Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC February 3, 1998 CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304. (612) 755-5100 Regular City Council Meeting - February 3, 1998 agenda 6:15 PM - Park & Recreation Commission Interviews Call to Order - 7:00 PM Bookmark Resident Forum Name Agenda Approval Consent Agenda Approval of Minutes Discussion Items I. Anoka County Sheriff Report sheriff 2. Lot Split, Continued/I 7203 Tulip Street NW/Johnson Isjohusou 3. Discussion, Continued/Approve Final Plat/Chesterton Commons 2nd Addition fpchestertou 4. Timber River EstatesIPark Dedication Discussion timber 5. Update of Drainage Issue/2776-l64th Avenue NW/JeffLeadens drainage 6. Sketch Plan! Andover Planned Unit Development andoverpud 7. Sketch PlanlBurr Oak Run burroak 8. Outlot Ai Brandon's Lakeview Estates brandons Staff. Committees, Commissions 9. Appoint Park & Recreation Commission Vacancy p&rvacan 10. Appoint Chair & Vice ChairIPark & Recreation Commission chairpr II. Appoint Chair & Acting ChairIPlanning & Zoning Commission chairpz Non-Discussion/Consent Items 12. Acknowledge Expiration Amended Special Use Permit/96-l6/l3727 Hanson Blvd NW/SA asupsa 13. Acknowledge Expiration Amended Special Use Permit/96-25/13476 Hanson Blvd NW/Shoberg asupshoberg 14. Approve MIS Contract/City of Champlin miscontract IS. Approve Change Orders/96-IS/Public Works cos9615 16. Order Plans & Specs/98-3/Cracksealing ord983 17. Approve Plans & Specs/98-3/Cracksealing appr983 18. Order Plans & Specs/98-4/Sealcoating ord984 19. Approve Plans & Specs/98-4/Sealcoating appr984 20. Approve Supplemental Feasibility Report/97-44/Shadowbrook 3rd Addition appr9744 21. Accept Withdrawal ofComp Plan Amend/18lst Ave and Round Lake Blvd/Rademacher rademacher 22. Kennel Licnese Renewal/Cleo Nehrt kennel Mayor/Council Input Payment of Claims Adjournment .. . . . -~ - ..-.-.....-. ." _. ..- ,."., REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 3, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS AGENDA APPROVAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CONSENT AGENDA Resolution R021-98 acknowledging expiration Amended Special Use Permit/ IP96-16/13727 Hanson Boulevard/SuperAmerica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Resolution R022-98 acknowledging expiration Amended Special Use Permit/ IP96-25/13476 Hanson Boulevard/Shoberg ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Approve MIS contract/City of Champlin ................................... 1 Resolution R023-98 approving change order #1/IP96-15/Gateway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Resolution R024-98 approving change order # 1 /IP96-15/Grazzini Brothers . . . . . . . . . I Resolution R025-98 ordering plans and specs/IP98-3/Cracksealing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Resolution R026-98 approving plans and specs/IP98-3/Cracksealing .............. 1 Resolution R026-98 ordering plans and specs/IP98-4/Sealcoating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Resolution R028-98 approving plans and specsllP98-4/Sealcoating ............... I Resolution R029-98 approving supplemental feasibility report/IP97-44/ Shadowbrook 3rd Addition ........................................ 2 Accept withdrawal ofComp Plan Amendment/181st Ave & Round Lake/Rademacher. 2 Kenne1license renewal/Cleo Nehrt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Resolution R030-98 declaring costs/order assessment/IP93-17/Crown Pointe . . . . . 2 Resolution R031-98 adopting assessment rolVIP93-17/Crown Pointe . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Resolution R032-98 declaring costs/order assessment/lP92-19/Weybridge 3rd . . . . . .. 2 Resolution R033-98 adopting asscssment rolVIP92-19/Weybridge 3rd ........ . . . .. 2 APPRO'l1\L OF Mll'<1JTES ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 UPDATE OF DRAINAGE ISSUE/2776 I 64TH AVENUE NW/JEFF LEADENS ..... .. 3 LOT SPLIT, CONTINUED/17203 TULIP STREET NW/JOHNSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 Motion directing Staff to meet with neighbors and discuss alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 DISCUSSION/APPROVE FINAL PLAT/CHESTERTON COMMONS 21\1]) Motion to table at the request of the developer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 TIMBERRlVERESTATES/PARKDEDICATIONDISCUSSION .................. 6 Motion to approve negotiated agreement ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 SKETCH PLAN/ANDOVER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 SKETCH PLAN/BURR OAK RUN ......................................... 10 OUTLOT AlBRANDON'S LAKEVIEW ESTATES Motion not to take ownership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION VACANCY Motion to appoint AI Grabowski ........................................ 11 CHAIR AND VICE CHAIRlPARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION Motion to appoint Al Grabowski Chair/Dave Blackstad Vice Chair .............. 