Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP June 1, 1989 CA·· CITY of ANDOVER Special City Council Meeting - June 1, 1989 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Public Hearing Smith's Green Acres/IP89-14 3. Public Hearing Frontage Rd/Jay St. to Hanson/IP89-12 4. Public Hearing Commercial Blvd. & Jay St./IP89-13 5. 6. Adjournment - -" .~ r , CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 1. 1989 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Councll was called to order by Mayor Jim El Ilng on June 1 , 1989: 7:00 p.m.. at the Andover City Hall. 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Orttel, Perry CounclJman absent: Kn i gh t Also present: TKDA Engineer. John Rodeberg: CIty Administrator/ Engineer. James Schrantz: and others PUBLIC HEARING/SMITH'S GREEN ACRES/IP89-14 Mr. Rodeberg reviewed the proposed storm sewer project to lay hard pipe from Heather Street east to the end of the lots. The estimated cost for 650 feet of pipe Is approximately $23 per foot. Along with additional costs. the estimated cost of the project Is $22,800, or about $3.800 for each of the six benefitted lots. He reviewed several other options, but felt laying pIpe would be the most feasible. Tom LeCuver. 2967 141st Lane - Is the first house off Heather. He stated he has checked around and found that the same pipe can be purchased for $16/foot and even as low as $8 to $10 per foot. Mr. Rodeberg didn't know If that would be the in-place price. The cost wi I I really depend on how much work wi I] have to be done In the di tch such as removing peat, adding a base, etc. He acknowledged the $23 figure Is high, but preferred to error on the hIgh side given the uncertainties of the amount of work that wi I I be needed In the soils. Mrs. LeCuver - asked why everybody In the area wouldn't benefit from the pIpe since the sewer Is necessary for their drainage. When they bought their home, i t Included the price of the storm sewer costs: now they are being asked to pay for the dItch agaIn. Mr. Rodeberg explaIned the price of the lot was based on there beIng a dItch In the back, not a pipe. Mrs. LeCuver - explained last year she pul led four chIldren out of the storm sewer grate because they open It up and get stuck. They are foster parents, and they do not let the children play In the back yard because of that ditch. She said she wants the project but feJt the price Is ridiculously high. Mrs. LeCuyer also noted her conversations with people who have II ved there 10 or 15 years who have had to open the dl tch to keep their driveways from flooding. Therefore, she felt the benefit is not only to their sIx lots, but to the entire area. , - - Special City Council Meeting Minutes - June 1. 1989 Page 2 (Public Hearing/Smith's Green Acres/IP89-14, Continued) Mr. LeCuver - said the people in the area are of the understanding it would be sewered. asking why the pipe was not put In before this. Mayor El ling didn't believe there was ever any discussion or consideration to Jaying hard pipe In that ditch. Also. the Ci ty's polley has been that those directly benefitting from any Improvement project pay for that project. Discussion was on an overflow drain and the layout of the storm sewer In the area at this time. Brad Munstenteiqer. 2919 141st - felt half of the problem Is the water does not run out of the main ditch: It Just sits there. Orin Hintz. 2903 141st Lane - asked where the storm sewer line drains on 141st. Mr. Rodeberg stated it drains from the high point In the road to the cuI de sac and out to the ditch. The ditch was left as a drainage easement when the property was platted and handles the water from both ends of Heather. Several residents complained the ditch has become a dumping ground for garbage. They complained that it Is an 8-foot ditch and they lose 45 to 50 feet of their back yards. There Is also the concern of kids playing In It. Mr. LeCuver - asked If he could do the project himself under the I nspect! on of the City. He stated he is able to obtain the materials according the specifications and get the help necessary to do the Job at about $1,800. or les than haJf the cost. Mr. Rodeberg stated the cost will depend on the sand and the muck In the di tch. Mr. LeCuver - stated there Is plenty of sand, as he plans to take all the sand oft his yard and replace it with bJack dirt. He would do Just his lot, but wouJd be willing to do others as weJ] at the same cost. Counc I J dlscusssed the project, recognizing It Is quite costly. It was generally felt that If It Is going to be done, It should be done completely, not on a lot-by-lot basis. Mr. Munstentelqer - wasn't excited about the project, preferring to use the money to landscape his lot. Mrs. Munstenteloer - stated the people on Lot 3 are moving to Ohio and are opposed to It, and so are the