The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC October 21, 1986 o ~ , ~ ~ j t -1 1 J ! I ~ 1 ~ t ~ j . ~ . j , j ~ I ] 1 , j . . i ~ . . . i I 1 i . i ~ . i i o i 7:30 P.M. CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING-OCTOBER 21, 1986-AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Local Oil Company Rezoning b. Local Oil Company Special Use Permit c. Final Plat/Oak Bluff d. Final Plat/Goodridge Acres e. 86-3 Report/Discussion f. Fino.l r-l-a4=jWoe-d-l-a-nd .Meadows D"ic.le *g. Raphiel Stifter Lot Split, Cont. 5. Staff, Committee, Commission Reports a. Cedar Crest Pond b. 86-7 Assessment Appeal c. Public Works Light Duty/EBA d. Reschedule November 4th Meeting e. Indemnification Agreements of City Officials f. Fire Department/Sprinkling Codes g. Park & Recreation Department h. Amend Ordinance #62/Firearms i. Tonson, Inc. Special Use Permit *j. Computer Specifications 6. Non-Discussion Items a. Transfer Ownership/Group W Cable b. Dehn's Pond/86-19/Approve Plans & Specs c. CPA Firm/TIF/Boisclair d. 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9. Adjournment *Not on published agenda. o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NODiscussion Item DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Planning & zoning October 21, 1986 ITEM Local Oi 1 Co. Rezoning NO. 4.a. BY: Vicki Volk APPROVED FOR AGE~:~(\ BY ~ v MOTION by Apel, seconded by pirkl that the Andover Planning and zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of a rezoning requested by Local Oil Company for the property known as PIN 32 32 24 24 0013 from R-4 to Neighborhood Business for the following reasons: 1) The rezoning was proposed by staff as they felt the property would be better suited for Neighborhood Business; 2) The rezoning will not have a detrimental affect on the health, safety or general welfare of the community; 3) Traffic will be impacted to some extent, but not to make it hazardous; 4) It will not decrease surrounding property values; 5) It is in general harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. Approval of the rezoning is contingent upon this property being combined with the existing piece of property. Motion carried unanimously. , . ; I i 1 , ~ j l , J l ~ ! 1 ~ 10 ~ , COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY . . ] 1 o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT October 21, 1986 Discussion Item Engineering APPROVED FOR AGENQ! ~ B~ ITEM NO. 4a Local Oil Co. BY: Todd J. Haas Alternatives from the Engineering Department concerning the drive access located at Bunker Lake Boulevard are listed below: 1. To eliminate the South access onto Bunker Lake Boulevard if a right-in and right-out inter- section cannot be obtained. 2. It is possible to use a traffic control device such as a raised concrete median to prevent vehicles turning left onto Bunker Lake Boulevard and driving East. The type of traffic control will eliminate the congestion at Bunker Lake and Round Lake Boulevards if the driveway access is to remain at the present location. SEE figure A. The intersection already is congested especially during the morning and evening rush hours. 3. Other alternative is to sign the driveway access intersecting with Bunker Lake Boulevard with No Left Turns. The problem with this is that vehicles are going to have a tendency to disobey the No Left Turn sign and turn left anyways. 4. Leave as is. Note *Engineering is also recommending to the City Council to keep in mind the speed limits are higher at the proposed Super- America than the existing SuperAmerica on 7th Avenue and Main Street located in the City of Anoka. Already this intersection in Anoka is also very congested. . COUNCIL ACTION o MOTION BY TO SECOND BY 1 ~ . ; I j 1 1 ; j j I j , ; l ~ 1 I J , 1 1 1 1 j . j i . j , 1 I i 1 , I l 1 ~ i i 1 i j j j , ~ ~ i , I ! o ! ) : , j l 1 , '0 I ta .J) -<( \f) c: 3, d \.., e:,. J g~ ~1 ~ ( i / , i / , ! I i ! / II / ,/ ./ ..~ P 3 qJ ,> - '- Ci. 2 c v ,0 .... - 'c!~ '- <> Q) , Q ~ ~" ",,"-, , " -~ '". ". 'i;; "~ ~.. ----~ '\ ..._~- " <. :z <t: ~ oJ - :;j 8 ,c;p V) LL ~ ~ cD ~I :::!... jl ~ Q/ ~I 1 en I ~ 'y -<. I 1\ I~ 14- II I \.. \ll \J ~ () ...s:: \!) 1lJ:' ~ I=> ~ I' r- I~ {b 1 IQ\J ~ 1 I . ] 10 ~ ! , , I 1 I ~ ~ ! i 1 . l J ! i ~ , , i . ] ~ j j 1 ~ j j 1 . . ~ J , 1 1 o ~ CITY of ANDOVER r,l 1685 CROSSTOWN BLVD; N,W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 REQUEST FOR REZONING Applicant LOCAL OIL COMPANY Address 357 East Main Street, Anoka, MN 55303 Home Phone # 421-3954 Business Phone #421-4923 or 929-7077 (Contractor) Date of Application September 25, 1986 Legal description of property involved: (Fill in whichever is appropriate) Plat Parcel PIN :1..< 3,) dt./ d1 00/3 Lot Block Addition If metes and bounds, please attach the compl~te legal. Reason for Request: Rezoning from R-4 to N.B. to The following information must be provid~d: ONames and address of all ~roperty owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Already has been provided to the City. ODrawing of parcel showing dimension, roads, ditches, water- courses, present and proposed buildings. Appli,cation Fee: $150.00 Date Paid 9. 30'f?, Receipt # ,-,...7/ y".2 / Filing Fee: $ 10.00 Date Paid 7 -30 ..Jt.Receipt # ~.2 /lJ. / Abstract Torrens . " o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Andover Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, October 14, 1986 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Andover, MN to consider the request of Local Oil Company to rezone the property described as PIN 32 32 24 24 0013 from R-4 to Neighbor- hood Business. (Property is located at approximately Round Lake Boulevard and Bunker Lake Boulevard.) All opponents and proponents of said rezoning will be heard at the above time and location. ~ o 32 32 24 24 0014 Norman & Julia Theel 13803 Undercliff NW Andover, MN 55304' ~ 32 24 24 0015 ~trick & LInda Chapman 13747 Undercliff NW Andover, MN 55304 32 32 24 24 0013 Joseph Chutich 13738 Round Lake Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 32 32 24 24 0028 Steven L. Boie 13748 Round Lake Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 32 32 24 24 0029 Donald & Renee Blue 49 91st Lane NE Blain~ MN 55434 32 32 24 24 0069 Doris Boie 10720 6th St NE Apt 102 Blaine,~N 55434 32 32 24 24 0070 David & Kathryn Danson 13748 Round Lake Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 32 32 24 24 0057 Ricky & Laura Hockinson 13772 Vintage Ct. NW Andover, MN 55304 32 32 24 24 0058 Robert Ki 1 i an 11 Willow Drive W St. Mi chael, MN 55376 32 32 24 24 0063 Carl & Linda Grassl 13786 Undercl iff NW Andover, Mn 55304 32 32 24 24 0064 Larry & Leah Jiroutek 13770 Undercliff St NW Andover, MN 55304 ~ 32 24 13 0069 ~dover LTD Partnership One Main Street SE Suite #600 Mpl s, MN 55414 32 32 24 31 0129 Meadow Creek I Route 1 Box 163 Delano, MN 55328 32 32 24 31 0010 Donald & Katherine Sheppard 3634 14th Ave Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0011 Terry & Kristine Bailey 3626 14th Ave Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0089 Robert & Cheryl Soj 3635 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0090 Cheryl Hv i nden 3637 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0091 Duane & Martha Karjala 3633 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0092 Gail Kunert 3631 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0093 John & Cathrina Steffen 3625 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0094 Gerald & Martha Burmis 3627 15th Ave Court Anoka, Mn 55303 32 32 24 31 0095 Darrell & JS Koopman 3623 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0117 James & Lori Malcolm 3630 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0118 Boulevard Mall Partnership 2126 2nd Ave N Anoka,~n 55303 32 32 24 31 0119 Marlys Jean Burke 3636 15th Ave Court Anoka, Mn 55303 32 32 24 31 0120 Ralph & Theresa Dupont 3634 15th Ave Court Anoka, Mn 55303 32 32 24 31 0123 Steven & Judith Svitak 3646 15th Ave Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 31 0124 Steven & Deborah Swanso 3644 Sunny Way Court Anoka, MN 55303 32 32 24 24 0010 Jay & Lola Fortner 13808 Rd Lake Blvd Andover, Mn 55304 32 32 24 24 0011 Donald & LInnea McRae 13758 Rd Lake Blvd Andover, Mn 55304 32 32 24 42 0009 Grace Luth Chur of Anok 13655 Rd Lake Blvd Andover, MN 55304 ^ AJ {)J r o j I . 1 . I j l 1 i 10 ] CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 8JJ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.8, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER. The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains: ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 6.03 IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: The District Zoning Map of the City of Andover, dated the 1st day of June 1985 shall be amended as shown on the attached map, showing the following rezoning: PIN 32 32 24 24 0013 rezoned from Residential R-4 to Neighborhood Business. Adopted by the City council of the City of Andover this day of , 1986. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl - Mayor James E. Schrantz - City Clerk IP ~\ II' ~ ..... h..1 J"""'11. ~,: 'M -:- I~lr---J- '. I ~ ';, iii ,I 'RoM '~;;Y/" t', '\'\. --"- V' ~J '. .t.: , !~HWr-~p''''' - , ' V)) ",-,,~/ ~ '.~~ ' ;5, . .'((.' " ~ " 'if' I 0/ '. l' \.\.:- , ,,' ',J/, I . II . . - .- . Yo'\,- .' I \' .' , ')'vv~ R' ~ . A.I ' -;, . ,c---:- f-r~~ A;..g.M'-;rA~i';';S ~..!... . ' . L :..0 ' I ""-;",, J.. I, .. .. ~. . ""- --- ;:/ I ,r--;. '----L , . I tmu . . , ! - . _L' -- ,-4"'-J.-.- €~~--r---- T ~ _. _ : ~. ;;R T' il !!, I !- ,~i-A. ~ ..:...' .7/' ,;.. \. r: :>.. :: . r-... ----; 1,' ,...1 ~ 0 -- ./ ~ i !i I f' .4~'~,,}'~\~~~. 'L;'1~ ~ , ,Iuu 'j .i~~~uu~ __u..~.L :u k':" V. . . 'u' ~ :t;, , -------ii..."]" - -------.--...,.~-----.,,--. -- ~~~ ..~...;. .;- .:.. =: ~'-r ;. .' ~d ::,- " ~r6 ~ f . ,. 4-'--' / t /},-J) /1\ ';,:1: \;,.J~ I ' ",'" '/ ,I ~2/ ,/.~- ~/~ / A;D~V{~ i, - '-=!, 1. 'IT !1tN ~jtl:"~ ~.-. \ ~rES.'r!1:;'5' r -, ('~ ~~(\-.-.,-..;~.Sl rti:fji, : >4;' I: \~y:F ....... ' .: " I "', , -,""" j -.2, ',.=,J.A' \ \ '~;. I j'{.v,rr'OOlJ -ST"M'f-I"" 12'.- :,',: I' ',' . It l.'~./' , I; '.' v~~ /.)r';; ~: kl. ,12, ': ROUND /il! .U' ! .~~~ .'~'O~m i ,L:Ut'p-y-n:1UA)n.N /.XE. E~~~ -; I LAKE ~ I .~ lft~ 'I ! I, rl , , .. :---~--.. . t:I ':,;'11.11=;'. "...' I~I .: ~. .'...J._,!.... -_.._.... ..,... ....~. .,....... .'..' __..... . ..,.. .~.I': "~"I:' ,~:. ~.~ 6<'~' ",' ;'il' .' ,I, I ' ::......'f ' /A . CITY .. , ./' T . . I' :- #'~~ o -r,. ,. ,., ~ ~ ' ~.. . I" . . !~ fi' I ~, '/i!l L . Z z.a'll' t:'~ . . .~';"'.. : \ ~~-fVf ;.:,..'. ll" . ,h" ,. ....1 , / ~lli'" ~'~WMIII / -)0;'<' !" . . . ' ,-...!,' if-'. '/l',. , ~ \. I'" . _(._c:S'L_'2' _h__.. t.-- ____ _ 'NOKACO. :Iflt~ ~' :. ;;,,;. q~",' l~~I.J ; ] 11-+ 'f 'V\ ~ H r-r- /' -------- '-: ,...L. ., ""<c.,.J.. '-__ r ~. 0;.. . .~''''.. -~.~ -"'\- I O/~ .,""".. ,_ -'.'.~ _v~ I '1'...1':!I.I-I' I \ . .... '1'1""- !' ......l' ",.,. - \ -'J <&.,..,:II~~::'~ rd'-J'I'I'~" ,'. I l:l' :. "" r.-'r.-m'ItlC ~ " ./ .' - ..,. ..;. ...........~~~ t, ..~ ........ ti; ,..+!~. .' ....- ~. f'ir.v t-'t-' I' ~~ I ' ~ "1:, I ~ ... . ~1. ,/ ~-4 rt I 'of' I I I 'rl ~.IYI I 1:;-' ~ r ~I p l -"6", ':I &~ ~~ OF r- I ..--- -- -- --t- ANDOVER r-O---R .1 I COMPILED AND DRAWN FROM OFFICIAL RECORDS ,=f I! _'''...;.J!t.''~,'~,:: · '.' N' . , r:w;tlf; l;: I',"'" ... I I I I 1 -- I r' I' i -"""""":><: i:'j~; jj i <i / . ,.~..i.' /j '..::~ I (I..'.. (1 i"f~l ' o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21, 1986 ITEM Local Oil Company , NO. Special Use Permit 4.b. BY: Vicki Volk APPROV.~D OR AGENJ;lJ ( BY:/! tI AGENDA SECTION NO. Discussion ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Planning & zoning MOTION by Apel, seconded by Vistad that the Andover Planning and zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Special Use Permit requested by Local Oil Company to build a convenience store/gas station at the intersection of Round Lake Boulevard and Bunker Lake Boulevard for the follow- ing reasons: 1) It will not be detrimental'to the health, safety or general welfare of the community; 2) It will not cause serious traffic congestion or hazards; 3) It will not depreciate surrounding property values; 4) It is in harmony with the zoning Ordinance. Approval is contingent upon the following: 1) Moving the proposed plan north to a maximum of 48 feet. However, the Commission would recommend a 40 foot northerly move if it will save additional trees on the north property line. 2 ) 3 ) Local Oil Company will not be permitted to sell propane gas. A 6 foot fence will be placed on the northerly portion of the building site. 4 ) The legal description will be corrected as well as some housekeeping items that need to be corrected, added, or deleted. 5 ) They will be limited to 36 nozzles on the gas pumps COUNCIL ACTION o MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o Local Oil Company Special Use Permit Page 2 6) The underground storage tanks will be inspected by the State and City Fire Marshals. 7) A 6" curb will be installed around the parking area. It should be noted that a public hearing was held and there was no real opposition to the proposed building but there were some concerns about traffic and screening to the north. Motion carried unanimously. o . . I -; 1 - o 1 , 1 j j j I ! i , ! . j , , . ] o .. \tV ~lll 01 ~l'lUUVLn 1685 CROSSTOWN BLVD. N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 .. REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT Name of Applicant LOCAL OIL COMPANY Address 657 East Main Street, Anoka, MN 55303 Home Phone # 421-3955 Business Phone# 421-4923 Date of Application September 8, 1986 Legal description of property involved: (Fill in whichever is appropriate) See Attached Sheet Plat Parcel PIN Lot Block Addition If metes and bounds, please attach the complete legal. Reason for Request: For underground oil facilities, tanks to service proposed project by Local Oil Company on above parcels of land. The fOllowing information must be provided: ONames and address of all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. ODrawing of parcel showing dimensions, roads, ditches, water- courses, present and proposed buildings. Application Fee: $150.00 Date Paid Receipt # Filing Fee: $ 10.00 Date Paid Receipt # I I , I "10 I I I ! i I o , - I I I I -I ,1 ~ I I , I i i ~ I . i - , o >,.' ... Paroel No.1' . ,... ',:' , The But 282 feet 01' all that part or the Seutll"',_'"1' .t* 1.nbW'e.t Quarter or Seotion ~2, TO'lIrl.bip '2, Rallp 24. :~, C~. ...... ~J1ac .ortb of the Soutb 1065 teet thoreof. exc.pt llht'I~:JO ,t..t 'be"'Ot .. subjeot to tha.t part taken tor C,unty St.". Al.:as.~\?"I~. 9 (...... loan , ROad). Containing l.~ aoro. 1I0ru or 1.... ''';;Y;::\ct;!:;j;:~r<':~....jf'::f.''''''> ' , - - :;.~'~~~ ~~l~ {': -t'{. l'::\' "~~~~l~~'!' ,..\~,:':, _ .- . ~~ ~J _' \.: j.f ~l," ~~ 1. >"(':1" < Parcol No.2," 'l..~, ,',' f~' . ". . That Wut 205 teet of the But 1#1f..1I ot' all 'b&'.'~. ~ ~"_~"'.___." of the HOI'thn.t Quarter ot Seotion 32. TGlIrDIhi, '2, bill' 24. -.'~"7, )(innelota, lying Nel"th ot the SOuth 1065 teet '.....,.i..." the l~h30 hft thoreor. Containing 1.06 aore. Illore 01' 1..... '.' ;.. . . . ' . . Pareel lio. 3 '. ,_ :,'.;,!\:;i;::i_':.:.;~':~\;:i:~~:".;~.. I, . ,.,." ;: ' 'TMlorth 215 teet of t~ South 1065 teet of tb! !;~t~JlO5.,~ott.., Sa" 4trt t..t' .' of the 8outhout Quarter or the lfGll'thwe.t Qta.n.r.;..t~~t1.,,_ f~l. Ja. ' bng. 24. An.lea County, Minnelota. Centabin, ?-~<~~'.''''',.'' ".... ., .o!', ' 'I >, '~~;~~J/:.f'< , '., . ' '.. . Paroel JlOt 4 . . : <\,';'i-'l>:' ~',:,...,~,l:*~;: .''' ',' , ":":, The Worth 215 teet ot the South 1065 t.., .t, ~... if. ' ,l!"~trp1JM 'CN~ Quarter ot the lierl;bn.t Quart... ~ ..0'''_ '1;' t"IIl:t~!i? . ^~ A..._'~: . County. Jl1m1...ta .ubjeot to that J&I"~ '~"f"-b." '~,.. 1Itp.iia,. ... 9~ ( Round Lake R..~ ). CODtdnlng 1.11 .o.....JI.~~~~..itl;' , ~d roo , . ,{:":,:,::l.'-"),:' , nitl'~h 215 te,et or the 5Mb 790 ,~::f4', '. ," ' . ';~.t!:;.'2lhlt-1. .~~jti:\..QbU'tlOl'l' "';.. . .... ''t0lUtt1 tiane...... .ilp~.o" to.tl'iat ~ '~fllWJ&d.I.ab Road ). ClOt.ining 1.16 ..re... ;1/ ,.. ..'. 'r., , .~'.' l\j ,'.. <.:' ~ l' f\ .'