11 CHAIR AND ACTING CHAIRlPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Motion to ask Jay Squires as Chair/Randy Peek as Acting Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 APPROVAL OF CLALvlS MAYOR/COUNCIL 11\'PUT Added agcnda items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 ADJOURNMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 --- ~-..._-- .---.._-,~_....-. - .~. -- -- -- -.-.. --....--....-. ~-\î-"\<b CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 3, 1998 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jack McKelvey, February 3, 1998, 7:03 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Bonnie Dehn, Mike Knight, John Kunza, Ken Orttel Councilmembers absent: None Also present: City Attorney, Barry Sullivan City Engineer, Scott Erickson Community Development Director, Dave Carlberg City Administrator, Richard Fursman Others AGENDA APPROVAL Add Item 23, Declare Costs/Order AssessmentsIIP93-17/Crown Pointe; Item 24, Adopt Assessment Roll/IP93-17/Crown Pointe; Item 25, Declare Costs/Order Assessments/IP93-17 IWeybridge 3rd Addition; Item 26, Adopt Assessment RolVIP93-17lWeybridge 3rd Addition. Move Item 5, Update of Drainage Issue/2776 164th Avenue NW/JeffLeadens, to right after Item 1, the Sheriffs report. Motion by Kunza, Seconded by Dehn, to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA Item 12 Acknowledge Expiration Amended Special Use Permit/IP96-16/13727 Hanson Boulevard NW/SuperAmerica (See Resolution R021-98) Item 13 Acknowledge Expiration Amended Special Use PermitIIP96-25/13476 Hanson Boulevard NW/Shoberg (See Resolution R022-98) Item 14 Approve MIS Contract/City of Champlin Item 15 Approve Change OrdersIIP96-15/Public Works (See Resolution R023-98 for Change Order #1 - Gateway/ACG, Inc; Resolution R024-98 for Change Order #1 - Grazzini Brothers) Item 16 Order Plans and SpecsIIP98-3/Cracksealing (See Resolution R025-98) Item 17 Approve Plans and Specs/IP98-3/Cracksealing (See Resolution R026-98) Item 18 Order Plans and Specs/IP98-4/Sealcoating (See Resolution R027-98) Item 19 Approve Plans and SpecsIIP98-4/Sealcoating (See Resolution R028-98) -- . - Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - February 3, 1998 Page 2 (Consent Agenda, Continued) Item 20 Approve Supplemental Feasibility Report/IP97-44/Shadowbrook 3rd Addition (See Resolution R029-98) Item 21 Accept Withdrawal of Comprehensive Plan Amendment/ 181 st A venue and Round Lake BoulevardlRademacher Item 22 Kennel License RenewaVCleo Nehrt Item 23 Declare Costs/Order Assessment/IP93-17/Crown Pointe (See Resolution R030- 98) Item 24 Adopt Assessment RoIVIP93-17/Crown Pointe (See Resolution R031-98) Item 25 Declare Costs/Order AssessmentlIP92-19/Weybridge 3rd Addition (See Resolution R032-98) Item 26 Adopt Assessment Roll/IP92-19/Weybridge 3rd (See Resolution R033-98) Motion by Kunza, Seconded by Dehn, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - .1a/1/1a/:V 20, 1998, Regular Meeting: Correct as written Jalluary 20, 1998, EDA l\feetillg: Correct as written. Jan/lary 20, 1998, HRA Meeting: Correct as written. "fotioll by Knight, Seconded by Kunza, to approve the Minutes. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, 1- Present (Dehn) vote. ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF REPORT Lieutenant Scott Andersohn introduced the City's lineup of Deputies which will serve Andover under the 1998 contract with the Sheriffs Department. Attorney Sullivan commended the officers, as his office works closely with them and they do their job thoroughly. Lieutenant Andersohn then reviewed the calls on which the Deputies responded in the month of December and the yearly totals for 1997 for Andover, a total of 7,803 radio calls. He also noted the Community Service Officer answered a number of calls in December, for a total of 1700 radio calls in 1997. He reported the efforts on the part of the Sheriff s Department and the Andover Sno- Dragons Snowmobile Club have been fairly effective. They issued 23 tags and 30 warnings. They put in an additional 34 hours of snowmobile enforcement through the use of the grant received through the D1'<'R. Much of that time was spent on Round Lake. He met with the Snow-Dragons Snowmobile Club earlier this evening, and he thanked the Club for their efforts and dedication to enforcement and education. The Council also noted that they received very few complaints recently and asked that the pressure be kept on. Lieutenant Andersohn agreed. - -- - .._ ._< ..... _0_- ~-- - _.- ------- .