The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC March 1, 1988 DATE: March L 1988 ITEMS GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL Letter - WOE M~mo Rll rPi'l\l of M~c1 i i'lT i on S~rvi CPR PLEASE ADDRESS THESE ITEMS AT THIS MEETING OR PUT THEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA. THANK YOU. February 29, 1988 '1:;' r:;C". 3/1/11% .- ., Mr. Kerry Street United States Environmental Protection Agency Region Five 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 \il~f:. Ei,~ \, t. :\~\\ \1 a.~ ' ,~ ~r-1""",~~~ ~11 , \\r~;~~~~~JI \ ...---- .- ~ ,.. :\1'......,0~!r:"r., CITY Or- - -- Mr. Ken Haberman Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Re: WOE Site, Andover, Minnesota Record of Decision Dear Mr. Haberman and Mr. Street: The SW-28 Group requests the Agencies to reconsider the Record of Decision's recommended response action relating to the so-called "wetlands" to the north of the WOE Site. As you are aware, the Group disputes the alleged classification of the wetland and any resulting imposition of liability upon the Group. See Respondents' letter, dated November 19, 1987, a copy of which is attached. The Agencies' attempt at classification and imposition of liability is far from thoughtful and is, perhaps, arbitrary. Since investigative activities began at the WOE Site in 1982, no indication was made by any party that a protected wetland was in the area of the Site. It was not until Respondents received Agency modifications to the Detailed Analysis Report in September 1987 that any mention was made regarding the alleged existence of a wetland. Respondents believe the Agencies have never been clear themselves of the classification, size or exact location of or their jurisdiction over the alleged wetland. [See Respondents' letters dated September 14, 1987 and November 19, 1987]. Moreover, the exact size or location of the wetland has never been identified with any degree of particularity. The Record of Decision describes only "wetlands north of the site" and "wetlands between the limit of refuse disposal and Coon Creek, particularly in the area of monitoring well nests 2 and 3." [ROD, p.7] No attempt was made by the Agencies to identify the precise location or areal extent of the alleged wetland. '.- Mr. Ken Haberman Mr. Kerry Street February 29, 1988 Page Two Somehow, however, the Agencies were able to arrive at a total present worth figure of $3,837 for implementation of the recommended response action for the wetland area. If this figure represents what the Agencies will accept for settlement of the wetland issue, Respondents will include this activity as part of the settlement proposal for ultimate site remediation. On its face, however, this figure appears to be another incomplete conclusion by the Agencies regarding the wetland issue. It appears from the general description that the wetland area may lie on private property, outside the WOE boundary. [See ROD, Attachment 14] The powers, rights, obligations and associated costs of the Group to enter upon private property and change that property significantly is not contemplated by the Record of Decision. Further, there is no indication if the costs of remediation referenced in the Record of Decision include costs associated with wetland replacement. Clearly, it is difficult to estimate the cost of replace- ment without some understanding of the size of the parcel to be replaced. Respondents request reconsideration of the Agencies' position regarding the alleged wetland. From the offset this position has been beset by misclassification, arguable evidence and a complete failure to provide accurate information on location and size of the allegedly affected area. The SW-28 Group cannot conceive of a situation in which any potentially responsible party would ever agree to fill the area or acquire comparable property on the basis of such seemingly arbitrary and capricious findings. Very truly yours, ON BEHALF OF THE SW-28 GROUP MOTOR COMPANY ~ HONEYWELL, INC. ~~.~j!l~~.- Co-Chair, SW-28 Group --- Mr. Ken Haberman Mr. Kerry Street February 29, 1988 Page Three UNISYS, INC. ~~.2~ Richard . Marchek Co-Chair, SW-28 Group jdal cc: Alan Van Norman James Elling SW-28 Group . ...-...... WOE SW-28 GROUP November 19, 1987 Mr. Kerry Street Remedial Project Manager U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS Mr. Kenneth M. Haberman Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 BY MESSENGER Re: WOE Site, Andover, Minnesota Dear Messrs. Street and Haberman: Pursuant to Section VII.B.3. of the Administrative Order and Response Order by Consent of March 1984, the SW-28 Group hereby notifies you that it does not assent to the eleventh-hour change by MPCA and EPA to Section 3.5.l.2 of the Detailed Analysis Report ("OAR") having to do with so-called "wetlands" to the north of the WOE site. This change was communicated to the undersigned by letter from MPCA dated November 4, 1987. The area in question has been characterized erroneously by you as a Type 2 wetland. The definition which you provided (Class Palustrine, emergent, subject to intermit- tent flooding, drained) is that of a Type I, not a Type 2, wetland. A Type 2 wetland (Class Palustrine, emergent, saturated) requires the "substrate saturated to the surface for extended periods during the growing season." Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U.s. F~sh and Wildl~fe Serv~ce Document OBS-79/31 at 30,24;. see also, Wetlands of the United States, USFWS Circular 39 at 21. Moreover, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification document lists the "common cattail (Typha latifolia)" as the example of "dominance type" of vegetation in an "Palustrine, emergent wetland, persistent" (Types land 2). Classification Document at 8. "A dominant plant species has traditionally meant one that has control over the community, and this plant is also usually the predominant species." Classifi- cation document at 14 (citations omitted). Personnel who have been in this area in all seasons over a period of years state that they have never, even periodically, seen standing water in this area even after heavy rains. More importantly, the soil is not saturated and has not ~ .. ~ ,.. ! Mr. Kerry Street Mr. Kenneth M. Haberman - 2 - November 19, 1987 been saturated to the surface or waterlogged during extended periods of the growing season. In addition, no common cattails were observed during a recent inspection of the area. On the contrary, shrubs, trees and numerous upland plant species were observed as the obviously predominant vegetation in this area. This area is clearly not a Type 2 or even a Type I wetland. MOl;"eover, even if this spot were a wetland, there is no evidence whatsoever that it is now contaminated or that it would be contaminated even if water were in it. Remedial measures, including the groundwater pumpout system, will effectively inhibit any such contamination. Therefore, the utili ty of covering the area with thousands of cubic yards of fill is simply incredible. Moreover, the adding of such huge amounts of additional fill may cause runoff and erosion into Coon Creek, thus creating turbidity, sedimentation and other problems where none now exist. In short, the costs of filling the area and replacing it with other property are outrageously excessive in light of the utter lack of benefit to be achieved by such a massive and unnecessary undertaking. For the above and other reasons, the SW-28 Group cannot conceive of a situation in which any potentially reponsible party would ever agree to fill the area or to acquire 14 acres of suburban property deemed comparable by the EPA or the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Very truly yours, ON BEHALF OF THE SW-28 GROUP FORD MO~~ Margaret A. Coughlin Co-Chair, SW-28 Group By HONEYWELL INC. ... By ~ Q... ko~ II ?;AJ Carl C. Meier l""'" Co-Chair, SW-28 Group UNISYS CORPOR~TION (-kt~.~ Richard J. Marchek ~ Co-Chair, SW-28 Group By cc: Members of the SW-28 Group ..~- WHAT'S HAPPENING The City received the attached "Maintenance of status QUO" from the State Bureau of Mediation Services. A petition requesting certification as exclusive representative for collective bargaining purposes has been filed with the Bureau of Mediation Services. The petition requires 30% of the unit to petition or 30% of 6 of at least 2 people. We have posted the notice as required. We are governen by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 179A Public Employment Labor Relations Act. BUREAU OF MEDIATION SERVICES - STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55103 TO: James Schrantz, City Administrator City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, Minnesota 55304 BMS CASE NO. 88-PR-2536 FEBRUARY l8, 1988 MAINTENANCE OF STATUS QUO A petition requesting certification as exclusive representative for collective bargaining purposes was filed with the Bureau of Mediation Services on February 18, 1988, by the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The petition raises questions as to the representation of the following described employee group: All employees of the City of Andover Public Works Department, Andover, Minnesota, who are public employees within the meaning of Minn. Stat. S 179A.03, subd. 14. This Order is issued to preserve existing conditions and promote a free and fair environment for the resolution of this question of representation. This Order is applicable to all employees within the above described employee group. It shall remain in full force and effect until an investigation and/or hearing has been conducted and the matter is disposed of by a determination issued by the Commissioner of the Bureau of Mediation Services. ORDER l. Wages, hours and all existing conditions of employment of the employees shall not be changed as of the date of this Order. 2. Negotiations shall not be carried on. 3. Threats or promises as to changes in wages, hours and conditions of employment are prohibited. 4. Employees shall not be questioned by the employer with respect to membership in a labor organization. 5. Employees shall not be discriminated against as a result of the filing of the petition. This Order shall not conflict with provisions of an existing labor-management contract or applicable law. STATE OF MINNESOTA Bureau of Mediation Services PAUL W. GOLDBERG, COMMISSIONER POST'NG...CO~Y PWG:JLK:jj cc: Lawrence M. Bastian DATE: ITEMS GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL woodland Development ComprlnY T,Pt-t-PT Rpecial city council Meetinq Minutes February 9, 1988 Ordinance lqH Ordinance 55G Ordinance 83 Metropolitan Waste Control Coromi s!':i on T.Pt-t-<=>T Planning and Zoninq Minute!': - F<=>hr'IElry q, 1 qR8 Park and Recreation commission Minutes - February 18, 1988 Regular City Council Mppt-ing Minutes - Februarv 16, 1988 Rpecial Closed City Council Meeting - Februarv 16, 1988 Revised Feasibility 87-IIB Feasibility Report 88-6 Feasibility Report 88-5 Woodland Creek :Final Plat Sketch Plan Oak Bluff 2nd Addition Final plat Sketch Plan Termination of the Sanitary Landfill Process Letter from Minnetonka City Office's PLEASE ADDRESS THESE ITEMS AT THIS MEETING OR PUT THEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA. THANK YOU. ~ WHAT'S HAPPENING 1. The Road at 7:30 P.M. Committee of Andover and Ham Lake ar)fgOing March 10th to discuss University Avenue. to meet We will then bring the proposal from that meeting to the City Council for approval. See February 2nd packet for MSA Report. 2. I am a number of the CEAM's Legislative Committee - each week we have a conference call with about 8 City Engineers,and 8 County Engineers, along with the State Aid and the Commissioner to discuss legislation and the position we as a group are promoting. We are to encourage our Councilor Boards to contact their legislators. 3. Item 6a on the agenda has a resolution discussing Highway Funding. I need your feed back! tf -....,. . 'r- .i-. ~-: The Honorable Gerald. G.. Windschitl, Members'of the City Gouncil CITY OF ANDOVER .". 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W. Andover, Minnesota 55304 Council As you know, ',we have purchased the George Adolfson Farm and have started developing this property for residential lots. The. subdivision has 'been named Woodland Creek. Prior to our acquisition of this' l~nd,.various assessments ; ", . were levied againsttlle property. The most recent assessment certified against.: ~hispr.opertywas the;',~ater connec:tion charge(s)., ,,' L;" .... ..., j' . .... The watert;onllection'assessment totals $225; 900. This amount has been calculated based onthef1and ha\,~ng 25 L dwellings, each being cllarged $900. . . The units were calculated using;2.5 units per acre times 100.4 acres,which results in units tot,ali~gI251.,; Hi;/ . -, ,.. of ,the land transactions' and platting process has; 'left 'us 'now of . needing ;' to will, ,be; '..,,-, . Please ,.c.onsider.,t .,' f;t!,f;a: fill~f;~h~~~r;cf"; ". "i:i.' . - The Adolfson property originally was assessed for water totalling $225, 900.;"This .was calculatedas"descr:i.bed,above.... . ,-..... :-,. ....'....... "," . '- ., '..:' '-'.; -.. . - We did not 'purchase the entire Adolfson Farm. The original homeplace and approximately 8 acres remain with Mr. and Mrs. Ad()lfson.We do not know the allocation of ..water connection costs assessed to that property,.' . . :'. ,'- . :',.: '_:-,': :: . . __'. _ < '_". .: H ,. ':' also have approximately 4.9 ,acres of land whiclJ. willberezonedt() This.1and lies adjacent'an~l;to"the north.of' Bunker Lake, Road. ',We, ;donot know what ,the apprOPFiatewater assessment fee will; be:';for, this, tra. ct; ;.'...n.....:.:......;c....",; ,_ "_' '-".. .-.-;-..... '"c";':,":'-' : -,~~~ Anoka, Minnesota 55303 ' -;"l~.