HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC August 2, 1994
~ CITY of ANDOVER
Regular City Council Meeting - August 2, 1994
Call to Order - 7:00 p.m.
Resident Forum
Agenda Approval
Consent Agenda
Approval of ninutes
Discussion Ite~s
1. Special Use Permit/Repair Garage/13624 Th~ush St~eet l~~
2. Lot Split/Va~iance/17004 Valley D~ive
3. Discussion/Ordinance 37/Septic Systems
4. Financing Options/Sewer & Water Ext./School District #11
5. Discussion/Ordinance 95/Boulevard Enc~oachment
Non-Discussion/Consent Items
6. Piper Mutual Fund Update
7. Award Bid/Refurbishing Engine 6
8. Appoint Election Judges for September 13 Primary Election
9. Approve Assessment Abatement
10. ) . , . ~_ \ J_ ,'_
11. Approvè 'No parking' Resolution/YuKon & 140th, Cont.
12. Approve Final Plat/Fox Woods
13. Approve Speed LimitjUniversity Avenue
14. Approve Change Order #1/93-18/Pine Hills
15. App~ove Easement/Ashford Development Corporation
16. Approve Change Order #l/Kelsey-Round Lake Park
17. Approve Change Order #2/93-12 for 94-11/Andover Center
18. Approve plans & Specs/Fox Woods/94-9
19. Approve Plans & Specs/Sharon's 2nå Addn/94-7
20. Approve Plans & Specs/Hartfiel's Estates/94-6
21. Accept Petition/Crown pointe East/94-22
Mayor-Council Input
Approval of Claims
Adjournment
- -.-.- ~---~--..._- ._--~-------- _.-
REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 2, 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RESIDENT FORUM . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 1
AGENDA APPROVAL . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2
CONSENT AGENDA
Piper Mutual Fund Update .................. · 2
Resolution R162-94 appointing election judges/Sept 13 primary · 2
Approve assessment abatement
Resolution R163-94 approving No parking/Yukon & 140th · · · · · 2
Resolution R164-94 approving final plat/Fox Woods · · · · · · · 2
Resolution R165-94 approving speed limit/University Avenue · · 2
Resolution R166-94 approving change order #1/IP93-18/Pine Hills 2
Approve easement/Ashford Development · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2
Resolution R167-94 approving change order #1/Ke1sey-Round Lake 2
Resolution R168-94 approving change order #1/93-12 for 94-11 · 2
Resolution R169-94 approving plans and specs/Fox Woods/94-9 · · 2
Resolution R170-94 approving plans and specs/Hartfiel's/94-6 · 2
APPROVAL OF MINUTES · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 3
DISCUSSION/ORDINANCE 95/BOULEVARD ENCROACHMENT · · · · · · · · · · 3
Motion to table to next meeting · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 4
SPECIAL USE PERMIT/REPAIR GARAGE/13624 THRUSH STREET NW
Resolution R171-94 approving the Permit · · · · · · · · · · · · 5
LOT SPLIT/VARIANCE/17004 VALLEY DRIVE · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 5
Resolution R172-94 granting the lot split and variance · · · · 6
DISCUSSION/ORDINANCE 37/SEPTIC SYSTEMS · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 6
FINANCING OPTIONS/SEWER AND WATER EXTENSION/SCHOOL DISTRICT #11 · · 7
Motion to pursue TIF financing option and for Staff to continue
discussions with the school district · · · · · · · · · · · 8
POND ON YELLOWPINE DISCUSSION . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 8
AWARD BID/REFURBISHING ENGINE 6
Resolution R173-94 to reject bids · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 9
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECS/SHARON'S 2ND ADDITION/IP94-7
Resolution R174-94 approving plans and specs · · · · · · · · · 9
ACCEPT PETITION/CROWN POINTE EAST/IP94-22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Resolution R175-94 approving request after Council has approved
a preliminary plat · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 10
MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT
Removal of trees from development sites · · · · · · · · · · · 10
Naming of streets · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 10
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 10
ADJOURNMENT . . . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 10
