Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC August 15, 1989 ·~.. CITY of ANDOVER . . " ..L Regular City Council Meeting - August 15, 1989 7:30 P.M. Call to Order Resident Forum Agenda Approval Approval of Minutes Discussion Items 1. Continued Public Hearing/88-16j173rd & Navajo 2. Continued Public Hearing/89-18jWatt's storm Dr. 3 . Assessment Hearing/86-21 4. All Parks Alliance for Change Presentation 4.a. Andover Neighborhood Preservation Assn. 5. Comprehensive plan Amendment/Hay 6. Murphy Variance 7. Kirby Estates Final plat a. Gorham SewerjWater Request 9. 1990-1992 CDBG Discussion 10. Request Land Use studyjWatt's Garden Acres 11. Joint Powers Agreement/Ham Lake 12. Deeding of OutlotsjWoodland Terrace Closed Meeting with Attorney Staff, Committee, Commission 13. Parental Leave Request/Utility Clerk 14. Budget Calendar 15. Replay of Council Meetings 16. 15 Year Anniversary 17. Personnel policy Update 18. strootman Park Dedication 19. Approve Resolution/Redesignation CSAH 18 Non-Discussion items 20. Request Speed Study/Hawk Ridge 21. Award Sealcoat Bid 22. CCO 89-1 & 89-2jWard Lake Drive, Tulip St. 23. Accept Roll/order Hearing/88-14; 88-18 24. Receive Petition/Stop Signs 25. Approve Res./Surface & Ground Water Study Project 26. Award ContractjWater Service US West Utility Bldg. Approval of Claims Adjournment "~ CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW< . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 15. 1989 MINUTES The Regular BI-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City CouncIl was called to order by Mayor Jim Elling on August 15. 1989, 7:30 p.m., at at the Andover City Hall. 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW. Andover, Minnesota. CouncIlmembers present: Jacobson, KnIght. Orttel. Perry Councllmembers absent: None A]so present: City Attorney. William G. Hawkins; Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas; CIty Planner, Jay Blake: Finance Director, Howard Koollck; CIty Administrator, James Schrantz: others AGENDA APPROVAL Mayor Elling asked for a motIon to approve the Agenda as presented. MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Knight. to so move. Motion carrIed unanImously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION by Perry. Seconded by Knight, the MInutes of Ju]y 25 Special Meeting and Regular and Closed MeetIngs of August 1. MotIon carried on a 4-Yes, I-Present (Jacobson) vote. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING/88-16/173RD AND NAVAJO Mr. Schrantz explaIned the public hearIng was continued so the full Counc II could hear It. Mayor E]llng reviewed the events and discussIons at the previous meetIng. Attorney Hawkins advIsed that those people on NavaJo south who petItIoned for 173rd can be Included In the assessments of 173rd. wIth 173rd and Navajo south then being treated as one proJect. There Is a questIon whether those on NavaJo receive the same benefIt as those on 173rd because they do not front on 173rd. He doubted they receive the same benefit but felt there may be some benefIt and that they can be assessed. Mayor EI]Ing stated It appears there Is a majorIty petition for doing 173rd to NavaJo south If those on NavaJo south are Included for assessment purposes. At the last hearIng the CouncIl could not decide on the remainIng two portIons of the proJect. TestImony was then opened to the publIc. Larrv Schalo. 17190 Navaio Street - talked to all hIs neIghbors who signed the petition, and all stated they were wIlling to contrIbute between $1.700 and $2.000 to have 173rd paved. AI I are wIllIng to sign an affidavIt to that effect. - Regular City Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 2 (ContInued PublIc HearlnQ/88-16/173rd and NavaJo) Mr. Schalo stated he had three sIgnatures of people who were not able to attend this evenIng. He was unable to contact John Shalen, but he was In favor of It. He dId not contact Mr. Dehn and Mr. Sundeen, but they were not In favor of It to begin with. Mark GrIffIn. 4615 175th Avenue - dIdn't think there was a maJorIty In favor of doing 175th, Part C of the proJect. Mayor EI]lng stated the petItion Is only for 173rd; however. the engIneers have advised doIng the entire proJect and resurfacing 175th because the blacktop Is breaking up. Mr. GrIffIn - lives on the sandy part of 175th and doesn't want anything done to that road. He dIdn't see a problem wIth It and didn't thInk $5,000 for tar on the sand Is worth It. Mr. Schalo - stated he walks 175th every day. noting only a little patch In the mIddle needs repair. Linda RIchards. 4707 175th Avenue - wrote a letter to the CouncIl. askIng that It be read Into the record. She asked If the portIon of 175th Is beIng considered thIs evenIng. Councllmember Ortte] explaIned the procedure of holdIng the hearing to Inform them of the proposal and to find out what the people want. Ms. Richards - stated they have not been part of the petItion process, asking for clarIfication as to what part of 175th Is being consIdered for pavIng. Mayor EllIng noted the engineers have recommended the crosshatched section on the map be rebuilt and reshaped. Ms. Richards - understood nothing Is going to be done with Part C. The assessments would be $5,000 for no work done in front of her property. Steve Gresham. 4629 175th - felt that beIng assessed $5,000 for his 100 feet and others with considerably more frontage also being assessed $5,000 Is grossly unfair. He dIdn't thInk It would raise his property value one bIt. Mayor EI]lng noted State law requires the Improvement must Increase the property value by at least as much as the assessment. He also explaIned the theory of assessing on a unit basis versus front footage. Mr. Gresham - stated the gravel appears to make the cars slow down. Once It Is paved. the people wI I I speed uP. asking If there Is any way to enforce that for the safety of the chlJdren. Mayo. Elling stated a speed study can be done and posted for 30 mph. Also. there Is better control over a vehicle on pavement versus gravel. Regular City Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - MInutes Page 3 (ContInued Public Hearlng/88-16/173rd and NavaJo) Karen Stoltz - questIoned the lots that would be assessed off Seventh Avenue and down 175th. Mayor Elling noted the polIcy of not assessing for parcels that do not exIt onto the street. Those that front Seventh Avenue would not be assessed. Bruce Perry. 