HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 23, 1976
"
/
\
\ )
\
\ )
\
)
C'''Y 01 ANDOVER
"
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
, /
Regular Meeting - November 23, 1976
AGENDA
Approval of Minutes
Comm. #11-76-2 Darkenwald Variance Request
Comm. 1f1l-76-3 "Capital Improvements Program" presentation
by Wes Hendrickson of Toltz, King, Duvall,
Anderson, and Associates, Inc.
Publish on November 19, 1976
\
, /
'-
\ /
o
~J
u
o
o U
C'7Y 01 ANDOVER
o
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
November 23, 1976
MINUTES
The Regular Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Ken Orttel on November 23,
1976, at the Andover Community Center, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW,
Anoka, Minnesota 55303.
Commissioners Present: Don Jacobson, Ralph Kishel, Ted Lachinski,
Larry Retzlaff
Commissioners Absent: Dave Jack and Art Jaworski
Also Present: Mayor Richard Schneider
Minutes of November 9. 1976
Corrections: page 2 - City of Andover Variance Request - 1st paragraph _
delete "City Attorney" 2nd paragraph - delete "the building official
should deny any further building in this plat but"
Motion by Commissioner Lachinsk1, seconded by Chairman Orttel, that the
regular Planning and Zoning Minutes of November 9, 1976 be approved
as revised. Vote on motion: yes - Chairman Orttel, Commissioner Lachinski,
Commissioner Kishel; present - Commissioner Retzlaff, Commissioner Jacobson.
Motion carried.
Darkenwald Variance (Comm. #11-76-2)
Those present concerning the variance: Clem Darkenwald, John Darkenwald,
Gilbert Darkenwald, Robert Huss, and Mary Sonterre. The property (Parcel
8490, Plat 65915 recorded on December 31, 1971) is 2\ acres and 208
feet of frontage on Nightingale Street. The Sonterre's had come to
a Planning and Zoning Meeting and requested a variance in 1971 and the
Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission checked the property and
apparently verbally said the variance was okay. He advised them to
divide the property as they did, narrower and longer, because of a low
spot in the front. In researching, there doesn't appear to be a variance
request form or Minute7 from either the Planning and Zoning Commission
or the Town Boar~relating to this property.
The Commission discussed the fact that Ordinance 10 was adopted after
this property was split and sold. Discussed: 1966 platting, Ordinance
8 Sections 4.09 and 6.02 and 4.04, Ordinance 10 - Section 19, when
the property was sold, and also whether to ask the Attorney before
a recommendation is made.
o
CJ
( )
~-
(J
, '\
V
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - November 23, 1976
Page 2
Motion by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by Commissioner Kishel, that
the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council that
a variance be granted to Darkenwald Real Estate, Inc., for Parcel
8490 of Plat 65915 legally described as: Commencing at the NW corner
of the swt of the SEt of Section 15, Township 32, Range 24; thence
East on the North line thereof a distance of 520 feet; thence South and
parallel with the West line thereof a distance of 208 feet; thence
West and parallel with the North line thereof a distance of 520 feet
to the West line of the swt of the SEt; thence North along the West Ad - ".,,-t
line to the point of commencement, containing approximately 2~ acres. D- (e'i-c.ef~ ~<,. 1w,;!.A
Subject to a township roadway over the West 33 feet thereof r The Planning plO'17 f-j\.+..'1''''4
and Zoning Commission finds that the parcel does not meet Ordinance 8 C'f~~1 J~tel
Section 4.09 and Section 4.04 - Subsection A and E. Not withstanding r}t- 1_;J-q_-,5)
this, the Commission finds a practical difficulty exists and an unnecessary
hardship can be eliminated by the granting of this variance. The use
of the property is in keeping with the general character of the surrounding
property and the granting of this variance will not adversely affect
the existing or potential use of adjacent land. Motion carried unanimously.
e-+;Oil
r" e
c.O 1"'-'7~
,~-
This will be on the City Council Agenda December 21, 1976.
/ '\
o
"Capital Improvements Program" presentation by Wes Hendrickson. T.K.D.A.