.~ CITY of ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100
'-'-'-"-. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 2, 1994
MINUTES
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to
order by Mayor Jack McKelvey on August 2, 1994, 7:00 p.m., at the
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Councilmembers present: Jacobson, Knight, Perry
Councilmember absent: Dalien
Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins
TKDA Engineer, John Davidson
City Planning Director, Dave Carlberg
City Finance Director, Daryl Sulander
City Administrator, Richard Fursman
Others
RESIDENT FORUM
Garv Raulinq. 2815 135th Circle - received a letter about some trees and
shrubs in the boulevard, saying he has to remove five trees because they
are obstructing vision. There is a clump of oak trees and one ash, and
they are not obstructing vision. He asked what he has to do to keep
those trees. They are 43 feet from the center of Crooked Lake Boulevard
and where there when he bought the property. He has landscaped around
them. If he has to fight this, he asked that this be postponed until
September because he has an obligation for the U.S. Air Force in
Virginia for the next 20 days. Mayor McKelvey stated he viewed the
site and found the trees do not obstruct vision. They are back at least
five feet from the curb. Councilmember Jacobson recalled the intent was
to leave trees in the boulevard if they were there prior to constructing
the road unless there is a site problem. Mr. Carlberg suggested he be
given an opportunity to look at the site himself. If the trees are not
creating a site problem, he will contact the property owner again. The
Council agreed and directed that an extension be arranged until the
first meeting in September if necessary.
Charlie Veiman, 13646 Crooked Lake Boulevard - was disturbed with Staff
sending letters to residents when it is very, very obvious that those
trees are not blocking the site. He also got a letter about some tall
grass on his property to the north of his house. It is an area where
little oak trees are growing, with grass and some weeds. This fall he
had planned on transplanting all the oaks at his son's place in Burns.
When he received the letter, he staked the trees to try to save them.
He did mow the area, but lost about 300 oak seedlings in the process.
His two sons are foresters, and they cherish the trees. He would have
preferred to have someone talk to him about his situation. Mr. Veiman
also noted some information he gave to Mr. Fursman on a Supreme Court
ruling on right of ways. The decision was for the homeowner. He asked
th~t that information be passed on to the Council. He then asked the how
the Council is kept informed on these types of court rulings. Mr.
Fursman explained legal matters are typically deferred to legal counsel.
If there is a problem, he would pass it to Staff or to legal counsel,
whoever would be responsible.
fr\.~;to- ~""" Yh)1'Y
-._ .. _ _ _.. _. .._. _.. _._L______ -.-
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 2
(Resident Forum, Continued)
Mr. Veiman - was not concerned about himself but in how these rulings
are passed onto the Council, City Attorney and Staff. Finally, he
understands the Staff is meeting with representatives from Piper Jaffray
tomorrow. He is really curious to hear of the problems with the firm
and what caused them. He made ten copies of all the newspaper articles
on this matter, hoping the Council would receive and read them. He
assumed he could get that information at the next Council meeting.
Councilmember Jacobson noted there is a class action lawsuit against the
auditors of Piper Jaffray.
AGENDA APPROVAL
Remove Items 7, Award Bid/Refurbishing Engine 6; 19, Approve Plans and
Specs/Sharon's 2nd Addition/IP94-7; and 21, Accept Petition/Crown pointe
East/IP94-22, from Consent Agenda for further discussion. Move Item 5,
Discussion/Ordinance 95/Boulevard Encroachment, to first item of
discussion. Add Item Sa, Pond on Yellowpine.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to accept the Agenda as amended.
Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of Items:
6. Piper Mutual Fund Update
8. Appoint Election Judges for September 13 Primary Election
(See Resolution RI62-94)
~9. Approve Assessment Abatement
11. Approve "No Parking" Resolution/Yukon and 140th (See
Resolution RI63-94)
12. Approve Final Plat/Fox Woods (See Resolution RI64-94)
13. Approve Speed Limit/University Avenue (See Resolution R165-
94)
14. Approve Change Order #1/IP93-18/Pine Hills (See Resolution
RI66-94)
15. Approve Easement/Ashford Development Corporation
16. Approve Change Order #1/Kelsey-Round Lake Park (See
Resolution R167-94)
17. Approve Change Order #2/IP93-12 for IP94-11/Andover Center
(See Resolution RI68-94)
18. Approve Plans and Specs/Fox Woods/IP94-9 (See Resolution
R169-94)
20. Approve Plans and Specs/Hartfiel's Estates/IP94-6 (See
Resolution RI70-94)
Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 1-Absent (Dalien) vote.
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 3
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
July 18, 1994, Special Meeting: Correct as written.
July 19, 1994, Regular Meeting: Page 10, bottom, the area crossed out
in pen should be deleted.
July 19, 1994, EDA Meeting: Correct as written.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of both Minutes of July
19, the Regular as clarified and the EDA meetings. Motion carried on a
4-Yes, 1-Absent (Dalien) vote.
MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Jacobson, the Special City Council Meeting
Minutes of July 18, 1994, as presented. Motion carried on a 3-Yes, 1-
Present (Knight), I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
DISCUSSION/ORDINANCE 95/BOULEVARD ENCROACHMENT
Councilmember Jacobson noted the resid~nt complaints on boulevard
encroachments. He felt a clarification of "imminent danger" in Section
2, D of Ordinance 95 may help, as he felt the main concern of the City
is having large immovable objects in the boulevard that interfere with
snow plowing and cause serious damage to the vehicle. He suggested
adding to the last sentence of Section 2, D, "... such as, but not
limited to, large rocks, retaining walls, berming, posts and fences,
brick, concrete or similar type construction." He didn't think the
intent was to eliminate the landscaping of crushed rock and shrubs which
would cause no damage to a vehicle. The ordinance currently allows a
resident to get a permit to place an encroachment in the boulevard if it
isn't defined as an imminent danger. That gives the City the ability to
work on utilities in the boulevard at a later date and not have to
replace the landscaping or other encroachments.
Council discussed the issue of trees within the boulevard. Some
recalled the intent was to leave trees that were there before the road
was constructed, but not to allow residents to plant them in the
boulevards. It was suggested another addition to Section 2, D, state
"not to include trees that were pre-existing."
Charlie veiman - asked for a clarification of what areas are being
considered in this ordinance. The Council explained it is the boulevard
area. The easement width varies from road to road, but this does not
affected private property unless there is a site problem on a corner.
Council also discussed adding an amortization clause to the ordinance
giving residents a period of time to comply with the ordinance. Mr.
Carlberg suggested it be added as Section 13 to the ordinance. Attorney
Hawkins stated generally an amortization provision is for more than 90
days. The question is whether the city is going to force the residents
to remove what they have in the boulevards or allow them to remain as a
nonconforming use. How badly does the Council want to enforce this
ordinance against nonconforming? He also felt that the issue of
liability is secondary, as there are trees in the right of ways allover
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 4
(Discussion/Ordinance 95/Boulevard Encroachment, Continued)
the United States. The boulevards could be clear cut, but he is not
convinced that trees in the right of way are necessarily a hazard that
needs to be controlled. Many communities encourage it.
Councilmember Jacobson suggested adding a section giving 120 to 180 days
to meet the ordinance. Not everything needs to be taken out; only those
items that pose an imminent danger. Permits can be granted for the
others. Councilmember Knight asked what happens on the dirt and gravel
roads that are often moved off the centerline when plowing and grading.
Councilmember Jacobson thought the legal right-of-way widths would
apply. Mr. Carlberg stated they haven't looked at the violations in the
rural areas yet, but they will review that issue when they start there.