~,'.:. , '\ .,,~'< l~~ ~~~<'~'i1r~.'p.I~~' r~' . '.'-i:,.~';,," Parcel 10. 6 -"" ,. ',I" ,..,R" .. '.. ..' ~m The North 215 toet .t the Swtll 790 t..ll or .~....'t ., .;t~k.etbt~' 481.. . ..,. . \v toeter tho South.utl Quarter of the Horthri.t. . ;, ,,,,".1. '2" ,~. "~ t\1' }2, Ranso 24, Anelea CountT. Ifinn8aota. ..mal" ...F........" 1..... ..S~ "','f.",!,';':> ..... . ,....." . , .....~~-I E:;:if::r~~:::.:; ::':=-:'SZ~:;::~~~,t~~~~j~~~ . (, '2, bop 24. Anelea County, Jli=e.ota. ContdrWlcl~~~~.~.'.'t~!...l.~.~ " :~'.~~t~ Paroel lie. e' , ' .it, ~,:',!..r;{';.;;:;',;l\.;'i,g;~j;;:~" / i .' ~ ,~~ ' 'lho North 21; t.et of the Soubh 575 teet or llht!;u..t,~lt~ if','''' ..,,'Dan .~ .~ ~ Quarter of the >>orthwe.t Quarto" otSeo1l1. n..-t.~,..,..,~...a4. .An_ . ~.~ J Cc:.:~ty. ::~4i\,t~ .:Wujy~~ _~. ~~'.~~i-;:';-:;.-~.-'..~'~~r~II-'1'~.~~_ ~ i....i. '.t~ oontaining 1.16 aore. 1101"0 or 1uis. ' , ., .'~ \ '!, i.' ,. .' '., ." '\. ~ , ~::; No.9, ,'.' :,' .', :,';':i:~: :;"~'::;F,....'l:;":.'b.,..:~;,. ' ~. '- The South 360 teet er tho ...t ~37 t.et otti1e a.~.....~.,.,.;\..!;. ,'. ')' ~..i' lribwe.t Quarter of Seotion '2, Town.hi, 32, a-C.i4. 'b.o1ra C,~,:~... ....:it" .ubjeot to that part taken tor County 8ta.. AU li11:~ ... 9 < "....Lt.. ....)~ ~ " and at.. aubjoot to that part bin rot Oount1 81Iat. AU Ble_, We. 116. " \.): ~ Centaining 3.13 aore. .ore or 10"." ',.., . , ' " ' ' .: \J " ~----" ., . I , ',~" \.' ~'~ ... . .;rW~,;~t;/)'j ..... I her.bJ oerUfy that 1Ihi. 11 .. 1~1'U. end ."'"',.".......1... it., .....,. , or the bwn4aio. of the parooll ,~r land .elOrlM."__~ 111 .... .if'U'POI't to .bow illprovement. or enoroaohl~_ah, it IUIJ..~ lit .. 01' UDd.r rq direct aupervidon thi. 15th. da:, et Ifal'oh 1961 .".!; i.' ..,' . ' "..:}>t"'7"';):'f,',J,> . ,$"/'\~,).I " l' ' "" 'lI ~) ~ ~. o ~ j , ~ j o September 8, 1986 To Whom it may Concern: This letter is to certify consent of property on corner of Bunker Lake Road and Round Lake Blvd, with the exact legal description of property on Special Use Permit application by Local Oil Company filed with the city of Andover. I give consent and Power of Attorney for Daniel P. Richmann, C.E.O. of Ackerson Building Corp. and Herbert Perry, representative of Local Oil Company to represent me at city planning and city council meetings on my behalf. Sincerely, o o o CITY of ANDOVER CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Andover Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public Hearing at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, September 23, 1986 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Andover, MN to consider the request of Local Oil Company to construct a service station with underground oil facilities by Special Use Permit on the property described as 'The South 360 feet of the East 487 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 32, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to that part taken for County State Aid Highway No. 9 (Round Lake Boulevard) and also subject to that part taken for County State Aid Highway No. 116. Containing 3.13 acres more or less., (Property located on the northwest corner of Round Lake Boulevard and Bunker Lake Boulevard). All opponents and proponents of said Special Use Permit will be heard at the above time and location. J . 1 J i J 1 l i , 1 1 . i i i , , o~oIANDOVER Request For Planning Commission Action Andover Review Corranittee fl y Todd ~aas Aoproved [ly' f.1,,'~lin9 Dale . 4", 1986 Time' 7 : 3 0 PM Case: SUPERAMERICA Location: Applicant: Attachments: LOCAL OIL COMPANY . Reques t: j The Planning Commission is requested to review the Site Plan for SuperAmerica. The Andover Review Committee has received the Site Plan and their comments follow: a) Currently the rear building setback is at 88'. It is recommended to use a rear building setback of 40' and move all structures, parking, pumps, etc. along with building to allow better access on to Round Lake Blvd. b) Recommended to develop proposed future drive now to reduce congestion along Bunker Lake Blvd. near inter- section. Also the Andover Review Committee recommends to remove driveway entrance (exit) at Bunker Lake Blvd. c) Recommended the proposed future drive exit (entrance) to be relocated along the West property to North as far as possible to allow stacking at the intersection of Underclift Street and Bunker Lake Boulevard. o o C'C'Ll_ \ "o,ic--I<..J }{-o ,10 "\ ':c Figure 5. Street Intersection Types and Resulting Traffic Pa"erns. I I i , 3 1 . ~ o ;;;', ..,1 '~ ..,.. '.. " o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NO. R A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY LOCAL OIL COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT A CONVENIENCE STORE/GAS STATION WITH UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE TANKS ON THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS PIN 32 32 24 24 0001 AND PIN 32 32 24 24 0013. WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice, the Planning and Zoning Commission has conducted a public hearing and reviewed the request of Local Oil Company for a Special Use Permit to construct a convenience store/gas station with underground gas storage tanks on the property known as PIN 32 32 24 24 0001 and PIN 32 32 24 24 0013; and WHEREAS, after such hearing and review, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the request with reasons for such recommendation as 1) it will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community; 2) it will not cause serious traffic congestion or hazards; 4) it is in harmony with the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council is in agreement with the reasons cited by the Planning and Zoning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby approve the Special Use Permit requested by Local Oil Company with the following conditions: 1) Local Oil Company will not be permitted to sell propane gas; 2) a 6 foot fence will be placed on the northerly portion of the building site; 3) there will be a miximum of 36 nozzles on the gas pumps; 4) the underground storage tanks will be inspected by the State and City Fire Marshals; 5) a 6" curb will be installed around the parking area. \, Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day of , 1986. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl - Mayor o James E. Schrantz - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21. 1986 Discussion Items ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering J I i t\<.t.O.,') ~!I)-J;J\ v] . BY: Todd J. Haas APPROVED FOR AG;~~~ ) BYV;& AGENDA SECTION NO. ITEM NQ Final Plat/ 4c. Oak Bluff The City Council is requested to approve the final plat for Oak Bluff. The final conforms to the preliminary plat. The streets have been constructed and were inspected by the City. The boulevards haven't been finished, top soiled and seeded at the time of this writing. I recommend the plat be approved subject to the following: (1) The developer has agreed to pay to the City of Andover the costs of inspection, field/laboratory testing, street signs and installation which is to be determined by the City Engineer. (2) A warranty escrow for one year from construction completion of $8,000.00. (3) The City Attorney receives the abstract for Oak Bluff. (4) The developer has dedicated park area. (5) The developer has agreed to enter a Development Contract for the required escrow which is to be determined by the City Engineer. COUNCIL ACTION c MOTION BY TO SECOND BY 1 o CITY OF ANDOVER COUN'l'Y OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NO. MO'l'ION BY COUNCILJ,1AN TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING: A RESOLUTIUN APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF OAK BLUFF AS BEING DEVELOPED BY .BURL OAK WEST IN SECTION 26. WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat of Oak Bluff; and WHEREAS, the developer has presented the Final Plat of Oak Bluff; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed such plat for conformance with the Preliminary Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has received the abstract on the property being platted; and vJHEREAS, the developer has agreed to pay for street slgn costs; and WHEREAS, the park dedication has been dedicated for Oak Bluff. WHEREAS, the developer has agreed to enter a Development Contract for the required escrow which is to be determined by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the developer has agreed to pay to the City of Andover the costs of inspection, field/laboratory testing, streets sign and installation which is to be determined by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the developer has paid the warranty escrow for grading, topsoil, seeding and blacktop in the amount of $8,000.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby approve the final plat of Oak Bluff as developed by Burl Oak West. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the City Council at a Meeting this day of , 1986 by unanimous vote. CITY OF ANDOVER o ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl - Mayor James E. Schrantz - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE nrt-nhpr 71 1 qfH; ITEM 86-3 Report/Discussion NO. 4e BY: James E. Schrantz APPRO~l~(OR ::E"ftCIJ AGENDA SECTION NO. Discussion Item ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineering The City Council is requested to consider the alternatives to the 86-3 Project (water & sanitary sewer to Hanson Boulevard) . NOTE: The project as bid could still be awarded, but is $400,000 over estimate. The developer of Hills of Bunker Lake and Anoka County are interested in the improvement be constructed as soon as possible. Anoka County will be awarding their bid for the Public Works Maintenance Building. THE CITY COUNCIL IS REQUESTED TO SET A SPECIAL MEETING FOR OCTOBER 23, 1986 AT 7:30 P.M. TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM. ~ COUNCIL ACTION o MOTION BY TO SECOND BY ~ ~ o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21, 1986 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT AGENDA SECTION NO. ITEM NO. Discussion Items Engineeri1,J)~ ~ BY: Todd Haas 4d Goodridge Acres APPRO~XOR AGE GD The City Council is requested to approve the final plat of Goodridge Acres, approving the resolut~on accepting the work. The final plat conforms to the preliminary plat. The streets have been constructed with Class V grade and bituminous surfacing. Top soil and seeding are complete. I recommend the plat be approved subject to the developer providing: (1) A warranty escrow for grading, topsoil, seeding and blacktop in the amount of $3,000.00. (2) Paying the cost of streets, signs and installation in the plat in the estimated amount of $500.00. (3) Title opinion - City Attorney - Legal fees of approximately $200.00. (4) Park dedication - cash in lieu of land - $2,220.00. (5) Inspection of $475.08 for City personnel and $782.70 STS Consultants field and laboratory cost for an estimated total of $1,257.78 to the City of Andover. The City of Andover has paid to STS the $782.70. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NO. MOTION by Councilman to adopt the following: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF GOODRIDGE ACRES AS BEING DEVELOPED BY GLEN E. GEVING AND WALTER A. JOHNSON IN SECTION 4. WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat of Goodridge Acres; and WHEREAS, the developer has presented the Final Plat of Goodridge Acres; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed such plat for conformance with the Preliminary Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has presented a favorable Title Opinion on the property being platted; and WHEREAS, the developer has deposited a warranty escrow for grading, topsoil, seeding and blacktop in the amount of $3,000.00; and WHEREAS, the developer has agreed to pay for the street signs and installation estimated amount of $500.00; and WHEREAS, the developer has paid the Park dedication - cash in lieu of land - $2,220.00; and ~vHEREAS, the developer has paid to the City of Andover to cover inspection and for STS field and laboratory tests for a total of $1,257.78. The City of Andover has paid for the field and laboratory test to STS in the amount $782.70. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby approve the final plat of Goodridge Acres as developed by Glen E. Geving and Walter A. Johnson. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting this day of ,1986. CITY OF ANDOVER o ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl - Mayor James E. Schrantz - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NO. MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING: A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK FOR PROJECT GOODRIDGE ACRES FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS IN THE GOODRIDGE ACRES PLAT. WHEREAS, the Developer has satisfactorily completed the improvements in accordance with the City specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Andover, Minnesota. The work completed on said project is hereby accepted and approved. MOTION seconded by Councilman and adopted by the City Council at a Meeting this day of 19 , with Councilmen voting in favor of the resolution, and Councilmen voting against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl, Mayor James E. Schrantz, City Clerk o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ITEM NO. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Engineer1:;) ~ ~ October 21, 1986 5a. Cedar Crest Pond BY: Todd J. Haas ~~~~'!1l~R BY: 17 V AGENDA SECTION Staff, Comm- NO. . lttee, Comm. Reports OPTIONS FOR CEDAR CREST POND (11 Backfilling: It is possible to backfill the rear yard and sYope the rear yard downward towards 'cb.e pond area. A swale can build from the culvert area to the pond and/or use drain pipe rolled in fabric and place rock over pipe to avoid fine, silty sand from accumulating within the pipe. This will allow storm water from ponding on the individual's property near culvert area on 172nd Lane N.W. (2) Storm Sewer: A feasibility report from the 1980 street and drainage improvement for the City of Andover, MN from TKDA Consultants indicate that: B. Drainage (1980) "rhe proposed storm sewer system is sho~n on the attached Map No.2. The pipe sizes proposed are in conformance with the Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. At the public informational meeting there was objection to adding additional water to the pond in the park, labelled as Pond #16 in the Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. The pond is on park property and on adjacent private property. The pond now has a high water elevation of approximately 883.7. The 100-year flood elevation with full development is proposed to be 887 with an 18" outlet in the Comprehensive PLan. The pond has a trib- utary area of 31.8 acres. Objections to using the pond have been that the two low areas that do not now flow to the pond would be drained into the pond by culverts under 172nd Lane and 173rd Lane, and that the periodic high water in the pond is flooding onto private property. COUNCIL ACTION c MOTION BY TO SECOND BY REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Item No. Sa. - Cedar Crest Pond <:J Page Two The pond outlet is shown on the attached Map No.2. The cost estimate for the pond outlet is included. An alternative to constructing the pond outlet would be to obtain temporary construction easements and regrade the area around the pond such that the pond would be totally on park property and to eliminate the culverts under172nd Lane and 173rd Lane and allow the water to collect at these locations as it does now. Feasibility The proposed project is feasible. The attached time schedule indicates the time required to complete the project. The project is proposed for construction during the 1980 construction season." COST ESTIMATE - SEE Attached Sheet NOTE: Before the construction of streets, a drainage and utility easement exists. The property owner should have been aware of the situation. The amount of runoff after street construction will not affect the elevation of the pond substantially. o o o REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Item NO. Sa. - Cedar Crest Pond Page Three (3) Pump: The last option is purchase a pump. SEE attached sheet from the Brisson Pump Company along with prices listed on the bottom of the page. The reason to select a pump is that in the future the pond located at Cedar Crest will not be the only high water problem there may be. Others may occur and individuals are not likely to wait for a storm sewer system. Cost estimate - $42,101.00. NOTE: Currently the pond elevation is 884.4. The berm adjacent to pond on South side is 885.5. The lowest elevation in rear yard is 885.4. Once the pond fills with storm water to and over berm area, this allows the pond flood rear yard. SEE FIGURE B. o COST ESTIMA TE STORM SEWER OUTLET POND # 16 Description Quantity 18" RCP 21" RCP Manholes 18'1 Flared End 2111 Flared End Ri Ra 530 LF 400 LF 2 Ea I Ea I Ea 5 CY Construction Total + 10% Contingencies Subtota 1 + 17% Engineering, Legal, Administrative PROJECT TOTAL 1980 PROJECT TOTAL 1986 ,~;',.,~ ; o -5- ".,( .... ?