Mr. Hendrickson presented the Commissioners with copies (copy attached)
of a proposed Capital Improvements Program. He reviewed the material
with the Commission and Mayor Schneider. Some of the items mentioned:
financing of the various projects - bonding, assessing, grants, etc.
The program would have to be ready by the fall of 1977 in order to be
implemented in 1978; planning - it would be primarily a guide to be
used rather than an absolute "rule book"; the CIP would incorporate
the Storm Drainage Plan, the Park Plan, the Flood Plain Plan, etc.;
cost - a rough estimate of $6,000 was given which would include about
6 work meetings of the Planning and Zoning Commission to draft a preliminary
and assistance at the public hearings. T.K.D.A. has been doing Capital
Improvements Programs for 3 years and has done them for the Cities
of North Branch, Wyoming, Forest Lake, and Hastings. The Commission
discussed getting a more specific formal bid from T.K.D.A. and also
get bids from other firms. They discussed checking with other Cities
that have Capital Improvements Programs to see how successful or workable
the Programs have actually been. Mr. Hendrickson gave Chairman Orttel
a copy of the Capital Improvements Program for the City of Mora for
the Planning and Zoning Commission to review.
Ad;ournment
-\
o
Motion by Commissioner Retzlaff, seconded by Commissioner Lachinski,
to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M.
,
I
,__J
n'e propose to:
( '\
\.J
r \
\.~
PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
CITY OF' ANDOVEH
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PHOGHAM
I. Assist the Planning Commission in establishing the five-
year program by the following procedure:
a) List the know necessary Public \Yorks ProJects.
b) Hank and establish priority schedule for projects over
a five year period.
2. Prepare prelirninary coat estin1ates and feasibility reports for
the Public '~rorkB Project proposed in the Five-Year Capital
Ilnpruvcrnent Progran1.
1. Dl't('rJnine tlH~ econornical fea.sibility [01' tilt. projects propoHcd
ill llle Fi\"c-Yt:ar Capital ITnprovcnlcnt Prograrn.
4. PrL'pare Public \Vorks Five-Year Capital Improvcrnent Report
and Capital Improvement Budget for 1978 and Tentative Program
for 1979-82. The report and budget will consist of the following:
a) lntroduction
b) ] 979 - 1982 Capital lmprovement Needs
\
, )
I)
2)
3)
-I)
5)
6)
7)
81
9)
Genera! Comrnents
COlnnHlnity Facilities
Stonn Sewers
SilnjlClI.~t St~wers
Water Distribution System
Gas Distribution SY6tem
Sidewalks
Hoads and Bridges
Parks and Hecrcation
c) HeCOIJH11Cnded Methods of Financing
I) Community Facilities
2) Sturin Sc\Vcra
3) Sanitary Sewer"
4) Water Distribution System
5) Gas Di"tribution SY6tem
6) Sidewalks
7) Hoads and Bridges
8) Parks and Hecreation
d) Prepare Five-Year Budget for Improvements
I) 1978 Capital Improvement Budget
2) 1979 Tentative Capital Improv,-,mcnt Budget
3) 1980 Tentative Capital Improvement Budget
4) lC)Hl Tentative Capital !JllprOVeJJH~nt nudgct
5) ]9H2 '["ntative Capital Improvement Budget
e) Map:1 Showing CapitallJnprovenlenl Projcct Locations
,
,--)
I)
2)
3 )
41
5)
1978 pJ'oject Locations
]979 Project Locations
1980 Project Locations
19B1 Project Locations
19H2 Project Locations
'J OLTZ, I\ING, DUVALL, ANDEHSON
^ND ^SSOCI^TES, INCOHPORATED
NOVEM BER 23, 1976
! '\
J
\
\ )
'. )
\
)
INTRODUCTION
Communities today are faced with the difficult task of
allocatinn limited resources amonn a ,ceminnly unlimited
, number of demands and needs for puhlic services, In many
/ instances, local .officials must determine the ",erits of one
project over another without benefit of sufficient informa-
tion, or without time for adequate evaluation. This situa-
tion may result in misjudnment, and may further limit the
community's ability to act precisely when the next major
hudget allocation decision is needed_ One method availahle
to local units of government to help manage and systema-
ti1e the blJ(lnet allocation process is ~ Capital Improvement
Pronram.