- ~ ~ PAULMCCARRON MWCC COMMISSIONER PRECINCT E 571.7976 ~ mETROPOLITAn ~, WAITE \~ (OnTROl ':::::7 ~tnJ!1J!!lon MWCC COMMISSIONER'S BULLETIN PRECINCT E MINNEAPOLIS EAST INTERCEPTOR SEWER WILL PROVIDE SERVICE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHERN SUBURBS The northern suburbs will benefit greatly from the Minneapolis East Interceptor Sewer (MEI) Project being constructed by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC). This large sewer (eight to ten feet in diameter) will eventually carry the entire sewaqe flow from the northern suburbs to MWCC's Metropolitan Wastewater Treat- ment Plant in St. Paul. The MEI Sewer Project is the largest tunneling project ever undertaken by the MWCC. After its completion in 1990, the new sewer will stretch six miles, from St. Paul to northeast Minneapolis, and provide the final link to the treatment plant for the sewer lines from the northern suburban cities. It is essential to the growth of the northern suburbs. It will provide sewer capacity for future development. ANOKA PLANT PHASEOUT I serve on the Anoka Wastewater Treatment Plant Phase- out Committee. The design stage of the phaseout of the Anoka Plant will begin in 1988. The Anoka Plant will continue operating until wastewater flows exceed the plant's capacity, and the Minneapolis East Interceptor Sewer project is completed. This is expected to occur around 1990. CHAMPLIN, ANOKA, BROOKLYN PARK (CAB) INTERCEPTOR SEWER The CAB Interceptor which runs through Champlin, Anoka, and Brooklyn Park, was completed about two years ago and provides needed sewer service for increased development in the northwestern portion of the precinct. Currently it serves Champlin and Brooklyn Park with future use planned for Anoka, Ramsey, Dayton, Andover, parts of Maple Grove and plymouth. Anoka and Ramsey will be con- nected to the CAB Interceptor which will be tied into the MEI Sewer when the Anoka Wastewater Treatment Plant is phased out. 350 Melro ~;qllcHe f1llilclinq, SCJinl f\11 ii, Minn0soln5:,101 (; 1 )..:;.:-;) - Ei1:~3 ~ BULLETIN -Precinct E January, 1988 Page 2 CITY OF BLAINE INTERCEPTOR SEWER The MWCC will coordinate with the City of Blaine when Blaine determines a schedule for design and construction of the Blaine Interceptor Sewer. CONTAMINATED GROUNDWATER CLEANUP -- ONAN SITE IN FRIDLEY The MWCC has assisted in the cleanup of the contaminated groundwater at the ONAN site in Fridley by permitting the contaminated water to be discharged into the MWCC sewer system. When the flow from this site reached the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment plant in St. Paul, it was treated along with the rest of the wastewater stream. Recently this groundwater discharge system was shut off. Reports from consultants and the Minnesota Pollution control Agency indicate sufficient contaminated water has been removed to insure groundwater quality. SOIL AND GROUNDWATER PROBLEMS CAUSED BY PAST IMPROPER HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL The MWCC is cooperating with the cleanup of polluted soil and groundwater at the FMC Corporation site in Fridley. The contaminated soil has been placed in a containment vault, and the water (leachate) which percolates through the con- taminated soil will be pumped out of the vault for treatment at the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant in St. Paul. In addition, wells strategically located in the cleanup site will be pumped to the sewer system to hydraulically contain the contaminated groundwater. This project is expected to be operational in 1988. BPE1.88 ... .~ mETROPOLITAn ~, WAITE \~ conTROL v;::::::;7 ~m!JlJ!!lon PRECINCT E ANOKA ANDOVER BETHEL IllAlNE BURN8lWP. CHAMPlIN CIRCLE PINES COlUMBIA HEIGHTS COlUMBUS lWP. COON RAPIDS DAYTON EAST BETHEL FRIDLEY HAM lAI<E HillTOP LEXINGTON UNWOOO lWP. MAPLE GROVE MEDICINE lAI<E OAKGROVElWP. PlYMOUTH RAMSEY ST. FRANCIS SPRING LAKE PARK PAUL MC CARRON MWCC COMMISSIONER PRECINCT E 571.7976 1 ' (!)~/ 'b '6 .,~(/ ,~') February 5, 1988 Ms. Victoria Volk, Clerk City of Andover l685 Crosstown Blvd. NW Andover, MN 55304 Dear Ms. Volk: The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) was established by the Minnesota Legislature in 1969 to efficiently collect and treat the wastewater of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, while preserving and protecting the environment. The MWCC sewage treatment plants process a total of 275 million gallons of wastewater per day for the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The Anoka Wastewater Treatment Plant is one of 12 plants in the MWCC system and treats over two and one half million gallons of wastewater per day for the cities of Anoka, Champlin and Ramsey. The rest of the wastewater from Precinct E is conveyed to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant in St. Paul through large interceptor sewer pipes. As the waste control commissioner representing your community at the MWCC, I am anxious to convey to you the status of some of the current MWCC projects and plans for the future projects which service your community. Minneapolis East Interceptor Sewer -- under construction. Essential to service future develop- ment of northern suburbs. Anoka Wastewater Treatment Plant Phaseout I serve on this committee. Design phase to begin in 1988. Champlin, Anoka, Brooklyn Park (CAB) Interceptor Sewer -- Completed service link for NW suburbs. 350 Mello Squore llllilding. Suir111'C1l11. lVIinnusolu5:j.1CJ1 () 12 2.n 1M23 .. February 5, 1988 Page 2 Blaine Interceptor Sewer -- MWCC will coordinate with Blaine when Blaine determines a schedule for design and construction. Contaminated Groundwater Cleanup -- ONAN site located in Fridley. Past Improper Hazardous Waste Disposal -- FMC Corporation site in Fridley. These topics are addressed in greater detail in the attached materials. If you have questions regarding the MWCC or would like for me to present more detailed information at one of your meetings, please contact me at 57l-7976. Sincerely, ~ Paul McCarron, Commissioner Precinct E PM/LS L2.5 ]0: :($( ?(i!~~ __."~ n.'.__ ,,". t)ICElVf" 1\1 fEB2 11988 il February 23, 1988 CITYOF ANDOVER Dear Mayor and city Manager: You are invited to a meeting on March 10, 1988, at 7:00 P.M. in the Minnetonka Community Center (map on reverse side) to discuss an issue of critical importance to your community. As you are undoubtedly controversial issue with will. be considered;" one metropolitan area suburbs. aware, property the. Legislature. in particular is tax reform is again a . While several proposals especially.. damaging to :-, ,~ The cities of Minneapolis and st. Paul have joined with the Coal~tion of Greater Minnesota Cities (the larger outstate cities) and hired Briggs and Morgan to develop a property tax proposal: .to, in the.ir opinion, "equalize"tax rates.. . .. .. . :<{:;.: Without going into details, the proposal favors those communities with residential values of under $68,000 per unit and lower commercial and industrial values. The proposal would elimiriate the Homestead Credit and Local Government Aid Programs and use that funding. for a new "Equalization" Aid Program.; Generally, the more valuation your community adds above $68,000 from residences or from commercial and industrial development, the less relative (and in some cases, absolute) aid your City will receive. . The proposal clearly works to the detriment of suburbs. Even those cities that don't immediately lose would ultimately because of the proposal's bias against higher valuations found in suburbs. This proposal must be taken seriously. Its proponents are lobbying hard and unless there is some effective counterbalance, at least part of the proposal may- be - adopted .c.'Therefore ,the-Municipa+' Legislative Commission is suggesting that all suburbs join to:defeat this proposal. This is not a request to join the M.L.C. or to form another ongoing group. Rather, the meeting will concern how we may cooperatively work to defeat this proposal. Please share this invitation with other members on your City Council and J01n us on March 10, 1988 to review the proposal in more detail and plan our lobbying strategy. J:::ilJ1 & rJ~ames F. Miller City Manaqer._____ __ ____ the city offices are located at 14600 minnetonka boulevard minnetonka, minnesota 55345-1597 933-2511 . - ~ CITY OF CORCORCAN, 9525 CAIN ROAD, CORCORAN, MN. PHONE 420-2288 55340 10 Ceo ~/I/{{g' TO: MINNESOTA LEGISLATORS, CITY AND COUNTY OFFICIALS AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES FRon: BOB DERUS, CITY CLERK/ADt'lINI STRATOR DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1988 SUBJECT: TERMINATION OF THE SANITARY LANDFILL PROCESS THE LANDFILL SITING PROCESS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR NEARLY A DECADE. A GREAT HUMAN AND ECONOMIC TOLL HAS BEEN PAID BY THE PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES AFFECTED. IT IS TIME TO EXAMINE WHETHER THIS PROCESS SHOULD CONTINUE. IT IS THE CITY OF CORCORAN'S INTENTION TO PROGRESS LEGISLATION TO TERMINATE THE PROCESS. THE ENCLOSED PAPER DETAILS THE CITY'S POSITION AND LAYS THE GROUNDWORK FOR LEGISLATION. WE NEED YOUR HELP~ PLEASE READ IT AND SHARE IT WITH OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS. WITH YOUR HELP WE CAN PUT AN END TO IT. THANK YOU. PLEASE CONTACT t'1E I F YOU (,JOULD LIKE TO ASSIST. "--- , -J.' E" [-~; ~". .~.. ~ /,,- " " ~.t. ',.\ii I. ..iJf (. ~r~2!~oltl ..- '... r'T\, ()Ie: -^~.I'Y)'.fr::R .. . - . With the primary goal of encouraging waste abatement and secondly the provision of environmentally suitable waste disposal facilities, the Waste Management Act of 1980 set in motion several parallel and concurrent efforts to site a hazardous waste land disposal facility; hazardous waste treatment facilities; and in the metropolitan area, municipal solid waste landfills, demolition waste landfills, and a land disposal site for sewage sludge .:ish. ONLY THE METROPOLITAN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL SITING PROCESS IS STILL ONGOING--ALL THE OTHERS HAVE BEEN TERMINATED. Anoka County has taken the lead, through its 1988 Legislative Package, in requesting that the wisdom and purpose of continuing the landfill siting effort be reconsidered. The points outlined below address this issue. The Waste Management Act ~equired that potential sites be found for the disposal of municipal solid waste and that the Metropolitan Council require development of only the miflimum potential capacity required through the year 1,000. However, the sites still under consideration are now being evaluated largely for the disposal of ash and other resource recovery facility residues and rejects. And sites are now expected to provide capacity well beyond the year 2000, in some circumstances sites would not even be developed until some time in the next century. APPROPRIATION OF THE SITES FOR DISPOSAL OF OTHER WASTES IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT MN Stat. 473.803 Subd. la specifies that sites be found for the disposal of municipal solid waste(MSW). Ash and other wastes not collected and disposed. in the aggregate are expressly excluded in the statutory definition of MSW (MN Stat. 11SA. 03 Subd. 21). "l"1b:ed 1TI1.lnicipal solid waste" means garl)age, refuse, and oth<:,r solid wd5te frorn rec;ic1ential, commercial, industrial, and community activities which is generated and collected in aggregate, but does not include auto hulks, street sweepings, ash, construction debris, mining waste, sludges, tree and agricultural wastes, tires, and other materials collected, processed, clnd disposed of as separate waste streams. Legislative intent is quite clear that use of the sites be limited to MSW. At the same time that the MSW siting effort began, distinct processes were required in the Metropolitan Area to identify potential sites for demolition wastes and for sewage sludge ash; a state-wide process was also required for a hazardous waste landf ill. ,- . ~ In part, separate processes Eor MSW, demolition waste, and sludge ash were required because it was understood that siting criteria for the different purposes would differ. (There is some confusion now because portions of the Waste Management Act dealing with evaluation, selection and development oE sites refer to "solid waste facilities"---a term which includes a \oIide range of materials in addition to MSW. This should not be misconstrued to indicate approval for using the sites for other waste::;. The:3e sections of the act were written to be broad enough to cover both the MSW siting effort and the concurrent demolition waste siting program. The demolition waste siting requirement was eliminated several years ago.) The Washington County Attorney's Office has provided guidance on the preparation of the Scoping Decision for the EIS on the_ County':::; candidate landfi)l site in Lake !~llllo. Because the Waste Management Act specifies use of the sites for MSW, the EIS for the Washington County site will not consider its use for demolition wastes or for ash. LANDFILLS ARE BARRED FROM ACCEPTING MSW FOR DISPOSAL AFTER 1990. MN Stat. 473.848 prohibits land disposal facilities in the Metropolitan Area from accepting MSW after January 1, 1990 with the exception of waste transferred from resource recovery facilities. The exception provided in the statute is consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Solid Waste Management Development Guide/policy Plan which specifies that MSW could be landfilled after 1990 in the event of emergencies, if alternate processing arrangements can not be made_ Some, however, are viewing the statute as allowing the landfilling of MSW diverted from transfer stations which also serve resource recovery programs. This is patently counter to the Council Policy Plan. More significantly, if such diversion occurs regularly, the Council's standards Ear management of waste by recycling and resource recovery would be violated. If abatement targets are not being met, the Council is obligated by statute (MN Stat.473.149 Subd. 2d) to recommend legislation which would transfer solid waste management responsibilities to assure that the specified abatement targets are achieved. In short, state law specifies use of candidate landfill sites for MSW. Ash and other discrete waste streams are, by definition, not MSW. Metropolitan landfills are barred from dispOSing of MSW after 1990. And there is a failsafe mechanism in place intended -to prevent slippage in meeting the abatement targets. It is thus illogical to continue a siting program for MSW facilities. Moreover, the distinction between MSW and ash/reject disposal facilities has become cleamrover the past years. EPA and MPCA guidance on ash disposal which has only become available in recent . v months now clearly points toward manofills as the proper disposal method. ALL OTHER SITING EFFORTS, BEGUN WITH THE MSW SITING PROGRAM HAVE BEEN TERMINATED The demolition landfill siting program was eliminated based on the belief that private enterprise would capably satisfy disposal needs. The Waste Management Act specifies that the Metropolitan Council Policy Plan and County solid waste master plans encourage private provision of waste disposal facilities (MN stat. 473.149 ~nd MN stat. 473.803 subd. 1). Little effort has been devoted to-date to identifying barriers to private provision of disposal capacity or to developing means to facilitate the alternative of private service. The hazardous waste land disposal siting effort has been terminated. An innovative alternative process is underway to locate a hazardous waste treatment facility. The effort relies on a negotiation process with significant local tinancial compensations to enable facility development. Efforts to site a sewage sludge ash landfill in the Metropolitan Area have been terminated. An intensive analysis of potential alternative uses of the ash has resulted in operations to reclaim metals and to produce building materials. A requirement for comparable intensive evaluation of the potential for abatement of residuals from municipal solid waste processing does not exist. Elimination of the MSW sites, seen by many as a fallback for residuals disposal, will increase pressure for residuals abate~ent. IF THE MSW SITING EFFORT CONTINUES MILLIONS OF PUBLIC DOLLARS WILL BE EXPENDED, YET STRONG DOUBTS REMAIN ABOUT THE ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT ANY OF THE SITES The stringency of MPCA landfill requirements has increased diamatically since the siting process was begun. Marginal sites approved for consideration in the early 1980's would not likely be approved today. Use of land enrolled in ag preserve programs and use of regional recreation open space is subject to challenge, but the issues remain untested. Liability for environmental testing and for future operation are significant and potentially insurmountable county concerns. Critical questions remain unanswered and untested for each stage of the site identification and evaluation processes: county, MPCA and Metropolitan Council. The~e are serious limitations to the present structure of county selection and development. It seems foolh~rdy to have the same ..