- Regular Andol'er City Council Meeting Minutes - February 3, 1998 Page 3 UPDATE OF DRAINAGE ISSUE/2776 I 64TH AVENUE NW/JEFF LEADENS Mr. Erickson explained the Council had directed Staff to look at the drainage issue along l64th A venue in an effort to resolve the problem. The neighbor had complained that a retaining wall constructed in the boulevard by JeffLeadens at 2776 164th Avenue was blocking drainage, causing water to run off to a pond on Tom Widhelm' s property to the east. The original grading of the plat called for a ditch system to be constructed along 164th Avenue to drain to the pond and discharge to a low area by the cul-de-sac. Now there is no ditch from Leadens' property, causing the water to pond on the Widhelm property. Staff identified two possible options to consider: 1) remove the retaining wall, install a new culvert under the Leadens' driveway and regrade the ditch on both sides of the Leadens' existing driveway, or 2) have Mr. Leadens discuss with Mr. Widhelm the possibility of regrading the ditch between their lots so it drains easterly to the existing wetland behind their lots. The existing driveway culvert for Mr. Widhelm's lot would need to be reconstructed so it drains to the east. At this time it is difficult to tell ifthere is a culvert under Mr. Leadens' driveway, though it appears one may be buried there. Councilmember Orue] asked ifit is a big water problem. Mr. Erickson stated that for periods of time in the spring when the frost is in th~ ground and after a large storm there may be up to six inches of standing water at any time. It is more or less a nuisance water issue He assumed the developer had installed ditches and culverts when the project was done, but at some time the ditch was filled; and the culvert, if it is still under the driveway, is no longer functioning. He guessed the filling in of the ditch was done by a previolls property owner. Any correction at this point would be done at the expense of the property owner. JeffLeadens - stated there was no culvert under the driveway when he purchased the property seven years ago. The development is 18 or 19 years old, and some places have small ditches and some have no ditches. He has been told his house was the first one built there, and the ditch along his property has been filled in. His driveway and yard sank three or four inches, so he tore out the old driveway, removed a lot of buried construction material from the site and added 12 inches of black dirt. Even ifhe did regrade the ditch on his property, he does not own the 400 feet to the county ditch, which would al so have to be ditched Plus it goes up hill in that direction. Mr. Leadens felt it would be more logical go to east, toward the natural wetland area. He would be \villing to remove the black dirt in the ditch at Mr. Widhelm's property line that is blocking the drainage that way, but he is reluctant to go onto someone else's property. The surveyor has told him water would only get to about six inches deep and would sit for only a short period of time because of the sand. He has yet to see any water standing there, even in a hard rain. Thm Widhelm - has talked to Todd Haas, Assistant City Engineer. He has been in his house since 1986. The ditch was on Mr. Leadens' property before he owned it. When Mr. Leaden moved in, within one or two years he was asked by Mr. Leadens if he wanted to fill in his ditch. Mr. Widhelm stated he said no, as he prefers to have the ditch across his property because he doesn't want to see his work disturbed and he doesn't want his yard to flow into the street. He leveled the area, dug out four inches of sand, put in black dirt and sodded the ditches. He has spent about $10,000 in his front --~- --.._-- .,-......-...,-..-'--- .. ... Regular Andover City Council Meeting lvIiI/utes - fèbrumy 3, 1998 Page", (Update of Drainage Issuel2776 164th Avenue NW/Leadens, Continued) yard. The area was developed so the water would drain to the west, which it did through ditches and culverts. He would like to see the drainage returned to that scenario. In heavy rains and snow the water will sit on the west side of the ditch. It basically sits in the ditch, which he now considers a part of his yard because it is just as green as the rest of his yard. In 1996, utilities were installed and the cable company had to install another junction box because Mr. Leadens buried the original cable junction box. Council discussion noted the difficulty of ditching to run the water west because of the length of the ditch needed plus the need to ditch across properties other than Mr. Leadens'. Councilmember Orttel suggested Staff look at the problem in the spring to determine how extensive it is He noted ditches are built to hold water; and if the water is just sitting in the ditch for a few hours and not overflowing onto the property, then it is just a matter of preference. Another possibility would be to have Mr. Leadens install a crushed rock pit to collect the water. The Council agreed to wait until spring to determine the extent of the water problem. Mr. Erickson stated they will review the problem in the spring and work with the property owners to resolve the -, Issue. LOT SPLIT, CONTINUED/17203 TULIP STREET NW/JOllNSON Mr. Carlberg reviewed the request of Tom and Shareen Johnson to split the northern and eastern ± 7.9 acres fcom a lOS-acre parcel at 17203 Tulip Street, zoned R-l, Single Family Rural Residential. A cul-de-sac intersecting Tulip Street is proposed in conjunction with the lot split, which eliminates the need for variances for lot width at the front setback for both lots. At the request of the Planning Commission, the applicant has approached the property owners to the north and south about constructing a joint access from 172nd Lane or 172nd Avenue, but neither party wished to