17337 Roanoke - stated the assessment for hIs lot No.3 faces 173rd. but hIs access and home are on Seventh Avenue. He Is concerned about being assessed for 173rd when hIs prImary access Is off Seventh Avenue and he only uses 173rd about four tImes a year. He understands that the people on NavaJo south have to use 173rd every day and would lIke to see It paved. but he didn't feel he would benefit from that pavIng. He asked to be consIdered as havIng access from Seventh and not being assessed. BI I] Heier. 4673 175th - Is agaInst the proJect. He felt It Is a large assessment for no value. He wasn't sure about the unbdullable lot abuttIng Seventh Avenue, asking what happens when the section In front of that place needs repair. He dIdn't thInk It was faIr. Councllmember Perry stated that Is why she would ]Ike the entIre proJect treated as one unit, so the people on NavaJo south would partIcIpate on work needed to be done on 175th; and those on 175th would partIcIpate when NavaJo south needs repair. She also noted that the life of a paved road Is about 20 years; and In sIx years or so, NavaJo south may need resurfacing, which would be assessed. Norm Veltz. 4605 175th Avenue - stated those along Part II asked to determine If the project Is feasIblle. When they found out the costs were $5.000 per 100-foot lot, everyone felt It Is out of lIne. He noted a 24x50-foot drive Is about $800 to $1,500. He stated he Is wI]llng to pay $1.500 for hIs 100 feet, not $5,000. Mr. VeItz also felt If the blacktop Is put In, everyone should pay proportionatelY and not expect a 100-foot lot to pay the same as the larger lots that can be subdivIded. He'd prefer to have the dirt than have to pay the $5.000. Richard Wandersee. 17315 Navajo NW - asked the Council to look at blacktopping the entire sectIon of the road and dividIng the costs between a I I the residents. He felt I t Is not cost effective for the City to leave the middle section as dIrt that needs gradIng. Mayor Elling read two letters Into the record, one from Linda Richards, 4707 175th Avenue. tota]ly opposing the proposed assessments and the method of dividIng costs. and one from Mark GrIffin opposing the resurfacing of the currently tarred road on 175th. Mayor EllIng also noted receIpt of a petition from six Indlvldua1s along Part II asking to pave the area from 173rd and NavaJo south to the existing blacktop on 175th as part of the same proJect and dividIng the costs equally. Regular CIty Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - MInutes Page 4 (ContInued Public Hearlng,'88-16/173rd and NavaJo) There was a lengthy discussion about whether thIs should dIscussed In sections or as one proJect, on the legal petitions before the Councl]. on the assessment polIcy, and different scenarios on determInIng cost per parcel. It was determined that In Part 1. there were five propertIes along 173rd and 14 along NavaJo south IncludIng the CIty Park, for a total of 19 assessable parcels. There are eight petitioners from that proJect area to pave 173rd. The fIrst two Jots on 173rd both face Seventh Avenue and would not be assessed. It was noted that the largest pIece. which Is owned by Councl]member Knight. has f~ontage on all three proposed proJects. Councllmember Knight stated he dId not petitIon for the proJect and does not want It. He understands the feeling of those wanting 173rd paved, but I t wI II not benefIt him. He stated he does not front on 173rd. his property Is all fenced and In agriculture. He also stated he has no Intention of developIng It. Frank Padula - stated he has one parcel with his house on. the remaInIng three lots are for agrIcultural purposes. If the proJ ect goes through. he wants to be treated the same as MIke Knight. and then he Is In favor. CounclJmember Orttel noted the policy Is to assess larger pieces on the number of units the property can be divided Into. Then Mr. Knight's larger parcel would be assessed three or four units. He didn't think there was a method of deferring the assessment untIl the agricultural use Is deleted. That would also lower the assessments to Part II. Councllmember KnIght noted that In the Russell/Stack AddItIon. Mr. Russell was given a 10-year exclusIon If he did not develop hIs property. He Is wIllIng to sIgn a slmlllar agreement. Councllmember Orttel argued the only reason that was done Is It was the only access to a neighborhood and a larger number of lots contrIbuted toward the cost. In this case, he didn't thInk It Is reasonable to expect the people along NavaJo south to subsidize the proJect along the river (NavaJo north and 175th). At the same time, he Is not In favor of a 100-foot lot payIng a $5.000 assessment. feelIng It Is about double the cost of an average project. Mr. Schrantz suggested assessing Councllmember Knight's largest parcel as three or four units, but have the City carry those extra unIts untl I the land Is subdivided. At the time of subdivisIon, the assessment would be paId at the Inflated rate of the construction Index. He would do the same for the Padula property. Counc I] felt that would not be practical because then there would not be enough Income to make the bond payments. Mr. Schrantz thought the payments could be made out of the special assessment fund. not from the General Fund. Regular City Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 5 (Continued Public Hearlng,'88-16/173rd and NavaJo) A member of the audience noted the school buses are heavy users of the the road, asking why the schoo] district can't contribute to the proJect. Mayor Elling noted the school district does not pay for roads In Andover nor In any other city. Councllmember Perry noted If Parts A and B were done as one project. all 36 units would pay $3.092.50 each If the costs were divided equally. Councllmember Knight noted If his parcel Is given more than one unit, then other five-acre parceJs In the project area should be given more than one unit as well. Mr. Schrantz calculated if Parts A and B were treated as one unIt, aJJ lots along Navajo south assessed $2.000, and Councllmember Knight assessed for four units, the cost to the parcels along 173rd and Navajo north would be $3,400/unlt. Three units for Mr. Knight and 2 for Mr. Padula could be carried In the bond Issue until they are subdivided. Mr. Schalo - stated one of Mr. PaduJa's parcels Is rental property. Councllmember Orttel didn't think the parcels could be deferred. as the City has never deferred vacant lots before, again expressing concern over the ability to make the bond payments without the payments from those lots. Council again noted a petition of 8 In favor for Part A. Mr. Padula again stated he Is in favor of 173rd If he gets the same treatment as Mike Knight and If Lot A enters onto Seventh Avenue. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we authorize the City Engineers to draw up plans and profiles for street construction from County State Aid Highway No. Seven and 173rd Avenue North west to the intersection of Navajo Street NW. The assessments on the north side of 173rd to be against Lot 3 and Lot 9; and on the south side, Lots 4, 5, and 2; and the properties abutting the NavaJo Street NW cui de sac. as per their suggestions tonight that they would be willing to pay up to $2.000, that that $2.000 would be assessed against those properties. and the remainder of the proJect be assessed against the others which abut 173rd. (See Resolution R140-89) DISCUSSION: Attorney Hawkins clarified that everyone along Navajo south wlJI be assessed whether they petitioned or not. He felt the motion on the table is lega]. Councl]member Jacobson stated the Intent of the motion Is If the total amount Is less than $2.000 per parcel, they would all be equal. If it Is more than $2,000 per parcel. those along the NavaJo cuI de sac would only pay up to $2,000. Each parcel In the proJect would equate to one unit. Mr. Schrantz calculated the assessment would be $2.028 based on the engineers estimate. Mr. Wandersee - felt the City Is not being responsible by faIlIng to look at what Is best for the whole neIghborhood. He also felt that the people on NavaJo south benefit equally because they use the entire road. not Just those on 173rd. Mayor Elling agreed with doing the entire proJect as one but stated that is not what the residents want. Regu]ar City Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 6 <Continued Public Hearlng,'88-16/173rd and NavaJo) Mr. Schalo - stated that $2,028 Is acceptable. Bob Protlvlnskv. 17325 Navalo - thought the motion before the Counc I I Is Irresponsible and should be rescinded and restated to Include the entire basin as one proJect. Councllmember Orttel didn't feel the assessment would be excessive If It were done as one proJect. He felt Parcel 9 <Mr. Knight's) should pick up more than one assessment as It goes up NavaJo. Councllmember Jacobson stated Parcel 9 has frontage on three sides and would pick up another unit when NavaJo north Is done. Attorney Hawkins advised even though Parcel 9 Is assessed for a unit at this time along 173rd, when NavaJo north Is done. It would pick up additional units for that frontage depending on the number of Jots that can be subdivided because It would have additional benefit at that time. Councllmember Knight again stated the land Is agricultural. asking If there Is consideration for deferring the assessment. Councllmember Jacobson stated he wasn't thinking about deferring It. Counc I I member Knight stated It Is a nebulous piece with no lines In It. Attorney Hawkins stated whenever an Improvement Is put In, the assesment Is based on the engineer's estimate of the potential subdivision. Councllmember Knight felt this Is forcing the development of that parce I . VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Elling, Jacobson, Orttel; NO-Knight. Perry. Motion carried. Councllmember Perry obJected believing It should be done as one project. She felt the City has made a serious error In not ordering It done as one proJect. Whenever a small portion of road Is left unpaved I twill cause problems which wi I] have to be dealt with In the future. Discussion was then on the petition to Improve NavaJo north from 173rd to 175th. Mr. Protlvlnskv - asked what happens when 173rd needs to be resurfaced. Mayor Elling stated It will be treated the same as tonight -- 173rd and NavaJo south as one proJect. Mr. Protlvlnskv - worried that this wi I] backfire In the future. Barb Jedneak. 17105 Navalo - addressed a previous comment about using NavaJo north and 175th. stating she lived there 12 years and has never gone up that road. Mayor Elling noted the petition before the Council is not valid given the Counc I I action Just taken on 173rd and NavaJo south. Using 11 lots In Part B, which gives only one unit for Parcel 9, the proposed assessment would be $4,980/unlt. Regular City Councl] Meeting August 15. 1969 - Minutes Page 7 (Continued Public Hearlng/88-16/173rd and NavaJo) Mr. Wandersee - agreed with Councllmember Perry, stating he wished she had pursued that ]Ine more. Councllmember Perry stated she discussed it at the last meeting and was unable to convince the other Councilmembers. She also met with Councllmember Jacobson, and he did not agree with her position. Mr. Wandersee - wished she had done that publlcally. He Is not In favor of assessing Mr. Knight unfairlY. but the other lots In the area are not subdividable as his Is. Mayor EllIng noted If Mr. Knight's parcel were assessed another three units plus his home, there would be a total of 14 units for Part B for a cost of about $3,915/unlt. Mr. Wandersee - asked If the City would be willing to consider deferring Mr. Knight's costs. Councllmember Perry didn't see this any differently than what was done In the Russell/Stack addition. Councllmember Orttel thought It was different In that the residents In Russell/Stack volunteered to do It. CounclJmember Knight pOinted out It has not been a policy to force development. Council continued to debate the number of units that Lot 9 should be assessed and whether or not some deferment should be considered. Mayor EI]lng asked the residents if they are stl]1 Interested In doing Navajo north, Part B, for a cost of $3,915/unlt. Al I verbal responses from the audience were no; none were In favor. The hearing was then adjourned at 8:56 p.m. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING/89-18,'WATT/S STORM DRAINAGE Mr. Schrantz explained the hearIng was continued so Staff could discuss the costs for storm drainage with Coon Rapids. The pondlng acquisition costs are Included In the proposed assessments. Herb Smith will be assessed right away because his lot will be fully developed after the City buys the pondlng area from him. KirbY Estates will be assessed as soon as that project IS completed. The assessments on the other parcels wlJJ trigger when development occurs, noting Page 3 of the JOint powers agreement. Discussion was on why Mr. Smith wouJd get an assessment at this time, some suggesting that It not be assessed until aJ] the other development Is In. Mr. Schrantz stated Mr. Smith Is using the storm drainage system now, plus he Is fully developed. Councllmember Perry argued that Mr. Smith has done nothing to Increase or stlmuJate the need for a storm drainage system. that that need Is the result of the development around him. Regular City Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - Minutes Page 8 (Continued Public Hearlng,'69-18/Watt's Storm Drainage) Councilmember Orttel had no problem with deferring the assessment but noted the problem Is that at the time of the assessment, It will be Indexed according to the Construction Cost Index for the Minneapolis area. Because of the increase In base cost each year, Mr. Smith may find it to his advantage to take the assessment at this time. Herb Sml th. 13309 Jav Street - explained he was approached on May 15 about the pond. but he told them he was not Interested in developing his property. He decided to negotiate rather than go through the condemnation process. but he stll I has no Idea what amount of money Is being considered for the purchase of his property. He stated all that Is happening Is the pond Is being moved out of Coon Rapids Into Andover. It was originally thought there was a lot of peat under his lowland. But the soil borings have shown there is only 1 1/2 to 2 feet of peat. On the advice of his attorney. he stated he will not sign the temporary easement until all of this Is done. Mr. Schrantz recommended approving the Joint powers agreement with Coon Rapids. ordering the Improvement. and authorizing the appraisal of the two ponds In this proJect. Counc II expressed concern over the statement about the pond being moved out of Coon Rapids and into Andover. Kave Olson - stated 133rd is being built through the pond. It Is all the same level of topographY. Mr. Schrantz stated it was orlglna]ly thought there was a Jot of peat on Mr. Smith's property; however. the soi] borings did not substantiate that. Councilmembers Jacobson and Perry were concerned that some of the safeguards talked about with Mr. Ottensmann are not included In this agreement. such as bringing any cost overruns to Andover before proceeding. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, to table this. Mot! on carried on a 4-Yes, I-No (Orttel) vote. Councilmember Orttel felt the Counc i I should not hoJd up the Kirby Estates plat. Mr. Schrantz asked the Council to authorize the attorney to hire an appraiser for the two ponds In this proJect. one on Mr. Smith's property and one on the Olson property. MOTION by Orttel. Seconded by Perry, to so move. Motion carried unanimously. It was agreed that Mr. Schrantz would discuss the concerns on the agreement with Coon Rapids and put It on the September 5 agenda. ThIs Item was discussed agaIn later in the meeting. The hearing adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Regular CIty Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 9 ASSESSMENT HEARING/86-21 Mr. Schrantz reviewed the assessments for those properties along the southern border east of Jay Street for watermaln. street construction, and storm drainage. Don Boeke - stated he has 10 acres, questionIng how the assessments were determined. Mr. Schrantz stated he Is being assessed for 1.35 acres. Mr. Boeke - stated the assessment appears to be high, askIng why he Is being assessed now rather than waiting until he uses It. Councl] and Staff discussion noted Mr. Boeke's situation Is the same as In the previous ProJect 89-18. They were concerned about treatIng property owners equally. Mr. Schrantz noted this proJect area Is under the orIginal 1986 Joint powers agreement where Coon Rapids bills the City for the entire area. Under ProJect 89-18. the City negotiated deferred payments for undeveloped properties. Coon RapIds did offer to carry the costs on this but they wIll charge Interest. Coon Rapids has already spent the money on this portion of the storm drainage system. Councllmember Orttel suggested It may be better to accept the assessment at this tIme rather than In the future at the Indexed prices. Herb SmIth - stated they were a]1 notlfed In 1986 and It was said they would not be assessed until development unless there Is benefit from the storm sewer system. Councllmember Ortte] noted that other than the two parcels. all are developers. and that Is why It didn't come up until now. MOTION by Perry. Seconded by Jacobson, a resolutIon adopting the assessment roI] for the Improvement of watermaln. sanitary sewer. storm draInage and street construction for Improvement ProJect 86-21, 133rd Avenue and Jay Street area for certifIcatIon. (See Resolution R141-89) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Elling, Jacobson. Perry; NO-Knight, Orttel, both feelIng that the property owners should be given the same opportunity as those In the prIor proJect. MotIon carried. ALL PARKS ALLIANCE FOR CHANGE PRESENTATION Charles PItts. Al I Parks Alliance for Chanqe - addressed the CouncIl and resIdents about ]Ivlng In mobile homes. He stated the organIzatIon represents residents who live In manufactured housIng, and they are concerned about affordable housing. They have no quarrel wIth the residents about how the property was sold, nor do they Regular City Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - Minutes Page 10 (A II Parks Alliance for Change PresentatIon. Continued) represent Mr. Hay. But they are happy to learn that a developer Is taking the challenge to buIldIng manufactured houses, as there Is a need for more openIngs of affordable housing of thIs type. Me. PItts stated he was alarmed wIth news media reports that Andover can't afford to have a mobIle home park In the neighborhood. The assumption was made that mobile home parks lower the surrounding property values, askIng If that Is an automatIc assumption or a proven fact. He also questIoned If democracy has died and whether the rIght to the pursue of happiness Is only for the weJ] to do. One newspaper: article quoted an Andover resIdent as statIng "A trailer park In Andover Is not progress; It's blIght." He showed an article from the MInneapolIs Tribune showing Rosemount Woods as beIng a well-desIgned park. A resident from the audience asked where In Rosemount the park was located. Mr. Pitts stated It was at the edge of the communIty. The resIdent responded that Is part of the answer; It's not In the mIddle of the communIty ]Ike thIs proposal. Me. Pitts continued that he and 16,000 famIlies In the TwIn Cities area would not