- . y governmental unit responsible for achieving waste abatement be in control of landfill capacity--the ultimate fallback if abatement programs are inefficient, insufficient or costly. Landfill capacity has consistently been viewed parochially. Serious intergovernmental conflict can be expected .if some counties lag in developing effective abatement programs at the expense of others. THE SITING EFFORT ACHIEVED ITS PRIMARY PURPOSE--SUFFICIENT PRESSURE AND PUBLIC SUPPORT WERE GAINED 'TO SHIFT TO A NEW WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. IT IS TIME NOW TO STOP THE PROCESS AND TO PURSUE NEW DIRECTIONS: MAXIMUM RESIDUALS ABATEMENT AND, ONLY IF ABSOLUTELY NEEDED, UP-TO-DATE DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES o CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 1, 1988 - AGENDA 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to order o o 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. continued Public Hearing/Bluebird Street/88-2 5. Discussion Items a. Oak Bluff 2nd Addition Final plat b. Woodland Creek Final Plat c. purchase of Conroy Property d. Revised Feasibility Report/87-lIB e. Corona Joint Powers Agreement f. 6. Staff, Committee, Commission a. proposed Resolution/Highway Funding b. South Andover site Comments c. Schedule March Work Session d. Park Board Requests for Projects *e. Carpet Proposal for Council Chambers 7. Non-Discussion Items a. Receive Feasibility Report/Kensington Estates 3rd Addition/88-6 b. Receive Feasibility Report/Hills of Bunker Lake 3rd Addition c. Order Feasibility Report/Brandon's Lakeview Est. a. li..pIU~8. ~ Plane ana l!ipl!l!Ie/87 11 e. Approve plans and Specs/Woodland Creek f. 8. Approval of Minutes 9. Approval of Claims 10. Adjournment * not on published agenda o o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March I. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering AGENDA SECTION NO. 4 ITEM continued Public Hearing NO. Bluebird Street/88 2 BY: James E. Schrantz 1988 FOR The City Council continued the public hearing for project 88-2 Bluebird Street so the property owners co~ld sign the petition. To date, February 24, 1988, the petition shows 4 yes and 4 no. We will place the latest update in the agenda packet. Resolution is in February 18, 1988 packet. MOTION BY TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION March I, 1988 DATE AGENDA SECTION NO.. . It D1Scusslon em ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROVE~FOR AGENDA ( BY: Engineering Sa -(.,~ ITEM NO. Oak Bluff 2nd Addition Final Plat BY: Todd J. Haas J The City Council is requested to approve the final plat for Oak Bluff 2nd Addition. The final plat is in conformance with the preliminary plat. Park dedication has been paid in full. It is recommended that the plat be approved subject to the following: 1. The City Attorney presenting a favorable title opinion. 2. security in the amount of $1,220.00 to cover legal, engineering, street sign and installation costs. 3. The developer escrow for the uncompleted grading of the site which is to be determined by the City Engineer. 4. Not to be signed by the Mayor or Clerk until their is a executed Development Contract, escrow paid (15% of the total cost for the improvements for the property (streets, utilities, etc...)) and a development contract awarded. COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY MOTION BY C TO , o o o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF OAK BLUFF 2ND ADDITION AS BEING DEVELOPED BY CONTINENTAL DEVELOPMENT IN SECTION 26-32- 24. WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat of Oak Bluff 2nd Addition; and WHEREAS, the developer has presented the final plat of Oak Bluff 2nd Addition; and WHEREAS, Park dedication has been paid in full; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby approve the final plat of Oak Bluff 2nd Addition contingent upon receipt of the following: 1. The City Attorney presenting a favorable Title opinion on the property being platted; and 2. Security in the amount of $2,150.00 to cover legal, engineering, street sign and installation costs. 3. The developer escrow for the uncompleted grading of the site which is determined by the City Engineer. 4. Not to be signed by the Mayor or Clerk until their is a executed Development Contract, escrow paid (15% of the total cost for the improvements for the property (streets, utilities, etc...)) and a development contract awarded. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover at a meeting this day of , 1988, with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor Victoria Volk - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March L 1988 AGENDA SECTION NQ. . It D1Scusslon em ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT APPROV.. f{:JOR AGEN " Engineering 1'~\o\ 5b ITEM Woodland Creek Final NO. Plat BY:Todd J. Haas BY. The City Council is requested to approve the final plat for Phase I of Woodland Creek. The final plat is in conformance with the preliminary plat. It is recommended that the plat be approved subject to the following: 1. The City Attorney has presented a favorable title opinion. 2. Security in the amount of $2,150.00 to cover legal, engineering, street sign and installation costs. 3. The developer escrow for the uncompleted grading of the site which is to be determined by the City Engineer. 4. Park dedication of cash in lieu of land $10,000.00. Park dedication also includes reduced green fees ($1.00 discount) for Andover Residents for five years; SEE ATTACHED Park and Recreation meeting minutes from July 9, 1987. 5. Not to be signed by the Mayor or Clerk until their is a executed Development Contract, escrow paid (15% of the total cost for the improvements for the property (streets, utilities, etc...)) and a contract for improvements awarded. MOTION BY TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY o o o h Park & Recreatio; Meeting Minutes July 9, 1987 Page Two MOTION by Kieffer, seconded by Strootman-to accept caSK in Ifeuof~land as determined by the city engineer for park dedication for Colonial Creek. Woodland Development would provide a twenty foot walkway between Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 with chain link fence and assist with the cleanup of Creekridge Park, fifty feet on either side of the proposed entrance. Motion Failed (VOTE: 2-yes, 3 no (Sabel, Kinkade, McMullen]). Discussion Larry Strootman did not feel that the park commission should ever be involved in accepting service of any kind as park dedication. MOTION by Kinkade, seconded by Sabel to accept as park dedication for Colonial Creek, $10,000 in cash, payable at time of final plat; reduced green fees ($1 discount) for Andover residents for five years; a twenty foot walkway between Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 of Colonial Creek with hedging; and assistance with cleanup of area that would be used as a proposed entrance (fifty feet on either side of entrance located at Creek- ridge Park). Motion carried. (VOTE: 4-yes, I-no (Strootman]). Discussion: Larry Strootman felt park dedication should be land or cash for parks, not service) He stated that the park commission does need money for development of existing parks and accepting service may leave the commission open to criticism from other developers. LANGSETH PARK Fencing for Langseth park, located on 174th Street off of County Road 9 has been estimated at about $900. MOTION by Kinkade", seconded by Strootman to request Frank Stone to order chain link fence for east side of Langseth Park with cost not to exceed $950. Motion carried unanimously. REPORT FROM PUBLIC WORKS Prairie Knoll grading has been approved. for grading. Hawk Ridge will go out for bids The City Council passed the amendment from to alleviate drinking from playing fields. this in the newsletter. the park board to Ordinance 47 Gretchen said she would put Frank will check with the DNR to see what the update is on the Rum River Canoe Landing. Larry asked if they could give an estimated completion date. REPORT FROM PARK CHAIRMAN Sales are running now on play equipment. City Hall has $4,000 alloted for equipment and it was decided that Frank will prepare an order from Mexican Forge--the money has been approved. Frank will also bring catalogs for the next park meeting. This will be an agenda item. o o o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF WOODLAND CREEK PHASE I AS BEING DEVELOPED BY LAWRENCE B. CARLSON, PRESIDENT OF WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT CORP. IN SECTIONS 28, 29, 32 & 33 TOWNSHIP 32 RANGE 24. WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat of Woodland Creek; and WHEREAS, the developer has presented the final plat of Woodland Creek; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has presented a favorable Title opinion on the property being platted; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby approve the final plat of Woodland Creek Phase I contingent upon receipt of the following: 1. Security in the amount of $2,150.00 to cover legal, engineering, street sign and installation costs. 2. The developer escrow for the uncompleted grading of the site which is determined by the City Engineer. 3. Park dedication fees in the amount of $10,000.00. 4. Not to be signed by the Mayor or Clerk until their is a executed Development Contract, escrow paid (15% of the total cost for the improvements for the property (streets, utilities, etc...)) and a contract for improve- ments awarded. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED with the following variances: 1. Variance for lot depth for Lots 4, 9, 14 and 19 Block 8. MOTION seconded by Councilman City Council of the City of Andover at a and adopted by the meeting this day of , 1988, with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST~ Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor Victoria volk - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1. 1988 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Administration FOR AGENDA SECTION NO. Discussion ITEM Purchase of Conroy NO. Property 5.c. BY: Vicki Volk The City Council is requested to approve the expenditure of $2,798.26 for the purchase of the tax forfeit Conroy property. The 80 foot strip that we split from the original parcel will cost $26.95 and the east parcel is $2,771.31 (See attached.) The County is anxious to have this transaction completed as the parcel containing the house has been sold contingent upon the city selling to Mrs. Conroy the 80 foot strip of property. The County will from the proceeds of the sale pay the City the special assessments in the amount of $2,647.00. V:Attach. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY CHARLES R. LEFEBVRE County Auditor Ext.1134 o o CO U N TY OF ANOKA Office of County Auditor COURTHOUSE ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 612.421.4760 February 18. 1988 Ms. Victoria Volk Ci ty of Andover 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover. MN 55304 RE: Conveyance of tax forfeited lands PIN f33 33 24 11 0018 Dear Ms. Volk: I am enclosing a copy of the applicatioll by governmental subdivision for conveyance of tax forfeited lands on the above lIamed parcel. Before I can continue with the process of obtaining the deed from the State of Minnesota I need a check from you for the amount of $2798.26 This amount includes tho following: West part East part Purchase Prien State Assurance Fund state Deed & Record fee State Deed Tax Stamp $10.00 .30 10.00 6.65 $2647.00 79.41 30.00 14.90 TOTAL fOR EACH PARCEL $ 2 6 .95 $2771.31 Please make the check payable to: Anoka County Treasurer and return as soon as possible. If you any questions regarding this matter please feel give me a call. have free to '{lI~.Je ~ ' Ct.,,'" R, t.,,,b,, ?J+ :::'r;;t:~--- J.R. Plemel. Deputy Auditor Enclosures Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer {,;ID.)..l o o o Y33-32-24-11-0010 (Part) FOR CONVEY ANCB OF ldover COmMissioner Haas-Slc~fcn -' Form No. 2597.S-I~ arll1l1'nl..1 T.nnll"" .....'m N.. II.' toMII'f'I'a,"w('n..Mlnn" .Iv. APPLICATION BY GOVERNME TAX.F .1/;"11'1'0111 SIIIIIII,",'1 N~;!'. s,.(./;"" N'8.!.OI In tM Matter 01 tM Applicatwn of . ..... th.'" ..<;:~t.Y..9f...bJ!c;j!?Y.."'.L..... a Govern~ntaZ Subdiriswn, for a COnl'eyanoe of Certain Landi. Com~' IU/W. <;:tt.Y...!?f....!.\!1qqver. (Il.m~ of .vbd.i...iaiop) ...............and aZIe~..: 1. Th4t applicant i. a (a) . .muni cipal....cox:por.atio.n. ~. That (b).. ~~~p;tg Council 33 -3d' ~t/ ,1!.CKJ,''g .P."':r:.~~~.s.",...?.E....S..,:,bJ",E~. 3. That there u sitUdted within appli'cl certain tax-forfeited land delcribed IU foll<Jw f?--r , I ( E "6:) I / of.. ......!\!:\9.K'L.. See attached legal description 4. That .aid land. are (c).....t."'.~....:f.~I.X:J~.i.t.....Q.p~.n..~.p.il.C;;g.............................. ........................................................ 5. That appl.i<>ant cU.ir.. to obtain said land for tM folwUJin; purp<J''': (d). ....J?"I:>.1..i..c...,p..~." 6. Tlw.t there i8 need for .uch lands for tM folwwinl! rta'ons: WMrefore applicant prays that said lands be conveyed w it for tM use stated Mrein. .~....:~::::.~~~;...:..:....::..::.::.:..::'. It. ............l:I.":Y..C>E...../.:................................................. ! ~. ,1/ / f ..nd V.iC.t.ox:.ia...'lDlk......4:........,:8.-.-::..L;..:t.:?::..... It. .......S~.1:X.....~.1.."'E.~.............. 6tate of '-innt5ota. In. County of. .......Anoka ... ....J.er.ry....windschi.tl...and....Vic.t.or..ia..volk...... ...................... ........each beinl! first duly sworn. cUp<J.e and ,ay. each for himself, tlw.t tMY a re respectively the .................~.":y'?r.:...................... ........................ and ...... ...... .....City....Clerk..................... of tM................City....of...-Andovel'.......................................................................; tlw.t tMY h4ve read tM fore;oing appZi<Jatwn and k n<>W tM contents tMreof; and th4t tM matters ,tated therein are trIte. .,,^^~^^,,,,,,,^^,\"I,'.'.,\'.A.'.. . 1.......,,\ SHlRlEV A ctItnON ~tljj NOTARV PUBLIC. MINNLSOTA : """'" ANOKA COUNTY ~ 11.)' Commbsion ExpIres Oct. 12. 19j~1 ~ .~'''~ ~~......{~,"-7~/L... . .~,.~,:o<..i"If::!......................... S~bscribed and .worn w beforB "'" thi8....,;:.~....:f........... :~..~~~r.:...f~~~. .Votary Public, .. .a,r~... ...County, Minn. .lfy oommi8sion e.;cpir............!.O.::::...L.,:?,::::..!..7..ZQ........ tal Statt fact5 re:lati..-e to le.,1 orl'aniutioQ. (b) Stue facti Ihowin( authoriutioR 01 ICQUilition 01 land hereinafter ducribcd by tctOIUtlOD of 10000&t'Il.h:l.1 body or by ...oterl, etc., .1 the ca.. Toll)' requite:, anlelilD<< c.opiu of rnoluli?D.', if any. . . ~~) ~T:~ri.~t~::::~ :1 ::~~".~,:..u:h~u~:~U~:I~ ~~::~r ::A I~nd,."mll.r fact.. RESOLUTION OF COUNTY BOARD UPON APPLICATION o WHERE.';:), /'/,e County Bo"rd of into tlu' alle~"fion8 of the application of datd JaT1Uj'Il:'.Y.4.~ ,.Iv?? A~9.KA.... .County, .Ifinn...ota, has er.ami.n.a . .c;i, tyOf....l\nqpyeL. ... ............... .... J for the conrfyanrc of oert.ain lands therein deqoribe-d; noU'~ Therefor<. be it. ruoZ..ed by th,' County Bonr',] 0/ fhat if hercl,y approz'cs said appUcatiJ'}n amI rc .