~:::j-g~//4 ~ '!) .. , _.,~ ~'~:.V.;i""'~:;;--- ~ ,':-: 'I' '-," -~""~ ,.~ ..._~ .,'-.......,. .-.. '. ..~,.,_.~ ..".....,....-~~.-..,.-...,.-.._.. ...-.... ,-,." - - "......".....,,,.,.,/l.~7" """'':''~'''~'~~~....;.:o-''>''''-'"''''''''''-'?",,"''l;~'>iJ~t''.~. o , ~ ~ o " MAP 2 lIo....~ 6 NORTH .-.. - . ,:...' !d ~Ili: ,L ~..L . . I. ~ ...L ~ ~~ r..,.:~.. ~ 2~ 12 ~P'""I''''I'' r- ., #.,,. .'.I.qpt!t':.~.I' -~ f...... , ' . '. . - .' 'l~. # . . . 'f' , . , I · ". J Cl 0A1l. 14., II '~TJIII V I~ ,~ 1\' r~T~T[ .131 "EF ~ IOIIIN ~ ~ · 4 J . I . ~4 J .. I. )1( CMP "- -;- I~I~'(' 4 J iT I !J\1",.t-r1/~ULVERT3- "7 7 ~A . i r}.-. t I · liMo I' 1__ ___...., r-;- . t I 4 J 1;_1": 1-..... "I II to 118Ua;~ ~ J 4 \ . , s;:j I ''\ 'i.... 10 " ". POND ~ =r-y. .. ~I OUTLET , "~I ~. '~"Nf).. 10 '~ A TIO IT ~ - ~~~_ II auMT'., '1';('~ . ~ "'"K ," I ,'111-. It 4 I . ~~,~'I .' , I " ~I.~ ~\ 7 . I . t ...,. . .~.. ,,., ,1_ .- PROPOSED STORM - -'r--. I. SEWER IMPRC1lEMENTS ~ '#..' -,r--, _ .. SCALE: U '\. I. . ......000' ,... - ~ ~ _fIV'-, --I'.- '\ ,.........".... ~~ -:....:-. <S;.)" r--;- ""-. L$ .\'''-.15,'' Ii) -;---., . - " t ~ V ~ ~ IAIU ~~m ~-~ --....., . .~ '':--:1 ' / JJ ~ '{ 'r : !J. ~ I ~;;..: . 4; , ~ :- 70T :;S ~ A'lr ~., l . \ . J,{IO." .'~'~ . \ 4, t I~' .~I I I r-- '~_I rr-, . I l '",. '/1 C~ s ""'~.-J I I.' . ~ " , l I-- ~ I I , ! .. 1 I ._--r--- 1980 STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT NO.4 o BRISSON PUMP CO. LEONARD L. BRISSON, President PUMPS & PUMPING EQUIPMENT SALES & CONSULTANTS FOR Aeration, Sewage, Sludge, Wastewater, Lift Stations, Floods, Industry, Construction, Dredges, Sumps, Liquid Manure, Irrigation, Hydraulic Powered Pumps & Hydraulic Power Units, Portable & Stationary, Etc. June 2, 1986 P~. Jim Schrantz City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, Einnesota 55304 Dear Jim: I am sending you a quote for the equipment that you just rented to pump out your various ponds this year like you did last year and I imagine you may have to again in the future. This equipment besides being used to pump out your water problems can also be used to bypass sewage, clean out manholes, as it will fit thru a 24" manhole, fill water trucks for fighting fires, and I am sure you will find other uses for it also once you have it in your inventory. It would include a 80HP Isuzu hyd power unit with a picker crane to lower and raise the pump into the lake or manholes, it could run a 8" pump and a 4" pump at the same time if need be at some time in the fu ture as it would have the 2 systems on it. It would also include a 8" \'fa ter & sewage pump with a rock guard on it that could pass kotex, panty hose, pampers, or whatever else that would get into it, 50 foot run of 1" hydraulic hoses to go from the power unit to the water pump with quick disconnects to the power unit, 8- stainless steel break over clamp or banded hose on a quick disconnect so that you can use it on PVC pipe or butyl discharge hose, 850 feet of 8" Heavy duty butyl industrial discharge hose. 80 HP ISUZU Hydraulic power unit with picker crane on trailer------------- ~22,744.00 8" Water & Sewage pump with rock guard & 50 foot run 1" Hyd Hoses -------- ~ 4,550 .00 850 feet 8" Heavy duty ind butyl discharge hose -------------------------- ~14,807.00 Total for all of the above items ----------------------------------------- ~42,101.00 Hope this will answer your questions that you might have for a system that would really do a good job for you but if you have any questions please feel free to call on me at anytime, Thank you, o LB/ sg f;:;j~ Leonard L. Brisson CCI Frank Stone: 2359 E. COWERN PL., NORTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55109 (612) 777-3317 / \ \ \ \ \. \ \ \ \ \ \. " \." , " "i- ", "j) / \.,', , / ",," i ;,/ " , " .." I r'~J > ,,," "> '....._ ';/ I .> ',,, ' , /1 ~/ ", '" ' / { 'I' ""..... '._ >,_;L~_._>..j I \ I. , " -. . > I '...... '-......', .rsLOCK I ";",_ ).~;lii~Vr ....... ...... .....'c:fIIIio 1. ..... ....... "" /.' 1\\o.~'i't\L. .......... ......... TJI'..... ........ '- .' <,t,.;:,: ':' , ......" ..... ',...... ',', / > (. : I ...~...... " ' ,> / ..'1\ ; I .......... ...... \ l'b:..1 I......~~ '\"I~\,,--,l--/r:-I.e I. \i'~M"'> ............ .....__' ....VT"\P..L.L-~" Vo,,{ t-- yy --'--; \,,1. (1\,. I :\-T\ .- I ........... '- ......-- ,.......... ......... '...................... .,.... ............ --:............................, ...." ' .,~:.~ \ \\ I I ...... . l...... ....." "'{~< \i!J/ ~,\\ I ---...... ,............., ;-- -..:. ".... ......"" '" I~~ito~.o I t -aD ~ .... ... ...., , . , .........,,,", I --.... ., " ......,.....", " ), ........., \. ' " ,',..... "" "" '....... / ( , '- ...... '- ' ~ ~_/ I .........., ,,' ," I ,\\ " ","""'",", \.{., \ j \ \. '\ " " ' \ I '\ " " ~t. I \" " t' .... / \ "........... '" I " ... -.... __:.. ':. -- -=:: ::~_ ~ ~.::: ~ - =--=-- __ -.::::: ~ \, ------- ----- \. ...._---------~. ------------- \ \ \ \ \ I I I ( &/ev .,f . p"~f) 6848 10-":'8' \. \ \. \ " \, " , " '\ , , , , , , .. " " , , \ .. .. ..... .... .... \. \. , ...... / / / / / I / I ( I \ \ \ " , , .... .... ..... .,.... ......... -- .... ....... ..... ..... , , , \. ~--->_.- >-_.~.-.> I / I I I I \ \. \ \ -0-- ~ I I / I \ \ I J I I \ \. \. \ I / / / I I + ~O CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, DATE October 21, 1986 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ITEM NO. 86-7 5b. Engineering FOR BY: James E. Schrantz The City was served with a Notice of Appeal appealing the assessment of Raymond and Mary Koski on 164th on Project 86-7. Bill Hawkins will discuss this item with the City Council. COUNCIL ACTION o MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF ANOKA TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Raymond Koski and Mary Koski Appellants, vs. NOTICE OF APPEAL City of Andover, a municipal corporation, Respondent. IN THE MATTER OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER ASSESSMENTS OF CERTAIN LANDS FOR IMPROVEMENT NO. 86-7 FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT. TO: THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE NAMED COURT; THE CITY OF ANDOVER, AND ITS CITY COUNCIL AND ITS CITY CLERK. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that Appellants herein, Raymond Koski and Mary Koski, owners of the hereinafter described property, do hereby appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 429.061 and 429.081, certain assessments levied against said property by the City of Andover, on or about October 2, 1986. That Appellants' land, which was included and assessed by Respondent, is legally described as follows: The North 233 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 32, Range 24, except the East 1,000 feet thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota. That Appellants have complied with the appeal requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 429.061 and 429.081. That Respondent has assessed Appellants' land in the following manner and for the following services, improvements and amounts: Street Improvement (164th Lane East of Round Lake Blvd.) $3,512.00 o o Appellants appeal said assessments on the following grounds: 1. Said assessments do not confer any special benefit to Appellants' land. 2. The value of Appellants' land is not increased in the amount of the as.sessments. 3. The issue of the increase in value of Appellants' land was not considered by the City Council in adopting the assessment. 4. Said assessments represent an unconstitutional taking of Appellants' land without compensaton. 5. Said assessments are improper, illegal ,unconstitutional, arbitrary and capricious. That Appellants seek an Order of the Court setting aside such assessments and awarding Appellants their costs and disbursements incurred herein. Dated: ~ STEFFEN & MUNSTENTEIGER, P.A. By R nald B. eterson ttorney Reg. No. 86344 Attorneys for Appellants 301 Anoka Professional 403 Jackson Street Anoka, Minnesota 55303 612-427-6300 Building 7 , 1986 . -2- o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, ommission Re orts DATE october 21, 1986 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ITEM NO. Public Works Light Duty 5c. /EBA BY: JamesE. Schrantz Engineering The City Council is requested to consider Public Works Light Duty. Currently we have taken Dale Mashuga on light duty paying him $5.00/hr. with EBA making up the difference to 2/3 of his wage loss at the time. We would like to continue employing Dick Vickstrom until it gets too cold to clean the sanitary sewer lines. Scott Protivinsky's employment with the City of Andover ends on November 8, 1986. Scott is paid from Park funds. Dick Vickstrom is being paid from the funds that would have been paid to Dale. With Dale back, we have an overlap in pay except for the funds that were not expended between when Dale was hurt and being paid by EBA/Worker's Compensation and when Dick vickstrom was hired. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21. 1986 AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT NO. Staff, Committee, Commis on S.d. ITEM Reschedule 11-4 Meeting NO. BY: Vicki Volk o MOTION BY TO FOR The City Council is requested to either change the date for the November 4th Regular Meeting or to change the time to 8:00 P.M. November 4th is the General Election and by law, meetings cannot start until 8:00 P.M. or they must be rescheduled. Thank you. COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE Ort-nhl'>r?l 1 QQh ITEM Indemnification NO. 5e. Agreements BY: James E. Schrantz AGENDA SECTION NO. Staff, Committee, ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Administration The City Council is requested to consider the attached Indemnification Ordinance for the protection of City Officials. Bill Hawkins discussed this in his attached letter. Staff and City Council seems to be covered by legislation. The Commission and Board members may not be covered such as the Planning & Zoning, Park Board and Water Management Organization representatives. The information I have attached is from Brooklyn Park. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY I 1 , 10 J J i i ; , I . ) I J J i I ~ ; I j ~ i ~ 1 ~ . 1 ~ i ~ J ! . . j , ~ ~ o ~C-~ LAW OFFICES OF Rurke I/Nd .Hl/wkiNG SUITE 101 299 COON RAPIDS BOULEVARD JOHN M. BURKE WILLIAM G. HAWKINS BARRY M. ROBINSON COON RAPIDS. MINNESOTA 55433 PHONE (612) 784-2998 September 29, 1986 ,0 etc. 101'1'11. Mr. James Schrantz Andover City Hall 1685 Crosstown Blvd. Andover, MN 55304 Re: Indemnification Agreements of City Officials Dear Jim: I am writing in response to your request that I review the Indemnification Agreements submitted to you by the attorney for the Watershed District. Pursuant to Minnesota law 466.07, Subd. la, the City Council "must indemnify and provide a defense for any employee or officer against judgments or any amounts paid in settlement actually or reasonably incurred in connection with any tort, claim or demand arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring within the scope of his employment or official duties." Subd. 1 is a permissive section that allows the Council to defend, save harmless, or indemnify any officers, employees whether elective or appointive, against any tort, claim or demand, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of duty. Subd. la may not cover volunteers of the City such as Planning Commission members, Park Commission, etc. In the event that such members were sued for actions that occurred in the performance of their duties, the City Council would have the legal authority to defend or save them harmless. The resolutions provided by the Watershed attorney merely puts the City Council on record that it will defend and indemnify these individuals. As a matter of course the City insurance policies would require defense by the insurance company and the City would utilize that defense counsel in conjunction with the City Attorney as the liaison. If the City Council feels it is an important issue to assure the members of the voluntary commissions that they will indemnify and defend them, I have no problem with them adopting the o o Mr. James Schrantz September 29, 1986 Page 2 Indemnification Agreement. If they wish to evaluate each individual situation at the time of the suit and determine whether or not they wish to defend the individuals based on the merit of the lawsuit, then I would not recommend adopting the resolution at this time but to consider such action when a lawsuit is commenced. . Hawkins WGH:mk o 1 10 j LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD A PARTNERSHIP OF f:>FlOFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS 1100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST A. THOMAS WURST, P.A. CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A. JAMES D. LARSON, P.A. THOMAS F. UNOERWOOD. P.A. ROGER J. FELLOWS MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE (612) 338-4200 August 22, 1986 Mr. James E. Schrantz, Chairman Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization 1685 Crosstown Boulevard Northwest Andover, Minnesota 55304 Re: Insurance and Liability Dear Jim: At the last meeting you asked me about potential liability for yourself and other members of the Lower Rum River Watershed Organization as it relates to the insurance or defense costs and indemnification. I told you that I had drafted an ordinance for Brooklyn Park and a resolution for Mound which were a little different, but that I would share these things with you and that maybe you and the other officers would like to have that kind of material incorporated into your own ordinances. I think you will find that your city councils will be quite sympathetic because it not only applies to staff members, it also applies to planning com- missioners, board of zoning appeal members, park and recre- ation members, etc; and I think it realistic in that it points out the real world in which we all live making controversial decisions. At your direction, I am sending you a copy of these documents and also sending a copy to each of the other com- missioners and to Bob Johnson. If you have any questions or comments concerning the material, please let me know. Very truly yours, Curtis A. Pearson CAP/ej Enclosure cc: Pete Raatikka John Weaver Tom Mathisen Bob Johnson : o RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INDEMNIFICATION OF DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS WHEREAS, the City currently has a policy of insurance providing protection for public officers and an employee's liability policy, and WHEREAS, said policy contain s a $200 deductible, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 466.07 provides that the Council may defend, save harmless, and indemnify any of its officers and employees, whether elective or appointive, against any tort claim or demand, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of duty, and WHEREAS, under Subd. la of Section 466.07, the statute states, "Each municipality or any instrumentality thereof shall indemnify and provide defense for any employee or officer against judgments or any amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred in connection with any tort claim or demand arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring within the scope of his employment or official duties, subject to the limitations set forth in section 466.04"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL: 1. The City shall reimburse or pay the $200 deductible amount contained in the current public officer and employee liability policy. 