Anderson's. Council noted a letter opposing the project from Tim and Gwen Anderson, 2935 141st Lane. Special CI ty Council Meeting Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 3 (Public Hearln~Smith's Green Acres/IP89-14, Cont!nued) Al Lorendo. Lot 6 - doesn't have a water problem; but the land slopes down, he can't keep It up, It breeds mosqultes and bugs, and Is a dumping ground. He'd Jlke to see something done but doesn't have that kind of money for an easement, thinking It wouJd not raIse the value of his property $3,800. Mayor EI ling noted It appears there are 4 lots In favor, 2 opposed. If the proJect was put out for quotes. he didn't think It could be done for half of the cost estimated this evening. Mr. Hintz - asked If the bids come In too high, what options do they have. Can they put In retaining wal Is down to the ditch to maintain a workable grade In their yards. Councllmember Orttel thought so, up to the 30-foot easement; however, they cannot Interfere with the legal easement. Mrs. LeCuver - asked why the easement Isn't maintained. Mayor EI ling explaIned the easement gives the City the right to drain water; It Is still theIr property. Mr. Schrantz recommended a review of the orIginal platting to see what was said about the storm sewer. He didn't know If they could legally prove that everyone in the entire basin benefits from putting hard pipe In the ditch. He suggesting proceedIng with the project to see what the bids will be. If they are still too high, they can be reJected. Counc I J expressed a reluctance to have biddable specs done if there Is a good chance the proJect wi I I not be done. Mr. Rodeberg stated he would use the drawings and ask for quotes from contractors, Including Burt Kraabel. Counc II agreed. MOTION by Jacobson. Seconded by Orttel, that we request the City Engineer and Consulting Engineer to get some independent bids on this project to see what the actuaJ price can be obtained to do this, report back with those numbers to the Council. If the numbers are favorable, to call the Individuals back In and explain the prices and see what we want to do from that point on which way we want to go. Motion carried unanimously. 8:00 p.m. SPECIAL MEETING WITH COON CREEK WATERSHED Mayor El ling reported the Coon Creek Watershed Board Is talking about borrowing up to $200,000 to keep the system going, which would be In addition to the $100,000 borrowed from the County. They are also Special CI ty Council Meeting Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 4 (Special Meeting With Coon Creek Watershed I , Continued) reluctant to give the City the letter asked for that no additional engineering fees wouJd be charged to Ditch 57. He recommended the Counc i I meet with Ken Slyzuk, Al Sannerud and Mel Schulte on this matter. Counc II agreed to Invite them to a Special Meeting set for June 22, 7:30 p.m. It was also agreed to discuss the requirements of the State that must be met regarding employees. Counc I I recessed at 8:18; reconvened at 8:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS/IP89-12 (Frontaqe Road-'Jav to Hanson) AND IP89-13 (Commercial Boulevard) Mr. Rodeberg reviewed the scope of the projects as outlined In the feasibility reports prepared by TKDA. With the proposed widening of Bunker Lake Boulevard to a five-lane roadway, the frontage road Is designed to fit in with those plans. In the future, it Is proposed there would be a frontage road extending south from Andover Tire along Hanson Boulevard. The residential area to the south Is proposed to be served by Coon Rapids due to topography. The assessments shown In the feasibility report Include those costs, as they wi J I be the same whether from Coon Rapids or Andover. Mr. Rodeberg explained the roads through the Industrial area are designed to channel traffic away from the residential area. AI] areas adjacent to Commercial Boulevard are proposed to be assessed. He also reviewed the assessment rates using three different options pIus the trunk area charges for sanitary sewer, watermaln and storm sewer. In addition, there would be connection charges tor sanItary sewer and watermaln. Testimony was then opened to the public. Ellen Wirkus. 13435 Jav. Lot 12 - asked where the name "Freshwater Tackle" came from. as they do not own anything. That name shouJd not be on any ot Andover's records. The land Is owned by Wirkus'. She also questioned how the footage amount was arrived at. Mr. Rodeberg stated the names were taken off the half-sections, so there may be some errors. Mayor El ling stated the front footage Is only for Commercia! Boulevard of 1,026 feet. Clarence Wirkus. 13435 Jay - asked how they came up with that figure, as It Is 1,296 feet from the center of Jay to the center of Hanson, less 268 feet off the east end and less 125 feet off Shamrock Bui lders. Mr. Rodeberg explained the numbers are as close as they Special CI ty Council Meet! ng Minutes - June 1 . 