Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOR April 26, 2005 / 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Board of Review 7:00 PM Tuesday I April 26, 2005 at Andover City Hall Conference Rooms A & B " / t&D c'9'Y&-t.-b Jb Un..tJ:tm :) ~ /1 ~D~ ANDOVER BOARD OF REVIEW -APRIL 26, 200S MINUTES The Andover Board of Review was called to order by Mayor Mike Gamache, April 26, 2005, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Councilmember absent: Also present: Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Ken Orttel, Julie Trude None City Administrator, Jim Dickinson Anoka County Residential Appraiser, Jason Dagostino Anoka County Assessor, Mike Southerland Anoka County Assessor, John Leone Others ANDOVER BOARD OF REVIEW Jason Dagostino, Anoka County Residential Appraiser, introduced himself, Mr. Southerland and Mr. Leone. Mr. Dagostino stated it was a busy year with a lot of activity in the market. He noted the coefficient was still very good. The Anoka County Assessor's office converted its appraisal system from a mainframe system to a PC based system. They could not do a normal book this year due to the short time frame. The number of phone calls were a little higher this year, but he was able to come to some type of conclusion with each ofthem. He logged 38 calls and 24 reviews. He stated people were concerned about the increases. Councilmember Trude asked if all the neighborhoods were escalating the same. Mr. Dagostino stated the median price was higher this year. Councilmember Trude asked if the fIrst or second home purchases were bidding up prices. Mr. Dagostino stated the entry-level homes were moving fast, but there was not a bidding war. The higher priced homes were sitting on the market longer. He added he saw some homes listed for $435,000 and then sold for $380,000 or $390,000. Councilmember Trude asked about Woodland Estates and Nightingale Estates. Mr. Dagostino stated he has not seen a sale less than what the person had originally purchased the home. Councilmember Knight asked about twin homes and town homes. Mr. Dagostino stated they are being built, but he did not see them moving very quickly. He noted Aztec Estates homes are high priced, but were selling. \, / Mark McClintook, 1408 141 st Lane Andover Board of Review Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 2 Mr. McClintook stated he moved in during 1997. He noted that each year the value had been rising. And this year it increased by $36,700 to a market value of $320,800. This was of concern to him since homes on his street had been selling for $296,500. His neighbor listed and sold his home for $279,500. He added the neighbor's home was the same size home with four bedrooms. All the homes back up to a wetland. Mr. Dagostino stated the last time the home was visited was 2001. He asked if there was a recent appraisal done. Mr. McClintook responded no. Mr. Dagostino noted it was a 12.8 percent increase. The median increase for the market was 11 percent. He stated he would be happy to investigate the home. Mr. McClintook stated he did not think the home could sell for over $300,000. Mayor Gamache asked for clarification. Mr. Dagostino stated the site was driving up the value. He noted it is a gorgeous lot and site. He did not have the ability to run comparable sales tonight, but could go out this week to review the property. He would look at comparable sales and see if an adjustment could be made. Winslow Holasek. 1159 Andover Blvd. NW Mr. Holasek stated he did not have a lot of time to review the statements since they came out on the 15th this year. He asked the reason for the late mailing. Mr. Dagostino stated the computer system change made it a tough year. The County still met the state guidelines, but the County usually mails them earlier. Next year the County should be back on track and mail them early. Mike Southerland, Anoka County Assessor, stated due to the new system, they experienced problems at every step in the process. Staff then had to work with the vendor to resolve the issue before the process could move forward. Mr. Southerland stated the old system was a mainframe system and housed in one machine. He noted the new system is integrated into two separate packages. He added it has an independent Oracle database. It is more complex, but allows the County to access all kinds of information. The County now has an additional year to further refine and input sales information into the system. Mr. Holasek asked ifhe had to submit a letter to reserve his rights. He gave a letter reserving his rights to Mr. Dagostino and requested the Council receive a copy. Councilmember Orttel asked how many parcels had been assessed in Andover. Mr. Dagostino responded slightly over two thousand. Andover Board of Review Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 3 Councilmember Orttel stated there were difficulties in fmding comparable sales for commercial property. John Leone, Anoka County Assessor, stated the City of Ramsey did a minimum assessment agreement. He