2. City officers, whether elected or appointed, shall be protected against any tort claim or demand and shall be protected and indemnified in accordance with the provisions of M.S.A. 466.07. Mayor Attest: Clerk o (0 o t Section 201:100 Defense and Indemnification of Officers and Employees of the City. Subd. 1. Pur~ose. In recent years there has been a loss of sovereign ~unity for municipal functions and employees and a trend has developed wherein municipalities, their officers, employees and agents have been joined in litiga- tion and a number of these lawsuits have been filed naming officers, employees and agents individually in lawsuits. As a result of this trend in the law, it becomes more difficult to obtain the services of citizens who are re- luctant to volunteer for service in municipal government and to assume individual liability t-1hen acting in behalf of the City. City council members, employees and officers are in the normal course of events participants in many controversial decisions which result in litigation and &~bject the individuals to concern regarding personal liability. Section 201:100. It is the purpose of this ordinance to unequivocally state that the City of Brooklyn Park will protect its City officials elected or appointed, including members of the Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Park and Recreation Commission, and other Commissions appointed by the City Council in performing their duties to promote the public health, safety and general welfare. Public officials must be in a position to make decisions when they are needed and to act to implement decisions of the City Council. Action on controversial subjects and implementing policy decisions can and will result in errors on the part of an employee or an elected or appointed official, and it is determined that it is better that said officials act and risk some error and possible injury from such actions rather than not to act at all. The public health, safety and general welfare will be pro- moted and preserved by providing assurances to these individuals that they will be supported by the municipality in carrying out their official duties. Subd. 2. Defense and Indemnification. The City shall defend, save harmless and ~ndemnify any of its officers and employees, whether elected or appointed, and specifically including members of its advisory commissions, against any tort, claim or demand, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of their duty. This responsibility to defend and indemnify does not apply in cases of malfeasance in office or willful or wanton neglect of duty. Section 201:100 added by Ordinance #1979-310(A) '. co \0 . , . Section 201: 100 Subd. 3 Subd. 3. Def'ense Counsel. The City Council will designate the City Attorney ar legal counsel representing an insurance carrier for the City to defend the City's employees and officers against all such lawsuits wherein the employee or officer is individually named as a defendant. The City shall continue to represent the employee or officer if the decision is appealed to a higher court, or the City Council may authorize the appeal of any decision against the officer or employee to a higher court. Subd.~. Right to Personal Counsel. The provisions of this Sect ion of the administrative code shall not supersede or preclude the officer's or employee's right to retain at his own expense his personal legal counsel to provide for his defense. The determination as to whether to use the City's legal counsel, for which the City shall be responsible for defense costs, or whether the officer or employee chooses to use his own individual counsel at his own expense, shall be at his option, and if the official selects his own attorney, this shall relieve the City from all present and future obligations as they relate to any defense' or indemnification of the officer or employee for the alleged tort, claim or demand. Section 201:100 added by Ordinance #1979-310(A) Q ~CA">-"' r .' \ """,.,,~,.,.. ",.::,. CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION Staff, Com- NO, mittee, Commission Repo DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT October 21, 1986 APPROVED FOR AGENDA s Building & Fire ITEM NO, Sf Fire Department Sprinkling Codes David Almgren BY: BY: MEMORANDUM TO: COPIES TO: FROM: DATE: REFERENCE: Mayor and City Council Fire Chief and Fire Ma~~ / ..". ,. David Almgren October 15, 1986 Appendix "E" State Code 1300.1150 Fire Suppression System . In checking with the state, there will be an amendment to subp. 3.G. when the 1985 Building Code is adapted later this year or the first part of next year. As it now reads, under B-2, retail, warehouse, or manufacturing areas with 2,000 or more gross S.F. of area or 3 or more stories in height must be sprinkled. With the new amendment it will go to 5,000 S.F. and at that time, you will have the option of adopting either the 2,000 S.F. or 5,000 S.F. I recommend that we wait until the adapt ion of the 1985 code by the state and then adopt this with the 5,000 S.F. amendment. David Almgren Building Official DA/ j p COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY j , J I '.1 ~ . ~ , , << !i" , 1 :~.... o o T_'h.~ , ~ ~/y 'Lf~ (7' ~.A) ~ ..;-"'....,.... Subp. 2. Municipal option. The sprinkler system requirements in subpart 3 may be adopted without change by a municipality. If they are adopted, the requirements are applicable throughout the municipality for new buildings, additions to buildings, and buildings for which the occupancy classification is changed. Subp. 3. Requirements. Automatic sprinkler systems must be installed and maintained in operable condition in buildings in the occupancy classifications listed in items A to L. This requirement is in addition to other minimum requirements set in the state building code. The height and area increases provided in sections 506 and 507 of the Uniform Building Code, as adopted in the state building code are applicable. ~ A. Group A-I occupancies. B. Group A-2 occupancies with an occupant load of 300 or more. C. Group A-2.1 occupancies. D. Group S-1 service stations with 3,000 or more gross square feet of area, not including canopies. E. Group 8-1 parking garages with 5,000 or more gross square feet of area. F. Group B-2 offices and postsecondary classrooms with 8,500 or more gross square feet of area or three or more stories in height. ';rG.> Group B-2. retail, warehouse, or manufacturing areas with' 2,000 or more gross square feet of area or three or more stories in height. H. Group E-l and E-2 occupancies with 8,500 or more gross square feet in area or two or more stories in height, except for minor additions that do not increase the occupant load or significantly increase the fire load. I. Group E-3 occupancies with an occupant load of 30 or more. J. Group H-4 occupancies with 3,000 or more gross squ'are feet of area. K. Group R-I apartment houses with 8,500 or more gross square feet of area or with dwelling units on three or more floors, except that when they are not required by Uniform Building Code, section 1807 or 1907, or other provisions of the state building code, automatic sprinkler systems within dwelling units in apartment occupancies are considered complete when protection is provided in all habitable rooms. Building officials, in concurrence with their fire chiefs, may accept alternate systems which have fire protection capabilities equivalent to systems whiCh comply with standard '38-1 of the Uniform Building Code. L. Group R-l hotels and motels with 8,500 or more gross square feet of area or with guest rooms on three or more floors. MS s 16B.59 to 16B.73 7 SR 1519 1300.1200 TITLE AND RULES. The rules contained in this code and rules and standards adopted by reference therein shall be collectively known as the 7 " o Appendix E - Uniform Building CodQ "y- 2 MCAR f 1.10020 OptiOllal ,,",visions for installation of on-premises fire suppression systems. A. Purpose. This rule authorizes optional provisions for the installation of on-premises fire suppression systems in new construction. It is intended to alleviate increasing demands for additional fire suppression resources by allowing a municipality to adopt the optional provisions of this rule based on its local fire suppression capabilities. B. Municipal option. The sprinkler system requirements in C. may be adopted without change by a municipality, If they are adopted. the requirements arc applicable throughout the municipality for new buildings. additions to buildings. and buildings for which the occupancy classification is changed. C. Requirements. Automatic sprinkler systems must be installed and maintained in operable condition in buildings in the Occupancy classifications listed in 1..12. This requirement is in addition to other minimum requirements set in [he state building code. The height and area increases provided for in Sections 506 and 507 of the Uniform Building Code. as adopted in the state building code may be applied. I. Group A-I occupancies. 2. Group A-2 occupancies with an occupant load of 300 or more. 3. Group A.2.1 Occupancies. 4. Group B-1 service stations with 3.000 or more gross sq. ft. of area. not including canopies. 5. Group B-1 parking garages with 5.000 or more gross sq. ft. of area. 6. Group B-2 offices and post-secondary classrooms with 8.500 .or more gross sq. fl. of area or three or more stories in height. 7. height. :) CC)D ')SJ..t- <<:OcL'-'o-j q"f~~ Group B-2 retail. warchous~. or manufacturing areas with 2.000 or more's sq. ft. of area or three or more stories in ., 8. Group E-I and E'2 oc;,~~am:ies with 8.500 or more gross sq. ft. in area or two or more stories in height. except for minor additions that do not incre4:.... the occupant load or significantly increase the /ire load, . ;....~ 9. Group E-3 occupancies with an occupant load of 30 or more. 10. Group H-4 occupancies with 3.000 or more gross sq. ft. of area. 11. Group R-I apartment houses with 8.500 or more gross sq. ft. of area or with dwelling units on three or more floors, except that when they are not required by Uniform Building Code. sections 1807 or 1907. or other provisions of the state building code. automatic sprinkler systems within dwelling units in apartment occupancies are considered complete when protection is provided in all habitable rooms. Building officials. in concurrence with their fire chiefs. may accept systems not fuUy complying with Standard 38-1 of the Uniform Building Code. 12. Group R-I hotels and motels with 8.500 or more gross sq. ft. of area or with guest rooms on three or more floors, o As adopted, effective April 25, 1983 Appendix E is a comprehensive sprinkler code requiring certain occupancies and area' to be protected by automatic sprinklers for fire protection. 0,- Cities in the State of Minneso'ta were among the first to pass such requirements. Since that time" over 20 states and over 300 cities have done 1 ikewise, using Minnesota as a model. However, when the State of Minnesota passed a state-wide building code, they repealed all local sprinkler codes. Appendix E brings those standards and requirements up-to-date. Automatic sprinkler systems are the most successful life-saving devices from fire our technology has been able to produce. Thei~ effectiveness in protecting people from fire is almost ninety-nine per~ent. No other devices, or combination of code requirements can even closely approach their ef.fectiveness. This is a fact that is even recognized by its opponents. In addition, when used over a long period of time, the city's requirements for water storage ,and water del ivery systems can be substantially reduced. The Fire Departmen can actually anticipate what their largest fire may be, thereby, making future plans for the department much easier with more economical budgets. There is always a favorable cost-effective as well as a cost-benefit ratio involved In the installation of automatic sprinkler systems, when all factors are taken into consideration. All too often, in fact always, the private sector does not take inte consideration the taxpayer1s cost in avoiding the installation of sprinklers. Sprinkler systems reduce the water requirements for firefighting by up to as much as eighty-five percent. When you reduce the firefighting water supply requirement, you reduce the required storage, you reduce the water main size, and you reduce the fire department manpower requirements. For instance, many shopping malls would require about i3,OOO gallons of water per minute (GPM) to fight fire in their complex; in addition, you would need a 3 to 6 hour storage of this amount of water. This would require a tank or tanks to store 3to 5 million gallons of water, close to 1411 to 16" water mains, to del iver to the storage area, and' 130 fi refighters to del iver the water to the fire, and 10 engine companies to pump water! To do different than this is to permit the building to be a total loss in case of fire. By completely protecting malls with automatic sprinklers, the water main requirements can be substantially reduced, 500,000 gallons of water in storage is more than adequate, and we can be expected to control a fire there with approximately 27 men!! Opponents will readily concede that they can understand the above example. They will say they are referring to much smaller buildings. However, the same criteria used in the above example, is also appl ied to smaller buildings and joined together to form a fire response area. . If you permit builders to build areas of unl imited size, without internal fire protection, and the building code permits this in many cases, then it goes without saying that the costs and fire department manpower must also be unlimited. o Builders and architects are free to come up with other solutions, if they so desire. They have, however, not done so, and we are faced with the problem now. I sincerely believe that anyone_ who creates a fJ!:.e_cor1trol_R.~oblem that ex.<:;eeds the c~p.a_biJIJY -6ra-'conYnunifiesT fi-re--deren-se-;- they, and not the general publ ic, pay for the reduction of this hazard to manageable proportion as has been determined by resource allocated to control the' fire problem. In doing so, you will be IIsaving the taxpayer I s money. 11 -.----------------.----------.-- The cost of instal ling ,1 comrlct!' aut.omat ic sprinkler system during the construction of a building is usually no morl' per squarc foot than the cost of Q installing wall-to-wall carpeting. In both new and existing construction, the existence of a building standpipe system c~n drastically reduce sprinkler system costs. A single riser is permitted by national instalJat ion standards to serve both sti'lndpipe and sprinkler functions, eliminating the need for extra pip~ng. Also in a completely sprinklered building, the water supply for the combined system need only be sized to accomodate the larger of the standpipe or sprinkler system demands. The larger demand is generally that of the standpipe system.. Therefore, once a water supply has been provided for a standpipe system, there is usually no need for additional pumps or tanks for the " sprinkler ystem, creating tremendous savings. The Factory Mutual System credits sprinklers with,bringing annual property losses from 30 cents per $100 of value to'Jess than 3 cents per $100 of value. Many building owners are not aware they can reduce their insurance cost by providing .~ sprinkler protection. The savings are often very dramatic, however, permitting the system to "pay back" its installation cost in as little as 3 or 4 years. After that, the savings continue for thc building owncr. Most building codes permit sprinkler to relax or substitute for certain other fire safety requirements. The relaxations and substitutions take the form of design options or "trade-offs". These trade-offs permit cost sayings to the building owner at the time of initial building con~truction or renovation. Typical trade-offs Include: 1. Larger oermissible buiding areas or heights for a given occupancy. 