participate. The PlanlÚng Commission has recommended denial citing poor road location, the negative cost of a road and concerns over whether the application is a lot split or a plat. In 1992 the Council delÚed a variance request to split the lot by creating a flag lot with a 34-foot width abutting the prope11y to the north at Tulip Street NW. At the last Council meeting Mr. Johnson requested the item be tabled to allow time to review his abstract to determine the status of the 33-foot easement abutting his property to the south. It has been determined that is a private ingress/egress easement which was never dedicated to the City. Tom Johnson - explained he was denied a variance in 1992 because of the requirements for a road. Now they are proposing a cul-de-sac which meets all the requirements but which apparently does not look good for the future development of the area. He felt if someone comes in with a proposal that meets all of the requirements but it is not acceptable, that the City should work with the property owner to find another way, possibly granting a variance. All they want to do is to be able to get to the back of their property and build a house there. The private easement to the south was created in 1970, and it wasn't the policy of the City at that time to have easements dedicated. - -- -.-.. .- -- ----~-~- - . .._--.._-~_.....- . - .... Regular Andover City Council Meeting Mil/lites - February 3, 1998 Page 5 (Lot Splitll7203 lìtlip Street NW/Johnson, Continued) Councilmember Orttel agreed with the objections of the Planning Commission regarding the construction of a cul-de-sac to meet the requirements for this lot split. He felt it is bad policy because of the maintenance required for one house. The size of the properties would be the same whether a cul-de-sac is constructed or whether it is split and a variance given to the width of the lots. He felt it would be more logical to take out the cul-de-sac and allow the split, and a variance could be justified based on the uniqueness of the situation. Otherwise the City is saying they have to wait IS or more years to develop. He felt the future development of the area will take care of itself The Council then discussed various ways to split the parcel and stìll meet the ordinance requirements, such as providing a V-shaped lot around a parcel that would include the existing residence, constructing a road up to the existing residence along the easement to the south plus the additional property needed ITom Mr. Johnson's lot and reconfiguring the split east to west to have access to the back, constructing a road and cul-de-sac along the northern boundary line which would include the 34-foot strip that is already owned by r-.1r. Johnson, plus many other proposals. It was noted that the construction of a road for one residence is costly to build and to maintain. There was also concern with allowir;g the lot to be split dmvn the middle, resulting in both lots having only ISO feet - of width at the fi·ont setback line because it would set a precedent. and there are many other five- and ten-acre lots in the City with 330 feet of road frontage that may come in with the same request. When discussing the overall future development of the area, some felt the extension of 172nd to the east would be very remote. The undevelopable wetlands and landlocked parcels were noted After considerable discussion, the Council didn't object to the lot split but wanted to do so without jeopardizing the ordinances. The question of possibly changing the requirement of 300 feet of width at ¡he tront setback was raised as it relates to these types oflot splits. It was then suggested Staff hold an informational meeting with the residents of the surrounding area for input on the future development of the area, costs for street construction, parcels that could be impacted, etc. llJotion by Dehn, Seconded by Orttel, that it go back and have City Staff contact the area residents to see if other alternatives that could happen in a compromising situation in conjunction with the whole area, treating the area as a neighborhood rather than individual parcels; and then perhaps even suggesting to the Ordinance Review Task Force of the PlanlÚng and Zoning Commission to look into situations of this sort that are very difficult to handle as far as a policy, if there is any way to consider these situations. Then bring it back to the Council. DISCUSSION: Because of the time requirements, Mr. Carlberg pointed out in order to table the item, the applicant will need to agree and the request submitted in writing Mr Johnson - agreed to table the item until he would request it be placed back on the agenda and to submit that request in writing. Dean Olson 17132 Round Lake Boulevard - was the one who approached Mr. Johnson to buy the vacant parcel if it is split because he heard Mr. Johnson wanted to sell it. He would buy it so they Regular Andover City Coullcil A1eetil.'g Mil11lt.:s - February 3, 1998 Page 6 (Lot Splil/17203 Tulip Street NW/Johnsoll, Continued) wouldn't have to worry about road frontage. However, he would like to see Mr. Johnson split that lot ifhe is going to build a house for himself on the vacant lot. If the intent is to sell the lot, he did not agree with the request. He also stated if the standard is lowered to allow 150 feet of frontage for lots, there will be many parcels coming in with lot split requests. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION CONT1NUED/APPROVE FlNAL PLAT/CHESTERTON COMMONS 2ND ADDITlON Mayor McKelvey noted the letter from Ashford Development to table the item indefinitely. "lotioll by Orttel, Seconded by Kunza, that, at the request of the developer, the Council table the item DISCUSSION: Councilmember Kunza noted if this plat is not developed, it would prevent the development ofüther proposed projects to the west. Mayor McKelvey stated the Council can look at those shteh plans and preliminary plats, but as iong as this plat is not developed, there is no way - to get the sev;cr ar:d '.vater to them. , J.Q.ry Windschitl - stated he did not have a time when this will be considered again. He is doing a market research now as to the effect of the post office project on the ability to sell single family residential lots. Staff was able to obtain documents of the post office project, but no screening, lighting or landscaping plan is shown. The Council asked to see the results of the market research. Mr Windschitl - stated that is private information, but he would be willing to go through the intòrmation with the Council on an individual basis. Motion carried unanimously. TIMBER RIVER ESTATES/PARK DEDICATION DISCUSSION Mr. Fursman explained Staff was asked to negotiate with the developer of Timber River Estates plat about what should be included in the park dedication fee for the PUD plat. Woodland Development originally offered over a six-acre park along the Rum River. At the approval of the preliminary plat, the Council agreed the park should not be considered as a part of the POD and felt that because the park is along the river that it may be worth more than the interior property. The City's appraiser has said that the property along the river is at least two times the value of the interior property, maybe more. The policy of the City has been to negotiate with the developer where the park would be and that land given is considered the same value as the rest of the property. The Staff and developer have agreed to consider the property dedicated as park at twice the value of the rest of the property. The Park and Recreation Commission is concerned with setting a precedent of assigning a different value for park property whether it is along the creek or whether it is wetland. This is a very unique situation, as the dedication of park property along the Rum River doesn't happen very often in --"---'.-.''''- .. 'þ. - Regular AndoPel' City Council Meeting Minutes - February 3, 1998 Page 7 (7Ïmber River Estates/Park Dedication Discussion, Continued) Andover. In this case he agrees with the developer to consider the land donated for park worth twice the property as a whole. Byron Westlund Woodland Development - stated the original submittal for park dedication was for over 20 acres ofland, including some of the wetland area. Through the course of the approvals, the Park Board did not want to take those wetlands as a part of the park dedication; and the park land dedication was narrowed to 6.8 acres along the Rum River. All of the rest is stìll in the plat, but it is not park land. It is under common ownership through the association. Mr. Fursman explained the total park dedication comes to approximately $124,000. The developer is asking to take twice the value ofth-: 6.8 acres at $6,800/acre and subtract it from the $124,000 owed. Mayor McKelvey asked what conditions were met by the developer to be allowed a density increase in the POD. Mr. Westlund - pointed out they did all of the park improvements including a sheltered picnic area, parking lot, soccer Held, bituminous trail from the parking lot to the river and class 5 trail through the !;rea and the common area of the association. Mr. Carlberg stated at the time of the preliminary plat, a presenta(ÎoP was give-n on how the four criteria for the density increase were being met. !2;JVe ŒTool~Par" and Recre~tion Commi~ion Chairperson - acknowledged there was some confusion on the PUD process in the beginning, and that is why they turned down the extra wetland area and trail system They thought that should be part of the PUD, not part of the park dedication. They did treat the park dedication and POD process as two separate processes. The concern of the Commission is will the City now start negotiating with all developers over the value ofland being dedicated for park purposes. It is a nice park and will be an asset to the community, but its location also makes the properties within the development more valuable because of the access to the river. The Commission tèlt it is best to follow the ordinance on the 10 percent market value for park dedication rather than to negotiate. Councilmember Orttel argued because it is rare that land for park is