}\~9.~}\ County, l,Iin-nt:Rofa, 71U~...~~.tQ~..~.~;:t;Lr 0n\.~. ...~ranted.. 6tate of Jfltnnesota, County of .A~9.KA JM' o I, ....9.~?:.J;).~,? R. ~~.~.~.PY!..~ . ..., county auditor and clerk of the County Board of . ... ... Ana}:'.? County, .Ifinne..ota, hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of resol,utian of the County Board of saf,d cottnt.y with the oridina.l reccrd thereof in tke. ntinutes of tlu proceeding8 of 80.id board at 0. meetin~ du.ly held ..f..ep.l:'.>;1;'IXY....!3...... . , 19..8 ?, and that tlu. sa,me is a true and. oorrect copy of said oritinal record and 0/ the whole thereof, and that said Teso~uticn wos duly adopted by said board at said meeting. I further certify that the application referred to in sald resolu,tion is hereto atta.cked. witnu8 my hand and seal this.... .....day 01.................... .... (~rt;/f;;t;,~'/..~<!.O........................................ County .fuditor and Clerk of the County Board ,19. .A.!'".9fu.\... ......County, Minnesota OFFICE OF THE CO.YMISSIONER OF TAXATION St. Paul, .Yinn.. ....,19............ Upon d.ue oonsideratitln (If tJu. wUhin, appLi.c.ati on it is orcUr'eiL that the sam.c be Q.nd it is hereby re jee/fd granted" ....................... ............................................................. Commissioner of Tax.aUQn By Depuf.y 1 0; e,; .i ,g ... ~ ~ .... .... ~ ..:I <z 0 l' "l ~ ~ ~. ~O ..... ~ ~ ] :2 ~ n ~ ~f-4~ .~ ~ 0 U ~ ~'Oj .., 1 ~ ::3 .... ~ Q. ?:l ] t; ~ Q. {; 'Ie. ..... ~ < ] ~ 1 ~ J ~ 1> ! ~ ~ ~ - I!l .! t: ~ '- 0; "'l .... :n n ,. z C "'0 n -l c 0 "'0 "'0 -l f "11 0 C ,. ,. c: 0 ,. m ~ ,. r n n z c ::t -l CP >< '" z :n ,. m -l :n m m r CP n m n -l =< :n m n 0 -< :n :n m "'0 ,. '" ,. m r z 0 -l n '" III :n ,. "'0 0 Z -l ,. 0 :n -l z of. 0 r (5 ? . i z m 0 z 0 c ,. 'd 0'\ , I ,. -l f-' H IV -l m \.0 f-' Z if m CO Ul CO il f-' (1) IV W i, (1) 0 w I ~ "tl I n C ~ w -f l:D n- IV C r "T1 n- I ~ 0 Pl IV '" r n :n -l "T1 0 ..,. '" ::f Ul I "'0. ,. V> V> m (1) 0 I-' ,. r ~ ~ ::j -< m r r 0- n- I-' r m Pl I m m 0 ,. "'0 Vi 0 3: :n ~ -l 0 -n ...:j n z H I-' 0 m < 0 I-' ::l CO ;;0 .... .... ... 0 -n I t-3 m w 11 'U ::j I s:: Pl CO Ul 11 m U1 n- n- O 0'\ ~ U1 Z \.0 0 W VO w I c z 0 C -l CP -l r n -l '" ,. -n ,. 0 "T1 0 0 c: 3: ,. c: :i "'0 "'0 0 -l "T1 Z -l r CP Z r m "'0 ;;0 m m 0 ,. C 0 -l CP n :n -n c :n r m m ,. m 0 -l Z :n :n ,. Vi -l 0 C'l r ,. ::j 0 '" C'l "T1 III r C m "T1 :n ;;0 m m -l :n m ::r: ... ... ... .... "'0 ;;0 m "T1 0 m :n 0 :n n ~ :n -l 0 ::j '" ~ Z ;;0 ::r: ,. "tl 0 0 r m "tl C ;;0 ~ Z ::t '" "tl V> m ~ ~ m ,. > 0 C 3: -f 0 "'0 < ~ -f Z ~ m .0 r 0 c m c:..; ~ 00 ..~ - o \ \ \ o The east 80 feet of the following described parcel: All that part of the NE~ of Section 33-32-24, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at a point on the south line of said NE~ distant 490.0' West from the SE corner of said NE~: thence North at right angles to said south line a distance of 630.0': thence West and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 154.0': thence north on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE\ a distance of 330.0' to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be hereby' described: thence south on the last mentioned line a distance of 207.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE\ a distance of 311.2'; thence south on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE\ a distance of 127.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE\ a distance of 110.0': thence north- westerly deflecting to the rt. 28047'10" for a distance of 242.4'; thence northwesterly deflecting to the rt. 2048'45" for a distance of 197.1', more or less, to the centerline of CSAH #18: thence northeasterly along the centerline of said CSAH #18 to its intersection with a line drawn northwesterly from a point, deflection angle 16026' drawn from a line which at rt angles to the east line of said NE~ (from W to NW) said point being 180' west on a line drawn at rt angles from the East line of said NE\ at a point distant 1023.0' south from the NE corner of said NE\; thence southeasterly along the last mentioned northwesterly line a distance of 410.0', more or less, to a point which is 180' west as measured at right angles from the east line of said NE\: thence south and parallel with the East line of said NE\ to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant 960' north as measured at rt angles of the south line of said NE\: thence west and,parallel with the south line of said NE\ to the actual point of beg: (Subj. to an easement for hwy. purposes over the NW'ly 50' as measured at right angles to the centerline of CSAH #18) Except all that part of the NE~ of Sec. 33-32-24, Anoka County, MN described as follows: Commencing at a point on the south line of said NE~ distant 490.0' west from the southeast corner of said NE~: thence north at right angles to said line a distance of 630.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE\ a distance of 154.0'; thence north on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE~ a distance of 330.0' to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be hereby described; thence south on the last mentioned line a distance of 207.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line if said NE~ a distance of 311.20'; thence south on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE~ a distance of 127.00': thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 110.0'; thence northwesterly deflecting to the right 28047'10" 'for a distance of 202.98'; thence North 44026'53" East to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant 1160.0' North, as measured at right angles, from said South line: thence E parallel with said south line 667.00' to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 180.00' W, as measured at right angles, from the East line of said NE~: thence south parallel with said Eline 200.09' to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with said south line from the actual point of beginning; thence West parallel with said south line 499.81' to the actual point of beginning. o .~ o , 33_32_24-11-001B (part) 65933-lB2U J\n<.!Ovur coml'1issioncr Haas-Stettcll ,Iii",,, it;fd" Sf"IIII,.,., NI;.fl. .\,.1'1;11" ..'8.!.OI Mlllf'l'l""II('n,Mlnn" I.. Form No. 2597.S U.. .,In,..1I1..f Tnnll"" r"rl1l s.. lor'! APPLICATION BY GOVERNMENTAL S T AX.FORFEITE FOR CONVEYANCE OF o In tM Matkr ot tM .-ipplicafion ot ........ .. G.,itY...9{ 1Hld..9.Y..EO!.... a Government-al Subdi1'isi,on, for a Conl'tyanoe. of Certain Landa. Com~. now.. C~.t Y.. ?fA..rl.~.?"eJ::.. (pan'lll)f,ubdlyitiop) ...and allete., 1. That applkant i. a (a) ..mll.!) i.ci P<lJCQXP.9X<l.t ;'.9.!l.. ft. That (b) ..t):1ec::it:Y c::OUIICU .):1C1s..",.Il:t:J:>?r~"",<i..~ll",..P~J::cJ:>CI!3",.?t.:...!311l:?j.",."t property $. That tMre U situated within applicant's boundari.. in tM County of......... certain tax-forfeited land described as tollows: .......................... See attached legal description Anoka 4. That said land. are (o)...........t.ax....forf.e.i.t ..open ...space......sux:rounding...properties are residential 5. That applicant lUsires to obtain said land tor tM foUowint pur_: (d)..... ..R.yp.J.;i.c.....\!..:e.~ o 6. That there u need for such lands tor tM followint reasons: ...P"'~!<....}i"rl.d.:.!....P?.r:(].~.r:\!..!. fire statlon, street Wherefore applicant prays that said tana. ~ conveyed to it tar the .... Btakd Mrein. ~. . "J; 'ge~W.....-K-&./.~ By ............'?.....y.W.t..!19.:eg.J:lJ.t..1.................. "nd It. ........May.ar.........('........;............./...:........... . . lk I --->,:,. . ~., /L./ Vlctorla Vo ii, "".(.~ L"~ ................,..................................h.~.:(.........,.............................. County of...... 33 . 3(J.-d-! .. 11- ~!8 p:+ ........Je.rry....wind(f::/ E 8. 0 ,) .)J'olk....................... .. .......each beint first duly Bworn, depose and say, each fa \..- . .-'" Itively the u....M.eY.9..r............ ..................... and .... .cit..y....C.le.rk ........... ... ...... VJ .._. ....._... .Andml.er.... ............ .................; that tMY have rood the foretoing applkatian and know tM contents tMreotl and that tM matters .tated therein are trlu. 1t.<;:i~Y..c::~"'E!c........... . &tatt of ~(nnt. ..~~Q!Sh o .fVV'''''VvvV..,v~V\f\I\I'./'-''..v",/.',..'.. '.', .,.\ .... . I('~'';'i SHIRLEY A CllI,IO" r~~.\'j NOTARY PUBLIC. MIfiNlSOlA ~ ANOKA COUNTY ;; ft.)' Commission Expires Oct. 12, 19:) :- .~,.,,^".,.'; <h~~:L;t~~~.~...................... ..,.r S.wscribed and &Worn to ~fore "'" thi&...r6.(e.....:::.. day of.9az~.......... 19.I.t .....xkv.L.~....(2.,..f~~..<........... .Vof.ary Pub/i<:. . ... ..a:?1,J,;~... ....Co..nty. Minn. .If y oommusion expir...........I...<J...::..t...2.c::../.."2..'2.Q...... la) Stale f.Ct5 rel.tin to lea',1 ,or..nintioD. (b) Sute f,et. sbo,*ina: aulhonutlon of Icqui.ition 01 land hereinaher dClcribe4 by rClolutioft of Io.araiq body or by ,"oters, etc., aa the cu. r,lly require. .!UChlll' copies 01 rnolutionJ. if aoy. ~~)).16f:;ri.~t~~~~: ~ll:~~"a:':o O:h~u~r&~u~:,&: :~.r:r~r ::ct i~ned/imil.r facll. o WHJo;RE..fS. the County Board of into th<' aUe~"tion. of the application of dat<<! Jan~a,(Y .~Ei , .IV. noU', ANOJ5A, . RESOLUTION OF COUNTY BOARD UPON APPLICATION ..County, Jlinnesot.a, h-as ex.aminr.cl City,. oJ. .,hndpv,!;:); ~B, for i,he conreyan.('c of oed.aill lands tll1!rcin deq(lribcdj Therefort', be it resolved by the County Boord 0/ fha t if herelJY approl'CS said appUcatkm and reeo AJIlQI5.A County, .:4Hn,1U'..8ola. "..~r"nt.ed, mend. that the .a& .":..."'~".., ..: .... '~%n\~- ._.-. ..Sj.. .tt-i,J \~~t!!fj;::i~ County Board of SQ.id Count.]! /, . ",Charles,..R ...,.Le.febvr,e..."..."...",., ,. ...,,', county auditor and. clerk of the County Board of ."..."... ""ADQ)<<l,...., ,..,... . ..., County, .Minnesota, hereby eertify that / have compared the foregoing copy of resolution of the County Board of .aid county with the origi1Ull. record thereof in the minutes of the praeeeding. of said board at a meeting duly held .F.:,",I:>.~ll.a.,J:".Y."9..,,, . ".,. "1988,, and that the same is a true and correct copy of said ori~i1Ul1 record and 01 the whole thereof, and that said resolution was duly adopted by .aid board at said meeting. / further certify that the applwation referred to in .aid resolution is hereto attached. 6tate of jIltnne5ota. COI~nty of .. ,. AJIlQ.J5A,.",.". ,.. . .lss, o Witness my hand and, .eal this ..", .",.. ,... , ",day of "."""... "., .. , ." . , 19 .' "/ / V __~ '/;.~_ ' ..,~~1:J!/f~~r-~/{~'c~;;~t;;jj;;;';d'.'." AJIlQ~A.. . ..County, ..Uinnesola OFFICE OF THE CO.I/MISSIONER OF TAXATION St, Paul, .Uinn,. .,.,19 Upon due consideration of the within appli.ea.ti on U is ordered that the same be and it is hereby rejected, ~ranted. ~ .... :B '" r.e ~ '" f-l ..e ~'O.! ~ 1 ~ ~ ~~ ~~I~ ~ ~a o ..................................... . Commissioner of Taxa.ti.on By Depu.ty a:; .... a:; .... .i ~ t.:> ,g> ""' ] ~ -.,. ~ '- .. " .~ l "c> .. l! .S " e; .... .. .s i ">: .j;. '" ~ " '-' ] "'- .~ ] 1 "'l 1 I:l '<i "" 1:'3 i ~ .!; '- ~ o All that part of the NE~ of section 33-32-24, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at a point on the south line of said NE~ distant 490.0' West from the SE corner of said NE~; thence North at right angles to said south line a distance of 630.0'; thence West and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 154.0'; thence north on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE~ a distance of 330,0' to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be hereby described; thence south on the last,mentioned line a distance of 207.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 311.2'; thence south on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE~ a distance of 127.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 110.0'; thence north- westerly deflecting to the rt. 28047'10" for a distance of 242.4'; thence northwesterly deflecting to the rt. 2048'45" for a distance of 197.1', more or less, to the centerline of CSAU 118; thence northeasterly along the centerline of said CSAU 118 to its intersection with a line drawn northwesterly from a point, deflection angle 16026' drawn from a line which at rt angles to the east line of said NE~ (from W to NW) said point being 180' west on a line drawn at rt angles from the East line of said NE~ at a point distant 1023.0' south from the NE corner of said NE~; thence southeasterly along the last mentioned northwesterly line a distance of 410.0', more or less, to a point which is 180' west as measured at right angles from the east line of said NE~; thence south and parallel with the East line of said NE~ to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant 960' north as measured at rt angles of the south line of said NE~; thence West and parallel with the south line of said NE~ to the actual point of beg. (Subj. to an easement for hwy. purposes over the NW'ly 50' as measured at right angles to the centerline of CSAU 118l Except all that part of the NE~ of Sec. 33-32-24, Anoka County, MN described as follows: Commencing at a point on the south line of said NE~ distant 490.0' west from the southeast corner of said NE~; thence north at right angles to said line a distance of 630.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 154.0'; thence north on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE~ a distance of 330.0' to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be hereby described; thence south on the last mentioned line a distance of 207.0'; thence west and parallel with the south line if said NE~ a distance of 311.20'; thence south on a line drawn at right angles to the south line of said NE~ a distance of 127.00'; thence west.and parallel with the south line of said NE~ a distance of 110.0'; thence northwesterly deflecting to the right 28047'10" for a distance of 202.98'; thence North 44"26'53" East to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant 1160.0' North, as measured at right angles, from said South line; thence E parallel with said south line 667.00' to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 180.00' W, as measured at right angles" from the East line of said NE~; thence south parallel with said Eline 200.09' to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with said south line from the actual point of beginning; thence West parallel with said south line 499.81' to the actual point of beginning. Except the east 80 feet thereof. o " o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE M~r~h 1. lqRR Discussion Item 5d Engineering APPROV~D\R AGE A()D BY: AGENDA SECTION NO. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ITEM NO. Revised Feasibility Report/87-llB BY: James E. Schrantz The City Council is requested to consider the trunk storm drainage revised proposals for Oak Bluff/Winslow Hills/School area. The water and sewer part of the project is on this agenda for plans and specifications approval. A '_ decision on the storm drainage has an immediate impact on Oak Bluff 2nd Addition and an impact on the future Winslow Hills and Santa's Tree Farm property development. John will be at the meeting to discuss. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. 