agree that a mobile home park Is blight. Mobl]e home owners stay In theIr homes an average of five years. disputIng the label that mobile home owners are gypsies. A.P.A.C. surveys of mobl]e home owners In the Twin CItIes metro area show that the average Income of residents with two children Is $20.000 to $32.000. Owners also pay taxes and want to be good cItizens and good neighbors. Mr. Pitts asked that everyone pull together. SInce the battle on thIs park In Andover has been going on sInce 1973 wIthout a change In position. he asked that everyone pool theIr Ideas and work out a plan for everyone. Take the time to work the problems out. Pat Daslewlcz. mobile home owner for 30 vears - suggested the CIty pass good ordinances and performance bonds and make sure the park owner Is responsIble for how It Is run. The cItizens are as good as the park. and the park Is as good as the ordinances. She expressed disappoIntment that It took a lawsuit to support a mobile home park In Andover. Mayor EllIng took exceptIon to Me. PItts' statement on the MetropolItan Council and low cost housing. An Indepth study was done regardIng low cost housing and the need for senior citIzen housing. and It was found that there Is not a market for such housing In the City at thIs time. Also, because It Is a growIng and new City, more lower-cost housIng would be found In the older cItIes, not the newer ones. Regular CIty CouncIl MeetIng August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 11 (A I I Parks Alliance for Change PresentatIon, Continued) Terri Odash. 14597 Guarani - had their house on the market and had an offer within hours from the first people lookIng at It. They fel] In love wIth the house and viewed It twice. When coming back to sign the papers. a neighbor mIsinformed them about the mobile home park; and the potential buyer Immedlat]y rIpped up the offer and walked out. She addressed Mr. PItts, statIng that mobIle home parks do affect the neighborhood. Mayor Elling thought one of the reasons the Rosemount park Is dl fferent Is because they dug down unde~neath the trailers and they sIt at grade with the doors about 1 foot above the ground. Mr. Hay has remarked that this wI I I be a state-of-the-art mobile home park. hopIng this type of construction wIll be considered. A woman In the audience stated most people would be more receptIve If Mr. Hay would leave the trees as a barrIer between the park and the sIng]e-famlly resIdentIal area. Mayor Elling stated there are a number of I terns that wI I I be addressed when It comes before the Council. One of hIs concerns I s the hugh Impact I t wI I I make on the school district. WIth over 250 units coming It, It could mean the need for one new school wIthin a year or two In a schoo] dIstrict that Is already stressed. Those are Items that A.P.A.C. has not addressed. Councllmember KnIght asked If A.P.A.C. Is supported by mobIle home manufacturers. Mr. Pitts stated no, they have no connection wIth manufacturers nor with Mr. Hay. They are Just supporting mobIle home lIving. Councllmember Orttel stated when the City was doing the Comprehensive Plan 9 or 10 years ago, the housing representative from the Metropolitan Council told the Council that mobIle home housing Is not consIder low-cost housing. At that time the CIty was told the only way the City would have low-cost housIng Is If It Is conventional housing that Is subsidized. Today mobile home payments and lot rent Is over $600/month. which Is not low cost. He dIdn't thInk low-cost housing Is the Issue. Mr. PItts argued he found It easier to make the down payment and get the loan, whIch made It more affordable. Mayor Elling countered the only person coming out ahead financially In this proJect Is Mr. Hay. Mr. PItts stated the City Is In the posItIon to control things. Mayor Elling stated no, the City does not. That has been taken away from the CIty. as no reasonable CouncIl would do what the court has ordered as far as zonIng, traffic, schools. pushing water and sewer Into areas where there Is no plan for It, and al lowIng 250 homes on a 50-acre parcel when the Metropolitan CouncIl has been preachIng for the last 10 years that the CIty should develop 4 houses per 40 acres or one house per 10 acres and has been upset with the CIty because It develops on 2 1/2 acres. But the Judge makes the decision the City will have 250 homes on 50 acres, Mayor E]llng statIng that Is stupId. Regular City Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - Minutes Page 12 ANDOVER NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION Lvndv Wiseman. 14821 Blackfoot - read a prepared speech of which copies were given to the Counc II along with copies of several articles relating to this issue. She refuted A.P.A.C.'s statistics used In a newspaper article In the Anoka Union that Andover Is the third worst city In providing affordable housing, stating It was based on an Incorrect Interpretation of the table. She pointed out to A.P.A.C. members that Andover Is only one percentage point away from the middle third of the chart. which Is clearly an adequate state of balanced housing for a young, growing community. She also noted that resldental development In rural areas, such as where the Hay property Is located, is not generally consistent with Metropolitan Council plans and policies. Mr. Hay's proposal Is about 20 times the density of her adJacent neighborhood. Ms. Wiseman continued that the residents oppose Mr. Hay's proposed mobile home park because It Is not responsible development. It has been estimated the outlet to the park will service 2,000 cars dally. and at this point In time the road services SO cars dally. A big concern Is the safety of the children on those residential streets. There Is also concern with the impact on the schools and on the abl I I ty of the City to provide adequate po]lce and fire protection. The residents of Oakmount Terrace Estates, which was developed by Mr. Hay and is adJacent to the park. feel the park is a violation to his own equitable covenant as stated in his procedure to lure prospective buyers to his development. A class action lawsuit Is being considered on the basis of Mr. Hay's misrepresentation of his plans to those homeowners. Ms. Wiseman stated the residents of Andover are In the process of estab]ishlng an on-going association to advocate the practice of responsible land development and use in al I parts of the City. It Is not a battle of the rich against the poor unless It Is considered a battle between a multi-million dollar developer and middle income families who want to preserve their neighborhood. Later in the meeting the Council agreed to submit Ms. Wiseman's speech and supporting documents to the Metropolitan Council wi th the Comprehensive Plan Update. Peter Rauen. 