1989 Page 5 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) could get. There Is a credit along one street and a charge against the other, but there may be some double frontage as we I I because of the layout of the road. He reviewed the assessment polley on corner lots. Mr. Wirkus - asked who proposed Commercial Boulevard. He owns about 90 percent of the property It Is proposed to go through, stat!ng he doesn't need $250,000 worth of assessments. Mayor El ling explained the planning process Involved with Commercial Boulevard and the alternatives proposed. Mr. Wirkus - asked why the project is being proposed, as no one in the area wants It. Mayor Elling stated Kottke's and a proposed residential development on the south end have asked for services in that area. Lloyd Hanson. Vice President of Kottke's - stated Kottke's had been Interested when they were told the assessments would be betweeen $75,000 and $80,000. Now that they are looking at $263,000, they are not Interested. He also stated the assessment figure has changed from yesterday, when they were told It would be about $240,000. Mayor Elling noted the proposed assessments are only preliminary numbers. Mr. Wirkus - evidently I t sounds like Kottke's Is not Interested either, so now no one Is Interested. The first phase of the Commercial Park has not grown since I twas bu II t , asking why they should invest this kind of money just to walt for future development. When the other commercial property gets built up, then everyone would be interested. Bu tat this point there Is no promise of development, yet they wou I d have to be paying very high assessments. Mayor Elll ng noted ha I f of the commercial lots are sold. Garv WaGner. LOT 11 - has someone Interested In purchasing his property; however, If Commercial Boulevard Is placed to the north as proposed, I t landlocks his land. He'd be assessed $111,000 but would not be able to get to the street. Mr. Rodeberg reviewed the options they looked at In locating Commercial Boulevard, why the northern route was chosen, and how Mr. Wagner's property could be serviced. His property could be served from Kirby Estates which is developing to the south or by a roadway extended through the property out to Jay Street. Mr. WaGner - felt It defeats the purpose of Commercial Boulevard If the traffic would have to come through the residential area of Kirby Estates. The southern route for Commercial Boulevard was definitely more advantageous to him. Councllmember Orttel noted the total proposed assessment £or Mr. Wagner is $153,000 £or fIve acres: the middle flye acres Is not being assessed at this time, whIch would double the assessments when that Is assessed. Special City Council Meeting MInutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 6 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) Mr. Waoner - stated that makes the mlddJe section undevelopable now. He's talking with a developer now; but It the northern route for Commercial Boulevard Is used, he didn't think the developer would be Interested. Ed Prater - fel t nobody will pay $60,000 an acre, which Is what Is needed because of the proposed assessments. He stated the Council will run them out of business I f these assessments are Imposed. He bought Lot 2, Panokln Addition, a year ago for $22,900, and it is worth about $25,000 now. It's been assessed once for lateral trunk, and the proposed assessments will be for another $60,000. If It Is assessed, he stated he wIll put the lot up for sale; and If It doesn't sell, the CIty of Andover will have a lawsuit because the City Is running him out of busIness. He asked how much of the Tax Increment Financing money was used to pay for Industrial Boulevard and the Downtown Center. He stated a lot of TIF money has been spent in the past, with the City having over $4 mil lion, but It doesn't sound like any of It wi I I be used to he]p them. Mayor EllIng stated the use of TIF funds Is not a gIve-away program. The City doesn't want to buy anybody out but wants to see the area redeveloped. Mr. Prater - argued someone Is not goIng to pay $60,000 for a bare piece of property on Bunker Lake Boulevard. If the frontage road goes through, he was sure there would be a class-action lawsuit against the City. He questioned the need for a frontage road, as he exl ts off Jay and Andover Tire exits onto Hanson. The frontage road will have a cui de sac, so traff Ie will have to drive back to get out. The only one that wi I I use It Is Midwest Drlvellne. He has earnest money for the purchase of the property from Rite Away; but If this goes through. he wi I ] not buy It. And according to hIs attorney, Rite Away can look at losing a sale because of these assessments. If a shopping