5 Discussion Items DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT 1 March 1988 APPROVED FOR AGE ITEM NO. 5 E. CORONA Powers BY: d'Arcy Bosell zoning Administrator Attached please find the Joint Powers Agreement which is in order for execution pursuant to your Motion of December 15, 1987, also attached. The names of the municipalities actually entering into this Agreement will be added to the cover page and a new cover page will be provided to each municipality by Mr. Bill Dorn. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o o JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AGREEMENT, Made this day of , 19B_ pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 471.59, among the municipalities of: (hereinafter referred to as PARTICIPANTS). RECITALS: PARTICIPANTS are municipalities in Anoka County, Minnesota, sharing many common problems and concerns relative to land use planning, development, interaction with metropolitan government, legislation, and numerous other matters. PARTICIPANTS have, since mid-19B7, from time to time sent representatives to informal meetings of concerned municipalities to discuss common issues and to inquire of other municipalities as to their concerns and problems and have selected the acronym "CORONA", for "COALITION OF RURAL OUTLYING NEIGHBORING AREAS" as descriptive of the nature of the organization in Which PARTICIPANTS have been interacting. PARTICIPANTS, through their respective governing bodies, have now detennined that CORONA can serve an inportant municipal function, and that its activities should be fonnalized and organized. The p.1rpose of this Agreement is to establ ish a framework in which PARTICIPANTS can carry out the objectives of CORONA. o o o IT IS THEREFORE AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Activities - General Authorization. Each of the PARTICIPANTS does hereby authorize the formation of a common board to operate under the name "CORONA", pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 471.59, Subd. 2. The purpose of the Joint Board shall be to do those acts and things necessary to restore control of local land use to local units of government. Pursuant to this objective, the Joint Board shall, with the consent of the governing bodies of the PARTICIPANTS, pursue legislation which would provide effective representation on the Metropolitan Council, for municipalities located within the Metropolitan Council jurisdiction area, but wholly or partially outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA), to determine a way of communicating directly with the Metropolitan Council and to provide an effective organization for presenting the concerns of the affected PARTICIPANTS. 2. Organization. A. Composition of Joint Board. The Joint Board shall be composed of one representative from each PARTICIPANT, to be designated by the governing body of each PARTICIPANT. The governing body of each PARTICIPANT shall also designate one alternate member of the Joint Board. Each PARTICIPANT shall have one vote at each Board meeting, regardless of the number of representatives attending from that PARTICIPANT. A member, once appointed, shall remain in office until the member resigns or the appointment is revoked by the appropriate PARTICIPANT. B. Board Meetings. The Joint Board shall meet at such times and places as the Board itself shall designate, and all meetings shall be open to the public and governed by the provisions of the Minnesota open meeting law. In January of each and every year, commencing in January, 1989, the Board shall select officers from its own number, 2 o o o consisting of a chairman, a vice-chairman, and a secretary/treasurer. Until January of 1989, the officers of the Joint Board shall be James Rahn, Chairman; Marilyn Schultz, Vice-Chairman; and d'Arcy Bosell, Secretary/Treasurer. C. Rules of Order. The Joint Board shall not be governed by any particular rules of order, except that no formal board action shall be taken unless a motion be made and duly seconded, and a majority of a quorum acts favorably on said motion. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the number of PARTICIPANTS. No action may be taken without a quorum, excepting that even with no quorum present, meetings may be convened, discussions may ensue, and the meeting may be adjourned. Minutes shall be kept at each meeting, and approved at the subsequent meeting. D. Clearing House for Funds. The City of Ham Lake shall be the clearing house for all funds of the Joint Board. The City of Ham Lake shall make all authorized expenditures from its own account, and shall be reimbursed for authorized expenditures by the PARTICIPANTS. 1. Contributions. Each PARTICIPANT shall make an initial contribution of $35.00 to the City of Ham Lake to be separately accounted for by the City of Ham Lake for disbursement as provided for herein. Thereafter, from time to time, as additional contributions are needed, the Joint Board shall make its request to the governing body of each PARTICIPANT, detailing the amount of contribution requested, and the reasons therefor. Any PARTICIPANT not desiring to comply with requests for additional contributions may withdraw from this Joint Powers Agreement, without any liability to the Joint Board or to the other PARTICIPANTS, in lieu of making such contribution. 2. Authorized Expenditures. The Joint Board may expend the funds provided to it for such routine items as postage, stationery, reproduction expense, mileage reimbursement and other routine operational expenses, and up to $7.00 per hour for an average of 10 hours per month, to hire an independent contractor to serve as a contact person for research and data gathering purposes. Initially, the appointment of LuAnn Hansen as the independent contractor is approved. Should LuAnn Hansen no longer serve in said role, the Joint Board may, with the approval of the governing bodies of all of the 3 o PARTICIPANTS, appoint a replacement independent contractor. No other expenditure shall be authorized without the unanimous approval of the governing body of each PARTICIPANT. 3. Activities - Specific Requirements. A. Use of the Name "CORONA". The Joint Board may use the name "CORONA" and may display the names of all PARTICIPANTS in a letterhead or other joint communication, in its day-to-day activities. The Joint Board shall not infer that "CORONA" is a separate legal entity, however, and in any official correspondence, the following letterhead or title shall be utilized: CORONA Coalition of Rural Outlying Neighborhood Communities A Joint Powers Effort of the Communities of o B. Official Acts. No communication or correspondence to any party shall be made by the Joint Board inferring that any position taken by the Joint Board bears the endorsement or approval of the PARTICIPANTS unless the Joint Board shall first have received the written resolution of the governing body of each PARTICIPANT endorsing the particular position desired to be taken. In the event that the Joint Board wishes to canvass the PARTICIPANT'S governing bodies for such approval, a proposed resolution shall be submitted to each governing body, and if adopted in substantially the same form as submitted, shall be deemed to re the approval of that governing body. When such resolution be submitted to a governing body of any PARTICPIANT, the PARTICIPANT's governing body shall re permitted two regular or special meetings in which to evaluate and act on the desired resolution. If after two meetings have elapsed, and no action be taken by the governing body of a PARTICIPANT, or if the governing body of a PARTICIPANT rejects the proposed resolution, the Joint Board may nevertheless publish the position of a majority of the PARTICIPANTS to this Agreement, provided that the Joint Board also publish the position of those PARTICIPANTS either taking no action or rejecting the proposed position. o C. No Binding Effect. No action taken by the Joint Board, no publication of any position, resolution or 4 o o o other communication shall be binding upon the governing bodies of any of the PARTICIPANTS, and the governing body of each PARTICIPANT shall, at any time, have the right to alter, modify, amend or withdraw any consent to any position previously taken. 4. Withdrawal. A. Withdrawal at Will. Any PARTICIPANT may withdraw from this Joint Powers Agreement at any time, upon the resolution of its governing body. No advance notice of the enactment of any such resolution shall be required, and withdrawal shall be effective upon the mailing of a copy of the resolution to any officer. B. Termination. This Joint Powers Agreement shall be terminated when there no longer remains more than one PARTICIPANT. Upon termination, if there remains in the possession of any of the officers, or in the possession of the City of Ham Lake, any property or funds, said property or funds shall be distributed equally amongst the PARTICIPANTS who were parties to the most recent contribution of funds to the Joint Board. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Joint Powers Agreement this day of , 19B (Signature blanks for appropriate municipal officials) 5 ~RegUlar City Council Meeting December 15, 1987 - Minutes Page 6 CORONA d'Arcy Bosell stated she has been representing the City at the meetings of the Coalition of Rural Outiying Neighboring Areas for the purpose of regaining Jurisdiction from the Metropolitan Council. Those cities now include Ham Lake, Oak Grove, st. Francis, Ramsey, East Bethel, Centerville, Andover, Columbis Township and Linwood. She reviewed the items discussed at their meetings, noting they are now at the point of wanting to meet with the representatives on the Metropolitan Council regarding their concerns. Ms. Bosell stated they are noW in need of some clerical help, and that LuAnn Hanson has agreed to be the secretary for the group. They are requesting that each city underwrite the secretarial expenses of CORONA in the amount of $35 to cover the next four months. She asked the City Council to ailocate the $35 but to hold the funds until a Joint powers agreement can be drafted and executed. Coun~il discussed t.he goalS of the group and its applicability to Andover. o MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Elling, that we approve the request for secretarial help for CORONA as requested contingent upon execution of a Joint powers ~greement. DISCUSSION: Mayor Windschitl asked that the Council be provided with copies of the Minutes of CORONA. He also suggested if the group is to pursue the matter more actively, that the position of Andover be set by the Council. Motion carried unanimouslY. ~RRONEOUS DEEDS . Dave Almgren, Building Official, explained what apparentlY happened to cause the erroneous deeds of property east of 133rd to Coon Creek. Because it was determined the city storm sewer is not located on the properties in question, the Council asked the staff to determine the procedure for vacating the easement and to determine who the property would be returned to. I Council recessed at 9:12; reconvened the meeting .at 9:23 p.m. FIRE STATION BOND ISSUE Councilman Knight reported School District 15 has rescheduled a $6.9 million bond issue election for February 18, 1988. Councilman Ape! asked if the consttuction of the two new fire stations would lower the cost of insurance to the residents. Fire Chief Bob Palmer didn't think it would. o CITY OF ANDOVER o REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, DATE March 1, 1988 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering FOR ITEM NO. Proposed Resolution/ Highway Funding BY: James E. Schrantz The City Council is requested to review the attached information from the City Engineers Association of Minnesota, and if acceptable, adopt the sample resolution as is or as modified. I need feed back as I am on the Legislative Committee for CEAM. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o o CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION of MINNESOTA February 10, 1988 (I ~~~,~.....;;; ~--_.. "--~.- --"~ U~j t: <<,': li"Jrh~ jj.>'~, ~ I~ ,'- [ ~;..~, I~t~': rJ ;~,;q;, ~ L~';;.1J ~~~R I TO: Mayors, Counci1members, City Administrators, City Clerks, and City Engineers RE: Highway Funding At the City Engineers Association of Minnesota annual business meeting on January 21, 1988, the need for additional monies to preserve existing roadways, reconstruct roads as necessary, and complete construction of the roadway system was discussed. A motion was passed supporting the highway funding recommendations of the Transportation Finance Study Commission. The recommendations are outlined in the enclosed document. The two primary recommendations are that the gasoline tax be increased by three cents per gallon effective June l, 1988, and that the share of the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) revenues going to transportation be increased from the present 5% to 35%. The motion directed that cities be informed of this position of the City Engineers Association of Minnesota, and be asked to take action supporting this position. Mayors, counci1members, administrators and other individual representatives of cities are also requested to contact their legislators to ask them for their support of the recommendations of the Transportation Finance Study Commission. A sample resolution is enclosed for your consideration. Your support of this very essential funding increase for transportation is encouraged. Yours truly, ~L.~ Ronald L. Rudrud, P.E. Vice President, CEAM RLR/an o AVi::{':i6D A<;., A 171<2 Li 1v1 ,,,-lA ?-'i" \,VZ)f:-N~C::1 ON~FT (SA~. (, 1'/ R~-;,) .vJITt-\ Ti--16 p.o-L.w:::.\;v'i~L'1 L-1+'1.....k/6: 6""/'1"'-~~ <"......u,V]I"'<::.IMIJ..+.oqS (>/1 4d? .t?\v: {. "'Iv.?! .-;/1 ttl;\~ i'-\J;;;:-r 3ff'c'()6 .:\-/;> I-">f c"'\C "ccHe~ill'''i +~\~ cJcvwhe.-L"1.v1<j 4..'Ftv.,:t, 1. COMMISSION BACKGROUND The Transportation FInance Study Commission was created as part of the Transportation and Semi-S'tates 1988-89 appropriation bill enacted in the 1987 legislative session. That legislation directed the Commission to study: 1. ,Present and future highway and transit needs. 2. The adequacy of existing revenue sources to meet those needs. 3. Methods of raising additional revenue. 4. Alternatives to raising revenue. 