noted the Assessor obtained blue prints and came up with a value. The taxes were based on that value. The agreement held that the value could not be lower than this value. These agreements guaranteed the amount of taxes for a commercial property. Councilmember Knight stated the Council is trying to determine values for people who want to purchase the properties. Mr. Leone stated any property fronting Bunker Lake Boulevard would sell for six dollars a foot. Industrial property would sell for up to three dollars a foot. Councilmember Orttel asked for clarification on industrial property. Mr. Leone stated industrial property has water and sewer available. There were many City sales in the City of Ramsey where the City purchased and resold the property. There were many sales in the City of Blaine due to the sport center area. The light industrial buildings are selling for ninety-five dollars a foot, but the average was eighty dollars a foot. Office warehouse buildings usually sold for fifty dollars a foot. The light manufacturing areas usually sold for fifty to sixty dollars a foot, but that would be for a very plain building. Councilmember Trude asked if Mr. Dagostino looked up all the homes that people called about. Mr. Dagostmo stated he returns all his calls and would continue to return calls all summer. He noted if someone calls, he does a review. He only has until the County Board of Equalization to make changes. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to continue the meeting to May 3, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. The Board of Review meeting adjourned at 7:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Czajkowski Ftecording Secretary S4\NDbVE~ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US City Council Workshop Tuesday, April 26, 2005 Conference Rooms A & B I. Call to Order - Following Board of Review Scheduled for 7:00 p.m. 2. Discussion on Status of Property Located at 1049 Andover Blvd. NW / 3. Discussion on Need for Traffic Impact Studies 4. Discussion on Fees for Roadway Improvements S. Discussion on Direction for Tree Preservation 6. Discussion on Buildability Requirements 7. Discuss Advertisements in Parks 8. Other Business 9. Adjournment c.~ Q...:)...i l\.JU..tt::Ln 5 -I,-C) S J ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP-APRIL 26, 200S MINUTES A Workshop of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Mike Gamache on Tuesday, April 26, 2005, 7:33 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota Councilmembers present: Councilrnember absent: Also present: Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Ken OrtteI, Julie Trude None City Engineer, Dave Berkowitz City Administrator, Jim Dickinson Community Development Director, Will Neumeister Others \ J DISCUSSION ON STATUS OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1049 ANDOVER BOULEVARD NW Community Development Director Neumeister referenced City Attorney Hawkins's letter. He stated if a payment is not made by the end of the month the property would be tax forfeit. Councilmember J aco bson stated the City should just wait until the end of the month. He asked if the owner is still living in trailer on the property and if so, why does the City allow it. He noted there are no sanitary facilities available. Mr.Neumeister stated the owner is still living in the trailer. He could request that the Sheriff check on the status of the property. Councilmember Knight asked about the bobcat. Mr. Neumeister stated it had left the site. CounciImember Trude stated the truck and white vehicles move to different locations on the site, but the other vehicles are disabled. Councilmember Jacobson asked if the owner does try to redeem it would he be told he could not live on the site the way it is. Mr. Dickinson stated it would take a formal action to redeem it. Mr. Dickinson stated the County would not release if for sale if requested by the City and the City would have six months to make a decision. \ Councilmember OrtteI is concerned the owner would sell the property for the tax money owed. Mr. Dickinson stated there is nothing the City could do to stop him from doing that. Councilmember Knight stated even if the owner made a payment, the Council did not want anyone Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 2 living on the property. Mr. Neumeister stated in the event a payment was made, the City would make an inspection and then the Council could start the abatement process to evict the owner and have the property taken down. Councilmember Trude stated the County wanted this site as a possible rail station. Councilmember Jacobson stated that is indicated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Orttel stated there is a problem since the rail station would need to be on both sides of the tracks. He noted the City would then need the property across from this one. Councilmember Jacobson asked about 510 Andover Blvd. and whether it had been sold. Councilmember Orttel thought the owners wanted to burn it. Mr. Neumeister