4110 147th Lane NW - suggested to those from A.P.A.C. that their efforts may be better focused If they would look at the exorbitant rents that mobile home operators are charging. They shou I d be concerned that the operators are typically charging half of someone's monthly housing allowance for the right to put their mobile home on their property. Mr. Hay supplied documents In the last court case that justified his position that while he was denied access to the sewer he lost profits of $1.S20.000. That money Is coming from the pockets of the people A.P.A.C. represents. Regular City Councl] Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 13 (Andover Neighborhood Preservation Association. Continued) Joanle Spathen. 14541 Guarani Street - Is speaking for herself and a neighbor who Is on vacation who has a hearing Impaired son. She has a handicapped daughter. They moved to Guarani Street because It Is qu let. With 2.000 cars going down that street, neither one of those children wl]1 be able to be In the street, asking what are they supposed to do. Mayor Elling acknowledged the traffic pattern Is something the Council will have to address when the proJect Is being discussed. Don Leece. 14417 Vlntace Street NW - read a statement regarding the traffic Issue noting that In the December, 1985. Metropolitan Council Housing Development Guide, Appendix E, Page 2, Paragraphs 5 and 6, they note they are primarily Interested In loca] plans that would Impact the relationship of the orderly and planned growth of both the ]ocal and metropo]ltan area. The proposed primary road for the mobile home park through the residential R-l area Is not designed to accommodate the large 2,000 cars per day Increase of traffic. He felt that amount of traffic wi I] have a profound effect on the surrounding neighborhood by creating numerous safety hazards. Mr. Legge stated he compiled a list of approximately 120 mobile home parks In the Twin Cities area, and after research he has found that all of the parks are directly servlceab]e by Interstate, US State. and county roads. He felt If the permIt Is approved, It would directly cause their residential R-l nelghborhhod to be turned Into county roads In the near future. thus creatIng a complete breakdown of the existing residential neighborhoods. He asked the Councl] to subml t this data to the Met Council for revIew along with the Hay permit. Later In the meeting the Council agreed to Include this study with the Comprehensive Plan Update to the Metropolitan CouncIl. Dave Bower. 1785 Uplander - commented to the A.P.A.C. representatives that most people did not start out In Andover but came from mobile homes and apartment buIldings. Most came out because of the large lots. the lake, and wildlife In the backyards, not to look at neighbors five to ten feet away. It Is not a community In whIch to purchase a first home, but to them It Is a little haven. It Is costly to maintain that atmosphere. and they accept that. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/HAY Mr. B]ake reviewed the request and background. noting the options are to approve the amendment based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission, which Includes the Hay property p]us the Sonsteby property on either side of the proposed sewer easement to service the Hay property; to approve the amendment for only the Hay property. which Is the only property the City Is under court order to supply sewer to; or to temporarily table the request. Regular City Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 14 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Hay. Continued) Counc I ] noted the decision had already been made to submit the proposed amendment for only the Hay property. They then went through the proposed amendment page by page and made the following changes: Page 1 , Section 3. A: 12a2 Minnesota Court of Appeals Ruling Section 1 . Page 2, D: Check nOtherl', and wrl te In "subml t ted as mandated by Minnesota Court of Appea1s." (This was changed later In the meeting.) Bottom of the same page: "Coon Rapids and proposed CAB Interceptors" Page 3, B. Transportation: Counc I I felt that the park would have a large Impact on transportation and Its trip generation onto the metropolitan highway system. It was agreed that under Item 3. Include the number of expected trip generation per day. Also add that It Is a detriment that the park Is not within a quarter mile of any State highway system, which raises concerns over the local and county road system that must be dealt with. Counc II also noted that transit systems would be Impacted, plus there may not be adequate access to transit. Page 4, D, Recreation Open Space: Counc II felt the park would have a definite Impact on the recreational facilities around Round Lake and Kelsey Park, especially over-usage of the lake. The thought was the lake can be considered a regional recreational fac III ty. Now there are about 50 or 60 homes on the Jake; this wi]] give direct access to 220 homes to the lake. Councilman Orttel was concerned about the potential for considerably more snowmobiles and boats on the lake plus minibikes In the park, etc. Mr. Blake stated the DNR Is aware of this proposal and wi I ] make Its recommendation when the permits are pulled. He also noted there are some concerns about Indian mounds and other historical Items that are not mentioned In the review but may be appropriate to Insert here. Counc II agreed to refer to that here and a1so to refer to the over-utllzatlon of the lake from a regional recreational use standpoint. Page 5, B, third line. change to: Due to a ruling by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. the CI ty Is required to request that the property be brought within the MUSA boundary. Page 6, Add Item VI: Counc II suggested that even though the Impact of the park on the school system Is not part of the Comprehensive Plan. some mention should be made of the City's concern and that It should be considered. Councllmember Orttel thought the City's population Is 1.8 children per household, suggesting that be used to factor the Impact this park would have on the school system. d'Arcy Bosell, Zoning Administrator. stated a study done In St. Francis found there averaged 2.6 students per home In mobile home parks. Regular CIty Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 15 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Hay, Continued) Mr. Blake was advised to dIscuss thIs wIth the school dIstrict and use their demographics regardIng mobile home parks. AppendIx A. first map: Mr. Blake stated that map wIll be changed to reflect only the Hay property required by the court order. Page 3. 