center were to go In there, Mr. Prater felt a frontage road could be justified; but he didn't feel It is Justified now for just one person, and he felt this Is definitely railroading. Mayor El ling again stated the City Is willing to work with the property owners to redevelop the area but does not want to actually do the redevelopment. Mr. Prater - asked how the City Is working with hIm now when It is assessing hIm this kind of money. He felt In 8 or 10 years he may be in a posl tlon to put In a strIp mall and the City's proposal would then be timely; but doing it now wi I I break him. He stated he Is not against progress, but felt It should be done when the people can afford I t when the prIce of the property gets there. Special Ci ty Council Meeti ng Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 7 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) M. J. Mardaus. Lot 10 - asked how the Bunker Lake trunk assessments affect him, as he has always been told their resldentiaJ area will be serviced through Coon Rapids. The Engineers explained the charge will be the same whether served from Andover or Coon Rapids; this shows him what that assessment will be. The proposed assessments are based on 9.8 acres with a potentia] subdivision Into 24 lots and It Is not assumed It will all be assessed up front. They also compared the difference In assessment amounts between residential and commercial areas. Mr. Mardaus - asked how he wIll be served by sewer 1 f It comes on on Jay Street but he Jives off Hanson Boulevard. Counc II and Engineers expJalned It will have to come across the back side and noted a joint powers agreement would need to be signed with Coon Rapids to service that area. It was also noted that the proposed assessments presented this evening do not Include Interior improvements. Mrs. Mardaus - asked that since Kottke's has stated they are not interested, why Is this being developed now. Nobody Is ready for this but the City. Several years ago they were told they would not be assessed unt I J they were ready to develop. She didn't feel anybody wants this now, asking who is deciding this for them now. Councllmember Orttel noted until this evening the City polley has been not to order projects unless 51 percent of the affected properties were in favor. Unless the polley is changed tonight, that policy wi I I remain. Mrs. Mardaus - stated there Is a majority that does not want the project now, asking whether the Council will force it upon them. She said everyone Is willing to have the project done, just not right now. Councllmember Jacobson reviewed the procedure used by the Council for projects from the public hearing to the bidding process and awarding of the job. The public hearing tonight Is to hear the inl t!al reaction to the drawings, the plans, and the cost. Mrs. Mardaus - stated this doesn't affect the Kirby Estates development because they will be served through Coon Rapids. She again asked if anyone else expressed an Interest In having this done. Mr. Prater - asked the Council to back off for a couple years to give them a chance to sell out to someone who wants to pay those kinds of taxes. Most of the time developers come In who do not have to pay the assessments until the Jots are sold. Mr. Waoner - asked If Commercial Boulevard changes the way the residential property Is assessed. Counc il stated no. Special City Council Meet!ng Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 8 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) Mrs. Wirkus - stated In the last two months they obtained a permit from the City to put a $20,000 addition onto their house. She asked why their builder wasn't informed of this proposal at the time he came In for the permit, as they would not have Invested that kind of money in a house In a commercial area if they had known about this project. She also asked If Commercial Boulevard Is going to be an MSA road. Counc II noted the road cannot be an MSA road because It does not meet the State requirements, though conceivabJy It could be in the future. Mrs. Wirkus - said If It could be made an MSA road, then the properties would not be assessed according to the City's ordinance. Mr. Schrantz stated commercial properties pay 50 percent on MSA roads. JoAnn Wilber - stated with these assessments plus potential future assessments for roads, she asked Just now much can they afford to pay for one piece of property that they don't plan on splitting or doing anything wi tho She asked what the area charges are under Wilber's Auto Parts. Mr. Rodeberg explained the area was not originally assessed the area charge because of the pond. It Is assumed that part of that pond will be fil led and deveJoped, and that assessment would only be paid If the area Is filled. Ms. Wilber - stated they could afford some reasonable assessments, but