stated the fIre department would not allow it to be bumed; the house would have to be torn down. Councilmember Trude stated there is a big hole in the back of the garage that should be boarded up. Mr. Dickinson stated he would send a letter informing the owner that if the property was not secured, the City would start abatement proceedings. Mr. Neumeister stated the inside of the house on Tulip Street is very bad. Mr. Dickinson stated the Public Works Department boarded this building up. The neighbors across the street reported the electric and gas meters were removed after the 1997 storm. He stated there have been animals inside the building. Councilmember Knight asked where the liability begins if a child gets hurt in this building and the City has not done anything. Mr. stated the City would only be liable for what it had done on the property. He noted the City sealed the house up to avoid this problem. The owner would be ultimately responsible. Councilmember Trude stated if the City begins the abatement process, it could assess its costs. City Administrator Dickinson stated the taxes are up-to-date on both properties. Councilmember Orttel asked if there were complaints about the Tulip Street property. Mr. stated he just received one last week. A neighbor felt the property was not originally a problem, but now that it is boarded it really looks bad. Mr. Dickinson stated he would put it on the Council's next agenda to begin the process. Mayor Gamache asked why the building can't be burned down. Mr. Neumeister stated it is too close to the intersection. The home is not very big and would not provide much practice for the / fire department. Councilmember Trude asked when the City boarded the front. Mr. Berkowitz stated when the resident died, his parents tried to do something with the home but did not get very far. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 3 DISCUSSION ON NEED FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES / FEES FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Mr. Neumeister referenced his report and noted new commercial sites have an impact on the surrounding sites in the City. When the traffic reached 100 trips an hour or 1000 trips per day, the amount of traffic justifies road improvements. As for the Fairbanks Buildings, since there was no plat, the City could not ask for improvements to the roadway system. He noted with a traffic impact study, the City could note that due to the 1000 trips caused by this project, improvements would need to be paid for by the developer. Mr. Neumeister stated the City has no basis for these improvements. If any other such developments came forward, the traffic impact study would give the City a basis. Councilmember Orttel asked about localized improvements. Mr. Neumeister stated the improvements would need to be very specific to the site. Councilmember Knight asked how far this requirement would extend. Mr. Neumeister stated the traffic would have to come out of the neighborhood and not just be internal to the development. Miller's Woods would be the best example. Mr. Berkowitz stated the developers of Grey Oaks, Shaw's Glen, and the Minks development are trying to work out a connection to IS7th. He noted they could join and do a traffic impact study. Mr. Berkowitz thought the developers would realize the benefit of working together to get improvements. Councilmember Orttel asked if the way to assess this area is to establish a proportionate share. Mr. Berkowitz stated that would be the ultimate goal. Staff would make comments establishing the developer is responsible for his proportionate share. Councilmember Orttel asked if the City could hold funds for the future if it knew the costs of the improvements. Mr. Dickinson stated the City could only hold the funds if the money was dedicated for a specific project. He noted the example gave 1000 or more vehicle trips. The Council could pick another number. Mr. Neumeister stated this has been the standard in Brooklyn Park for some time. He noted there must be some indication that 100 trips in a given hour is an indication of a need for a study. Intersection improvements are probably needed for deceleration and acceleration. Councilmember Knight asked how staff determines where the effects ofthe development are. Mr. Berkowitz stated staff would look at areas directly adjacent to a development and would consider arterial and collector streets and how they are affected. / Mr. Berkowitz stated immediate improvements are needed for Nightingale. The policy should contain language to provide for review of arterial streets. Nightingale and Crosstown need to be reviewed to see how they are impacted by development. Council needs to decide if the City Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 4 should collect a proportionate share and then determine the contributing area. Council should also decide if the City should collect funds and hold them until it does the improvements. Mr. Neumeister stated the City has traffic improvements for