4: Me. B]ake was asked to check on the meanIng of that question, as the City does have some areas where sewer facilities are used JoIntly with Coon Rapids. Page 4: Counc II questioned the figures used for the capacIty of the sewer, suggesting Mr. Blake check on that further getting something In writing from TKDA. There are two fIgures. the physIcal capacity of the trunk and the amount al located by the MWCC. It was fel t the MetropolItan Council should be supplied with the percent of use of the allocated capacity, not the ultimate design capacity. Attachment A, map on proposed land use: Mr. Blake was asked to subml t the corrected map. Page 4, Conclusions: Councllmember Orttel had never heard of a possible need to Increase the capacity of the trunk II ne on Bunker Lake Bou]evard. That pIpe Is down 24 to 30 feet plus a I I ner over a layer of quicksand. and It would be an Incredibly expensive pipe to replace. If the replacement of that line would In any way be related to this proposed development, he felt there should definitely be a contribution from that development to pay for It. Peter Rauen - representing the Andover Neighborhood PreservatIon AssociatIon. then raised severa] Issues wIth the proposed update to be sent to the Metropolitan Council. Counc I ] then went back over the Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding Mr. Rauen's poInts of concern: Page 1 . I , B, first paragraph: should read "approxImately 50 acres". Page 2. D: Mr. Rauen stated the Association Is asking to move the check to "consIdered but not approved by the governIng body" and Include the seven Items as ratIonale for not approving the amended plan. He revIewed those seven points, and the Counc II agreed they should be Included as proposed. Later In the meeting, the Attorney advised the CIty Is under court order to submit the amendment and cannot undermine that order by not approving It. At that tIme, the Counc II agreed to leave the check for Item D as "Other". using the wording from the court order. "granting the claim for Immediate sewer service." The seven points listed by Mr. Rauen are st II ] to be Included. Regular City CouncIl Meeting August 15, 1989 - MInutes Page 16 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Hay. Continued) Page 3, B Transportation. 2: Mr. Rauen suggested It be clarIfied that the park would not be on County Road 7 as access to Co.Rd. 7 would be through a residentIal area on 24-foot wide streets. Counc II agreed. Page 4. Section III. A. 1 , a: Size of affected area In acres, should state "50 acres". Page 6, IV, B: Mr. Rauen asked to make It clear that thIs would not be applicable because there Is no Information that this project will have any Impact on the supply and affordablllty of housing. Counc II agreed. Mr. Rauen mentIoned several other Items that the Counc II had already addressed. Karla Wahl. 4717 IDS Center - attorney representing Mr. Hay. She stated Me. Hay obJects to all of the changes dIscussed tonight and to the change In 4a, which Is contrary to what the PlannIng Commission recommended. Me. Hay also believes the changes represent arbItrary actions on behalf of the City that are without factual support that has been found by a court of Jaw continuously to have occurred by the City of Andover since 1973. She requested Mr. Hawkins to preserve the video tape of tonIght's meeting as a record. She also requested that the resolution and requested amendment to the Comprehensive Plan contInue to be submItted to the Metropolitan CouncIl so they can make their determInations. Mayor Elling stated the City wI I] meet Its legal oblIgations. A resIdent noted Mr. Hay Is not In attendance this evening. Dave Blacksted. 14349 Vlntaqe - suggested In the transit sectIon. It wasn't mentioned that there Is the possibilIty of 143rd being used. He also submitted a petitIon sIgned by almost 1100 people representing 650 households In Andover opposing the extension of sewer to the Bruce Hay property and requesting the CIty Council to forward the amended Comprehensive Plan wIth a "No Recommendation", emphasizIng the changes were made solely to comply with the court order and were not the result of any planning process of the CIty. Furthermore, the petItion requests the Metropolitan Council to deny approval of the amendment and help support responsible development In the City of Andover. Counc I I then agreed to submit the petition with the amendment. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, a ResolutIon submIttIng an amendment to the Andover ComprehensIve Plan and Development framework a]lowlng an expansion of the Metropolitan Urban ServIce area as prepared with the fol lowing changes: between the first and second WHEREAS, Insert: WHEREAS. under the normal Andover plannIng process, this Is an unacceptable use In the area. forcIng premature urban services and leap frog development with wholly Inadequate traffic access. and the apparent Inadequate school capacity; and WHEREAS, thIs Regular CIty Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - Minutes Page 17 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Hay. Continued) use could disrupt and-'or termInate the planned expansion for the CAB service to the City. In the current third WHEREAS, e J Iml nate the words "and water". Under the NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED. that based so]ely on the MInnesota Supreme Court rule of 1973 and the Minnesota Court of Appeals decision of February 27. 