2. Reductions in the required fire-resistance ratings of walls, floors, ceiling asscmblies, fi're doors, and other buiJding,components. o ----3~--1ncreasc-d-e-xh -.acces s- -t r~v-e-l, d-.J..stance--nnd- f-ncFeB'Sed-ex h--capach-i es--- per unit width. " ~ !O , ; I j ! -: . j ,; . ~ ~ i J ~ j 1 ~ l . i i 1 i I -I ~ ) I j > 3 i i j . I j I 1 . ! i ~ r-o 1 J . i ; 1 j 1 4. WIder choice of interior finish materlals~ , 5. EII~inatlon of occupant uSe hose and certain building alarm systems. An excellent study of. potential sprinkler construction cost savings was performed by Lothrop Associates, Architects for the Council of American Building OffIcIals In 1978, under a grant from the U.S. Fire Administration. Three common building types were chosen for the analysis: a high-rise office building, a mid-rise apartment building, and a small two-story building with a mercantile occupancy on the first floor and office space above. Case 1: High-Rise Office Building Cross building area was 1120,000 square feet. In the sprinklered version, add-on costs included the sprinkler system (at 80 cents per square foot) and tempered glass smoke vents on every floor. With the general contractor's overhead and profit, the total add-on costs were $367,902. In the unsprinklered version, a two-hour rated compartmenting wall was needed to divide each floor, along with one-hour rated exit access corridors and elevator lobby enclosures. Smoke vents operable from other than the 'fi re floor were needed instead of the tempered glass panels on every floor. A smoke-proof tower, fire alarm pu I I boxes, and 'Occupan t use fire hose and cab i ne ts were all requ ired. In addition, the fire resistance of columns had to be increased from 2 hours to 3 hours, the floor/ceiling assembl ies from I! to 2 hours, and since the model codes do not permit a duct to penetrate the 2 hour compartmenting wall in the unsprinklered version, separate air supply, return and exhaust systems had to be provided for each compartment. An additional toilet exhaust system had to be provided. Automatic fire dampers had to be provided for all ducts penetrating shaft and corridor walls, along with automatic self-closing, fire-rated doors activated by smoke detectors. These factors resulted in a total add-on cost for the unsprinklered version of $537,657.00. In effect, the sprinklered version could be bui It for about $200,000 less than the unsprinklered version. An additional $7,000 per year savings in insurance costs was projected for the sprinklered version. While the savings are small In relation to a total 1978 construction cost of approximately $2 mi II ion,. they do demonstrate that sprinklers can pay for themselves. Case 2: Mid-Rise Apartment Building ThIs second building was qriginal Iy designed as a protected noncombustible housir facilIty, with a gross building area of approximately 98,000 square feet. By ___I_ncl.u~In9_ a. ~pri_nkler system, _ther_e,was one di~tlDS;t_a,dvant..~g'~,L tn.L9Ae:-_S[ory_ buIldIng h~ight increase for a given construction classification permitted the four-story' bui iding to be bui It using 'unprotected noncombustible construction. The sprlnk1.'red version <!dd-on was $1)1,9/10. This covered the cost of the system plus the general contraClor's overhead and profit. o o The un~prlnklered version add-on was $153.316, which included the additional cost of. upgrading the ..tructural componenets to quality as protected non-combustible, and the cost of occupant u..e hose stations and cabinets. Again, the sprinklered versi0n could be built for less than the unsprinklered version, a construction cost savings of over $15,000.00. Case 3: Low-Rise ~ercantile Office The third building looked at in the USFA CABO study was a typical two-story 10,000 square foot building with leasable mercantile space. The structure was slab on grade, wi th s~eel frame and brick masonry veneer exterior walls. Although a sprinklered bui Iding of this size and occupancy could be constructed using unprotected I'I00d frame constructi.on outside of a fire district, the -use of non-combustible construci:ion was considered more realistic. As a result, no meaningful trade-offs were available to offset the $8,275 projected cost of the sprinkler system. If the second floor were partitioned to accomodate more than one t:"nant, the one-hour fire rating of corridor walls I'lOuld not be necessary in the sprinklered version, but savings would be minimal. This type of building does, however, offer substantial savings in insurance rate reductions for both owner and tenants. The estimated insurance savings to the owner were $2,000 per year, permitting the sprinkler system to pay for itsel' in four years. Insurance savings to the tenant would serve as an extra inducement, possibly permitting higher rental income to the owner. *Courtesy of NAS & FCA city of ~ / coon rapids o to: Mayor, City Council, City Manager from: Wm. F. Thompson, Fire Chief date: January 9, t,Jr7' 1984 subject: Insurance Rates From Insurance Service Offices The Insurance Service Offices in the State of Minnesota is that agency which sets the base rate for all insurance companies through- out the State. Having determined the base rate on industrial, commercial or retail stores throughout the State they then pass this information on to the individual insurance carriers who set their rates based upon local conditions. This then allows an individual to go shopping to the different insurance companies to find the best rate of insurance for their particular needs. Many variables are figured into the cost of insurance such as; size of water mains affecting water supply, proximity of the nearest fire department, type of construction, type of contents, etc. Referring back to the base rate as established by the Insurance Service Offices for the business community they have informed us of the following: On a frame structure that is not sprinkled the cost of insurance would be approximately $1.43 per 100. The cost of a frame structure built with sprinklers would be .322~ per 100 for a savings in the neighborhood of 75%. On a masonary building of noncombustible material without sprinklers the cost would be ~293~ per $100.60, with sprinklers the cost would be .099~ per $100.00. On a fire resistive building non-sprinklered the cost would be .116~ per 100, whereas a sprinklered fire resistive building the cost would be .047~ per 100. Bear in mind that these are the base rates prior to any insurance company setting low premiums in order to pass on to the potential customer. Obviously this is one of the reasons why a person should shop around to insurance companies to determine which company is offering the best insurance rate for their particular needs. o WFT:kak 1313 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 (612) 755.2880 city of ~ coon rapids o to: Mayor, City Council, date:December 8, 1983 City Manager from: Wm. F. Thompson, Fire Chief . Jack Dorholt, Chief Building Official subject: Appendix "E" Sprinklers Uniform Building Code INTRODUCTION The 1983 session of the legislature passed legislation that allows each community to adopt an appendix to the Uniform Building Code (Appendix "E") that would give the communities an opportunity to require sprinklers in new construction that previously were not required. BACKGROUND Optional Appendix "E" the Automatic Fire Suppression Systems to the 1982 Uni~orm Building Code contains provisions for the installation of on-premise fire suppression systems in new construction. It is intended to alleviate the increasing demands for additional public fire suppression resources by allowing municipalities to adopt the optional provisions based on our fire suppression capabilities. If adopted, ihe provisions of Appendix "E" may not be changed. These requirements are applicable to new construction, additions to build- ings, and buildings for which the occupancy classification is changed. Many problems arise from the builders and architects in regard to the cost involved in placing sprinklers in buildings of new construction. We have tried to alleviate some of these fears and the questions that arise out of it by trying to make a comparison of the costs of new buildings without sprinklers, and new buildings with sprinklers. If a builder were to place sprinklers in a given building of any size there are other building considerations that he would not have to place in that building as far as travel distance and exits are con- cerned or possibly even separation. All these items when taken into consideration are a considerable savings to the builder. Another area of concern the builders or property owners would realize a savings is in the area of insurance. I have been in contact with two insurance agencies in this community and asked them identical questions. "At what rate would an insurance company insure two buildings of similar size and construction in the City of Coon Rapid~ if one were sprinklered and the vther were not?". "Would t;lt: owner of the sprinklered building receive a reduction in his insurance due to the sprinkler system?" o The answer I received back from Mary Ann Dagler, North Suburban Agencies, was as follows: On a business owners policy with the Hartford Insurance Company a retail building of frame construction without sprinklers would cost 68~ per 100, a retail frame 1313 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 (612) 755.2880 .~ . i: l- .-.. Uniform Building Code Page 2 o building with sprinklers would insure at 35C per 100. A joisted masonary building without sprinklers would 59~ per 100 for insurance and a joisted masonary building with sprinklers would cost 29~ per 100. A non-combustible building without sprinklers would cost 34~ per 100, with sprinklers a non-combustible building would cost 12~ per 100. She also stated that Auto Owners Insurance would charge: 75~ per 100 for a frame building without sprinklers and 25~ per 100 with sprinklers. A joisted masonary building would be 67c per 100 without sprinklers and 21~ per 100 with sprinklers. A non-combustible building would cost 52~ per 100 without sprinklers and 18c per 100 with sprinklers In all cases i~surance would be adjusted with the contents of the building, whatever they may be. I then contacted the Johanson Agency in order to obtain the same type of information and he informed me that the insurance can range all over the scale from a 3% savings to a 50 - 55% savings depending upon the contents of the building. Using a building of similar construction to that which was recently built on Coon Rapids Boulevard in the Industrial Park, it seemed to Mr. Johanson that a savings of 50% could have been realized on this gentleman's insurance if the building were sprinklered. It is quite evident that the owner of a building that had sprinklers installed will realize his investment back from his insurance pre- miums within four to six years from the time of the sprinkler instal- lation. It is very difficult to give 3pecific information regarding insurance savings for all buildings that would be affected. This is due to tho complexities of rating systems and the variety of premium schedules used by the various insurance companies. However, it can be assumed based on experience, that there will be a savings that can result in sprinkling. These savings can pay back the sprinkler system cost in some cases in one year, or to twenty years for high-rise type con- struction. o u;..~~.......i..J... .....,.....................':;l -........................:. Page 3 o A survey was conducted (attached) which indicats what the com- munities around us have done or will be dOing in the near future in regard to Appendix "E" of the Uniform Building Code. An example of what sprinklers are capable of doing can be shown with two different situations we had right here in the City of Coon Rapids. In November of 1966 a fire took place at the North- dale Shopping Center which tied up the Coon Rapids Fire Department for a period of approximately twenty-two hours and total cost of building and contents of close to $800,000.00. More recently on August 20, 1976 we had a fire at Bimbos Restaurant in the Village Ten Shopping Center and in fact this particular fire was set by 10 fire bombs. This building was sprinkled. As the fire bombs went off, the sprinklers opened up and in fact, 52 of th 56 sprinklers in the building were activated. The Fire Department was tied up there on that scene for a period of time that did not exceed more than one and one-half hours. The total loss on this building from fire and water damage was $100,000.00. It is quite evident that sprinklers do the job. If the comparison could have been made in an equal time frame instead of 1966 to 1976, I am confident that the building without sprinklers would have cost a minimum of ten times as much to restore as the building with sprinklers. RECONMENDATION The Chief Building Official, Jack Dorholt and Fire Chief, William Thompson, recommend to City Council, that they pass on first reading the adoption of option Appendix "E" of the 1982 Uniform Building Code. 0u-/--6~-;1:;Lr . lick Dorhol t, thief Building Official . ..I- /./ .'_ IJI/ Ilt'{ , ..:.;J, /'1",./1, vv .{. /.A,.. (/~ ~'f/ ' v~ ,~([1"v",:';v t/',u William F. Thompson, F ire Chief JD:WFT:kak attachment o ~ t- ::0, ~ . Q o and funds, or as required by law the state building inspector shall review plans, sp~cifications, and related documents for compli~~~e wjtb the code. Subp. 2. Types of r.view. Types of plan review include: A. plans of buildings required to be submitted to any state agency including, but not limited to, state-owned buildings, buildings licensed by state agencies, and buildings financed in whole or in part by state funds; B. manufactured buildings in which all elements of the total assembly cannot be visually inspected on site, and C. plans submitted by municipal inspection departments for- review. Subp. 3. Content of plan review. The plan review function,for structures 'in subpart 2, .it"IDSA and C,applies to nonstructural code requirements.'. The 'structiiral. Portion of a plan shall be reviewed to determine that the professional engineer has considered the minimum loading requirements of the code, but shall not include review for accuracy of structural design and calculations. The plan review function for subpart 2, item B structures applies to all aspects of code application and shall be marked approved by the state building inspector. Subp. 4. Materials to be subaitted following material shall be submitted: For plan review the One set of plans, specifications, an.... other relevant documents necessary to evidence code com~liance, together with a transmittal letter shall be sent to: State Building Inspector, State Building Codes and Standards Divisi_~, 408 Metro Square Building, Seventh and Robert Streets, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101. Manufactured building submittals shall include two sets of plans, specifications, and other relev-.;lt documents. Subp. S. Review and comment. The ~tate building inspector shall review submittals and forward written comments on items not in compliance with the code. The letter shall be mailed to the following: municipal building official, designer of plans and specifications, and state agencies involved, if applicable. Subp. 6. Contracting for plan review. The state building inspector may contract for plan review as required by this part with any municipality the state building inspector determines is properly staffed and qualified to perform the plan review function, No fees shall be paid by the state to any municipality performing- said con"tract function. The municipality shall charge its standard plan review fee directly to the applicant for a building permit. Subp. 7. Fees. No fee shall be charged for the review of submittals listed in subpart 2, item A. Fees shall be charged for review of plans submitted as described in subpart 2, items B and C. Fees shall be as required in parts 1300.1700 and 1360.3600. MS s 16B.59 to l6B.73 l1 ~6>-'1e..