5. Alternative methods of distributing revenues among various levels of government. The Commission was directed to report its findings and recommendations to the legislature by February 15, 1988. The following members of the legislature were appointed to the Commission: Senator Gary DeCramer Senator Keith Langseth Senator Marilyn Lantry Senator Lyle Mehrkens Senator Clarence Purfeerst Representative Doug Carlson Representative Bob Jensen Representative Henry Kalis Representative Bernie Lieder Representative Art Seaberg o At the Commission's fIrst meeting Senator Purfeerst and Representative Kalis were selected to serve as co-chairs. II. COMMISSION ACrIVITIES The Commission's first meeting was in the State Capitol and provided essential background on the developments which had led to the Commission's creation. Rep. Bob Vanasek, Speaker of the House, testified on the scope of the Commission's work, a subject also addressed in a statement provided by Senator Roger Moe, Senate majority leader, and Governor Rudy Perpich. Transportation Commissioner Leonard Levine spoke on the changes which the Department of Transportation were forced to make as a result of funding shortfaIIs after the 1987 legislative session. The next three meetings, also in the Capitol, focused on state and local highway and transit needs and also heard a report on the Legislative Auditor's study of county state-aid distnoution. The Commissionlhen began a series of hearings at locations around the state in an attempt to obtain a sense of what th~ public expected and demanded of the legislature in terms of transportation service and willingness to fInance that service. Meetings were held in Shakopee, Richfield, Two Harbors, Breezy Point, Mankato and Marshall. All these meetings were characterized by heavy attendance (several to the point of capacity) and public testimony from more than 150 persons. While the testimony covered a broad range of transportation subjects almost all of it spoke to the public's awareness of the importance of transportation to the state's eronomic be"lth.' The specific points brought out most frequently in these hearings may be summarized as follows: o 1. The motoring public is willing to pay for the support of highways as long as it can be sure that the money will actually go for highway improvements and maintenance. p.age 2 2. The motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) is a highway user tax and should be treated like other highway user taxes -- that is, dedicated to transportation. o 3. Throughout the state people have been waiting many years for highway improvements and are becoming impatient with what they see as endless delays. 4. 'In rural areas weight restrictions on highways are a serious impediment to economic growth and add significantly to the costs borne by many segments of the economy, particularly those related to agriculture and manufacturing. 5. Public transit is a subject of vital importance to a sizeable segment of the population, and there is strong support among these people for expanded use of MVET funds for transit as well as for highways. 6. Local elected officials are particularly appreciative of the local bridge bonding program and hope it can be continued. 7. People generally believe that Minnesota's highways are in fundamentally good condition but can and must be improved in areas of capacity and safety. The Commission completed its work with an examination of the costs and benefits of credit fmancing for highways, then began its consideration of its final report. III. SCOPE OF THE COMMISSION'S WORK The overall charge given to the Transportation Fmance Study Commission was an extremely broad one. If taken literally it would require several years of study, debate and public testimony to cover adequately. Given the limited amount of time available to the Commission it was necessary for us to concentrate primarily on the most pressing issues of transportation fmance and to look specifically for recommendations to be made to the 1988 legislative session. This meant that We have been unable to formulate a plan for resolving transportation fmancing questions beyond the 1990-91 biennium. o This decision was not made easily. One of the major problems facing transportation today is the fact that many of its financing decisions have been made on a short-term basis which inhibits long-range planning and leads to public confusion and frustration. To the public the practice of scheduling highway projects and then cancelling them appears as bad management and bad planning when in fact it is the inevitable result of short-term decision making. Nonetheless we determined that our first responsibility in fulfilling the legislature's charge was to seek out the public's views on the kind of transportation system it wants and is willing to pay for. This concentration on learning what the public expects from the 1988 legislative session made it impracticable for us to conduct the kind of in-depth hearings necessary to formulating a long-term proposaL Even with this limitation we believe that the recommendations in this report will provide a foundation on which a more permanent solution can be cons,tructed. IV. COMMISSION FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Commission believes that the most immediate transportation needs racing the 1988 legislative session are: (1) the restoration of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's highway improvement program o -~----j- Page 3 o for the 1988-89 biennium to its level before the AUgust, 1987, project deferrals were announced, and (2) the restoration of state public transit assistance at least to its 1986-1987 level. In both these areas the fundamental issue is one of commitment. The first responsibility of the legislature in fmancing transportation should be to avoid retreating on the state's commitment to a highway system adequate to sustain economic development in Minnesota and a transit system which provides a basic level of mobility for a substantial portion of the state's people. Both those objectives have been compromised by recent legislative actions. The reasons for those actions need not be debated here, but we feel that it is now time for the legislature to resolve, or at least alleviate, the problems raised by those actions. Only when the cutbacks of recent years in both highways and transit have been addressed can the legislature begin seriously to restore its full commitment to an adequate transportation system. The magnitude of the cutbacks in the highway development program did not become fully apparent until August, 1987, when the Department of Transportation announced that 36 highway projects with a total cost of about $96 million, originally scheduled for contract letting during the 1988-89 biennium, would be indefinitely postponed. These deferrals were made unavoidable when the 1987 legislature reduced from 50% to 5% the share of Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) revenues going to transportation in this biennium. This had the effect of reducing the Trunk Highway Fund's share of the MVET revenue from about 23% to about 2%, requiring a cutback in the highway improvement program. A failure to increase the share of MVET revenue going to transportation in the 1990-91 biennium beyond the 5% level (a 75% level was provided in the original MVET transfer legislation) will necessitate another round of project deferrals, amounting to approximately $150 million, in that biennium as well. o The present level of state assistance to public transit is also characterized by cutbacks which, while perhaps less dramatic than those in the highway area, nonetheless are symptomatic of a declining state commitment to transit. Appropriations for transit assistance for the 1988~89 biennium were some $500,000 less than actual state spending for the same purposes in the previous biennium, and some $3 million below the original appropriation for that biennium. This continues a pattern of maintaining state support for transit at an essentially unchanged level throughout the 1980s, a pattern which when combined with flat fare box revenue and declining federal ;lid has made transit throughout the state increasingly dependent on property taxes to meet rising costs. The opportunity to attract new riders to transit and to make it more effective in meeting the transportation needs of rapidly-growing areas is being lost. At a time when Minnesota is making major efforts to enhance economic development in all parts of the state a transportation program which is characterized by reductions, delays and uncertainties is clearly counterproductive. The first step toward making transportation part of the solution instead of part of the problem must be to take major steps toward restoring the cutbacks of the past year. To help accomplish this the Commission recommends the following actions: Recommendation No. 1. The state l!'asoline tax should be increased bv three cents oer 2allon. effective June 1. 1988, o The gasoline ta"4: has been the foundation of state highway fmancing for over fifty years, and we believe it is an essential part of any highway fmancing package in 1988 as well. The gasoline tax is the one tax where payments for most taxpayers are most closely related to actual highway use, so that it is widely viewed not simply as another tax but as part of the overall cost of motoring. As long as the gasoline tax is dedicated solely to highway purposes it has widespread public acceptance, and we believe that the public is willing to pay such a tax as the price of improving the highway system to meet the demands of its users. Page 4 In increasing its gasoline tax (which has been unchanged since January I, 1984) Minnesota would be 0 following a clear national trend which has seen eighteen states increase their gasoline taxes since September 1, 1986. Among these states is Wisconsin, which in 1987 increased its tax to 20 cents per gallon. We expect that a number of other states will adopt increases in 1988, including possibly Iowa where the state Transportation Commission has proposed raising that state's 16 cent tax by three cents. Recommendation No.2. The share of Motor Vehicle Excise Tax revenues 20in2 to transDortation should be increased from the Dresent 5% to 35%. As has been noted, many persons who testified before the Commission felt strongly that the excise tax on motor vehicles is as much of a highway user tax as are the gasoline tax and motor vehicle license taxes, and should be dedicated to highways just as those taxes are. We believe that this testimony is representative of a sizeable portion of public opinion. The fact that many people believe that the MVET was always dedicated to highways, and that the legislature in 1983 took it away from highways and has refused to give it back, reflects not so much an erroneous view of the legislative history of MVET as a deep-seated sense that an MVET dedication to highways is fair and equitable. The Commission agrees with this public sense. Additional funds are needed if transportation is ever to become a stimulus for economic development, and the excise tax must be an essential component of a funding package. We recognize the strong feeling on the part of many members of the legislature that they cannot accept an increase in the gasoline tax without a substantial increase in the share of MVET going to highways. We further believe that both sound policy and the necessity of public acceptance of any funding package require that the present division of MVET's transportation share between highways and transit (75% to highways, 25% to transit) be retained. 0 The excise tax is of particular im portance as the legislature is faced with proposals to reexamine highway jurisdiction in Minnesota. Because it is free of constitutional requirements for its distribution among state and local governments the excise tax is the only potential highway user tax with the flexibility to fInance transfers of highways among jurisdictions. The additional 30% transfer would increase the total share of the excise tax going to transportation to 35%. The 30% figure was selected in order to keep the proposal within the realm of feasibility given the fIScal realities facing the next legislative session and also to provide a rough parity in the total package between MVET revenue and gasoline tax revenue. Table I shows the anticipated revenue from the Commission's transportation fmancing proposal. The trunk highway share will be sufficient eventually to restore all the projects deferred from the current biennium's highway improvement plan and avoid more than 80% of the probable deferrals in the next biennium. While this package does not go as far as some of us would like in providing revenue for state highways we feel that it is the largest highway funding package which can realistically be presented to the legislature. The total amount which the package will raise for statewide transit assistance over the next three years is about 552.1 million, or an average of $17.4 million per year. It will be up to the legislature to determine how much of this money will be used to augment present transit appropriations from tb~ general fund and how much will be used to replace those general fund appropriations. The Commission recommends that whatever this decision is, the following fInancing objectives should be met: 1. The dedication of revenue from driver license fees which was used to supplement transit appropriations in the 1988-89 biennium should be repealed for fIscal 1989, and that money be provided from the new MVET revenues going into the transit assistance fund (the dedication is o 1- o .." o Page 5 scheduled to expire at the end of fiscal1989)..Driverlicense fee revenue should properly be used to finance the driver licensing system and ought not to be used permanently as a revenue- raising device. Repeal of this dedication will require about $43 million in MVET funds for fiscal 1989. 2. The new MVET money should also be used to provide the additional funds needed to maintain the Metro Mobility program through the rest of the biennium at its present level of service. The increased demand for this service will force it to run out of money before the end of the biennium unless its appropriation is supplemented or service cut back. The amount which the Regional Transit Board is presently requesting for the Metro Mobility supplement is $7.2 million. These two objectives will require about $11.5 million in fiscal 1989. The Commission hopes that the legislature will fmd it possible to use the remainder of the additional MVET revenues going to the Transit Assistance Fund as supplemental rather than replacement funds, so that the state can make a meaningful renewal of its commitment to transit as a vital public service. While the Commission believes that this program will mark and end to a policy of retreat in the face of transportation problems and a start toward a permanent solution, it is by no means a complete plan. There is a need for a long-range plan to define Minnesota's real transportation needs and to formulate methods of meeting those needs, including long-term sources of fmancing. Our fmal recommendation calls for a process for developing such a plan. Recommendation No.3. The lel!islature should create a Transportation Studv Board to orepare a lonl!- ranl!e studv of transoortation needs and fundinl!. Such a board ought to consist of both legislators and a broad cross-section of the public, including representatives of business, labor, manufacturing, agriculture, tourism and other major highway users. It should be given sufficient time, staff and resources to make a thorough study of transportation needs both today and over the next twenty year and to develop a plan to meet those needs. Such a plan will necessarily be a compromise between the desires of all highway users and the ability of the state to make those desires a reality, but it is hoped that the board's studies will be aimed primarily at achieving a transportation system which will be a positive force for encouraging economic development and expanding public mobility. Specifically, we recommend that as part of its studies the board should consider: 1. The possible use of tolls for fmancing major highway improvoments. 2. The costs and benefits of further borrowing to fmance highway and bridge improvements. 