dedicated along the Rum River and because the land is at least double in value, it is reasonable to negotiate a value. It is an opportunity for the City, and the City should not be abusing the right to take 10 percent for park dedication. Chairperson O'Toole - stated the property was proposed by the developer. He doubted the Commission would have gone through the expense of taking park on the river if they had known the value would be considered twice that of the other property. In fact, the proposal now means the City is buying the land back at double the average price. Mr Westlund - stated the City is getting about $124,000 in land and cash. The park land was given because the Comprehensive Plan calls for a park in that area, and cash was taken in lieu ofland in the development to the north because of that. Councilmember Orttel stated the Park Board always has the option of telling the developer whether or not it wants land or cash for park dedication and which land it wants when a plat is brought in. Under the proposal the City is paying what the appraiser says the bare land is worth. He felt the motion can be made such that negotiations like this would only apply to park land in the scenic river area that is worth more than twice the average value for the -... .. .~--- -- --- ~- - . -- -- -~------ .- - -, Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minules - February 3, 1998 Page 8 (7ìmber Ril'er Estates Park Dedication Discussion, Continued) remailÚng property. Councilmember Knight noted the Council must be very careful in the future to specifically identifY what items are accepted to meet the criteria for increased density and what is park dedication only. That will avoid some of this confusion in the future. Mr. W estlund - stated land and cash are being considered for park dedication. It has nothing to do with the improvements that have been made. In his mind, there wasn't a mix between meeting the criteria for the POO density increase and the park dedication. They presented a very extensive narrative on this issue at the time the preliminary plat was being approved. After further discussion, the Council noted it was their direction that the Staff and developer negotiate the park dedication; and that is what they have done Morioll by Orttei, Seconded by Dehn, that the Council direct Staff to prepare a Resolution citing all the ulÚque qualities of the property in Timber River Estates that would set it apart from other plats in the City to justify the change in valuation of park land in the plat; and that the Council also approve the Staff recommendation on valuation in the plat, that being a total cash amount that could be payable of $124,400 and that they be given $93,400 credit against that 6.8-acre river lot that is dedicated as park land. (See ResolutiœJ R034-98) Motion carried unanimously. SKETOI PLAN/ANDOVER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOP1',fENT Mr. Car!berg reviewed the proposed sketch plan of 351 residential dwelling units of the Andover Planned Unit Development located in Section 22 as presented by Chesterton Partnership. All units \\ill be owner-occupied except the two 64-ulÚt buildings, which will be rental. There is a commercial component to the POO in the southeast corner plus a day care. No density increase is being requested. Staff is looking at how this area will be served with sanitary sewer. The eastern portion will be served by a line through Chesterton Commons. Another trunk from the south will serve the western portion of the plat. The Council has dismissed the concept of an MSA road through the area. An issue to be resolved is that of private versus public streets. Staff has researched what other cities have done and found that a concern is with the street cohstruction and maintenance of private streets. If Council allows private streets, Staff would recommend specific requirements on construction and maintenance be incorporated in the association documents, as well as the funding be established for the future reconstruction of the streets. The only other private streets in Andover will be in the Third Addition of Shadowbrook. It is also proposed that the entrance to Hanson Boulevard be public, which will also have the entrance to Burr Oak Run proposed to the south. The utilities would be public. The Planning Commission has recommended the streets be public. The Commission also talked about an access to the property to the north, but that was dismissed. There was concern, however, about the length of the temporary cul-de-sac proposed in Burr Oak Run to the south. Because of that, the Commission has recommended there be a western connection between the Andover PUD and Burr Oak Run. The original proposal to access Burr Oak Run was a frontage road along Hanson Boulevard. The county has objected, and the developer is now proposing an access - ..~ .. .. -. Regular Andover City Council Meeting ivlinules - February 3, 1998 Page 9 (Sketch Plan/AndOl'er Planned Unit Dewlopment, Continued) road between the convenience center and the day care center. The Planning Commission, however, has suggested that road be moved even further west, west of the day care facility so there wìl1 be a full T -intersection within Andover PUD and that there be some frontage road within the commercial area to limit the entrances onto that main road. The Park and Recreation Commission has not yet discussed this proposal, but they are recommending trails along Nightingale and Hanson Boulevard in the Burr Oak Run project plus a trail from this plat south to Oak View Middle School. Mr. Carlberg also noted that because this is a PUD, the City can spell out the types of businesses that would go into the commercial area. He understands the proposal is for a day care facility, a convelÚence store/gas station and a pharmacy. During the Council discussion it was pointed out that if the streets are private, the traffic can be restricted and even gated; and that restriction would be enforced by the association The police and fire departments would respond to emergencies, but the police would not patrol the area as they would an area with public streets. The advantage of private strees is it allows the developer to vary from the setback and street width requirements. Mr. Carlberg pointed out the Council may want to consider public streets with a variance for some of the setback requirements. Mr. Erickson also noted that the City would own the utilities under the streets; and I'.ith private meets. the City would require a condition in the association documents that if the streets had to be dug up for utility maintenance, the association would pay for the repair of the streets. In talking about public streets, the City would be asking for 60 tèet of right of way. The developer wants to negotiate the street and right-of- way width, which he feels is an option for the City. Staffs preference is to have a dedicated public street. Because it is a PUD, he felt the City could negotiate the street and right-of-way widths. Jeny Windschitl. Ç'hestertoTl Partnership - stated what he is asking is identical to what was approved in Shaàowbrook, including the road width of 24 feet and setbacks. They do not want parking on the streets. A 60-foot right of way would call for a siglÚficant redesign of the plat because of the setbacks, but he would be I'.illing to work I'.ith the City to find something that would satisfY the City for public roads and to satisfy the setback issue. They have set aside an area for an R V garage in the northwest corner that would be available for sale. It has about 16 stalls. Councilmember Knight felt that more stalls may be needed, as this age group tends to have more boats and trailers, RVs, etc. Possibly some other fenced parking spaces for these vehicles should be provided. Mr Windschitl - agreed, and stated they wìl1100k at that again. There wìl1 be restrictive covenants. In discussing the public versus private street issue again, the Council suggested Staff and the developer continue to negotiate. They were generally agreeable to public streets but there may be some flexibility in the width of the right of way, street width and/or setbacks. Mr Windschitl - stated they have proposed the access to link Burr Oak Run between the day care tàcility and the convenience store. He felt there would be some difficulty in moving that access further west as proposed by the Planning Commission because of the gas line easement, plus they would like to keep the traffic away from the day care center. He is willing to look at that location again. Mr. Windschitl stated they are opposed to the western connection to Burr Oak Run because ~-.- -..._-- .._----~--'...-.- .~. Regular Andover City Council.Meeting Mil/utes - February 3, 1998 Page 10 (Sketch Plan.lAndover Planned Unit Development, Continued) it has the effect of creating more traffic for their development because it would be another feeder street from the south. They do not have a problem extending the walking/biking trail to Hanson Boulevard, but they do not want to extend it to Nightingale because they do not want to encourage the public to use their private trial. Also, the area along Nightingale is all wetland. There is a relatively high demand for the use of a swimming pool by this age group, and they are wìlling to pursue some layout of a trail access south to Oak View Middle School. Plus those in this age group tend to be active volunteers in the schools. There were no further comments on the sketch plan. SKETOI PLAN/BURR OAK RUN Mr. Carlberg reviewed the proposed sketch plan of Burr Oak Run, which consists of 44 single family residential lots, located in Section 22 as presented by Pilot Land Development Company. The property, currently zoned R-l, Single Family Rural, will have to be rezoned to R-4, Single Family Urban. An access will have to be coordinated with the Andover POO. The Planning Commission has recommended another connection to the Andover PUD be made further west because the road ends in a temporary cul-de-sac of over 2,000 feet. The wetlands prevent access to Nightingale directly to the west It has also been recommended that there be a trail between the Andover POO