>9'- ~-C:__.7 j" ~-~ FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS, OPTION. V,B<- 1300.1150 Subpart 1. Purpose. This part authorizes optional provisions for the installation of on-premises fire suppression systems in new construction. It is intended to alleviate increasing demands for additional fire suppression resources by allowing a municipality to adopt the optional provisions of this part based on its local fire suppression capabilities. 6 .-.-.---...---. o REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ANDOVER DATE n~r~ho~?l. l~e~ AGENDA SECTION Staff, ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT NO. Committee, Comm. Report ITEM NO. 5g. Park & Recreation Department BY: James E. Schrantz FOR The Park Board has recommended a change to the Park Ordinance 47. Attached is 47A. Other items the Park Board has we haven't received. It will be a hand-out from the floor. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 47A A N ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 47 KNOWN AS THE PARK ORDINANCE, ADOPTED AUGUST 23, 1979. The City Council of the City of Andover does hereby ordain: Ordinance No. 47 is hereby amended as follows: Section 2.12 C. Red Oaks West Park will be open from sunrise to sunset; sunset beinq not later than 10:00 P.M. Adopted by the City Council this day of 1986. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl - Mayor James E. Schrantz - City Clerk o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21, 1986 AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT NO, Staff, Committee,Commiss' n 5.h. ITEM Amend Ordinance #62 NO. BY: Vicki Volk o MOTION BY TO The City Council is requested to adopt the attached amendment to Ordinance #62. This amendment would clear up a lot of confusion in the office regarding what sort of firearms are allowed to be discharged in the city. The Deputies have also asked that this be amended. COUNCIL ACTION SECOND BY o o -~- o CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 62B AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 62, KNOWN AS THE FIREARMS ORDINANCE. The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains: Ordinance No. 62 is hereby amended as follows: Section II. Regulations e. No rifled barrel rifles or handquns are allowed to be discharqed in the City of Andover except at licensed rifle ranqes. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day of , 1986. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Jerry Windschitl - Mayor James E. Schrantz - City Clerk o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE OctobF'r 7.1. 1 qAfi 5i. Tonson, Inc. Special Use Permit BY: James E. Schrantz AGENDA SECTION Staff, NQ . . . Commlttee, CommlSSlon ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Administration ITEM NO, The City Council is requested to consider the information provided by Staff and advise us to any policy decisions that may be involved in this process of revoking the special use permit. Attached are: (1) d'Arcy's memo (2) Resolution 85-83 Special Use Permit and Permit Conditions (3) Letter from Tonson, Inc.'s Attorney COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o o MEMORANDUM TO: COPIES TO: FROM: DATE: REFERENCE: CITY of ANDOVER Mayor and City Council ,James E. Schrantz and William G. Hawkins d'Arcy Bosell 7 October 1986 In Re: 2050 112 NW Bunker Lake Blvd. Tonson, Inc. In preparing the reasons why the Special Use Permit of the above- named applicant should be cancelled, I have the following questions in regard to the original Permit Conditions. The answers to these questions may give us additional reasons why the SUP should be cancelled. General - 6: Schriptek was to advise the City of anu changes in operation or management, changes in the agreement with the Heidelbergers, or ownership of the property 60 days prior to the effective date of such change. THIS PERMIT SHALL BE VALID ONLY SO LONG AS THERE ARE NO CHANGES UNLESS SUCH CHANGES ARE FIRST APPROVED By THE CITY. '\ \ Question: inclusion effective Did we receive notice of change in regard to the of the Heidelbergers at least 60 days prior to the date of such change? If not, that was a violation. Question: Did we receive notice of change in regard to the sale of the business (or however this occurred) from Schriptek to Tonson, Inc. (or anyone in between) at least 60 days prior to the effective date of such change? If not, that was a violation. Question: Did we receive a request for change in operation as it relates specifically to the change in ratio from the operation at least 60 days prior to the effective date of such change? If not, that was a violation. Site - 4-: o This section deals with access and the security thereof and provides that such access be adequately secured to prevent unauthorized access and/oT use. o o J Page Two T ons.on , I:nc. 7 October 1986 o Ques~ion: How can an open hole ~n a fence be construed to be n d tIn a equa e y secured. Site - 7: Requires that a sign be placed at the site entrance stating the site name {i.e., Tonson, Inc.}, hours of operation, charges .and rules of operation. Question: To the best of my knowledge none of the above exists. Is this not another violation? Site - 14: Site shall be locked when an attendant ~s not on duty. Question: How can you lock an open fence? Operation - 1: We are to receive an Operating Report by the 15th of each month including the items as set out in this Condition. Question: Are we in receipt of these reports from 8-16-83 and on? If not, this is another violation. Operation - 2: As documented by the County, there have been numerous occasions when they have exceeded the number of tires in the processing/receiving area. Question: Do we have more reports of this excess number of tires in this area other than the two attached to the County data of September 25th? Each time this is exceeded is another violation. Operation - 5: The ratio set out in this section is 3-1, however, the ratio may never fall below 2-1, and such 2-1 ratio may continue only for 30 days. Question: Do we have the reports documenting that they have been meeting these ratios? If not, that is another violation. Operation - 7: As documented by the County, the operation was receiving waste tires while their equipment was not operable. Question: Do we know how many other times this has occurred? In any event, this is a violation. Operation - 8: If they fail to operate the shredding of tires for 30 days it is construed to be cessation of the ,operation and would require the removal of o . o o ------:>:::::..--:::: Page Three Tonson, Inc. 7 October 1986 o all tires and tire products from the "receiving/ processing area". Question: Do the records we have indicate the continuous shredding of tires? If not, this is a violation. Operation - 9: The conditions of this permit limit where the receiving and storage can occur. Question: Has this been monitored so that we know they are in compliance with this condition? If not, this could be a violation. Operation - 10: This item limits where the reduction of old waste tires shall occur. Question: Has there been any change from the plan as detailed on Exhibit F of the permit? If a change has occurred without prior notice and approval this is a violation. Operation - 17: Do we have access to or copies of the receipts of new waste tires and shipments of recap casings and processed tire chips (these are to be weighed and recorded] as provided in this section? Question: If they have not kept the records required in this section as well as others in this permit, is not each instance a violation? Operation - 20: Attendant versus equipment operator. Question: Can that person be one and the same? Operation - 23: This section deals with records again in regard to the quantity of waste tires passing through the site and the site operations. Question: Have we requested a review of these records and been denied that review? Do we know that in fact these records exist? Operation - 24-: Annual reV1.ew. Question: Who is to be the moving force l.n this regard? The City or the operator? The reason for this rather long dissertation is to gather as many reasons .my the "Cancellation of Special Use Permit" should be acted upon. o o o Page Four Tonson, Inc. 7 October 1986 There are also some other items such as insurance, bonds, etc. that the County requires, however, I don't know whether they would fall under our "reasons" or be additional supporting reasons. In talking with Bill Hawkins, the procedure to initiating the "Cancellation" would be the same as a Rezoning and once we have our reasons nailed down, the procedure can begin. Any assistance or direction will be appreciated. t-t ((A' :"'i) d'ArcyJ P. S. Perhaps because we know the operator (Tonson, Inc.) has engaged legal counsel it might be wise to have Bill draft the Notice of Cancellation of Special Use Permit so that all the bases are covered and the wording is correct. o o o ( <0 ( CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NO. R 85-83 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A CQNPJ~IONED TIRE RECYCLING FACILITY AS REQUESTED BY SCHRIPTEK RECOVERING SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC., AND SETTING OUT CONDITIONS FOR SAME. WHEREAS, pursuant to published notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission has conducted a public hearing on the Special Use Permit request of Schriptek Recovery Systems, Inc. for the property describe&on the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, after such hearing and review the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the request, giving as reasons for such recommendation as being 1)the pr?posed use will be extremely beneficial to the health, safety and general welfare of the cOmmunity, 2)it will not cause serious traffic congestion, 3)it will have a beneficial effect on neighboring properties, 4)it is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan, 5)it will improve the scenic beauty of the area and 6)a public hearing was held and there was no opposition to the operation; and WHEREAS, the City Council is in agreement with those reasons given by the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges that the Special Use Permit will contain the same provisions as set out by Anoka County in their license under the Solid Waste Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City County further acknowledges that Schriptek, Inc. has entered into a written agreement with Anoka County covering the conditions set forth in their license. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby approve the Special Use Permit request of Schriptek Recovering Systems, Inc. under Ordinance No. 8, Section 8.01 (B) for the purpose of recyling waste tires on the property described in the attached Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such approval shall be contingent upon the applicant meeting all provisions of the attached "Conditions". BE IT STILL FURTH~R RESOLVED that such Special Use Permit shall be for the period of August 16, 1983 through June 30, 1984, unless terminated sooner for non-compliance. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 16th day of August , 1983. CITY OF ANDOVER ~/M. J: ry W' dschJ.tl .~ -<'<~ - Mayor c;c o o PERMIT CONDITIONS Schriptek Recovery Systems International, Inc. August 16, 1983 - June 30, 1984 ,(> General 1. A performance bond in the amount of $12,500 shall be provided to Anoka County each year, with a copy filed with the City of Andover; the first bond to be received by the City and County before September 16, 1983. 2. The permit fee shall be $150.00 3. A Junkyard License shall be obtained by September 16, 1983; and shall be renewed pursuant to Ordinance No. 44, on or before December 31, 1983 and each year thereafter. The fee for the original license shall be $250.00; renewal fees to be set by Council Resolution. 4. The submission of engineering plans and report is waived. 5. The licensee shall provide and maintain all equipment necessary for the conduct of the operation. Such equipment shall include, but not be limited to, scale, shredder(s), and tire moving equipment. 6. The licensee shall advise the City of any changes in operation or management of this facility, the agreement with Cecil and Patricia Heidelberger, Or the ownership of the property at least sixty (60) days prior to the effective date of such change. This permit shall be valid only so long as there are no changes unless such changes are first approved by the City. 7. All applicable portions of City Ordinance shall apply. Site 1. The site shall consist of approximately 15 acres as described on the attached Exhibit A and shown in Exhibits B & C; subject to reduction by the City, according to such terms and conditions as the City may require, upon application by the licensee and a showing that the property to be removed from the site is free of waste tires and is not reasonably necessary to conducting the permitted activity. 2. The "Receiving/Processing Area" shall be confined to that portion of the site north of a straight east-west line which extends along and is identical to the south side of the existing steel building which will house the stationary shredder as in Exhibit D. 3. All processing and storage shall take place in, and be limited to the areas identified in Exhibit E. cO 4. The site shall have only one acoess, which will be off Bunker Lake Boulevard between the Kline property and M. Heidelberger property; and shall be adequately secured to prevent unauthorized access and/or use. This shall be done immediately. 5. The "Receiving/Processing Area" shall be screened by a City approved fence of at least 8' in height, so none of the activities in the "Receiving/Processing Area" can be seen from the public. right-of way. This to be completed by October 16, 1983. ---, o o No operations shall occur in the wetland area. A sign shall be placed at the site entrance stating the site name, hours of operation, charges, and rules by October 16, 1983. Sanitary facilities and shelters shall be provided by September 16, 1983. Electrical service for operations and repairs shall be provided by October 16, 1983. Firefighting facilities adequate to insure the safety of employees shall be provided immediately. Emergency first aid equipment to provide adequate treatment for accidents shall be provided immediately. 12. Potable water for site personnel shall be provided immediately. 13. A telephone shall be provided immediately. 14. The site shall be locked when an attendant is not on duty. Operation 1. An operating report shall be submitted to the City by the fifteenth (15th) day following the end of the month. Such operating report shall include at least the following information: quantity of new waste tires received; quantity of new waste tires graded for recapping; quantity of waste tires shredded; quantity of whole tire shipped; quantity of shredded tires shipped; quantity of old waste tire reduction; quantity of new waste tires remaining unprocessed; receivers of waste tires and/or waste tire products; and copy of Shriptek's report to Cecil Heidelberger. The City may require additional information to monitor this operation. 2. The maximum number of waste tires stored in the "Receiving/ Processing Area" shall not, at any time, exceed 25,000 tires. Upon reaching the maximum storage limit, no further receipt of waste tires shall occur until the excess storage is brought into compliance with the stated limits. 3. Fire access shall be maintained in accordance with City of Andover requirements. 