this Is ridiculous; plus there wi 1 1 be more In the future. She asked to see the map of proposed future roads through their area. Mr. Rodeberg reviewed the map of the commercial area. Mayor Elling also noted one problem that has occurred because of the junkyard area is that FHA Is not financing some of the developments such as Red Oaks 6th Addl tI on. Sue Kristin. Lot 5 - stated the developers of Red Oaks 6th knew about the Junkyards before they developed; the Junkyards were across the street first. Secondly, Commercial Boulevard is proposed to continue up Lot 5, which Is residential. She didn't want to rezone her home to commercial, and they don't want a 4-lane highway next to their house. She stated the question was never really answered as to who wants this project. Mayor El ling stated this has been Inl tlated by the Staff and Council to look at ways of promoting and cleaning up that area. Even with the bermlng In front of Mom's, FHA stilI Isn't satisfied. That also affects Ms. Kristin's property. Ms. Kristin - again stated those people knew of the junkyards when they bul I t and moved In. She doesn't want to seJ I her property, appreciating the junkyards because no one bothers them. Mr. Wirkus - stated he would prefer to sel J aJ J of hIs property to the City since the road Is going through it, asking what the City would pay for It. Mayor Elling stated the City Is not Interested In buying the property. Right-of-way acquisition was not factored Into these figures. Special CI ty Councl J Meeting Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 9 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) Mr. WIrkus - again stated he cannot afford the $250,000 assessment, asking the City to buy him out. He said he would never have Invested $20.000 on an addition if he had known about this. Mayor Elling stated the Staff Issuing the permit probably was not aware of the proposed project. Mr. Wirkus - felt the City was negJlgent, that the Staff should be aware and should let the residents know when they are about to Invest that amount of money. Common sense should have told them that the area should have been flagged for bulldlng permits. ThIs was his retirement, and this will destroy him. He expressed frustration at the lack of justice. Mrs. Mardaus - also stated the City Staff should know what Is going on and should have Informed the Wirkus' of the proposed proJect. She felt It was terrible to issue that permit without Informing them of this. Mr. Prater - reported the time the Mayor and City Planner came Into his shop talking about the City putting In a frontage road, landscaping, etc., which he felt meant the City would pay for It. Then he found out the City would assess him 50 percent. Following that, a] leging behind a closed door meeting where none of them were invited, It was learned he is Interested In putting up a building for used auto parts and It was decided to assess him the entire amount of the frontage road. Mr. Prater stated he Is In favor of a frontage road, stating he'd put up a fence, shrubs, blacktop, but the City should pay for It. He is wl]ling to do some landscaping, but won't be able to afford I t wi th these assessments. Mayor EIJlng said Mr. Prater had stated he was willing to do the landscaping. They also ta]ked about the frontage road. The Counci] discussed the assessment along the frontage road In that It onJy services the parcels on the south, so It doesn't fit Into the normal assessment polley. There was a brief discussion between the Mayor and Mr. Prater on their positions as to what was said In prior discussions about the possibility of putting In the streets and utilities and the estimated costs. Several residents aJso accused the City of trying to push th I s through, of not being up front about who pays what when It was first discussed, and of not really listening to what the residents have said. Mayor EI ling noted the Items that still need to be decided are whether to assess half or all of the frontage road to those parcels abutting It and whether TIF funds should be used to construct Commercial Boulevard. Special City Council Meeting Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 10 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) Mr. Mardaus - asked what the frontage road will accomp II sh. Mayor Elling reported once Bunker Lake Boulevard Is upgraded, no access wi II be al lowed except Jay Street. He though t It Is proposed to be done In two or three years. Mrs. Mardaus - stated at the last meeting the person from the county . stated the Improvement of Bunker Lake Boulevard was not In their plans for the next five years. Mayor Elling stated the traffic count Is getting quite high on that road. Also, the road is off center and will have to be moved about 15 feet south when it is done. Discussion continued with