3. The role of town roads in the state's overall road system and the appropriate level of state highway user tax revenue which should go for town roads and bridges. 4. The possible restoration of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's exemption from the state sales tax, and the exemption from the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax previously enjoyed by both Mn/DOT and local units of government. 5. The use of wheelage taxes as a measure for fmancing local road and street improvements. 6. The desirability of amending the Minnesota Constitution to provide permanent dedication to transportation purposes of some portion of MVET revenues. 7. The abandonment of the present per-gallon basis for the gasoline tax and its replacement by a Page 6 tax indexed to fuel consumption, fuel prices, construction or maintenance costs or some other variable. 8. The feasibility and desirability of imposing a sales tax on motor fuel. either at the retail or wholesale leYeL 9. The future of financing major highway improvements through a sharing of the cost between public agencies and benefited economic development centers. 10. The use oC the State Transportation Plan as a me,.h~n;."1 for guiding future transportation investment. While the focus of the board's studies would be on transportation it is our intention that it consider transportation spending within a broader context of overall state spending. The events of recent years indicate that transportation spending. and particuIarly highway spending. can no longer be considered in a vacuum apart from other state programs and commitments. The sooner such a broad context is achieved the more likely it is that the present uncertainties and policy shifts can be replaced by the funding stability needed to carry out any long-range plan. 1 I ~--- o (f! o REVENUES FRal TIlAIISPOItTATlal FtllANCl: STUll CQ4MtSstal REClMlEIIDATlalS 0 1ge9 1990 1991 1990-91 11...,1<. 1IlT0I VEHICLE EXCISE TAX (ADOITIOIIAL 30X lIlAllSFER) Total MllET r........ 221,llOO,OOO 231,559,000 241,748,000 473.307,000 30X of MllET r........ 66,540,000 69,467,700 72.524.400 141.992.100 Tr_It share 16,635,000, 17,366.925 18.131,100 35,498.025 Metro 13 ,:soa. 000 13,893,540 14 ,504 ,llllO 211.398.420 lIon-_tro 3,327,000 3.473,3a5 3.626.220 7,099,605 High...., share 49.905,000 52. tOO. 775 54.393.300 106.494,075 TnN High...., FU'XI 30,691,575 32,041.977 33,451,llllO 65,493.856 Co. State-Aid FU'XI 14,771,llllO 15.421,829 16.100,417 31,522,246 ClUIti.. 14,594,617 15,236,767 15,907,212 31,143,919 T__ 177,263 185,062 193,205 378,267 Nun. State-Aid FU'XI 4,441,545 4,636,969 4,841,004 9,477,'173 3 CEIIT GASOLIIIE TAX INCREASE lIet per pemy 20,682,706 2O,663,5M 20,583, lllI2 41,247,471 Net f r~ 3 centa 62.044, "8 61,990,765 61,751.647 123,742,412 TnN High...., FU'XI 38,159,592 38,124,320 37,977,263 76,101,583 0 Co. State-Aid FU'XI 18,366,243 18,349,266 18,278,488 36,627,754 Cou'Iti.. 1II,145,ll4S 18,129,075 18,059,146 36,1U,221 T__ 220,395 220,191 219,342 439,533 Nun. State-Aid FU'XI 5,522,2112 5,517,178 5,495,1197 " ,013,075 TOTAL AODITIOlIAL REVEIIUE TnN Highway FU'XI 68,851,167 70,166,297 71,429,142 141,595,439 ClUIty State-Aid FU'XI 33,138,123 33,771,096 34,378,904 68,150,000 ClUIti.. 32,740,465 33 ,365, ll43 33,966,357 67,332,200 T__ 397,657 405,253 412,541 811,llOO Nun. State-Aid FU'XI 9,963,827 10,154,147 10,336,900 ' 20,491,041 Metro Tr_It 13.308,000 13,893,540 14,504 ,llllO 28,398,420 lion-Metro Tranalt 3,327,000 3,473,385 3,626,220 7.099,605 Total 161,726,240 165,229,560 165,229,560 o o o o Sample Resolution RESOLUTION # WHEREAS, there is a need for additional funding for highways to preserve the existing roadways, reconstruct roads as necessary, and complete the incomplete system of roadways; and WHEREAS, the 1981 Minnesota State Legislature directed that the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) be transferred to Transportation by increasing increments of 25% percent per biennium beginning with 1984-85 biennium and ending with the total transfer in the 1990-91 biennium; and WHEREAS, the 1981 Legislative law directed that of the amounts transferred to Transportation, 75% go to the Highway Users Tax Distribution Fund (HUTDF) and 25% to the Transit Assistance Fund (TAF); and WHEREAS, the 1983 Legislature, reacting to the State's general fund shortfall, delayed the MVET transfer to the 1986-87 biennium; and WHEREAS, the 1984 Legislature modified the schedule by advancing the first phase of transfer to the year 1985 and was to continue through the 1986-87 biennium; and WHEREAS, the 1986 Legislature acted to eliminate the transfer of MVET funds for the 1986-87 biennium; and WHEREAS, the 1987 Legislature acted to eliminate the transfer of MVET funds for the 1988-89 biennium; and WHEREAS, the roadway systems under the jurisdiction of State, County, City and Township can no longer be maintained to minimal standards utilizing current funding; and WHEREAS, the liveability of Minnesota is highly dependent upon its transportation system of which the roadway system is the major artery; and WHEREAS, a maj or portion of the roadway system in the state is over 40 years old and in need of major repairs or reconstruction; and WHEREAS, the roadway systems will continue to deteriorate at a faster rate than current funds will provide for future repairs or reconstruction; and .H.......'O\J'/"" ~,,- \. WHEREAS, the major issue is to prhovide sufficient funds to meet the needs O. of the total transportation system wit in the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Finance Study Commission has made recommendations to provide additional funding. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY that the city strongly endorses the State funding for transportation; and OF Legislature providing additional FURTHER, since the Transportation Finance Study Commission recommendations will provide such additional funding, the State Legislature is encouraged to consider adoption of their recommendations as outlined in the Transportation Finance Study Commission's working draft document dated January 7, 1988. PASSED by the city council of day of , 1988. this o o ----=- - -T ~ ,- o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT AGENDA SECTION NO.Staff, Committee, i i ITEM South Andover NO. Site Comments 6b Engineering BY: James E. Schrantz The city Council is requested to formulate a response feasibility study reports recommended conective action recommendations. The following comments are offered for your consideration: 1. A time table for the corrective action is very necessary. 2. Immediate attention to this problem is necessary to stop the migration of the contamination. GET STARTED NOW 3. The moratorium on the development status of the surrounding property is a liability to the property owners and the city. 4. Recommend the removal of the surface contaminated soils, (PCB'S, PAH's) to prevent contaminate migration into the ground water. 5. Concur with CCWD's concerns as to the outlet piping into Coon Creek if that alternate is approved. 6. Should the discharge be placed into the sanitary sewer for Metro treatment? 7. Attached are Anoka County Comments. 8. CCWD comments will be available by Tuesday. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o CoIf to Trt Dm COUNTY OF ANOKA COMMUNITY HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOURTH FLOOR COURTHOUSE ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 612-422-7000 Public Health Nursing Services Environmental Health Services Mental Health. Mental Retardation, Chemical Dependency Services Family & Children's Services Volunteer Services Developmental Achievement Centers February 23,1988 R~~lill C'TV O-;-'''o""e:, I United States Environmental Protection Agency c/o Richard Dagnall 230 South Deerborn Street Chicago, Il1inois 60604 o o Dear Mr. Dagnall: Reference is made to the remedial investigation (RI) and feasibility study (FS) reports for the South Andover site, Andover, Minnesota, dated January 29,1988. Our review of these reports indicated the following comments: 1. The FS report indicates that volatile organic compounds were found in one lower sand aquifer well in the southwest corner of the site and that there has been a deep penetration of contaminants into the aquitard separating the lower and upper sand aquifers. It is my understanding from comments made at the February 8, 1988 informational meeting that EPA plans to conduct additional studies at the site to determine more accurately the nature and extent of the problem and make a determination as to appropriate actions necessary to prevent further penetration of the aquitard and/or the lower sand aquifer by contaminants. The report, however, does not project any time schedule for such activities. It would be most helpful if you could advise us more definitively what actions are anticipated and the timing of such actions. 2. All of the alternative actions, except the no action alternative, include provision for implementation of deed restrictions on properties outside of the site area to prevent or limit the construction of below grade structures and the installation of wells. This would seem like an unnecessary corrective action element since the data, to date, does not indicate that there has been any off site migration of contaminants to warrant such a drastic incumberance on these properties. It would seem to be unfair to these ajacent property owners when they had no part in creating the problem at the south Andover site. Such action would also make these properties unmarketable. If there is a risk, or potential risk, the RI/FS should have adequately identified that risk and corrective action should be taken to mitigate and control any such risk at the property line of this site rather than putting the financial burden of such mitigation on adjacent property owners. The need for deed restrictions on adjacent properties should be more adequately investigated and addressed before imposing such restrictions. Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer o o o United States Environmental Protection Agency c/o Richard Dagnall February 23, 19BB Page 2 3. The Waste Disposal Engineering Landfill (WOE) superfund site is located about 3,000 feet north of the south Andover site. As you may be aware, the WOE site has been undergoing RI and FS studies. This site is currently at the point of the record of decision stage. It would seem that since these sites are so close together that the MPCA and the EPA should determine, as part of the record of decision for each site, whether or not the proposed correcti ve actions at each si te will have any adverse effect on the other site and as it relates to discharges to Coon Creek (not only in terms of contaminants but also in terms of disruption of bottom sediments from the large quantity of water that will be discharged). 4. This site has been under study for a long time. Sufficient data should have been developed by this time to determine whether or not the deep aquifer has been impacted or likely will be impacted. I am pleased to see that something will be done about the upper sand aquifer but it is disturbing to have to still wait for an undetermined period of time while the lower aquifer is to be re-studied. This study should be expedited and undertaken immediately and a schedule for such work and related feasibility study included as part of the record of decision. 5. The cost estimates for maintenance of the upper sand aquifer pump out system would appear to be unreasonably low. 6. The cost estimates for connection to municipal water seems to be unusually low. Also, the costs only provide for connection costs and did not include the costs for water mains. In some cases, it may be necessary to extend water mains as part of this action. Your favorable consideration of the foregoing will be most appreciated. If you have any questions concerning this matter or if I might be of any service to you, please feel free to call me. RMH:kk.B cc: MPCA (D. Robohm) City of Andover Commissioner Natalie Haas Steffen o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1, 1988 6c Administration APPROVED FOR AGENDA~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee. ITEM NO. Q:'- ./ Schedule March Work Session BY: James E. Schrantz The City Council is requested to set a work session for 8, 1988 at 7:30 P.M. PROPOSED MARCH WORK SESSION 1. Review Pending change orders (TKDA) 2. Assessment policy Discussion A. Allocation of costs between subdivisions and trunk costs B. City costs for county roads (curb and gutter costs) C. City costs for MSA streets D. storm sewer costs within sub-watershed 3. Schedule for assessment hearings for 1987 projects 4. Construction schedule for 1988 projects (TKDA'S) 5. Lot standards (Dave) 6. community Development report (Daryl) 7. Settlement discussion 80-3 Rosellas (Attorney requests closed session. ) 8. Water system phased improvements. Water Tower No.2? Finance? PROPOSED APRIL WORK SESSION 1. Staff goals/Direction/priorities 2. Growth and Future Staff needs; Equipment needs con't... COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o 3. Rural street/storm Drainage (Catch Basins) 4. Overlay City Streets 5. Gas to Oil Conversion (City Hall/Public Works/Fire) 6. Police Level of Service, etc... 7. Items not completed in March Work Session o o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE Mar~h 1. lqRR AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT 6d Parks Department ITEM Park Board Requests NO. for Projects BY: Frank Stone/Todd Haas The City Council is requested to authorize the letting following items: 1. Park Board has requested staff to check: A. Concerning the Anoka Shopper showing that three different developments have established an Andover Athletic Complex. B. Regarding the raw market value of property per acre in order to provide similar consideration for the upcoming Old Colony Estates project as was done for the Hills of Bunker Lake. C. Regarding the available double garages up to Hawkridge Park for use as a warming house. D. Into receiving a report every month. E. Into obtaining the comprehensive plan for review and revision. 2. Park Board has directed staff to draw up the layout for Oak Bluff Park which will include a soccer field with some grading and seeding. 3. Park Board has directed staff to draw up plans and specs and go out for bids for grading and seeding in Fox Meadows. 4. Park Board has directed staff to immediately obtain the recommended two soil boring at the Northwoods Tennis Court. 5. Park Board is recommending sliding hill needs to be flatten at prairie Knoll. 6. park Board is recommending staff review of Woodland Park and makin estions for ark la out. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o ~ , o REQUEST: FOR THE PURCHASE OF PARK EQUIPMENT PRAIRIE KNOLL 1. Swing Climber Model DE 5680 2. Back Stop 3. Two Players Benches 150 EA. 4. Three Grills 100 EA. 5. Cement Floor Shelter 6. Post Around Parking Lots 1988 Capital Budget 15,000 HAWK RIDGE 1. Shelter 2. Back stop 3. Players Benches 4. Hockey Rink 5. Swing Climber Model DE 5680 6. Cement Floor For Shelter 7. Post Around Parking Lot 150 EA. COST 8,755 1,000 300 300 500 800 Total Cost 11,655 2,600 1,000 300 5,000 8,755 500 600 1988 Capital Budget Total EST.Cost 5,000 18,755 Will Nead 13,755 From Dedication Also Would Like To See Lights On Hockey Rink If There Would Be Extra Money. HIDDEN CREEK SOUTH 1. New Twister Slider 2. Regular Park Benches Model DE 5679 (TWO) 600 EA. 1988 Capital Budget 6,000 3,998 1,200 Total EST. Cost 5,198 '.i, .i o o o o o o HIDDEN CREEK NORTH 1. New twister Slider 2. Regular Park Benches 3. Trees Around Park Model DE 5679 (TWO) 600 EA. Residents Will Plant 1988 Capital Budget 6,000 HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE Model DE 5679 (TWO) 100 EA. 1. New Twister slider 2. Grills 3. Back stop 4. Players benches 5. Class Five & Post for Parking Lot 6. Two Small Picnic Table Shelters 1500EA. Developer Has Paid 4,000. 