4. Cecil Heidelberger shall have no involvement in the operation of the facility and shall not conduct any operations on the site. (0 5. An accumulative quarterly net reduction of the old waste tire inventory of at least three (3) ton of old waste tires processed for each one (1) ton of new waste tire received shall be accomplished; however, under no conditions shall the monthly reduction of old waste tire inventory be less than two (2) ton of old waste tires processed for each one (1) ton of new tires received. -2- o o - -- 10 6. Until the stationary shredder is operational, the portable shredder shall not be removed from the premises while any un shredded new waste tires remain on site. 7. No waste tires shall be received if processing equipment is not present on site. 8. Upon cessation of operation, all tires and tire products in the "Receiving/Processing Area" shall be removed from the site. For purposes of this requirement, cessation of operation shall include failure to shred tires during any thirty (30) consecutive days. 9. All new waste tire receiving and storage, recap casing grading and storage, and shredded tire storage shall be limited to the areas designated in Exhibit E. 10. The reduction of the old waste tire inventory shall first clear the "Receiving/Processing Area" and then the fire lanes as shown in Exhibit F. No variation from this progression shall occur unless first approved by the City. 11. If containers of hazardous wastes are encountered, the licensee'shall immediately discontinue work in the area, notify the City, and secure the area to prevent spillage or container damage. ( 12. Receipt of new waste tires shall not occur between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. or on Sundays or legal holidays as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 645.44. (New Years Day, Presidents Day. ~emorial Day, July 4th, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day). Processing of waste tires shall not Occur before 6:00 A.M. or after 11:00 P.M. or on Sundays or holidays. 13. The licensee shall maintain haul routes within one mile of the site free of waste tires. 14. Noise shall not exceed 85 decibels at the property line. 15. All receipts of new waste tires shall stay within the "Receiving/Processing Area". 16. All waste tires shall be processed to a maximum particle size of six (6) square inches. 17. All receipts of new waste tires and shipments of recap casings and processed tire chips shall be weighed and recorded. -0 18. A minimum separating distance of five (5) feet shall be maintained between site operations and the adjacent property lines. -3- ---- - -- o o 10 19. The licensee shall engage the services of a qualified exterminator or pest control operator, acceptable to Anoka County, to inspect and treat the "Receiving/ Processing Area" when deemed necessary by Anoka County. 20. An attendant shall be on duty at the site at all times while it is open to the public. 21. The premises and entrances shall be maintained in a clean, neat and orderly manner at all times. 22. All incoming and outgoing traffic shall be controlled by the licensee in such a manner as to provide orderly and safe ingress and egress. 23. Records acceptable to the City shall be maintained indicating the quantity of waste tires passing through the site and the site operations. These records shall be available at all times for review and inspection by the City. 24. These conditions shall be subject to an annual review on or before June 30 of each year; and to immediate revocation of the Special Use Permit for any violation of the conditions listed herein. 25. These conditions shall remain in effect through J~ne 30, 1984, ~nless terminated sooner for non-compliance; and shall be subject to revision and renewal before July 1, 1984. (0 -4- o o ----- o o RICHARD J. SUNDBERG ATI'ORNEY AT LAW 533 WEST P ARKDAU! Puu 1660 SOIlJ'H HIGHWAY 100 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 (612) 542.9220 10 ce, 10/7/16 September 30, 1986 The Honorab+e Mayor of Andover The Honorable Councilmembers of Andover and Mr. Jim Schrantz, City Administrator Andover City Hall Andover, MN 55304 Re: Tonson, Inc. Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Please be advised that I represent Tonson, Inc. I am advised that certain questions have arisen concerning the compliance of Tonson, Inc. with the zoning ordinances of the City of Andover. I request an opportunity to meet informally with yourselves sometime within the next ten days at a time and place of your convenience. I would most appreciate if Mr. Schrantz could arrange such meeting and advise me accordingly. I don't think such meeting would require more than 30 minutes or so of discussion. Very truly yours, JLi~ RJS:mc o o ---------- - :;...- ~ - - --- .---- o CITY OF ANDOVER si REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO. DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT 17 October 1986, ITEM NO, Additional infonnation 5i BY: d 'Arcy IbseU Zoning Aaministrator Discussion Attached please find the License Conditions prepared by the County of Anoka for Tonson, Inc. dated July 1, 19.86 through June 30, 1987. These are the current conditions by which the waste tire recycling operation is to be conducted. A close. review of the former document and this document will reveal that there have been some deletions and changes from the original Permit Condj.tions. I have reviewed the same and in regard to my memorandum, the only real thing that has changed i.s the numbering. This new document is provided tor additional infonnation only. PLEASE NOTE: Under Si,te 4 and Site 14, would you please delete these items as there is a fence which rolls across the opening in the fence. I had not observed it partially opened so I did not pick up on that particular item until just today. 1~) COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o o ~ - I . COUNTY OF ANOKA COMMUNITY HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOURTH FLOOR 6l2-4.~2-7QQQ COURTHOUSE ANOKA. MINNESOTA 55303 ~~~H~ XX~~XX PubliC Health Nursing Services Envlfonmental Health Services Mental Health. Mental Retardation, Chemical Dependency Services Family & Children's Services Volunteer Services Developmental Achievement Centers LICENSE CONDITIONS TONSON, INC. dba Tonson Waste Tire Processing ;Julyl, 1986 - JUne 30, 1987' General I. The licensee shall provide financial assurance in the amount of $12,500 for the operation and closure of the facility by irrevocable letter of credit in a form acceptable to the County Attorney. Correction of said financial assurance documents shall be submitted within 30 days of request by the County. 2. The licensee shall obtain necessary City of Andover permits and/or licenses. 3; The required submissiOh of engineering plans and report is waived. 4. The licensee shall provide and maintain all equipment necessary for the conduct of the operation. Such equipment shall include, but not necessiarily be limited to scale, shredder(s), and tire moving equipment. 5. The licensee shall advise the County and City of any changes in the operation or management of this facility, the agreement with Cecil and Patricia Heidelberger, or the ownership of the property at least 60 days prier to the effective date of such change. This license shall be valid only so long as there are no changes unless such changes are first approved by the County. 6. All applicable provisions of the Anoka County Solid Waste Ordinance, as amended, shall apply. Site o 1. The site shall consist of the approximately 15 acres as described in Exhibit A and shown in Exhibits B &: C. The site may be reduced by the County, according to such terms and conditions as the County may require, upon application by the licensee and a showing that the property to be removed from the site is free of waste tires and is not reasonably necessary to conducting the licensed activity. The "Receiving/Processing Area" shall be confined to that portion of the site north of a straight east-west line which extends along and is identical to the south side of the existing steel building which will house the stationary shredder as shown in Exhibit D. 2. Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer o o - - -2- o 3. All processing and storage shall take place in, and be limited to, the areas identified in Exhibit E. 4. The site shall have only one point of access, which shall be off of Bunker Lake Blvd., beween the Kline and Marian Heidelberger properties, and shall be adequately secured to prevent unauthorized access and/or use immediately. 5. The "Receiving/Processing Area" shall be screened by a fence at least eight feet, but not more than ten feet in height so that none of the activities in the "Receiving/Processing Area" can be seen from the public right-of-way. 6. No operations shall occur in wetland areas, except to facilitate the removal of existing waste tires in that area. 7. A sign shall be placed at the site entrance stating the site name, hours of operation, charges, and rules. The sign and jts placement shall be subject to approval by the Department. 8. Sanitary facilities and shelters shall be provided. 9. Electrical service for operations and repairs shall be provided. 10. Firefighting facilities adequate to insure the safety of employees shall be provided immediately. ll. Emergency first aid equipment to provide adequate treatment for accidents shall be provided immediately. 12. Portable water for site personnel shall be provided immediately. 13. A telephone shall be provided immediately. 14. The site shall be locked when an attendant is not on duty. Operation 1. An operating report shall be submitted to the Department and City by the fifteentH ',day foJJowjng',the,en(Lo1:4he~,month~ Such operating report shall include at least the following information: quantity of new waste tires received; quantity of new waste tires graded for recapping; quantity of waste tires shredded; quantity of whole tires shipped; quantity of shredded tires shipped; quantity of old waste tire inventory reduction; quantity of new waste tires remaining unprocessed; and receivers of waste tires and/or waste tire products. The Department may require additional information necessary to monitor this operation. o 2. T~tii'A""~s stored in the "Receiving/Processing Area"~ ttl6t~at any time, fie Jj~.u__""titt!!ll (automobile equivalent). Upon reaching the maximum storage limit, no further receipt of new waste tires shall occur until the excess storage is brought into compliance with the stated limits. For purposes of determining compliance with this condition, 25,000 tires (automobile equivalent) shall mean a pile(s) of waste tires of .50,000 cubic feet of volume. o o -l- o 3. Fire access shall be maintained in accordance with the City of Andover requirements. If. A quarterly net reduction of the old waste tire inventory of at least three (3) ton of old waste tires processed for each ton of new waste tires received shall be accomplished, however, under no conditions shall the monthly reduction be less than 2 ton of old waste tires processed for each I ton of new waste tires received. 5. No new waste tires shall be received if processing equipment is not present on site. 6. Upon cessation of operation, all tires and tire products in the "Receiving/Processing Area" shall be removed from the site. For purposes of this requirement cessation of operation shall include failure to shred any tires during any thirty consecutive days. 7. All new waste tire receiving and storage, recap casing grading and storage, and shredded tire storage shall be limited to the areas designated in Exhibit E. 8. The reduction of the old waste tire inventory shall first clear the "Receiving/Processing Area" and then the fire lanes as shown in Exhibit F. Thereafter the old waste inventory reduction shall progress by work areas identified in Exhibi t F. No variation from this progression shall occur unless first approved by the Department. 9. If containers of hazardous wastes are encountered, the licensee shall immediately discontinue work in the area, notify the Department, and secure the area to prevent spillage or cont~ner da'llage. 10. Receipt of new waste tires shall not occur before 7:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. or on Sundays and holidays as set forth in MS 645.44, subdivision 5. Processing of waste tires shall not occur before 6:00 a.m. or after 12:00 a.m. or on Sunday or holidays as set forth in MS 645.44, subdivision 5. II. The licensee shall maintain haul routes within I mile of the site free of waste tires. 12. Noise shall not exceetl 85 decibels at the property line. 13. All receipts of new waste tires shall stay within the "Receiving/Processing Area." 14. All waste tires shall be processed to a maximum particle size of six square inches on any surface. 15. All receipts of new waste tires and shipments of recap casings and processed tire chips shall be weighed and recorded. 16. A minimum separating distance of five (5) feet shall be maintained between site operations and the adjacent property line. 17. The licensee shall engage the services of a qualified exterminator or operator, acceptable to the Department, to inspect and "Receiving/Processing Area" when deemed necessary by the Department. pest control treat the o 18. An attendant shall be on duty at the site at all times while it is open for public use. o o -4- o 19. The premises and entrances shall be maintained in a clean, neat and orderly manner at all times. 20. All incoming and outgoing traffic shall be controlled by the licensee in such a manner as to provide orderly and safe ingress and egress. 21. Records acceptable to the Department shall be maintained indicating the quantity of waste tires passing through the site and the site operations. These records shall be available at all times for review and inspection by the Department. 22. Prior to cessation of operation the licensee shall: a. Notify the Department at least 90 days before cessation of operation. b. Notify regular customers of record, if any, at least ~5 days, but not more than 60 days, before cessation of operation. c. Public notice in local newspapers distributed in the area served by the station at least ~5, but not more than 60 days, before cessation of operation and upon cessation of operation. d. Post a sign at the gate and attendant's window from at least 60 days before to 120 days after cessation of operation. e. These notices and signs shall identify the date on which the station will close and alternate services available. 23. Upon cessation of operation the licensee shall: a. Remove all waste tires, used tires, tire products and other solid waste from the site (receiving/processing area) within one week. b. Pick up litter and remove salvaged materials within one week. c. Administer closed building pest eradication to the building, and surrounding 'grounds, by a qualified pest control operator acceptable to the Department within one week following completion and the building and grounds cleaning. d. Secure the site to prevent unauthorized disposal activities. e. Notify the Department of closure work completion within one month of cessation of operation. 2~. The operational bond in effect at the time of closure shall continue until the station is properly closed and approved by the County. o 25. Approval of this plan or waiver of any plan requirement, does not in any way limit or reduce the licensee and owner's obligation or responsibility to properly close this site and to maintain it in such a manner that it does not degrade the soil, waters, or air of Anoka County or create a nuisance or endanger the public or to take remedial action to correct such degradation. o o - ~ o o -5- 26. If financial assurance documents are not satisfactory to the County Attorney's Office, corrected documents in proper form are to be submitted within 30 days of request by the County. 