those residents present stating they do not want the roads and the proJect; and the Counc II explaining the hearing Is to get their Input, after which they will need to decide on several polley Issues and on the proJect Itself. Mr. Waqner - asked If he will Jose his access to Hanson Boulevard If the road Is constructed as proposed. How wll J he get access to his middJe lots. Counc II stated he would not lose access to Hanson Boulevard, though It may require a service road along Hanson. None of the figures IncJude the Internal cost of developing the property. Ms. Wilber - her accountant told her the additional cost of the utilities for commercial Is out of line compared to residential. She felt that apartment buildings would use the storm sewer and streets a lot more than they do as commercial. Mr. Rodeberg explained the road in the commercial area will be a 9-ton road and wider. Mr. Schrantz recommended the property owners look at and comment on the overall layout of the area to come up with an acceptable plan. That way as the properties are sold for development, potential buyers wi 1 I know what is being planned and what they have to work with. Mr. Prater - agreed there should be a plan, but didn't think they need the project for 5 or 8 years. He said they need a chance to prepare for this, not rush them Into It. Obviously the frontage road with a strip mall will be needed, but he can't afford It If It is put In this August. Gordon Clements - stated If a developer buys their property, It automatically Increases the market value of all the property In the area. But the market value of the developer cannot be Increased for three years, which Is unfair. That law was passed In 1974 by the State Legislature. A piece of property up the street from him was sold for $250,000, and It Increased his taxes 600 percent In one year. Llovd Hanson. Kottke's - asked the time tabJe on assessments for resldent!al and commerclaJ property, and what Is the penalty If they are not paid. The Engineers stated commercial property generally Is assessed up to 10 years and residential for 15 or 20 years depending on the Interest rate. The penal ty Is the same as for taxes. Special City Council Meeting Minutes - June 1 , 1989 Page 11 (Public Hearlngs/IP89-12 and IP89-13, Continued) Mr. Hanson - stated the $405,600 of assessments for 10 years would be approximately $45,000 a year, and that does not even include the frontage road along Hanson. Plus they are already paying $34,000 a year In real estate taxes. That wou]d work a tremendous hardship on them. He likes the plan, though he does not like Commercial Boule- vard, not seeing a need for It at this time. If the road Is going to be put In, the entire road shou]d be put In at one time. He also stated they don't need the project now. He asked for the timetable of the service road on Hanson Boulevard. Mayor Elling didn't know, though the county has Indicated they want access no Jess than every 600 feet. As that area develops, a service road will be needed on the west side of Hanson, but It may not be needed for a number of years. Mr. Prater - fe]t the frontage road along Hanson should be included In an overall plan so the plan Is in p]ace for everybody. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, that we close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, that in the matter of the frontage road, Jay Street to Hanson Bou]evard, and Commercial Bou]evard and Jay Street, that It be tabled Indefinitely for the Council to reconsider, to look at Its pol icies; and that no further work proceed on this until and If the Counc i I determines that there is another way to do It or a cheaper way, and at that time, if that occurs, that another public hearing be held to Inform the peop]e of the revised plans. DISCUSSION: Councllmember Perry noted the updating of the Comprehensive Plan and wanted to IncJude the revision of the commercial area In that Plan. She encouraged those residents present to come In to talk about what wou]d be good for the area. There was a brief discussion on whether the project should be terminated at this point or tabled. CounciJmember Orttel felt It should be terminated, the polley questions settled, and a new hearing called again in the future. Councllmembers Perry and Jacobson felt the hearing should be held open to discuss the polley questions, noting the motion calls for written notification to all residents when the project Is to be discussed again. Because It Is understood that the residents wi]] be renotlfled In writing when the plans are discussed again, Councllmember Orttel agreed to tabl ing the project. Motion carried unanimouslY. MOTION by Orttel to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adJourned at 10:08 p.m. R.sp.ottu]]V ;¡¡bm]tt~ \\ C~'v-~~ CC " u- Ma cella A. Peach Reco Ing Secretary