1989, the City Counc II of the CIty of Andover, forwards the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council. Then go on with the rest of the text for property description, etc. DISCUSSION: Attorney Hawkins advised the court order states the CIty shal I grant the application, so there must be some language that says the CIty Is approving the appJlcatlon and requesting the Met Council to approve It. He felt the CI ty wl]1 comply with the court order by g~anting the c]alm as well as listing Its concerns. Severa] residents expressed their disagreement, and after further discussion It was noted the court order states " ...the City Council sha] I grant the claim for Immediate sewer service.. . " Councllmember Orttel then CHANGED HIS MOTION to: "granting the claim for Immediate sewer servIce" In al I applIcable places In the Resolution. (See ResolutIon R142-89). Second Stands. DISCUSSION: To be consIstent In the wording. Counc I I agreed to add the wording "grantIng the claim" on Page 2, D, of the update. Counc II also agreed the documentation and evIdence In AppendIx D should be sent with the update but should not be Included as part of the Update I tsel f. Motion carried unanimously. Counc II recessed at 11: 12; reconvened at 11:24 p.m. MURPHY VARIANCE Mr. Blake revIewed the request of WIIJlam Murphy for a 20-foot front-yard setback variance which allows an accessory structure In the front yard to be within 60 feet of the front lot line. The 50-foot pipeline through the property does create some hardship In locatIng the structure on the property. He was particularly concerned with the large sIze of the parce I . The PlannIng CommissIon felt there were other locations on the property where It could be located, and they denied the request. Counc II reviewed the proposal and options avallab]e to the property owner. William Murphv - stated he did not want to put the building on the north because of the large stand of trees that would need to be taken down. There are three trees In the proposed location which he wi I I remove with a tree spade and transplant. He also does not want to put Regular City Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - Minutes Page 18 (Murphy Variance, Continued) It in the front yard because his garden Is there and he does not want to have to drive across the front yard to get back to it. His lot is at the end of a cuI de sac so the proposed location will not be offensive. presenting a petition of neighbors who have no obJection to the request. He also didn't want to reduce the size of the garage, as that Is ]egally what can be constructed. Ron Narhqnv. 16011 Narclsus. Lot 4 - stated he would be the person to look at the garage and he has no obJections to It whatsoever. Otherwise Mr. Murphy would have to put It where his garden Is located. stating then he wouldn't have the benefit of the produce from Mr. Murphy's garden! MOTION by Jacobson. Seconded by Perry, to uphold the Planning Commission's findings and deny the variance. (See Resolution R143-89) Motion carried unanimously. KIRBY ESTATES FINAL PLAT There was some concern about the grading. Mr. Haas stated the grading permit has been Issued to the Olson's which states the grades will be constructed according to BRW's grades. They are 4-to-l slopes In the pond area, which Is acceptable. Marilvn Mardus. 13350 Hanson Boulevard - stated Hummingbird Lane wi I I be coming out onto her property. She has submitted a sketch plan by the same engineer doing Kirby Estates, and there is concern about the road layout. Mr. Haas showed the Council an alternate road alignment through there which was worked out by her engineer. After further discussion. the Council felt It was Inappropriate to be changing road a]lgnment In Kirby Estates as this time. Mr. Schrantz again noted the Joint powers agreement with Coon Rapids should be approved so this plat can proceed. He felt that the agreement before the Council does Include the changes previously agreed to by Coon Rapids. Council then agreed to discuss the Joint powers agreement at a special meeting on Thursday, August 17. At that time. the remaining Agenda Items will be taken up as well. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Perry, the prepared Resolution on Kirby Estates with the addition that it be subJect to the approval of the Joint powers agreement for improvements between the City of Andover and Coon Rapids. (See Resolution R144-89) Motion carried unanimously. Regular CIty Council Meeting August 15, 1989 - Minutes Page 19 APPROVE RESOLUTION/SURFACE AND GROUND WATER STUDY PROJECT Patricia Rudolph, Anoka Soil and Water Conservation District, Is preparing an applicatIon for a Clean Water Partnership Grant for the Upper Coon Creek area withIn the cities of Ham Lake and Andover to study surface and groundwater quality and development of Best Management practices. They are asking the City to approve a contributIon of $3.500 of In-kind services to this project. She summarIzed the proposed study. noting It will provIde a handbook In terms of how to assess ground water and how to prepare ground water plans for future use by the cities. watershed and county. MOTION by Orttel. Seconded by KnIght, a Resolution In support of Anoka Soil and Water Conservation District's proposal to study the surface water quality as prepared. (See Reso]utlon R145-89) MotIon carried unanlmous]y. PARENTAL LEAVE REQUEST/UTILITY CLERK MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by KnIght, that we approve the proposal by the Finance DIrector (parental leave for the UtIlIty BillIng Clerk) DISCUSSION: Mr. Koollck recommended all four recommendations be approved, thinking It Is not an InordInate amount of time. Councllmember Jacobson dIdn't think sIck leave should be used for other than sickness. Councllmember Orttel agreed to clarIfy the motion: Option No. 1 , usIng remaining vacation and compensatory time prior to parental leave. Second Stands. Motion carried unanimously. Council generally dId not have a problem with the request for an additional two weeks of unpaId parental leave following the allowed six-week leave. Mr. Koollck asked for authorization to hire temporary help to fIll In for the Utility Billing Clerk while she Is on leave. Council felt that Is an administrative decIsIon and does not need CouncIl actIon. BUDGET CALENDAR MOTION by Orttel. Seconded by KnIght, setting August 29 as a special budget meeting at 7:30. Motion carrIed unanImously. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel. approval of bIlls Check Numbers 17045 through 17151 for a total amount of $342.413.83. MotIon carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting August 15. 1989 - Minutes Page 20 Counc i ] recessed tor a closed meeting with the City Attorney on the Vapors litigation. 12:07; reconvened at 12:12 a.m. MOTION by Jacobson to adJourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adJourned to August 17, 1989. 12:14 p.m. RespectfuIIY~l ~ Cl ~ Ec'-LJ Mar I 1 a A. Peach Recor ng Secretary