Andover Station. Staff looked at three intersections and reviewed the road widths and whether it could handle that much traffic in the immediate vicinity. Mr. Berkowitz stated the review confirmed what the County requires for long-range controls. Councilmember Orttel asked if there is a way to come up with a flat amount per lot. Councilmember Jacobson stated the City currently has a park fee and a trail fee. Councilmember Orttel stated the City could determine a dollar figure per house dedicated to the intersection in this area. City Engineer Berkowitz stated this worked well with the rural reserve. Councilmember Knight asked what would happen if the development came to an arterial that had already been developed. Mr. Neumeister stated the study would not be needed if there was no turn needing a deceleration lane. Councilmember Orttel stated these fees have to be fair. Mr. Neumeister stated many cities are taking this approach. He noted there is going to be traffic and if the developer causing the traffic does not pay, then the cost goes to the taxpayers. He added with a study the developer's fair share would include the professional's cost for the study. Councilmember Trude stated this would be all right with commercial development, but the City has mostly residential development. Councilmember Knight stated he would like to see how other cities actually do this. Mr. Neumeister stated it was done as part of the building permit process. The developer must prove the traffic impact before a building permit is issued. If the traffic study shows a turn lane is needed the developer has to put one in. Councilmember Orttel stated he did not like the idea that the last development pays for all the improvements. Councilmember Jacobson asked what would be done for a plat of200 lots that was to be done in phases. Mr. Neumeister stated the entire plat would be evaluated as a whole. Councilmember Jacobson stated the City could almost treat it like a trail fee. Councilmember Trude stated cities that had done that are at risk. Mr. Dickinson stated the cities that had been challenged did not have a study and did not spend the fees for that specific project. He noted if the funds were not spent on the project they were refunded to the parties paying the fee. Mayor Gamache stated it seems like a study is needed otherwise the last one in pushes the development. Councilmember Orttel stated a study was probably needed. He noted if it was a flat amount then it could already be paid when the improvements are needed. .' Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 5 '\ Councilmember Jacobson asked who would be responsible for the difference if the City set a fee, waited two years to do the improvements, and then found out it would cost more. Mr. Dickinson stated the city would be. Councilmember Jacobson asked how to guard against that. Mr. Dickinson stated staffwould use current numbers, a use index, and look at interest allocation. He noted it would still be an educated guess. Councilmember Orttel stated the City could develop a cost per zone. Councilmember Knight asked who pays for the study. Mr. Dickinson stated each developer pays in his area. Community Development Director Neumeister stated a one to two page analysis would cost approximately $1,000 and a more detailed report would cost about $3,000. He has seen the cost go beyond that based on higher developments. Sometimes the traffic engineers had to do a computer model. For plats in general, the City was covered without doing traffic impact studies. Councilmember Trude asked if the City would start with what is needed five or ten years from now or just what is needed now. Mr. Berkowitz stated if this is connected to a County road, the County would want all the turn lanes completed now. , / City Administrator Dickinson stated there have to be fairly specific policies for when the maximum development occurs, otherwise the Council would have to restrict developments. Staff would have to work with the development contracts to restrict lots. The restrictions on the lots would be designed to not allow too much traffic at an intersection. Councilmember Trude asked about the time value cost. Mr. Dickinson stated it would have to be computed. Councilmember Knight asked if the City could tax that far out in front and hold the funds for ten years. Mr. Dickinson stated it could for a specific improvement. Mr. Neumeister stated part of this discussion is the road improvement discussion. A traffic impact started to calculate the costs. Beyond that were road reserves or phased development. He stated there are other ways to fund this that solve some of the problems. He noted this would be for vacant lots or redeveloping lots. Molly I and Molly 2 probably would have shown no great need for improvements to Crosstown. A bigger development might have needed improvements. Mr. Berkowitz stated this would give staff guidelines on when to require a traffic study. '\ Community Development Director Neumeister stated the study requirement could be put in at the J discretion of the Council on new developments whether redevelopment or reconstruction. Mayor Gamache stated it could be based on staff recommendations. Councilmember Knight asked if staff would work with people who brought in plats before they J Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 6 '\ came to the Council for approval on whether it shows an impact fee or the necessity of an outright improvement. Mr. Neumeister responded yes. Councilmember Jacobson asked if the schedule would change every year. Mr. Dickinson stated this type would be done on an improvement-by-improvement basis. He noted it would be an additional requirement. City Engineer Berkowitz stated this could be controlled through the plat approval process. He noted with regard to Nightingale the City had already estimated it. He added staff tried to be conservative. Mayor Gamache noted other developments that went in to the south had right turn lanes. Mr. Berkowitz stated that was per staffs requirement. He noted the City should have looked at Nightingale. Now staff is looking at right turn lanes and a possible left turn. He noted the costs the City would now pay for these improvements. These should have been made back with Woodland Fourth and Sixth. Mayor Gamache stated that was just re-striped. Mr. Berkowitz stated the shoulder was not as wide as the roadway so the City needed to reconstruct the shoulder. Councilmember Orttel stated it is the same situation now, but they only have to pay one-eighth of the cost. Mr. Berkowitz stated now the City is taking the lead and making it an assessment process. Mr. Dickinson asked if it happens who would be assessed. The City does not want to assess the buyer of the lot most recently sold. Councilmember Jacobson stated it seems if this is a County Road the County and the public should be cost sharing. Mr. Dickinson stated the County would have to put money aside for those improvements. Staff is trying to put the City in the position to be able to make these improvements and assess the proper person. City Engineer Berkowitz stated when a development gets to the threshold for safety (more than 30 lots) there needs to be a right turn lane at a minimum. CounciImember Jacobson asked since staff knows what is going to be needed, could staff figure out a cost per dwelling unit. Mr. Dickinson stated there are different examples where staff would like to use studies such as large residential developments, redevelopment, and commercial properties that do not require platting. The requirement would be at the discretion of the Council. Councilmember Trude stated she supports that idea. Mr. Dickinson stated staffwould like the ability to request a study in order to keep money on the table. Councilmember Jacobson asked ifit is discretionary over 1,000 trips per day. Councilmember Knight stated it should be discretionary no matter what. I Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 7 Councilmember Trude asked if these could be done in-house. Mr. Berkowitz stated it is more complicated than that. A traffic engineer is needed to do the analysis. He added one consultant could do it and skew the results. Those results could be reviewed by the County and they could say the numbers are not accurate. The Council should consider whether it would require specific consultants be used or whether the studies should be sent for review. The issue is how to ensure the studies would be accurate. Councilmember Trude stated the language should indicate the study be done under City approved criteria. Mr. Dickinson stated if there is agreement among the Council, staff would write up the policy. Mr. Neumeister stated there would be guidelines, but it would be at the discretion of the Council. Councilmember Trude stated this should be a Council policy. She did not think the Planning Commission has the familiarity with the issue. Mr. Neumeister stated it could be a policy or part of the Planning Code. Councilmember Knight agreed it should be a policy, but made simpler. Councilmember Orttel stated he would like to get input from those affected. Mayor Gamache stated the County has an established policy for what it requires and does not go to a traffic study. Mr. Berkowitz stated the County's projects are large enough that it could set requirements. Mayor Gamache asked if other cities have policies similar to the County. Mr. Berkowitz responded no. Mr. Neumeister stated other cities do traffic studies. Cities could not always tell what would happen. The solution could be signals, turn lanes, a right in - right out. He noted it was more complex. The traffic engineer reviews the study and tells the City whether or not it has a good study that meets the review criteria. The engineer further notes whether the City should agree with the recommendations. He added one solution does not always fit. Councilmember Orttel asked if this policy only applies to County roads. Mr. Dickinson stated it would apply to all roads. It will be brought back as a policy. Councilmember Orttel stated he would like this discussed with developers. Mr. Berkowitz stated that approach worked well before. Mr. Dickinson stated staff could have meetings with developers and take comments. Councilmember Trude stated if there are issues raised the Council would need to hear about them. Councilmembers Jacobson and Knight noted a desire to have City Attorney Hawkins address whether the City could take money for future improvements and how long the money could be held. Mr. Dickinson stated in addressing road improvements there are three areas to discuss. One issue is for larger projects. The City was too late to make an impact on the County CIP this year. He stated the County adopted its CIP in May. He wished to discuss the City's CIP process. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 8 City Administrator Dickinson explained that staffhad started the CIP process by discussing issues and a timeline. Staff wants to look at every road from a transportation perspective and identity costs and funds available based on classification. Staff would consider the following funding sources: Federal, state aid or grants, County, City, Developers or other available sources. Mr. Berkowitz stated signal projects are currently generated by the County, but perhaps the City needs to initiate such a project and invite the County on board. Mr. Dickinson stated rather than be reactive, the City would tell the County what it wants done. Blaine appeared to be successful in its funding by being prepared up front. Andover wants to be in that same position. Councilmember Jacobson asked how many road intersections are anticipated. Mr. Neumeister stated the main ones are listed in the report. Then there are main roads like Crosstown. Mr. Dickinson stated he did not know if the City could go to the level of turn lanes. Mr. Neumeister stated for the main intersections Federal funds could reduce the problem. The City could try to persuade the County to contribute when it is ready with funds available for a project. Mr. Dickinson stated staff wants all projects on the list. The city needs to look at road classifications and review those that do not qualifY for funding. The City needs to be segregating tax dollars so it is not caught off guard. Mayor Gamache stated in order to get Federal funding, the City needs to be prepared. Mr. Dickinson stated the first step is the inventory. This is a two to three year process. Councilmember Trude stated the railroad overpass on Bunker should be included in the transportation plan. Mr. Dickinson stated the goal is to develop project and funding awareness. Mr. Berkowitz stated not every signal would be listed, but there would be a few. He noted when it comes to funding for specific signals, there has to be a hazard reduction. Mr. Dickinson stated the City would be starting over this year. He asked for a consensus to move forward. Mr. Dickinson stated staff would provide the list for the Council to decide priorities. Mr. Neumeister stated this would get the City's projects on the radar for County funding perhaps six years out. Mr. Dickinson stated the County does no big projects unless there are multiple funding sources. He noted there would be interim policy questions and need for direction. On County controlled roads, which entity should take the lead on requiring the project get completed. Mr. Berkowitz stated the City should require improvements at the time of development. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 9 City Administrator Dickinson stated the issue would be whether to do improvements piecemeal or do the ultimate at one time. He noted a piecemeal approach has no risk for the City, but an ultimate approach puts the City at risk to fund it all. Councilmember Jacobson and Councilmember Knight agreed there should be a case-by-case determination. City Administrator Dickinson stated the piecemeal approached uses the developer's money. The ultimate approach could use the developer's, the City's and the County's money. City Administrator Dickinson stated in some cases where the City is at risk, there are deferred assessments. Councilmember Orttel stated the City could not go back to a homeowner after they had moved in. City Administrator Dickinson asked if there was agreement by all Councilmembers that they do not want deferred assessments. Council concurred. He added the ultimate projects would be decided on a case-by-case basis. The discussion was about a true fee, that was part of the nexus combination. The transportation plan and the resulting costs need to be integrated. Councilmember Trude stated she wants to have the discussions about the master plan before the developers come in. She would rather have their reaction to the City's plan. Councilmember Trude asked about rural reserve properties. Community Development Director Neumeister stated staffwould check into Maple Grove's costs. He noted Maple Grove lines up half of the project cost and then requests money from the County. Councilmember Trude asked if this is done on residential and