Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC October 16, 1990 ~ - '.',', '.,~ ~ "., CITY of ANDOVER ~ Regular City Council Meeting - October 16, 1990 7:30 P.M. Call to Order Resident Forum Agenda Approval Approval of Minutes Discussion Items 1. Scardigli Variance 2. Ordinance 79 Amendment 3. padula Sign Discussion 4 . South Coon Creek Drive Sidewalk to Park Staff, Committee, Commission 5. Appoint Accounting Firm 6. Schedule Meeting/Canvass Election Results 7. Close 1978 Bond Fund Non-Discussion Items 8. Approve Bond Sale 9. woodland Development Escrow Refunds 10. Kirby Estates Escrow Refund Approval of Claims Adjournment "'CA' ,..... , "'J. ;i\ CITY of ANDOVER l,'f \ .L .ß "" c'o"oow' "'""'''0 'w. · "00"'. ""'''''TA "'''' · '"'' ''''"'00 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 16. 1990 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was cal led to order by Mayor Jim Elling on October 16, 1990, 7:30 p.m.. at at the Andover City Hal I, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councllmembers present: Jacobson, Knight. Orttel. Perry Councilmembers absent: None Also present: City Attorney. William G. Hawkins: Planning Commission Chairperson, Rebecca Pease: City Planner. David Carlberg: City Finance Director, Holward Koollck; City Zoning AdmInistrator. d'Arcy Bosell; City Administrator, James Schrantz: others RESIDENT FORUM Gary Gorham. 3538 Mississippi Drive. Coon Rapids. builder and developer of Winslow Hills - asked for help In expediting a request to construct a house in Winslow Hills across two Jots. A client, who Is currently an Andover resident, wishes to have a home built on two lots because one lot is not big enough for that large of a home and It would fit into the neighborhood better with wider side yards. Apparently the easements on the Interior lot line of the two lots need to be vacated and the lots made Into one. They would like this done as soon as possible because the buyer needs to be In the home In 120 days. Attorney Hawkins stated the lots cannot be combined because they are platted lots: however, the City can vacate the easements on the Interior lot line. A public hearing is required. He also thought the ordinance sets out a maximum lot size In subdivisions. which requires a variance request on lot size to be heard by the P & Z. Staff discussed the maximum lot size requirement, thinking that was eliminated from the ordinance. Ms. Bosell stated she will research that tomorrow morning and let Mr. Gorham know whether or not a variance request is needed. If it Is, they will try to get it on next week's agenda: If it is not. no action is required. Council aSked what happens to the extra sewer and water stub for the lot. Attorney Hawkins noted the property owner will be responsible for all the assessments. Dave Almgren. Building Official, stated In other areas they closed off the sewer and water lines below ground at the property line. The Council generally agreed to the concept and asked that a public hearing notice be published and the easement vacation be placed on the November 6 agenda as we I I as the variance request if one Is needed. Regular City Council Meeting October 16, 1990 - Minutes Page 2 AGENDA APPROVAL Counc i 1 agreed to the addition of Item lOa, Joint Powers Agreement/ Fiscal Disparity. MOTION by Jacobson. Seconded by Perry, to move the Agenda wi th the change. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION by Knight. Seconded by Perry, approval of Minutes for October 2. Motion carried unanimously. SCARDIGLI VARIANCE Chairperson Pease reviewed the PJanning Commission's recommendation to deny the variance request by Ceserina Scardigli to construct a 26' x 48' accessory building, a garage and screened porch, encroaching 21 feet into the front yard setback along 177th Avenue, CoRd 58. Because I t is a county road, a 120-foot setback from the center of the road Is needed. The proposal is for a 99-foot setback. The Commission did not find a hardship that would enable them to recommend approval. The Staff did come up with an alternative placement of the structure along side of the residence. Ceserlna ScardlQI 1 - explained with their proposed placement, they can use the existing driveway. The Staff's proposal would mean having to construct another driveway plus remove 20 to 25 more trees. Mr. Carlberg felt the same driveway could be used with the Staff's proposa I . Staff does not believe any criteria is met to grant a variance in this case. Ms. Scardi Qll - stated they removed about 20 trees to constrct the structure in the proposed location prior to the request for a variance. They removed the trees based upon advice from City Staff that their proposed Jocation was okay. They then came back for the building permit and were told at that time that a 120-foot setback was needed. She felt the variance shouJd be approved because of the hardship created due to erroneous Information received from City Staff. Chairperson Pease explained the first drawIng that was presented to Staff did not show the road as being a county road, so the Staff thought the setbacks would be from a normal City street. That portion of 177th Avenue is a]so CoRd 58. and that was not realized untiJ they came in for the building permit. She fel t it was a problem of communication. Regular City Council Meeting October 16. 1990 - Minutes Page 3 (Scardigli Variance, Continued) There was considerable discussion on what precipitated the misunderstanding, on the interpretation of setbacks required by the ordinance, and on possible alternatives. Mr. Scardioli - noted the 12x26'foot screened porch that will be looking at the side of the existing garage. To move the building to be more in line with the house would mean some congestion for vehicles from the existing and from the proposed garage, plus about 20 to 25 more trees would have to be removed, mostly maple and pine. Councllmember Orttel thought the ordinance could be Interpreted to mean a 110-toot setback is needed, in which case there is only an ll-foot encroachment. Mr. Carlberg noted the upgrading of CoRd 58 is scheduled within the next five years and Is on the county's 2010 Plan. Councilmember Jacobson said that whether the encroachment is 11 or 21 feet, no hardship is demonstrated to meet the criteria for granting a variance. Council asked the Scardlglis whether they could move the structure back 11 feet to meet the setback requirements. Mr. Scardioli - stated many maple and pine trees that they planted years ago would have to be removed. Mrs. Scardigli thought maybe if they had not been misinformed, they may not have even tried to build the accessory building. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, the Resolution (See Resolution R148-90 denying the variance request of Cesernia Scardigli for the construction of an accessory structure encroaching 21 feet into the front yard setback on the property located at 444 177th Ave. NW, CoRd 58) Motion carried on a 3-Yes, 2-No (Elling, Knight) vote. Mayor Elling stated he had a problem denying the variance, though he recognized the criteria for allowing It Is based on the topography of the land. Councimember Knight felt the confusion Is partly, but not mainly, the City's fault. Given the circumstances, he has trouble denying the request. Councilmember Orttel said he'd be happy to re- consider If there is an alternative, but he was not able to find one. ORDINANCE 79 AMENDMENT Chairperson Pease reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend Ordinance No. 79 to allow the Issuance of a license by Staff for a temporary retail food establishment. It is limited to two events a year with a promotion running not longer than 10 days at a time. The county also licenses such operations. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Perry, Introducing Ordinance No. 70A as presented with the addition under Section 2, Item 7, at the end of the sentence. add a comma and go on to say "but not to operate prior to 7 a.m. or past 11 p.m." Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting October 16, 1990 - MInutes Page 4 PADULA SIGN DISCUSSION Ms. Bosel I summarized the background relating to the sIgn located on Lot 2. Block 4. PIne HIlls AddItIon advertisIng a dell owned by Frank Padula. In researching the resolution passed in December, 1982, the request to install the sIgn was denIed: however, Mr. Padula was given one year to relocate it. That has not been done. She has receIved several complaints on that sIgn recently, those beIng from resIdents. passers-by, and Staff: and that is why the Item has been brought up. She saId when she originally sent a letter to Mr. Padula, she had not researched the 1982 resolution. That letter noted basIcally that the sIgn advertIsed a busIness which no longer exists. Mr. Padula argues that the business is tunctlonlng. Attorney HawkIns advised that even though the sign was not removed within one year, the Counc i I stIlI has some legal basis to take actIon to have the sIgn relocated because It Is a zoning violatIon. Frank Padula - said he never receIved a copy of the 1982 resolutIon, recallIng he left that meetIng thinking the sIgn had been approved. He wasn't aware that the sIgn had to be removed In one year. He also noted the deli Is stili in operatIon, expressIng annoyance over the matter being brought up again. Jackie Padula - stated the sIgn Is not In anyone's lIne of vIsIon, that one must really have to look for the sign, questioning why it should bother anyone. Councilmember Jacobson poInted out the Issue is that It is not permItted on the property on whIch It is located. He asked If Mr. Padula would have a problem taking the sign down. Mr. Padula - saId yes, for personal reasons. He paid for a sign permit, claiming that fee was never returned to him. Counc i I noted the motion to refund the $15 sign fee at its October 19, 1982, meeting. Staff was asked to determine if that fee was actually refunded. After further discussion with Mr. Padula, Council agreed to require the sign to be relocated within 30 days because it Is now a non-conforming use in a residential area. It the origInal fee for the sIgn was not returned, the charge would be waived for the relocation. It it was refunded, the normal charge for sIgns would apply. Ms. Bosel I noted If the sign Is located on property other than where the business is located. a Special Use Permit is required. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that the City Council agaIn recognizes Resolution Rll0-82, whIch Is a ResolutIon denyIng the request of Frank Padula to Install an advertIsIng sign on resIdentIal Regular City Council Meeting October 16. 1990 - Minutes Page 5 <Padula Sign Discussion, Continued) property In the CIty of Andover: and consIderIng the discussion that has taken place tonight, grant Mr. Padula 30 days to remove said sign from the property; and turn the matter over to the City Attorney In the event that after 30 days it is not removed, authorize the City Attorney to proceed has he normally would with this type of Yiolatlon. DISCUSSION: CouncIl also verbally agreed that Mr. Padula would not have to pay for a sign permit twice, again directing Staff to determine whether or not the origInal fee for the sign was refunded. Motion carried unanImously. SOUTH COON CREEK DRIVE SIDEWALK TO PARK Councilmember Jacboson reported sevebal residents have called him with concerns about the sidewalk constructIon along South Coon Creek Drive. Because many of the big trees are going to be removed along the north side of the road. the residents have asked whether the City would replant some of them with 6- to a-foot tall trees or pines as a buffer to that area. Council thought tree restoration may be eligible for MSA fundIng and that possibly It should be included in all projects. Discussion then ensued regardIng the intended removal of trees on the project. It was the Council's understanding that Staff had been dIrected to save as many trees as possible, winding the sidewalk through the area If need be. Mr. Schrantz saId that was not the Staff's understanding. The plan calls for the sidewalk to be placed one foot from the property line. They feel by working around the trees, they become damaged and diseased. It Is difficult to put the sidewalk In that area and save the trees unless It is next to the street, which is not practical for safety reasons. One resident stated the land slopes, so fill will need to be brought In to level it to the curb. He measured out 17 to 20 feet to the curb, and there are a lot of trees withIn that area. He asked why they have to come in 16 feet with the sidewalk. Why can't it be a or 10 feet from the curb? TheY were told by Todd Haas, Assistant City Engineer, that all the trees would be taken down. RandY Holt. 14394 Kerry - thought there was going to be a stop sign on South Coon Creek Drive. Mr. Schrantz said no, that it doesn't meet warrants, though the Council did talk about It. Mr. Holt - thought the stop signs would slow down the traffic, and there would be better visIbilIty from a stop. He asked if trees are taken out, would new ones be replanted. CouncIl thought so. Mr. Schrantz stated an issue Is If a tree In a boulevard dies, who Is responsible for taking It down. Staff's position has been It Is the responsibility of the property owner. Council thought It probably should be the responsIbility of the City, but a policy should be established. No actIon was taken on that Issue. Regular City Council Meeting October 16, 1990 - Minutes Page 6 (South Coon Creek Drive Sidewalk to Park. Continued) Council then agreed the sidewalk should be put In such that as many trees as possible would be saved. possibly weaving the sidewalk within the easement or moving it closer to the curb to accomplish It. A tentative plan is to be brought back to the Council at the November 6 meeting. APPOINT ACCOUNTING FIRM Mr. Koolick reviewed the quotes received from two accounting firms to perform the City's audit. He was employed with the firm of Pannell Kerr Forster prior to coming to Andover. though he said he left on very good terms. He also felt the additional documentation proposed by the firm of Voto, Tautges, and Redpath can be done in-house quite easily. MOTION by Knight. Seconded by Perry. that we appoint the accounting firm of Pannell Kerr Forster to be our official accounting firm for the years 1990-1992 for the amounts that are shown here. (Three-year engagement to do the City's Audit -- 1990. $12.000; 1991. $12.500; and 1992. $13,000) Motion carried unanimously. SCHEDULE MEETING/CANVASS ELECTION RESULTS MOTION by Knight. Seconded by Jacobson. that we set a meeting for 7 o'clock on Thursday. November 8. to conduct a canvass of the election results. MotIon carried unanimously. KIRBY ESTATES ESCROW REFUND MOTION by Knight. Seconded by Perry. a Resolution approving the final grading of Kirby Estates as being developed by Wayne and Kay Olson in Section 34-32-24. (See Resolution R149-90) Motion carried on a 4-Yes. l-No (Jacobson. as he'd rather have an engineering firm approve the final grading) vote. CLOSE 1978 BOND FUND Mr. Koolick explained the final bond payment was made on the GO Bonds of 1978 for flrefighting equipment and the public services building. The balance plus interest to the end of the year should leave a balance of about $120.000. This balance must be deposited In the PIR Fund per Resolution R74-90. in either the Public Improvement Account or the Capital Improvement Account. Regular CIty Council MeetIng October 16, 1990 - Minutes Page 7 <Close 1978 Bond Fund, ContInued) CouncIl generallY felt that It would logically be placed In the CapItal Improvement Fund to be used for purchasing equIpment since the bond was purchased for publIc safety improvements. The need for funds for dIseased tree removal and the WDE SIte was also raIsed. Mr. Koollck stated he will be presentIng a budget for the PIR Fund for Council consideration, and the funds can be earmarked at that time. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, the Resolution as presented wIth the followIng numbers inserted in the blank: zero dollars allocated to the PubJic Improvement Account and $111.358,21 plus accrued interest for 1990 allocated to the CapItal Improvement Account. <See Resolution R150-90) Motion carried unanImously. APPROVE BOND SALE Attorney Hawkins reviewed his October 3, 1990, letter on his recommendation to re-Issue $1,550,000 General ObligatIon Temporary Improvement Bonds 1987B. The majority of those funds were used to fInance the Improvements of the CommercIal Park plus severa] developments. The alternatives are to roll It over one more time in a temporary issue or to Issue a long-term General ObligatIon bond. Under the circumstances, he felt It would be most benefIcIal to issue temporary bonds agaIn, because In all liklihood the receIpt of tax increment collectIons, county payments, and specIal assessment receipts will be sufficient wIthin the next two to three years to pay off all or most of the bond. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, that we authorize the CIty Attorney and Mayor to take all the steps necessary for the Issuance of three-year Temporary General ObligatIon Improvement Bonds In the amount of $1.550,000 to refInance General OblIgation Temporary Improvmeent Bond Series 1987B. <See Resolution R151-90) Motion carried unanImously. WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT ESCROW REFUNDS MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, that we return the escrow amounts In the amount of $1,336.06 to Woodland Development as enumerated here. Motion carried unanImously. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT/FISCAL DISPARITIES Mayor Elling noted the letter from the Mayor of Blaine on retainIng Charlie Weaver to represent the cItIes on the tlscal dIsparItIes Issues durIng the 1991 Legislative Session. Council briefly discussed the agremeent. but questIoned where the funds would come from as It was not In the approved 1991 budget. Regular City Council Meetl ng October 16, 1990 - Minutes Page 8 (Joint Powers Agreement/FIscaJ Disparities, Continued) It was agreed to tabJe the item to the next meeting to al low the CounciJmembers time to review the Joint Powers Agreement and for Mr. Koolick to determine where the funding could come from. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Jacobson. Seconded by Knight. the claims as presented on the computer printout of 10/1V90 in the total amount of $215,131.95. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel to adjourn. Mayor Elling declared the meeting adjourned at 9:36 p.m. RespectfuJly submitted, ~,.QOe. ~--:~ Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary 1