through this development to the Oak View Middle School. The specific access point to the school has not been discussed with the school district. A trail will be constructed along Hanson Boulevard which will connect with the City's trail along that road. Councilmember Ortte! pointed out the intent is to have another access/exit to the development, which '-"'111 be met when thc property to the south and west is developed. The long cul-de-sac would only be in place until the southern property is developed, but the question is how soon will that property develop. He thought more serious consideration should be given to getting the road in Burr Oak Run to access onto Nightingale. Don Jensen Pilot Land Development - asked why the road should run through the wetland to Nightingale when it will sub to the south as soon as that southern property develops. That is why they went with the long cul-de-sac at this time. They don't know the schedule of when utilities will be available to be able to develop the southern property. They have talked to Staff about having a permanent cul-de-sac and holding Lot 26 as a temporary outlet for employees. If Staff determines there can be orderly development from south to north, then this is the best layout because the road is not being forced through the wetland. There is also the question of whether to have two trails accessing the school, one along Hanson Boulevard and one in the interior of the plat running between two lots. They already have a natural causeway that doesn't impact the commercial or residential use. Now a road connection to the Andover PUD is being considered at the T-intersection west of Hanson Boulevard. The trail would fit in the location of the gas line easement to move pedestrians to Hanson Boulevard and down to the school. - - -_..- ~-. ~_..- _.~- -- --_.--- Regu/ar Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - Februwy 3, 1998 Page 11 (Sketch P/anBurr Oak Run, Continued) Mayor McKelvey didn't think the City wanted to consider a lift station for sanitary sewer at this location, especially since there is a sewer line brought up to the border of the school. Councilmember Orttel felt the decision on how the property will be serviced with sanitary sewer will determine the issue on the street. If the southern property can be developed within a year or two, then the temporary cul-de-sac would be eliminated and the road would go through. The Council agreed to receive the Staff report on serving this area with municipal utilities at the next meeting before deciding on the cul-de-sac issue. ¡VIr. Carlbcrg stated the PlanlÚng and ZOlÚng Commission has suggested the developer look at custom grading the lots rather than granting a blanket variance for front-yard setbacks on those lots abutting the school propeI1y. The lCquest was tor a variance ITom the rront-yard setbacks of those lots to save the trees in the back. The Council preferred that custom grading of the lots be considered first. There were no futthcr comments. OUTLOT Alm?ANDON'S I.AKEVlEW ESTATES jI,[otion by 0l11d, Seconded b.\' Ddm, that the Council agrees with the Park Board and that they are not interested in taking ownership of Brandon's Lakeview Estates Outlot A. Motion carried unanimously. APP01NT PARK AND RECREA TION COMMISSION VACANCY Motion by DeIm, Seconded by Orttel, that since Mr. Grabowski was the person interviewed and his credentials seem to be in order, move to reappoint Mr. Grabowski to the Park and Recreation Commission, a three-year term to expire December 31, 2000. DISCUSSION: Mayor McKelvey was interested in knmving why none of the other three applicants appeared for the interviews this evening. For that reason he will vote in favor of the motion. That way he can reopen the matter ifhe finds something took place. Motion carried unanimously. APPOlNT CH4.IR AND VICE CHAIR/PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Kunza, to appoint Al Grabowski as Park and Recreation Chair for 1998, and that Dave Blackstad be appointed Vice Chair. Motion carried unanimously. - __-0.0 Regular Andowr City Council Meeting Minlltes - February 3, 1998 Page 12 APPOINT CHAIR AND ACTING CHAIR/PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Dehn, that Jay Squires be asked to serve as Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission and that Randy Peek be the Acting Chair. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Motion by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, the payment of Claims. Motion carried unanimously. MA YOR/COUNOL INPUT Added agenda items - Winslow Holasek asked the policy for adding items to the Agenda. Public copies of those items that were added trus evelÚng were not available. Mr. Fursman explained added items have to be made public and must be voted on by the Council. Those documents should have been avaibbk 011 occasion people do take the agenda items. Motion by Kunza, SCCGnded by Dehn, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11 :35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, \~\~k~L Marcella A. Peach Recording -.- .- -,- - ---- -- -- _.--