27. The licensee shall not accept large heavy equipment tires or any other waste tire which cannot be processed by the equipment on site. It is recognized by the County that the operator is not required to process the large heavy equipment tires currently on site. \ - -- ---- -- -=----=1--=:--- - -----=----c__::_ =-- o o fXHlflIT A primary Tract % Comroencln~ at a poInt 241. iOB .feet West of the NorH.eest COIner of Qhe Northeast ouar'~er of the southwest Ouarter of Section 34, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka county, Minnesota: thence West parallel with the North line of sai~ quarter-quarter section 208 feetJ thence South parallel with the East line of 5ai~ quarter-quarter section 626.124 feetJ thence East parallel with 5ai~ North line 416.108 feet: thence North parallel with 5ai~ East line 208.108 feetJ thence west parallel with .ai~ North line 208.708 feet: thence North to the point of beginning, except that portion of the North 40 feet of the West 100 feet of the Oescrlbe~ tract, lying South of the right-of-way of Bunker Lake Blv~., which Ooes not un~erly the traller- house off ice presently .i tuate~ on or a~jacent to sal0 40 x 100 foot excepteO portion. Secon~ary Tract: Beginning at the Southeast corner of the Primary Tract: thence West parallel with the South line of the primary ~ract 1040 feet, more or less to a point of intersection with a line parallel with anO Oistant 241. 108 feet East of the West line of said quarter-quarter, as measured along the South line of said quarter-quarter: thence South parallel with the West line of said quarter-quarter 416 feet more or less to a point of intersection with a line that is parallel with and distant 241.708 feet North of the South line of said quarter-quarter as measured along the West line thereof: thence East parallel with the South line of said quarter- quarter to a point of intersection with a line parallel with and distant 33 feet West of the East line of sald quarter-quarter: thence North to the point of beginning. Except such portion thereof as may be owned by Marion ,Jldc!elberger,. o '-19 o o .-- fII"'\".--., .0 ./ ,- o c - -I .~ !i CD ~ ~ \i ~ C ..J I ffi ~. i- ! i , . l~ -'~:..- f ~~', ". ..-;; ~, ~ ~ ~l~ ''.. ~ · Ex h,'fJ,'r ~ o .. .. .. " ", .. .. .. .. .. , .. .. , , .. , , .. , \ t ..-. , - " , , e .. ) , .. , .. '- , .. , .. ~: ..i 0 ~ . , . I ~ . , ~: . , 0 . . " , 0 , . , . ,-- . , , , . , . , , .. . . . . . .. , .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. , . . . . . .. - -,'''T/ n:' . . .. ~e ! ~t' I ~ " ~ . -! , . , 0 ;, ii. . .. . .. . . .. . ' I . . . . . . '\i I . . . . .1.... i . .:t .. . ~~ .. ..~ 0 . . 0 I , . 0 ..,~..I~ .-. . . . . t- o .. C' '. . ... , ~ .. .. ::0..... -40. 0 R~ " ~u"~ ",. .. - lC ~ '" 'Ie --.- . , (lI'Hh -' . . __ - t ~"l'~ .. .... , , .... '\. I ....-\ --"-. , , : , I . : i-J , I "'., I e'- ........ l I I ~ ~ ~t .. -~ - . . .-" 0 , . . . . . 0 , , . s/ o ( " o I J " C " -= I&J ~. i" ! - . .. . ~ . , '" ~ ~~ ,,) ~i -" -', 1 <: . '" '" ~ . i ~ i .. i ! ! . I t ~ ii I t . j I I 1 i t j ;; i j . . i ~ i j . ~ ! i l \ ,: ! ! . I . . 10 i j I j i ~ . , I" -........ ~~, , ~~ It ~' ." , .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. '\. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ ..,....,.. -'- . ~~ti ~.... , I " ~ . .' 1,' _.____. 1 , , -. ~.., ,/.~" o ..-. -- .. , . ,. .. , .. , .. " " ~ ~. ~ . ..:::::.: ..a l ~ . ,.,./ .~ . .. o .. . ... ""' , \ , .. , . I .. .. , .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . ~ . . H )\ . . o .. -,~/", .. -. r. . ' . , . I ~ 1,,1 ,..., ~ t' 0" ... \.. " .... ... ~i\ ~~, ~ . . ; , ~. t. .~ I 'I .. . .. . . .. .. I .. 'r _'i... e1l~ . -::-:'"'\ .. .,. -., -, - .. .......-': . ,...-- . - . . o. . . . . i . . . -;:. l~ ....:: ~ ~ . .. . .. . . . I . .. .. . o .. .. . .. . ---' . : r xl: I,,! D ( . ",0-1 -~.. , , . , I I . ( i-4J ....., , .... .-..... 1 , I ~ .. . .. . . . . : . . I't ' . ~ l-__L . .",- I ~'! --.. I II ; :~~... "., ~ , f ".' " - t ~I ~"lo~ . 0 ..... " . --.-- - ;.-- "". ,: .. , ~ ~t ~I . I , . . .. ... -, --I ~------ : ' "._ ~."r.. h., . , o .' o. ." o . s). .... . .. . , I .. . o .. o .. I o i i i i , . I ~ i I I I . I I I I ! I' Ii 01 Ii I ! ~ ... ~ ~ -l .J t ! ! ~ I ! i i ! . j ~ ! i 1 I ! j c T If; w ~ i. ! : ~ t: . I I" ....... I' ~~1 , ~~a ~ ~ o . " . I ..... '. .... .. . " . . .. . . . . . . .. .. .. , .a...... . ... - ~ ", ~ r. , i: , .. ._.....~~-~ .". .- . " . , .. , .. " .' ~ ~. ~ . ..:::;.} "I · ",. . J ~ · . .. . ~.. ~ ~ . . . ~ . . .-~ ' ~.' " \ : I ,.. · '.. : ... .. . .. . .. .. 0 . -.. : .. ... .. . ..- . ~ -~ . Itl I ~~-{ r-~ ~.. \.. ... . ... .. ~i, ~~.. ~ o . . , :. ;, .. .~ .'rHJ. . S. . .. .. . ~ '\i ., .~" . -12" --.~ ... ~ ~.~ --. -. . . ~.-=w:-;. .. ......... ... C' .. . -- - . .. ... o .. . . . .. -- ", o . . . . o 1 t ~l'< \:.\ .. . .. ~I I I I .! ~ .. ... .'" . . . . . , : , . , _to. ":"00..1., ~.f'll , ",' . , (.~""'h .... . . . . . Ex 4" ~/f E t I _I... . I ., .' , , . . I . , , . . .. . .. I l-i " I ,,0- --_..- 1 ~ ,.-, : I . ~i ! ~ t -_.~- ..':.... . I.: "".c . " --.-~-1i : ~'. ... :i' ~ , ~ ~l t .. .1 . . .. ------.. -I .. :. . .: , =---""'~ "I, . . . . ," " 0" . . - I . . .3~ . , " o o o . J I f ) J ]0 1 I . I . I I ~ I Ex L L/ h/n-} ire;J F 5ei~~(!.e CENTER SEC, ~-I I,_~___-i'. -' , . ~ I ~ . ~ 1 i 1 I . ~ ;I , ; j I i =' ; . I i ! ; j I i i i ~ . - ." "t~':":". :.... - "lOG 704 -'-~. -. --- ',....- - -... '. ... -'.. ............. ~ ... ..... ,- .- _ ~-:-.'.N.(J1'.4r.. , , , , , , , , , ';67' ~ I UtJI I ~ (~ YJH/ - - , , , , ' o . o .Il .! , \ , " , : "~O."08 c~l'fRtR-t-A~ , 0 (J) ft-t;::Jo) ~W;9hf KI/;"~ .. $,J ~ , / , ~ , ," . ! r p ~l I ~I' i . ~ I I ~ , , j."'--'.i-- " ..; . \ I ' , "') .,.' (-I) , , . ~ (IO) I. --, ., .................. , , " , , \ \ . , / , , , , , -,. . . . , . . . o o , . \ ~ , I , , I I , o ( , ( , , , , , stf ,.,.1... ,;,.." .. ; -'~-, 1/7/ Ie. I . ~ -L.- \ (''/ ~ \"'~ l &/~ ~ ~"~J ~,~ 'l--k'~ ':..: '- ~ - - J.L. - -- ;-~ - - J O ' -, --.:....:.:.:.uf~: . ...~; , .... .cw""" ,..,..' . , '.,' f'I'X7J '/,n;reJ "A,,,~ ; L ieJI"per ~ !.. ~ (f)~ ~ I I I " -- - ---- SJ~ I I I . I , , " (~J (-I~blJ ; /.M7 ,<>- ... ~ j~ ~ \.: ,. ~ .. : I ~'7 ' ~~ S~ ~h "~ 3:' . , (It) I . ~ 'l- i-=- \/'~') , , , , . 0 , 0 . I 0 , . , , . , I o o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21, 1986 ITEM Transfer-Grp. Cable to NO, North Central Comm. BY: James E. Schrantz AGENDA SECTION NO. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Non-Discussion 6a. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF GROUP W CABLE OF THE QUAD CITIES, INC. TO NORTH CENTRAL CABLE COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION. Group W is obligated to receive the City Council's approval for this transaction under the Franchise Ordinance. The attached resolution will eff~ctively approve the transaction consistent with the Commission's recommendation. Following the approval of this resolution, a signed copy and certification must be returned to the office of O'Connor & Hannan. JES/jac COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY - , o o I o MINNEA.-oLIS P K . T DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (612) 343-1102 TO: FROM: DATE: O'CON NOR & HAN NAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3800 IDS CENTER 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-2254 16121341-3800 TELEX 29-0584 TELECOPIER 16121 343-1256 0" COUNSEL FRE:DERICK w. THOMAS WILLIAM c:. KELLY 11818-181'01 DENVU MARTIN M. BERLINER" ARNOl.D R. KAPLAN" TERENCE P. BOYLE" ROBERT WIEGAND .." NOL" S. OYAL'" CE BANK CENTER N STREET 80203'4~7 700 OF COUN_1. DAI/ID BURLINGAME:" WILLIAM R. FISHMAN. MAO"ID O,.,.ICE VELAZQUEZ, 21 MADRID I, SPAIN 43-31'00 TELEX 23!543 I.,OCAI.. COUNSEL ,.RANK ..I. WIRG"" 0,. COUHHL. WILLIAM T. HANNAN lIell-laSSl JOHN oJ. FLYNN DAVie c. TREE:N'" WILLJAM E CROTTY' MEMORANDUM City Managers and Administrators Quad Cities Cable Communications Thomas D. Creighton, October 6, 1986 RE: Transfer of Ownership and Control of Group W Cable of the Quad Cities, Inc. ,. CONSULTANT MARY SCOTT GUEST" DAVID "'_ ZISSE:Ro LARRY O. GALLEGOS. .JAMES A. NATIONS' DIANE BL.IESZNER" "NOT MEMBER Of' MINNESOTA BAR As you are aware, Group W Cable, Inc., by and through Group W Cable of the Quad Cities, Inc., requested the Cities' consent to the transfer of ownership and control in Group W of tIle Quad Cities, Inc. to North Central Cable Communications Corporation ("North Central"). Group W is obligated to receive the Cities' approval for this transaction under the Franchise Ordinance. The Quad Cities Cable Communications Commission has undertaken an analysis of the legal, technical, and financ~al qualifications of North Central in the transaction. At its meeting on September 11, 1986, the Commission determined to recommend to its member cities the approval of the transfer of ownership of Group W Cable of the Quad Cities, Inc. to North Central. The complexity of the transaction and the specific analysis which was undertaken by the Commission, on behalf of its member cities, cannot be fully described in this memorandum. I have included a copy of a memorandum which explains in detail the transaction. This memorandum was presented to the Commission and formed a basis for their recommendation of approval. I have enclosed this memorandum for your information and for the information of your Council members. i . . . . J o , O'CONNOR & HANNAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW c:> City Managers and Administrators of the Quad Cities Cable Communications Commission Page Two September 19, 1986 I have prepared a Resolution for your City Council which will effectively approve the transaction consistent with the Commission's recommendation. No ordinance amendment is required. I would ask that you place thiS-matter on your next Council agenda. If you would like a representative of the Commission to be present at your Council meeting, please contact Terry O'Connell, Cable Administrator, at 421-6630. Additionally, if you should have any questions concerning this transaction, you may contact either Mr. O'Connell or myself. Following the Council's adoption of the enclosed Resolution, I would ask that you promptly return it to me at the above address. Note: Nbrth Central has requested that the attached Resolution be certified according to your regular procedures for such certif-' ication. Please return a signed copy of this Resolution and the certification to my office as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. MJA:abg cc: Terry O'Connell o o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION NO, DATE October 21, 1986 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ITEM NO. Non-Discussion Item Dehn's Pond/86-19 Approve Plans & Specs Engineering BY: James E. Schrantz The City Council is requested to approve the resolution approving the Plans & Specifications and Order the Ad- vertisement for Bids for Project 86-19 Dehn's Pond area. We are proposing to advertize this project so the bids can be awarded the first meeting in November - 11- 4-86. This is an assessment project so the improvement project needs to be advertized for bid. A DNR permit will be required to outlet the protected wetland. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY o CITY OF ANDOVER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE October 21, 1986 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT AGENDA SECTION NO. ITEM NO. Non-Discussion Items Engineering 6c. CPA Firm/TIF/ Boisclair BY: James E. Schrantz The City Council is requested to select a C.P.A. firm to review the financial statements and record of the parties per the Contract for Private Development between the City of Andover and Andover Limited Partnership. . Attached are pages 18 and 19 of said agreement. COUNCIL ACTION MOTION BY TO SECOND BY BY: ,.. o State or with any court of the State or the federal government. The Redeveloper shall not, prior to the Maturity Date, apply for a deferral of property tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.86, or any similar law. . Section 6.3. Assessment Ag-reement. Prior to execution and delivery of the Redevelopment Property Deed pursuant to Article III of this Agreement, the Redeveloper and the City shall execute the Assessment Agreement, substantially in the form of the Assessment Agreement contained in Schedule C of this Agreement. The Assessment Agreement shall provide that the Minimum Market Value of the Minimum Improvements shall be equal to the percentage completed of the Minimum Improvements on January 1 following the start of construction, based on a market value for the Minimum Improvements of $2,626,535, and $3,600,000, representing the completed market value of the Minimum Improvements, each year thereafter until the Maturity Date. Section 6.4. Loan Amount and Repayment Schedule. The Redeveloper shall repay the City a portion of the Proceeds provided through the issuance of the Bonds. The portion to be ['epaid by the Redeveloper shall be equivalent to an amount equal to 32% of the Proceeds provided by the City. The Redeveloper shall repay the amount calculated plus a rate of interest equal to 5.5% per annum in 180 or less monthly repayments. The first monthly repayment shall be due on or before September 1, 1989 and the last repayment shall be due on or before August 1, 2004. The repayment schedule is Schedule G. Section 6.5. Guaranty. Robert J. Boisclair and William C. Rademacher (the "Parties") shall personally be responsible to pay to the City in any year during the term of the Bonds an amount of any deficiency as determined by the City. For the purposes of this section a deficiency is the difference between the costs identified in Section 6.1<0 and (ii) and the amount of tax increments' resulting from the Redevelopment Property. The Parties also agree to guarantee the amount of the loan repayments as provided for in Section 6.4. If the City determines that a deficiency will occur, the City must notify the Parties in writing of the amount needed to pay in that year the costs identified in Section 6.1(i) and (ii). If the Redeveloper does not make a scheduled loan repayment or the loan repayment is only a portion of the scheduled loan repayment, as provided for in Section 6.4., the City must notify the Parties in writing of the amount of loan repayment due. Within 30 days of written notice from the City, the Parties shall pay to the City the amount specified. The obligation of the Parties to make the payments as provided in this Section shall be a joint and several obligation of each Party and an absolute and unconditional, irrespective of any defense or any rights of setoff, recoupment or counterclaim it might otherwise have against the City or any other government body or other person. The Parties will not fail to make any required payments for any cause or circumstances whatsoever, including any change in law, or any other event, even if beyond the control of the Parties. All appropriate and applicable financial statements and records (the "financial documents") of the Parties shall be confidentially reviewed by an ~independent certified public accounting firm (the "CPA Firm") chosen by the City. Said review of the financial documents will occur prior to the sale of the Bonds and, unless the Parties and the City receive written notification from the CPA Firm within thirty (30) days of submission of said financial documents to the contrary, said financial documents shall be deemed to be satisfactory upon 18 ,---- o o .' recommendation and approval of the CPA Firm. If, within thirty (30) days of submission of said financial documents, the Parties and the City receive written notification that said financial documents are not satisfactory, the Parties will be responsible to re-submit satisfactory financial documents to the CPA Firm for its review and approval. The financial documents must be deemed approved by the CPA Firm prior to the sale of the Bonds. The financial documents shall be confidential between the Parties and the CPA Firm. The Parties will present to the City on the date of closing for the Bonds a letter of credit for $150,000, effective until receipt by the City of the first tax increment on the Redevelopment Property. The City will provide the funds to pay the fee for the letter of credit out of Bond proceeds. o REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ANDOVER DATE October 21. 1986 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT AGENDA SECTION NO, Approval of Minutes ITEM NO. 7 By:Vicki Volk FOR The City council is requested to approve the following minutes: September 16, 1986 Regular Meeting September 23, 1986 Special Meeting September 30, 1986 Special Meeting (Lachinski absent) October 2, 1986 Assessment Hearings (Lachinski absen October 7, 1986 Regular Meeting COUNCIL ACTION o MOTION BY TO SECOND BY