1988 Capital Budget None Money to Come 11,000 Yet To Be WILD IRIS 1. Two Small Picnic Table Shelters 2. Two Grills 1,500 EA. 100 EA. 1988 Capital Budget 3,800 3,998 1,200 802 Total EST. Cost 6,000 3,998 200 1,000 300 1,000 3,000 Total EST. Cost 9,498 From Detication Received 3,000 200 Total EST. Cost 3,200 An exercise trail would cost approximately $8,000 with the idea to approach contributors once a layout is available. (Nead Council Direction On This) CITY PARK COMPLEX 1. Large Trees 2. Sand Lot Volley BaII,East of City Hall 1988 Capital Budget 1,700 WOODLAND MEADOWS 1. Two Picnic Table Shelters 2. Grills (TWO) 100EA. 1988 Capital Budget 4,000 - 1,200 500 Total EST.Cost 1,700 3,000 200 Total EST. Cost 3,200 ':;, :, ~_: .-:-:. o o o o o o ~ NORTHWOODS WEST TENNIS COURT Chairman McMullen Stated that there should be approximatley $25,000 accruing in the tennis court fund. Awaiting two soil borings. Park Board felt the City should go ahead with the borings and not wait until May. and that the Tennis court will stay in that area. o CITY OF ANDOVER, REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, Commission ITEM Carpet proposal for NO. Council Chambers DATE March 1, 1988 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT 6e Administration FOR BY: James E. Schrantz The city Council is requested to consider new carpet in the Council Chambers. Various people have commented on the appearance of the Council Chambers carpeting. Attached is a price to replace to the old carpeting with the same carpeting as in the new addition. The cost is $2,612.64. MOTION BY TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY Project Locatioll, .. Andover City'"Hall' 1685 Crosstown Blvd. Oddin& Coapany Supreae Floors 1634 N.E. Hwy. 10 Sprin& Lake Park. Attn: Jim Perry MN. 55432 786-5845 Carpet and Laltor 167.33 sq. yds. Pai1ade1paia Capital @ $13.21/sq. yd. tota1in& $2.210.42 (includes installation) 167.33 sq. yds. rultlterltack take up @ $2.35/sq. yd. tota1in& $393.22 6 ft. metal @ $1.50/ft. tota1inl $9.00 33 ft. upholstery @ ~ charze Dispose of old carpet @ ~ caar&e * * * TOTAL $2.612.64 * * * *** custoaer to move furaiture o o R. . E eEl V E i',) FEB 22 198~lJ o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1. 1988 AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT NO. . 7 E' . Non-Discuss1on Item a ng1neer1ng ITEM Receive Feasibility Re- NO. port/Kensington Estates 3rd Addition 88 6 BY:James E. Schrantz The city Council is requested to approve the resolutions (1) declaring the adequacy of petition and ordering preparation of feasibility study (2) receiving feasibility report waiving the public hearing, ordering the improvement and directing preparation of plans and specifications for Kensington Estates 3rd Addition. The 3rd Addition may be constructed in 2 or more phases. MOTION BY TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY o o o February 26, 1988 Mr. James E. Schrantz city Engineer city of Andover 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover. MN 55304 RE: PROPOSED KENSINGTON ESTATES SUBDIVISION 3RD ADDITION Dear Mr. Schrantz: Gerald G. and Carol A. Windschitl do hereby petition for improvements by the construction of watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and streets with concrete curb and gutter with the costs of the improvements to be assessed against the benefiting property which is described as that part of the proposed plat of Kensington Estates 3rd Addition to be constructed in 2 phases. We requested the feasibility report be prepared for all of Kensington Estates in the March 31, 1987 petition. In addition we request that a very careful accounting be made for all costs associated with any future City improvements in this area, such that when the project is finished no questions exist as to who should pay for them. 'ncerely, o o o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY STUDY, WAIVING PUBLIC HEARING, ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER, STORM DRAIN, STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER FOR KENSINGTON ESTATES 3RD ADDITION PROJECT NO. 88-6. WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 1st day of March, 1988, order the preparation of a feasibility stuay-for the improvements in Kensington Estates 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, such feasibility study was prepared by TKDA and presented to the Council on the 1st day of March, 198a;-and WHEREAS, the property owners have waived the right to a Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the feasibility study and declares the improvement feasibile, for an estimated cost of $811,220.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby receive the feasibility report with an estimated total cost of improvements of $811,220.00, waive the Public Hearing and order improvement of watermain, sanitary sewer, storm drain, streets for concrete curb and gutters for Kensington Estates 3rd Addition under Improvement Project 88-6. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council to hereby direct the firm of TKDA to prepare the plans and specifications for such improvement project. BE IT STILL FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council to hereby require the developer to escrow the sum of $25,000.00 with such payments to be made prior to commencement of work on the plans and specifications by TKDA. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the day of City Council at a Meeting this 19 , with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor Victoria volk - City Clerk CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA o RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS OF WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER, STORM DRAIN, STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERS, PROJECT NO. 88-6, IN THE KENSINGTON ESTATES 3RD ADDITION AREA. WHEREAS, the City Council has received a petition, dated February 26, 1988, requesting the construction of improvements, specifically watermain, sanitary sewer, storm drain, streets with curb and gutters in the following described area: Kensington Estates 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, such petition has been validated to represent the signatures of 100% of the affected property owners requesting such improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover that: 1. The petition is hereby declared to be 100% of owners of property affected, thereby making the petition unanimous. o 2. Escrow amount for feasibility report is $1,000.00. 3. The proposed improvement is hereby referred to TKDA, and they are instructed to provide the City Council with a feasibility report. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the City day of Council at a Meeting this 19 , with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor Victoria Volk - City Clerk o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1. 1988 ITEM Receive Feasibility NO. Report/Hills.o~ Bunker BY: James E. Schrantz BY: AGENDA SECTION NO. . . Item Non-DlscUsSlon 7b ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering The City Council is requested to approve the resolution recelvlng the feasibility report, waiving the public hearing, ordering the improvement and preparation of plan and specs for project 88-5 Hills of Bunker Lake 3rd Addition. The developer are proposing to do the 3rd Addition in 2 Phases. The entire 3rd Addition is about 1.1 million dollars requring a escrow of $34,000.00. If developed in 2 Phases the escrow is $17,000.00 for each phase The plat must be recorded along with the construction phases. MOTION BY TO COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1. 1988 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering AGENDA SECTION NO. Non-Discussion Item 7c ITEM Order Feasibility Report NO. Brandon's Lakeview Est. BY: James E. Schrantz BY: The City Council is requested to approve the resolution declaring the adequacy of petition and ordering the feasibility report for project 88-7 Brandon's Lakeview Estates. Mr. Tollefson has paid his $1.000.00 escrow. The preliminary plat goes before the Planning Commission on March 8th. 1988. We will not start the feasibility report until the preliminary plat has been approved. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY STUDY, WAIVING PUBLIC HEARING, ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER, SEWER, STORM DRAIN, AND STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER FOR HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE 3RD ADDITION. WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 12th day of February, 1988, order the preparation of a feasibility stuay-lor the improvements in Hills of Bunker Lake 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, such feasibility study was prepared by TKDA and presented to the Council on the 1st day of March, 1988; and WHEREAS, the property owners have waived the right to a Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the feasibility study and declares the improvement feasibile, for an estimated cost of $1,000.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby receive the feasibility report with an estimated total cost of improvements of ~1.148.23Q.OO , waive the Public Hearing and order improvement 0 watermaln, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and streets with concrete curb and gutter for Hills of Bunker Lake 3rd Addition under Improvement Project 88-5. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council to hereby direct the firm of TKDA to prepare the plans and specifications for such improvement project. BE IT STILL FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council to hereby require the developer to escrow the sum of $34,000.00 with such payments to be made prior to commencement of work on the plans and specifications by TKDA. MOTION seconded by Councilman City Council at a and adopted by the day of Meeting this 19 , with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor Victoria Volk - City Clerk o o o I"~ E ~":'L.' ~j"-. H ~l' F' U. : ( . ":"'!j Ii If':: ~; - _.t" ..~"'l . 1 u::lI ' L~~"~~~~-l . ..~~,~'-o:-"'--r ,.,_."-,-".-,,,~._-'.-."~"" PHONE (612) 867-1845 CITY OF ANDOVER James E. Schrantz City Engineer City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover, Mn. 55304 RE: Proposed BRANDONS LAKEVIEW ESTATES Dear Mr. Schrantz: Brandon Construction, Inc. does hereby petition for improvements by the construction of water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and streets with concrete curb and gutter with the costs of the improvement to be assessed against the benefiting property which is described as: Brandon's Lakeview Estates We request that a feasibility report be prpared as soon as possible. We have enclosed a sheck for $1,000.00 for the feasibility report expenses. \.. ~~t~;:-. ..__...._-~ /~ I~~ ~on Co;~t;~~tion, Inc. Developer CONSTRUCTION, INC. 311 SUNRISE lANE, CHAMPLIN, MINNESOTA 55316 o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANORA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS OF SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORM DRAIN, STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER PROJECT NO. 88-7 , IN THE BRANDON'S LAKEVIEW ESTATES AREA. WHEREAS, the City Council has received a petition, dated February 23, 1988, requesting the construction of improvements, specifically sanitary sewer, watermain, storm drain, streets with concrete curb and gutters in the following described area: Brandon'S Lakeview Estates; and WHEREAS, such petition has been validated to represent the signatures of 100% of the affected property owners requesting such improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover that: 1. The petition is hereby declared to be 100% of owners of property affected, thereby making the petition unanimous. c:> 2. Escrow amount for feasibility report is $1,000.00. 3. The proposed improvement is hereby referred to TRDA, and they are instructed to provide the City Council with a feasibility report. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the City day of Council at a Meeting this 19 , with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor Victoria Volk - City Clerk o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1, 1988 AGENDA SECTION NO. Non-Discussion Item ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT 7e Engineering ITEM Approve Plans and Specs NO. Woodland Creek APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: James E. Schrantz BY: The City Council is requested to approve the resolution approving the plans and specs and ordering the advertisement for bids for project 87-27 Woodland Creek. The proposed bid date is March 25, 1988 John Rodeberg will be at the meeting to discuss this with the City Council. Plans are in my office for your review. COUNCil ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR PROJECT NO. 87-27 WOODLAND CREEK FOR SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STREETS WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERS CONSTRUCTION. WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 163-87, adopted by the City Council on the 18th day of August 1987,TKDA has prepared final plans and specifications for Project 87-27-ror sanitary sewer, watermain, streets with concrete curb and gutters construction; and WHEREAS, such final plans and specifications were presented to the City Council for their review on the 1st day of March, 1988. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover to hereby approve the Final Plans and Specifications for Project No. 87-27 for sanitary sewer, watermain, streets with concrete gurb and gutter construction BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby direct the City Clerk to seek public bids as required by law, with such bids to be opened Friday, March 25, 1988 at the Andover City Hall. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted day of by the City Council at a Meeting this , 1987, with Councilmen Councilmen voting favor of the resolution and voting against same whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Ken Orttel - Acting Mayor victoria Volk - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE March 1,y1988 AGENDA SECTION NO. Approval of Minutes ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Administration ITEM NO. 8 BY: Vicki Volk APPROVED FOR AGE~ ~ The City Council is requested to approve the following minutes: December 29, 1987 Special Meeting January 5, 1988 Regular Meeting February 2, 1988. Regular Meeting February 2, 1988 Special Closed Meeting February 9, 1988 Special Meeting February 16, 1988 Regular Meeting February 16, 1988 Special Closed Meeting COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY