Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC November 21, 2006 o 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Regular City Council Meeting - Tuesday, November 21,2006 Call to Order - 7:00 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance Resident Forwn Agenda Approval 1. Approval of Minutes (11/8/06 Regular) Consent Items 2. Approve Payment of Claims - Finance 3. Approve Lot Split/Lot 1, Block 3, Andover Station North - Planning 4. Approve Lot SplitlLot 24, Block 1, Parkside at Andover Station - Planning 5. Terminate Project/06-45/14430 Crosstown Boulevard NW/SS & WM - Engineering 6. Approve 2007 Tobacco and Liquor Licenses - Clerk 7. Approve Health Insurance Renewal and Employer Contribution - Administration 8. Approve LMCIT Liability Coverage - Administration 9. Approve Application Fee Refund - Administration ~ Discussion Items 10. Receive Anoka County Sheriff's Department Monthly Report - Sheriff 11. Authorize Execution & Delivery of Lease Agreement (Andover Community Center Refmancing) - Administration 12. Consider Lot Split/13423 Crooked Lake Boulevard NW (Cont.) - Planning 13. Update of Speed StudyIMeadowlark Heights - Engineering 14. Discuss Anoka County EDA Exploratory Committee Nomination - Administration Staff Items 15. Schedule EDA Meeting - Administration 16. Administrator's Report - Administration Mayor/Council Input Adjournment ~ ~~ \)Y\ltKn )2~ (t) Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - November 21, 2006 Page 10 ~ ~ REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -NOVEMBER 21,2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE..................................................................................................... 1 RESIDENT FORUM ................................................................................................................. 1 AGENDA APPROV AL............................................................................................................. 1 APPROVAL OF MIN1JTES...................................................................................................... 1 CONSENT ITEMS Approve Payment of Claims ................................................................................................2 Resolution R135-06 approving Lot Split/Lot 1, Block 2, Andover Station North ..............2 Resolution R136-06 approving Lot Split/Lot 24, Block 1, Parkside at Andover Station.... 2 Resolution R137-06 terminating Projectl06-45/14430 Crosstown Boulevard NW/SS &WM.............................................................................................................................2 Approve 2007 Tobacco and Liquor Licenses ...................................................................... 2 Approve Health Insurance Renewal and Employer Contribution........................................ 2 Approve LMCIT Liability Coverage ................................................................................... 2 Approve Application Fee Refund ...........................................................................,..........., 2 Resolution R138-06 approving Tulip Street Speed Study................................................... 2 RECEIVE ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT Received.. .................... .......... .............. ...... ..... ............................ ............ .... ............... ............ 2 AUTHORIZE EXECUTION & DELIVERY OF LEASE AGREEMENT (ANDOVER COMMUNlTY CENTER REFINANCING Motion to approve (RES. R139-06)...................................................................................... 2 CONSIDER LOT SPLIT/13423 CROOKED LAKE BOULEVARD NW (CONT.) Motion to table ................................................ ........................................... .......... ..... ............ 3 UPDATE OF SPEED STIJDYIMEADOWLARK HEIGHTS.................................................. 7 DISCUSS ANOKA COUNTY EDA EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE NOMINATION .......8 SCHEDULE EDA MEETING................................................................................................... 8 ADMINISlRATOR REPORT ......,........................................................................................... 8 MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT Water Quality Report ...................... .............................................. ............... ...... ......... .......... 8 Meter at Community Center ................................................................................................. 9 Non-Commercial Sign Exemptions .................................. ........................ ............................ 9 ADJOURNMENT......................................................................................................................9 e c ~ REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING -NOVEMBER 21,2006 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Mike Gamache, November 21, 2006, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota Councilmembers present: Councilmember absent: Also present: Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Ken Orttel, Julie Trude None City Attorney, William Hawkins City Engineer, Dave Berkowitz City Administrator, Jim Dickinson Community Development Director, Will Neumeister Others PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RESIDENT FORUM No one wished to address the Council. AGENDA APPROVAL Add Item 9a, (Approve Tulip Street Speed Study) to the Consent Agenda. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, to approve the Agenda as amended above. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 8, 2006, Regular Meeting: Correct as written. Councilmember Trude stated she has one minor change on page 13. Under Mayor/Council input there is one word that is wrong. The third line should read "...indicating they did not want Vifl:Btea the lot split into two". Motion by Trude, Seconded by Knight, approval of Minutes as indicated above. Motion carried unanimously, o Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - November 21, 2006 Page 2 CONSENT ITEMS Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 Item 5 Item 6 Item 7 Item 8 Item 9 Item 9a Approval of Claims Approve Lot Split/Lot 1, Block 3, Andover Station North (See Resolution R135-06) Approve Lot Split/Lot 24, Block 1, Parkside at Andover Station (See Resolution R136-06) Terminate Project/06-45/14430 Crosstown Boulevard NW/SS & WM (See Resolution R137-06) Approve 2007 Tobacco and Liquor Licenses Approve Health Insurance Renewal and Employer Contribution Approve LMCIT Liability Coverage Approve Application Fee Refund Approve Tulip Street Speed Study (See Resolution R138-06) Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, approval of the Consent Agenda as read. Motion carried unanimously. CP RECEIVE ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT Lieutenant Jim Stuart, Anoka County Sheriff's Department, provided an update on law enforcement activities occurring within Andover. Councilmember Jacobson wondered if the deputies have maps in their cars showing permitted and non-permitted zones for snowmobiles. Lieutenant Stuart stated they would. Mayor Gamache stated the damage to property arrests are going way down and with the arrest of certain individuals this seems to be the reason. Lieutenant Stuart indicated this is correct. AUTHORIZE EXECUTION & DELIVERY OF LEASE AGREEMENT (ANDOVER COMMUNITY CENTER REFINANCING) City Administrator Dickinson explained activity in the current bond market is indicating that there is an opportunity for the EDA to save some significant long term debt service expense by refinancing the EDA's $19,640,000 Public Facility Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2004. c Motion by Trude, Seconded by Knight, to approve the attached resolution relating to $10,000,000 Public Facility Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2006 (City of Andover Community Center) and authorizing the execution and delivery of a lease agreement, memorandum of lease and continuing disclosure undertaking. Motion carried unanimously. (RES. R139-06) o Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes -November 21,2006 Page 3 CONSIDER LOT SPLIT/13423 CROOKED LAKE BOULEVARD NW (CONT.) Community Development Director Neumeister stated at the October 17fn City Council meeting the Council expressed interest in discussing two options that need further research. The review period has been extended by 60 days to allow the Council the opportunity to discuss options available and will expire on January 1,2007. The two options that need research are: 1. Review with the City Attorney if there is a hardship that could be used as a finding to grant the variance. 2. Determine if there is an ordinance that could be modified to enable this lot to be approved without a variance. The staff and City Attorney could not identify a potential hardship. The second option does not appear to be a good one without further research and discussion at a future council workshop. The creation of a special ordinance section dealing with this needs to be very carefully written so as not to allow the smaller lot sizes throughout the City. c Dennis Steinlicht has applied to split his property along Crooked Lake Boulevard into two urban residential lots. The existing house, built in 1946, would be removed and two new houses built on the lots. Councilmember Trude wondered how big the lot is adjacent to this property, Mr. Neumeister stated it is two hundred feet wide to the south. Councilmember Jacobson stated it appears that the vast majority of the lots in the area are of the larger size or approximately the same size as the one under consideration. Mr. Neumeister indicated that is correct. He showed the area on the map and indicated which lots are smaller and larger than the one being considered. CD Mayor Gamache stated going back to the information they received for the 1986 split, this variance was granted with two conditions. The first condition was "It will not have an adverse effect on adjacent properties" and the second was "It is the most reasonable use of the land". He noted these are not the kinds of hardship they have grown accustomed to or have been told they need to come up with. He wondered ifhardship issues have changed over the years and if so, are they more difficult to approve these things due to having hardships or can the Council approve something where it says it will not have an adverse affect on adjacent properties or it is the most reasonable use of the land. City Attorney Hawkins stated they are now incorporating in their Ordinances hardship standards found in the State Statute. He did not recall whether or not that standard was in effect twenty years ago. He was a little surprised when he read through this that there was a reference made to that so it would lead him to believe that that was not the standard in the State Statute and their ordinance back then and has been adopted subsequent to that time but he could not say with absolute certainty. Mayor Gamache stated this is the issue he is looking at because knowing this neighborhood and looking at the homes, there are a few areas here where the lots look to be the same but there are (J) Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - November 21, 2006 Page 4 probably about twelve different lot sizes in this one neighborhood. They did two lot splits and one was approved with the lot only seventy feet wide and both of those homes have long time owners. He stated he was looking at this split not having an adverse affect on the adjacent homes and it would be the most reasonable use of the land. He stated by splitting this, it will take the driveway off of Crooked Lake Boulevard and make it a safer intersection. Mayor Gamache stated many of the neighbors are in favor of this split and it will bring the property values of the surrounding homes up. He thought they were asking for a minimal variance and he did not see a problem with this affecting the neighborhood. Councilmember Jacobson asked what the hardship would be. Mayor Gamache stated he would go back to what the Planning Commission approved in 1986. Councilmember Jacobson stated that was twenty years ago under a different ordinance. Councilmember Orttel thought it was the same ordinance. He thought this was in their ordinance which stated it could not have an affect. He read some of the items from the ordinance. He thought a hardship could not be an economic consideration only. Anything to do with a property right is basically financial in one way or another. This cannot be a primary factor. o Councilmember Orttel stated when he looked at this, it is not a bright spot in the neighborhood and they have had some complaints from the neighbors. Because of the age and construction type, he understood it is not worth rehabbing. The choice is to leave it as a rental house if it cannot be fixed up or sold or to leave it vacant which it is now. He did not think they could put one house on the lot in this neighborhood and make it feasible. These are bigger lots. When this area was developed, there was not any sewer or water so the lots needed to be bigger. ~ Councilmember Trude stated after the meeting last week, she had phone calls from two neighbors who said that the individual who spoke and indicated he was representing the neighborhood was not representing them, She stated one of the individuals was the property abutting this at 13409 and she would prefer there be one house and one homeowner and she is fine if it is rental property. There was also contact from someone down the block that said there are other homes in the neighborhood that have had families renting them and families that rent are just as good as families that own homes. They did not think that the property as a rental is a problem but they did not want to have two houses replace one on a lot. They thought if the owner wanted to do something he could take better care of the property and get good quality renters which he generally had done except for one renter which was a problem. Both neighbors pointed out that the house directly across Crooked Lake Boulevard is on a very large lot and is a home of substantial value. She thought the indication of what the character of the neighborhood is the people that live in that neighborhood are saying it is only a problem if the owner does not maintain it and that was something the landlord had said he was not always good at. She did not want to stretch the definition of hardship when there does not seem to be one. She tabled it because she was having a sidebar discussion with their City Attorney on whether character of the neighborhood could qualify as a hardship and with further research that was determined that it really could not. There is not any seeming condition of the property that puts it in that category that it cannot be economically put to good use based on its value. If the owner wants to rehab the home or continue renting it, that is acceptable to other people in the neighborhood and she thought if there was anything else to be looked at, it would be an ordinance. The people she has heard from are saying they want the Council to be very cautious about going to small lots in Andover C Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - November 21, 2006 Page 5 and everyone cites the case where they have homes on smaller lots which do not seem to sell well. She did not see a hardship. Mayor Gamache stated bringing the point up about the homes on smaller lots not selling well did not make sense because that is a whole different ball game in a different part of the City. He stated there are four homes a block away the exact same size the owner is planning to build. They will sell quickly and between $250,000 to $300,000. He stated they will be at the exact same value, if not more than the homes that surround them, including his. He has not heard from any residents and he has talked to many of his neighbors in the area and they all say they do not have a problem with this going through and he has heard from many residents that it fits and is reasonable. CD Councilmember Trude wondered how this would fit with the house directly behind it. Mayor Gamache stated the house directly behind it also has two homes directly across the street from it and has a large back yard area and the second home would not bother it. These would be bigger and nicer homes and will be about the same distances from where the current home sits to the neighbor's yard. He stated he would actually be surprised if the neighbor did not like it because from what the owner indicated, he talked with her and all of the neighbors in the area and they had not indicated there were any issues. If the neighbors have the choice, they would prefer one house over rental property. Mr. Dennis Steinlicht, 2766 133rd Lane, stated the tenant has more rights than the landlord. The way this house is designed they could not get an upper class rental. He stated once someone is in there and they sign a lease, legally they have to go through a number of steps to get rid of a renter, they can not just be kicked out if a problem occurs. He stated on the hardship, all hardships come down to money, no matter what happens. He did not have a hardship on keeping this a rental but he would rather not. He noted he lives in the same neighborhood and he would rather take this home down and build two homes on the lot. It is better for the neighborhood and better for the neighbors. He wondered if a hardship has to do with the neighbors and what is around it too. Councilmember Knight stated he understood the arguments for the split and did not have a problem with it except he wondered what they would do with the variance issues because the City Attorney has indicated there is basically no hardship. He stated he has a problem with ignoring the fact that there is not a hardship. Cl) Councilmember Orttel asked if configuration could be a hardship. City Attorney Hawkins stated a variance requires a hardship on the part of the applicant and the burden approving the hardship shall fall upon the applicant. He stated there are three definitions. The first is "The granting of the variance means the property cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the visual controls". Has the applicant shown you that he cannot put the property to reasonable use because without a variance he cannot make reasonable use of it. The second is "Has he proven that his plight is unique to the property not created by him" and the last is "Has he shown to the Council that this variance will not alter the essential character of the locality". It also states that "economic considerations alone are not to constitute a hardship". He thought they have indicated this is not a sole determination of whether he qualifies or not. G Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes -November 21,2006 Page 6 Councilmember Orttel stated they briefly talked about a change to the ordinance but he did not know what it would be or how they could have special rules for that. Mr. Neumeisterreviewed some of the history of the property with the Council. He stated when they talk about an older part of town compared to a brand new subdivision area where they have large pieces ofland they can work with, maybe there could be something crafted in an older section for an infill type of development. The section could allow back-to-back lots to be ninety-foot comers which would help this situation. They could have a ninety-foot comer with a seventy-five foot interior lot. That is what the lots on 133rd and 134th are. They would be granting variances to width on the interior lot and probably the area requirement. Councilmember Jacobson stated the only problem with that is it could probably be worked up in an ordinance change later on but they have to work with the ordinance they have now. Mr. Neumeister stated they would need to work on this at a Council workshop and have the applicant allow them additional time. CD Councilmember Trude stated if they move forward with something, they should have a neighborhood meeting and discuss this with the neighbors to see what they want. The Council discussed options for this item. Mr. Jack Noble stated this home is not conforming to the neighborhood. The homes in the areabave conformed to seventies or newer style of home which this home is not and they are moving toward conformity in the neighborhood not away from it. He stated the price of this home as it stands right now with what the applicant has put into it is nearing $200,000. The holding cost of a $200,000 piece of property, non-homestead, is they would have to rent this at nearly $2,000 a month just to break even and they will not find renters of any caliber that would rent this home for that price. He stated renters do not maintain the yard or upgrade the yards. If they are planning to improve this home in this neighborhood they need to get housing that conforms with site lines and style to the neighborhood even if it is a rental. ~ Councilmember Trude stated her focus has been on the legal part of this and the variance does not fit any of the legal definitions so if they would deny that, the Council could talk about if they want to look at a workshop on this item. Staff would then do some research on this to see if anything they do on an ordinance level would potentially open any neighborhood up to somebody coming in as an investor, buying a large property, tearing down an existing home and putting two there. There is a real anxiety in Andover about any area where they put more homes behind an existing house or next to an existing home than exists there now. People really like the idea of their lot lines lining up. She stated this is a path they would want to go down very cautiously and very limited and she thought a neighborhood meeting would be important. Mr. Noble indicated the owner originally purchased the property to try to improve it for the neighborhood because he lives in the neighborhood. The idea of the lot split was not the original intention. After fmding out he could not properly function with this as a rental property and properly o Q) c Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes-November 21,2006 Page 7 maintain it, then he looked to split the lot. Councilmember Knight stated his concern is the legalities of this will come back and haunt them. Councilmember Trude thought the only way to go was not the variance route but to do a little bit more thorough work to evaluate if they want to go down this path as a redevelopment type of issue. The Council further discussed options for this and the majority of the Council determined they should table this item and bring it to the January City Council Workshop for further discussion and work. Motion by Gamache, Seconded by Knight, to table this item to the January City Council Workshop. Motion carried 4 ayes, 1 nay (Jacobson). UPDATE OF SPEED STUDY/MEADOWLARK HEIGHTS City Engineer Berkowitz explained this item is in regard to the speed zoning study that was done recently by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for the Meadowlark Heights development. Mr. Berkowitz reviewed the study with the Council. Mayor Gamache stated they have passed their information on to Representative Tinglestad. He stated they have asked Representative Tinglestad to begin working on this piece oflegislation at the next session. He thought they had a speed limit on the curve of 30 or 35mph. Mr. Berkowitz indicated they have a winding road sign and on the bottom is an advisory plate posted indicating 25 mph. Mayor Gamache asked how long the road is. Mr. Berkowitz thought it was a quarter mile. Mayor Gamache stated this is a 55mph road because of the State law and the MN Dept of Transportation and their ultimate wisdom decided that was a good speed limit for this road. You cannot drive 55 mph on this road without endangering yourself or someone else on this road which was pointed out last summer when a car went off the road and crashed into a home burning it to the ground. They are trying to work with their State Legislators to get some action taken so that cities can set their own speed limits. DISCUSS ANOKA COUNTY EDA EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE NOMINATION City Administrator Dickinson explained the Anoka County Board of Commissioners is seeking nominations from all of the County's cities and townships for consideration of appointment to an eleven (11) member Exploratory Committee. The committee will review whether or not Anoka County should form a county economic development authority pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 469.1082. o G o Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes-November 21,2006 Page 8 Councilmember Trude nominated Councilmember Jacobson to sit on the exploratory committee. Motion by Trude, Seconded by Jacobson, to nominate Councilmember Jacobson for consideration by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners to be appointed to the Economic Development Exploratory Committee. Motion carried unanimously. SCHEDULE EDA MEETING Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, to schedule an EDA meeting for December 5,2006 at 6:00 p.m. Motion carried lImmimously. ADMINISTRATOR REPORT City Administrator Dickinson updated the Council on the Administration & City department activities, media relations (Update on Water System), meeting reminders and miscellaneous projects. City Engineer Berkowitz updated the Council on road improvements projects in the City. Community Development Director Neumeister updated the Council on development activity in the City. MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT (Water Quality Report) - Councilmember Trude asked Mr. Dickinson for information regarding the Channel 9 report on the water quality in Andover. Mr. Berkowitz stated they have approval through the MN Department of Health to use two of their wells within their city as peaking wells. They have a maximum they can pump out of those wells of 55 million gallons a year each. Mr. Dickinson indicated the two wells are well 2 and well 3. They showed on a map the location of all of the wells in the City. Mr. Berkowitz stated the actual amount of water they pumped out of those wells in July was 1.6 million gallons from well 2 and 2.9 million gallons from well 3. He stated the health department felt this was a safe amount of water to pump. They are utilizing that well the least possible amount. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are not drawing water out of those wells at this time. The only time the wells are in use is during peak water times in the summer. He stated the water is distributed throughout the entire system. They have six other wells within the system that go through the water treatment plant and wells 2 and 3 get blended in with the other six when in use. Mr. Berkowitz indicated they are making improvements to the wells and system all the time. By o c o Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes-November 21,2006 Page 9 constructing new wells and making future improvements they anticipate the two wells that have the radium in them will be greatly reduced. He stated Andover per capita uses more water than any other city and they hope to reduce that. (Meter at Community Center) - Councilmember Knight wondered how they are coming with the meter situation at the Community Center. Mr. Dickinson stated it is progressing and they are working with the mechanical engineer that designed the project. They will probably put a meter onto the gas that goes into the boiler room. Mayor Gamache wondered if the field house has been booked for the entire winter. Mr. Dickinson indicated it is. (Non-Commercial Sign Exemptions) - Councilmember Jacobson stated he received a folder about the laws pertaining to the election and he came across one regarding non-commercial sign exemptions. He read what the law stated. He thought this was supposed to be for political signs but it could be any kind of sign as long as it is non-commercial and he did not think that was correct. Mr. Neumeister thought this would need to be kept in context with the political section of the State Statute. City Attorney Hawkins indicated he would look into this. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Susan Osbeck, Recording Secretary