Ralph Clark, 13919 Winterqreen - received a letter about a boulevard
encroachment. He talked to the Code Enforcement Officer and found his
lantern must be 14 back from the curb. It is now 10 feet back; but in
front of the lantern is a 5x5-foot utility box, a street light and a set
of mailboxes. The lantern doesn't possess a hazard; yet the City wants
him to move it three feet. Mr. Carlberg thought the permit could be used
when the item is that distance from the road. It doesn't appear that
the lantern would pose an imminent danger at that location. The problem
is this becomes an interpretation issue -- is ten feet back okay or does
it have to be out of the right of way all together? Councilmember
Knight felt the other items would be hit before the lantern.
Councilmember Perry felt this puts the Staff in a difficult position of
deciding whether there is a good reason or not to allow the
encroachment. Her preference was to simply not allow any encroachments.
She recalled the ordinance was passed because of the concerns raised by
Public Works with them having access when needed and for snow plowing.
She suggested Public Works attend the next meeting to review their
concerns. Councilmember Jacobson tended to agree. Mayor McKelvey felt
it is ridiculous to take everything out of the right of way, noting
Minneapolis is encouraging the planting of trees in boulevards.
It was suggested further research be done as to what other cities do or
do not allow in the boulevards. Others disagreed, noting this was
thoroughly reviewed in 1991 when the ordinance was adopted. With one
Councilmember absent, there was no majority on the position the City
should take on boulevard encroachments. Council asked that they receive
the information in the Supreme Court decision that may apply in this
matter and that the Staff provide a proposed revision with the changes
recommended this evening for consideration by the full Council. They
also recommended that no further action against residents be taken by
Staff on this issue until a decision is made by the Council.
- MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, that we lay the matter over
until the next regularly scheduled Council meeting for additional input
and allow Staff to draft the existing ordinance with changes and supply
us with other information we requested; and that during this interim
period that no enforcement action be taken on the matter. Motion
carried on a 4-Yes, 1-Absent (Dalien) vote.
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 5
SPECIAL USE PERMIT/REPAIR GARAGE/13624 THRUSH STREET NW
Jim Huqhes. owner of Northwest Transmission. previous Iv at 1716 Bunker
Lake Boulevard NW - stated he moved from the above address in June when
he did not renew the lease. He plans to build a 5,000- to 7,OOO-square-
foot facility for transmission repair and sale of parts and equipment to
other facilities. There will be no outside work or storage. Mr.
Carlberg noted the Economic Development Authority authorized the sale of
the lot in the Commercial Park with the understanding that this Special
Use Permit would be granted as well. Councilmember Jacobson expressed
his concern about the number of automotive uses in the area where the
City is trying to reduce them, but he understood this meets the criteria
for the Permit.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, the Resolution granting the
Special Use Permit with the change in the four points, add a fifth,
based upon the discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission, "No
outside storage of parts or vehicles after the close of business each
day." (See Resolution R171-94) DISCUSSION: Mr. Hughes stated when he
was on Bunker Lake Boulevard he had a U-Haul dealership, and he was
asked if he would be willing to have them again. Those would be parked
outside. Mr. Carlberg advised rental businesses are allowed as a
permitted use in the commercial area, so no Special Use Permit is
needed. But the EDA sold the property based on the use of a repair
garage, and he did not know how they would react to an additional use of
the lot. Councilmember Jacobson again expressed concern about not
having outside storage; and if rental is added, it would have to be
inside a fenced area. His main concern is the aesthetics of the area.
Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
LOT SPLIT/VARIANCE /17004 VALLEY DRIVE
Mr. Carlberg reviewed the lot split request of Fred Dailey to split an
eight-acre parcel into two parcels of 2.5 acres and 5.5 acres. There is
also a request for a 47-foot variance on Parcel B to the lot frontage
requirement. The Planning Commission recommended approval. The county
has not commented on a proposed driveway for Parcel B, but he did not
think they could deny it because the City has the final decision.
Councilmember Knight stated that corner could be substantially altered
by the county when the road is upgraded. It is a bad corner now.
Mr. Dailev - stated the property will be sold and the house will be
about 300 feet from the curve. Councilmember Jacobson asked why the
line dividing the lots could not be configured suc~ that no variance for
lot frontage would be needed. Mr. Carlberg explained to create a
greater frontage on Parcel B would mean the lot line would be very close
to the existing structures on Parcel A. It would also create a very
odd-shaped lot to get the 2.5 acres needed for Parcel A. Councilmember
Jacobson noted there was concern expressed at the public hearing over
the amount of wetland, noting just because the lot split is granted
doesn't mean there will be a buildable lot.
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 6
(Lot Split/Variance/17004 Valley Drive, Continued)
Mr. Dailev - stated he mows back there now. There is a lot of high land
where the house will be built.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Perry, the Resolution granting the lot
split and variance request of Fred Dailey to create two parcels. (See
Resolution RI72-94) DISCUSSION: A resident asked if they will be
notified when a building permit is pulled for this property, as there
was concern with building in wetlands and in what he was told is a DNR
protected property. Staff explained other agencies control the wetland,
but all ordinance requirements must be met before a building permit is
granted. Neighboring residents are not informed when building permits
are issued. All permits are handled in-house by Staff. Motion carried
on a 4-Yes, I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
DISCUSSION/ORDINANCE 37/SEPTIC SYSTEMS
Jim Larson, Enqineer and Planner of the Metropolitan Council Water
Manaqement Unit - reviewed the policy of the Metropolitan Council that
local governments that allow development using on-site septic systems
within rural areas on less than 4/40 or 10-acre lot sizes have a
comprehensive program in place to deal with those systems after they are
installed. They require inspections at least every other year. Inver
Grove Heights determined it was more cost effective to have the systems
pumped every two years. They send out reminder notices to the residents
and have set up a permit program to provide funding of the part-time
person who sends out the reminders. The intent is to eliminate and
prevent contamination of the groundwater and surface water from septic
systems that are not functioning properly, and to prevent system
failures to avoid costly extension of the municipal sewer system. He
went into some detail on the process of inspecting an on-site septic
system and items the inspector will look for.
Councilmember Knight argued it will not be possible to see everything on
all systems. Mr. Larson stated the systems are required to have
inspection holes over the baffles, but a qualified inspector has other
ways to check the system. All inspectors are required to be certified
by the PCA. He also explained that the Minnesota Extension Service
studies indicate systems should be pumped everyone to five years.
People with garbage disposals should pump every year. It is not
dependant on soil types. Requiring inspections every two years was the
policy chosen by the Metropolitan Council. Other cities have also
enacted ordinances to meet this requirement.
The Council raised the issues of having to dig up yards every two years
_ to do the inspections or pumping, that people in the rural area know how
to take care of their septic systems and do not have garbage disposals,
that the City already has a biennial inspection ordinance in place. Mr.
Larson countered the inspectors have good techniques in locating the
tanks and that the expense of digging up yards is one of the costs of
having that type of treatment system. He did not feel homeowners are
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 7
(Discussion/Ordinance 37/Septic Systems, Continued)
qualified nor capable of determining the integrity of the tanks in the
ground and whether or not they need to be replaced. They need to be
inspected by certified inspectors.
Don Olson, Buildinq Inspector for Andover for six vears - stated he had
to become a certified on-site septic inspector when he was hired. He
explained all on-site septic systems are installed upon installation.
The installers are also licensed. The office also has a detailed
drawing of all the tanks and manholes. Andover has a good system for
on-site system installations and for the on-going maintainance with
inspections every two years, far better than what other communities have
been doing for a long time.
Mr. Larson stated if all 2500 homeowners have been pumping their systems
at least every other year, very little will have to change. But he
argued that most pumpers are not certified to inspect the septic systems
and the drain fields. The two-year requirement has been a policy of the
Metropolitan Council for over ten years, and it is a policy he supports.
By going beyond two years for an inspection, it increases the potential
for a system to fail.
Councilmember Perry asked if there were other methods of detecting a
failing system, such as checking the drain fields, rather than having to
dig up lawns to reach the tank. Mr. Larson reviewed how an on-site
septic system functions and the need to inspect the tank every two years
to keep the solids out of the drain field and to eliminate the potential
for a health hazard. Another community had wanted inspections every
three years, but the Metropolitan Council has continued to be firm in
staying with the two-year policy.
Mr. Larson stated he would be willing to meet with the Staff to resolve
whatever differences there are and to get a clear indication of the
City's current program. If the systems have been pumped every two years
arbitrarily, he thought the Metropolitan Council may grant a variance
for Andover. The Met Council has continually stood behind this policy
for rural on-site septic systems and is requiring this policy be
instituted by communities requesting Comprehensive Plan amendments for
MUSA expansion. Councilmember Jacobson suggested if Andover cannot get
future MUSA expansion, a possibility would be to allow one-acre lot
development in the rural areas.
The Council then asked the Staff and Mr. Larson to work together on this
issue. No further action was taken.
FINANCING OPTIONS/SEWER AND WATER EXTENSION/SCHOOL DISTRICT #11
Mr. Sulander reviewed the financing options to fund the extension of
sewer and water to the proposed middle school site north of City Hall.
The assumption was the extension would not be dependent on future
housing developments to finance it, nor would the City go into debt to
--.--.
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 8
(Fianncing Options/Sewer and Water/School District #11, Continued)
finance it. The options proposed are: 1) To have the school district
finance the entire project; and as housing is developed in the future,
the school would be reimbursed for the City's share of development; or
2 ) That the City finance the extension with TIF funds. The last option
allows the City to expand the TIF District; and any assessments paid by
the school could be used for other City needs such as a Public Works
Building addition, pay down deficit on sewer trunk fund, new City Hall,
new Fire Station, etc. The assessment to the school using the existing
policy $557,000. He noted the TIF funds are available for this project;
however, it is not yet known how much will be needed to purchase the
junkyards. If necessary, the City has the option of bonding for one or
two years until the anticipated tax increments are received. The TIF
fund is increasing about $700,000 per year in tax increments.
Mr. Davidson gave an overview of potential areas beyond the middle
school site that could be served with sanitary sewer. He determined
that it would not be necessary to construct the trunk line at this time
along the western edge of the school property to its northern boundary
to service the area beyond. The sewer and water lines could be extended
both east and west from the northern edge of the City Hall property to
service the remaining areas to be serviced with this line.
Discussion was on whether to charge the school district per the existing
policy, which is an assessment exceeding the cost of bringing the line
to the middle school site, or whether to give some consideration in
reducing the assessment. It was noted that much of the land in the
potential service area is in Ag Preserve or Green Acres, so it cannot be
assessed at this time. One point of view was that if it were a developer
asking for the sewer extension for residential housing, the assessment
policy in place would be applied; therefore, it should be applied to the
school district as well. At this point the Council generally did not
feel there was a valid reason for changing the policy for the school.
The Council also preferred the option of financing the sewer extension
with TIF funds.
Mr. Fursman felt more discussion is needed with the school district. He
suggested Staff be directed to pursue the TIF financing option and to
indicate to the school that the City will stick to the assessment policy
as written.
MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Jacobson, to so move. Motion carried on a
4-Yes, I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
POND ON YELLOWPINE DISCUSSION
Councilmember Knight asked for an update on the issue with the pond,
noting a letter the Council has received about it. Mayor McKelvey
stated he and the residents were told by a DNR representative at a
neighborhood meeting last year that a 10-foot area around the pond
should not be mowed. It should be left natural for wildlife habitat.
Mr. Carlberg stated he was not familiar with the issue but would bring
it up to the Staff tomorrow and update the Council at the next meeting.
-
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 9
AWARD BID/REFURBISHING ENGINE 6
Mr. Fursman noted his recommendation to reject the bids for
refurbishment of Engine 6. He doesn't agree with how the bid was
carried through. In addition, he would like to look at the polices of
the Fire Department for running the vehicles to see if there might be
other avenues to explore outside of the $55,000 renovation. He wasn't
involved in the first discussions on this improvement, but he would like
to get information on how the Department uses that vehicle to determine
whether the amount of work being proposed is defendable. He questioned
whether Engine 6 is worth as much as the amount of money proposed to be
put into it.
MOTION by Knight, Seconded by McKelvey, that we reject the bids and
table the issue and refer it back to the City Administrator. (See
Resolution RI73-94) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECS/SHARON'S 2ND ADDITION/IP94-7
Councilmember Jacobson questioned why the issue of the pump for the
landlocked pond in the Hills of Bunker Lake 3rd Addition should be
included in this project, which is totally unrelated. Mr. Davidson
stated the same developer built three houses in the Hills of Bunker Lake
3rd lower than grade. As a result, the developer of the 4th Addition of
the Hills of Bunker Lake paid for work to bypass that pond so additional
water would not be added to it and flood those houses. He has learned
that this developer did participate in that cost. Now, however, the
City must maintain that pond to the 100-year elevation; and in order to
do that, it has to be pumped after each rain. He talked to Mr. Smith
about the pump, and Mr. Smith did not feel he should be responsible for
the entire cost of the pump. That cost was added to Sharon's 2nd
Addition at the request of the Staff.
After discussing whether or not to include the cost of the pump in this
project, it was agreed to include the pumping facility as an alternate
bid and have the engineer discuss the issue further with the developer
before the project is awarded.
MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Jacobson, the Resolution approving the
final plans and specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for
Project 94-7 and also authorize the alternative bid of a pumping
facility for the landlocked pond in the Hills of Bunker Lake 3rd
Addition. (See Resolution RI74-94) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Absent
(Dalien) vote.
ACCEPT PETITION/CROWN POINTE EAST/IP94-22
Council noted the request to order preparation of a feasibility report
for the improvement of sanitary sewer, watermain, street and storm sewer
in the Crown pointe East area. The concern is the preliminary plat has
not been approved by the Council; and the feasibility could be
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - August 2, 1994
Page 10
(Accept Petition/Crown Pointe East/IP94-22, Continued)
inaccurate if it is based on the sketch plan and changes are then made
to the preliminary plat. To avoid any potential problems in the future
with a feasibility report, it was agreed that report should be based on
an accepted preliminary plat.
MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Perry, on Item 21, Petition for Crown
pointe East to prepare a feasibility report for sanitary sewer,
watermain, street and storm sewer, which would be Project 94-22, that
the City Council approve the request for the feasibility study but only
after the Council has approved a preliminary plat. (See Resolution
R175-94) Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 1-Absent (Dalien) vote.
MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT
Removal of trees from development sites - Council noted at the
construction sites of the SuperAmerica station and Povlitzki' s, all
trees have been cut. Mr. Carlberg stated the trees had to be removed to
allow for the construction of the building and ball fields. Povlitzki's
will submit a landscape plan, and there will be added plantings.
Naming of streets - Councilmember Knight noted a city in Minnesota has
named its streets after people from the city who have died in the
military. He felt it is a very nice way of honoring them and asked the
Council to give it some consideration.
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Jacobson, the edited list of 7-26-94 and 8-
2-94 in the total amount of $55,636.08. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 1-
Absent (Dalien) vote.
MOTION by Perry, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 4-
Yes, I-Absent (Dalien) vote.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~~L
Marcella A. Peach
Recording Secretary
- ~---