Specific community development projects contained in
the complChensive community plan stand a beller chance
of beinn implemented if they arc included in the Capital
Improvement Program.
It enables the iocal officials to focus their attention on
the needs of the entire community and to put into
perspective pressures from special interest groups and
proponents of special projects.
It enables a community to take a long-,,,nne view of
needed improvements aod determine responsibilities fo,
future development.
A "Capital Iml(rovement" may be defined as a major
expenditure of public funds, beyond maintenance and
operating costs, for the acquisition or const,uction of a
needed physical facility. Salaries, supplies, and other over-
head expenditures are considell,d mainten"nce and opera-
ting costs and are provided for in the annual budgctary
process, Improvements or acquisitions of a pelJnanent
nature representing a long term investment such ~s tbose
listed below may be considered Capital Imlllovements:
Projects can be scheduled within a community's
anticipated ability to finance, and time is available to deter.
mine merits of various sources of revenue.
Capital pronramming permits beller coordination
between municipal departments, and facilities coordination
with other government agencies.
" .J
Municipal Buildinns
Fire and Police Stations
lihraries
Park Acquisition and Development
Utility Construction and Waste T, eatment Plants
Refuse Disposal Sites and Major Equipment
Road Construction and Parkinn F~cilities
Joint School and Community Development Projects
AirpOl ts and Ha, bors
Hospitals
Fire Finhting Equipment
Capital pronramming improves local ability to use state
and federal grant-in'aid programs, Applications can be
timed to fit the development schedule,
How Does a Capital Improvement Program Relate to the
Community's General Financial and Planning Program?
Belore a capital improvement pronram is adopled, it is
necessary to ex"mine in detail the financial status of the
community. An analysis of this type should include the
following:
Revenue sources (past trends, current and future
eSlimates!.
A Capital Improvement Program is simply a method of
planning for these types of improvements and scheduling
the expenditures over a period of several years in order to
maximi1e the use of public funds, In other words. it is a
means of coordinating a physical development plan with a
financial plan. A C~tpital Improvement Ploglarn tHeN cover a
periorl of from four to ten years, hut generally a six year
term is considered adequate by most public administralorS,
Each year the Capital Improvement PlOgram should he
updated and extended one year to cOlnpensate for the year
expired, In this way, a Capital Improvement Pronram is a
Clll' ent document that is kept responsive to the area's
changing conditions and neerls.
Operatinn expenses (past and current trends.)
Present or pending capital improvement expenditures_
Pre,ent bonded indebtedness, terms of relirement and
projected debt service payments.
Projection of operating and maintenance costs related
to proposed capital improvement projects.
Examinalion of proposed bonding scherlule and muni-
cipal dcbt capacity,
Carefully ,planned and prepared. a Capital Improvement
Program will enahle a communily to rcnlizc ~ numher of
benefits, For example:
Establishment of a fiscal policy to determine whethel
to issue bonds for capital projects, utili1e gencral revenues,
or requcst federal and Slate aids,
Why Undertake a Capital Improvement Program?
Major improvements Can be anticipated in advance
/ rather than overlookd unlil critically ,,,,eded, 1 hu,. large
expenditures can he hudneled ovel a ,,,,rind 01 sevI,.al yea's,
It is advisable th"t communities base Capital Improvements
Pronramming Decisions on the area's Comprehensive Plan if
one has been developed, The Comp,ehensive Plan contains
an ~nalysis of present conditions alonn with recommeorla'
tions fill future development. These recommendations
! '\
, /
J
along with projects contemplated by operatin~ municipal
departments, will provide a basis for con,idering a Capital
'''provement PIO~ram that will be responsive to the corn.
/<1nit'es' current and projected needs.
Since it is unlikely that any community will have sufficient
resources to undertake all the capital improvements that are
needed, a system of criteria should be established where
least imporlant projects can be delayed or postponed.
Listed below are some typical criteria w/;ich could be used
to measure proposals.
Example of Priority System
Mandatory. projects that are urgently needed to protect
life, or maintain public health.
Necessary . highly desirable projects needed to provide
important public services for the convenience or
com fOrl 01 its citizellS, conserve endangered reo
sources, or complete parlially linished projects.
Desirable. projects which protect property, replace obso.
lete facilities, improve community attractiveness.
Acceptable . plOjects which will result in a reduction of
operating costs, The Planning Commission will recom-
mend priorities for capital improvements submitted
by each (lepartment listing them according to the
established criteria.
rhis is probably the most difficult step of the capital
improvement process and .equires a thorough understand-
ing 01 the community and objective judgment in relating
proposals to the established criteria,
t
!
i
.
In determining the priorities for capital improvement
proposals, consideration should be given to the timing of
the proposal and all available sources 01 financing, The
following questions should be answered:
1. Is the improvement needed immediately or can it be
delayed until some future date without ieopardizin~
the community's welfare?
2. Can the communitY absorb the costs throu~h existing
revenues and develop projects on a pay.as.you-go
basis, or will revenue or ~eneral obligation bonds be
necessary?
3, Are there federal or state aids available as a source of
IlJndin~?
,I
1
I
.
While a pay.as.you.go policy is considered desirable. most
communities will lind they need to utilize long term
bonding pro~rams. The Planning Commission and Finance
Officer should analyze their community's .elative position
in the municipal bond market. While this will vary from
time to time, some general observations can be made in
,
" /ompJrison to other communities. One means of cOlllpari-
son used in Minnesota is the per capita debt, as calculated
~
,
1
,
\
,
~
o
'. /
\
)
by addin~ all municipal bonded debt and the community's
sha,e of ovedapping debts, then dividing by the eSlimated
population of the community. In established communities,
the ,ule of thumb is that this figure should not exceed $500
per capita. In rapidly expanding communities, the rule of
thumb maximum is $1000 per capita,
A second measure is the ratio of the net bonded debt of the
cornnllJllily to its IOlal market v"luation as most recently
determined. State law limits a community's net debt to not
more than (j,(j(j% of its market value. In this analysis,
Ma, ket Valuation is defined as the actual sale value of
property in Ihe current market.
How Is a Capital Improvement Program Prepared?
The prep"ration of a capital improvement program is nor.
m"lly the joint responsibihty of the chief administrator or
planning commissi,,", mayor, d"partment heads, governing
body, and citizen commillees, The administrative organiza.
tion used to prepare a capital improvement program may
vary from community to community depending upon local
preferences, the form of government, and available person.
ne!. In municipalities that have comprehensive plans, a
plannin~ agency review of a proposed capital improvement
pro~ram is required by law. A few typical administrative
o'ganizations that may be formed to prepare a capital
improvement program include:
The community planning commission and chief fiscal
officer.
A staff commillee of department heads and the chief
executive,
A committee of citizens, principal department heads,
existing commission representatives, governing body
members,
Below is a schematic chart showing the steps that might be
followed in the development of a capital improvement
pro~,all1 in a small community with a limited staff.
2
'\
/
j
\
" )
\
)
A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CYCLE
"
MAYOR OR CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR
Initiatcs Preparation of CiJpital Improvcment
Program
'/
DEPARTMENT HEADS
Undcrtakc Capital Improvcments Author-
Ized
DEPARTMENT HEADS
Prcpare estimate for each Capital Project
Summarizes projects for department
CITIZENS
PulJlic hearing on improvements & Rcferen-
rlum when necessary
/
PLANNING COMMISSION
Analyzes financial aspects
Rcview Comprchensive Plan
Develops pI iority criteria
Estimates expenditures for Capital Improve-
ments
Recommends Capital Improvement Program
CITY COUNCIL
~
Reviews Capital Improvement Program
Conducts Public Hearings
Adopts annual budget and Capital Improve-
ment Program
MAYOR, OR CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR
Reviews Capital Improvement Program
Recommends to Council
,/
3
'\ , 0 , , '\
, V J )
J J '- '-
I MAYOR OR CHIEF ADMINISTRATORl
.J
Delegales respomibility for the preparation of portiom of the Capital improvement program.
Directs department heads to examine capital improvement needs' and report to the planning commission. (Appendix.
Letter of Instructions Form A, Form B.I
Directs the chief fiscal officer to assist planning commission.
6 G 0 I)
V V V "f
DEPARTMENT HEADS
Prepare a detailed project form for each capital project needed during the next 6 years, Data should include a
description of the project, estimated costs, additional operating costs associated with the project, schedule for
construction, justification and priority of the proposal, and suggested methods of financing the project. (Appendix
Form A.)
Summarize proposed capital projects for each department (Appendix Form B.I
)
Return forms to the rJlanning commission in sufficient time so an approved capital improvements program may be
reflected in next year's annuJI budget.
/
4
'-
!
.I
'\
.J
G
V
o
V
,
" J
J
/
PLANNING COMMISSION
'.
Analyze the financial conditions of the community with the chief fiscal officer or clerk and prepare the following:
1. Past trends and future estim.lIes of property valuations, mill rates "nd t"xes collected, (Appendix _ figure III, IV,)
2. Past trends and future estimates of operating expenditures by major category, capital outlay and bond redemption.
(Append,x - figUle V, VI )
Contact other government agencies that may be planning projects that might affect the community's fiscal position and
capital improvement schedule.
Review the comprehensive plan to identify capital improvement needs.
Examine and develop a list of criteria for establishing a priority.
The recommended Capital Improvement Program should include in addition to capital project costs. estimates of any
additional operating costs associated with each proposal. (Appendix, figures I, II, III) The completed Capital
Improvement Program as recommended hy the Planning Commission is suhmilled to the chief administrator and
governing hody for approval. The Caflital budget recommendations listed for next fiscal year should be included in the
annual municipal hudget. (AflflerHlix - Sample Capital Improvement Program)
-~
j
o
V
I
I
I
V
I
I
MAYOR OR CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR
I
I
Reviews recommended Caflitallmprovement Program and submits it to the governing hody,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'f
\
/
To City COlmcd
5
)
/
"
/
, )
\
J
)
y ~ I
CITY COUNCI L t
The recommended Capital Improvement Program, including the recommendations of the mayor or chief administrator,
is presented for consideration, First. year projects should be presented in sufficient detail to provide for inclusion ,in
next year's budget.
.
~
;
.
;
.
.
CITIZENS
I
I
I
'it
Public hearing held on major capital improvements,
Where an election is necessary. voters approve or reject bond issue.
, /
. . . .
VVVV
DEPARTMENT HEADS
Undertake Capital Improvements authorized.
'.
MAYOR OR CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR
Capital improvement cycle starts again one yeai later deleting the capital improvements just completed and adding an
additional year to the program,
, ,
\
, /
6
'\
I
\
;'
'~ /
'\
)
POTENTIAL CAPITAL NEEDS LIST
/)
1.
Community Facilities
City Hall/Community Center
Public Works and Maintenance Building
Related Major Equipment
2. Wastewater Treatment Works
Any Related Major Improvements
Lift Stations
3. Water System
Back up Wells
Treatment System
Pumps
/
Water Storage Facilities
Distribution System
- Residential
- Commercial
- Industrial
Replacement Lines
"Loop" Lines
4. Roads and Bridges
Major Capital Equipment, Trucks, Graders, Plows
Bridges or Bridge Improvements
New Streets
Replacement Streets and Maintenance
, /
Pedestrian Semaphore
Street Lighting
- ReplacelTIent
- Additional Lights:
'\ \ " )
/ ) , /
'. - Residential
- Comlnercial
- lnd \I stria 1
Tra ffic Control Signa Is
Curb and Gutters
5. Sidewalks
New Sidewalks
Replacement Sidewalks
- Commercial
- Residential
6. Sanitary Sewers
New Sewers to Residential Development
Replacement Sewers
7.
Parks - Recreation
)
/
Land Acquisition
Park Equipment - Development
Swimming Pool
Tennis Courts
Hockey Rink - Enclosure - Skating Rink - Lights
Land Acquisition 0 f Conservation Areas
Land Acquisition of Potential Bike Paths, Signage, Stripping, etc.
8. Gro wth Management System Updating
9. Office Equipment
10. Fire Equi!Jmen"
11. Other