove payment in the
amount of $36,190.25 to BaLbaLossa and Son fOL the 87-3B Project.
Motion caLLied unanimously.
MOT! ON by Ape I , Seconded by OLttel, to adJouLn. Motion carLied
unanimousJy.
Meeting adJouLned at 10:10 p.m.
RespectfuJJy submitted,
\~~~\~-k~t~',,:/:: L
f _/
MaLceJa A. Peach
Recording Secretary