commercial properties. Community Development Director Neumeister responded he was not sure, but would look into it further. He noted if the County and City working together gets the people the road that they need it would probably not be a bad thing to do on a per acre cost. Councilmember Jacobson stated the City needs to be careful on a per acre figure since some developments have more than one lot per acre. Community Development Director Neumeister stated there is a density segment to handle that issue. DISCUSSION ON DIRECTION FOR TREE PRESERVATION Mr. Neumeister stated this issue came from the Planning Commission. With flat topography it is tough to save trees. He added the City of Blaine had a problem with preserving too many trees. Many trees die anyway so the developer might as well clear them out. Staff was not a big advocate of custom grading since it often resulted in potential stormwater problems after the homes were built. Mr. Berkowitz stated that in one instance the developer had to go back and put in catch basins. Mayor Gamache stated one of the better developments is Woodland south of the golf course. He asked if there are any issues in that development. Mr. Berkowitz stated it turned out very nice. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 10 He noted the Woodland Creek developments are on sites higher than the roads. Mr. Neumeister stated the sites have to balance the earthwork. He noted importing dirt came at a great expense. He added red oaks are very sensitive. Staff would identify on the grading plan where the trees could be saved. This decision should not be totally decided by the developer. Councilmember Trude stated some developers are getting homeowners upset because of cutting red oaks. If developers could do this work in the winter, it would not spread disease among the red oaks. Mr. Berkowitz stated staffhas to approve a grading plan before the developer could do anything. Staff could set up the procedure so this is done in winter. Councilmember Trude stated staff should make developers think about this issue. She noted residents are concerned about trees on the adjacent properties. Councilmember Jacobson stated there is a difference between showing something on a plan and what really happens. There are no penalties for taking down the wrong trees. Mr. Berkowitz stated he had received several phone calls on Andover Station South. When the official went to the site the tree removal was according to the plans. Councilmember Jacobson stated there should be stronger penalties. He noted the developer should replace a tree with two others ifit was wrong to remove it. Mr. Berkowitz stated the City does have that provision, but it is rarely done. He noted there have been a few instances where a contractor made a mistake. Mr. Neumeister stated if a developer does not put any trees back, they would owe $2,000 an acre. If eight trees per acre are saved, there would be'no penalty. The developer said it was worth more to save the trees. Mr. Neumeister stated if it was made worthwhile for the developers they would do it. The City does not want wholesale custom grading. He stated it would just be for some select areas. City Administrator Dickinson asked if the Council wanted staff to come back with half step measures. Councilmember Jacobson stated there should be economic penalties. Councilmember Trude stated staff should look at the City of Blaine's ideas. She noted the recommendations should then be taken to the Planning Commission to get feedback. Mr. Neumeister stated the Council should give some direction. How far does the Council want to go to encourage tree preservation? He asked if the Council wanted to demand the perimeter trees be saved. \ Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page II ) DISCUSSION ON BUILDABILITY REQUIREMENTS Mr. Neumeister stated there was a review of this six or seven years ago. About two years ago a section of the ordinance changed to indicate the 16-~ foot buffer strip should not be within the 100-foot buildable area, but in addition to it. The Public Works Department felt it was tough to maintain wetlands with this change and the Building Department stated it was difficult to site decks. He showed a diagram of a home with only 80 feet of buildable space. The homeowner could hardly get a deck on the site. In Sophie's Manor, the City knew the development was set tightly between two wetlands. There was only between 105 and 1 08 feet of buildable space due to wetland mitigation. City Administrator Dickinson asked if staff should research this problem and require more buildable area. Councilmember Orttel stated the market determines this kind of thing. Councilmember Jacobson stated the City should stamp plans not suitable for decks or require a deck if a patio door is installed. Mr. Neumeister stated many times when a resident wants to put in a patio slab, deck or pool the slope creates drainage problems. Landscaping changes the site. Councilmember Trude asked if a 30-foot backyard setback would take care of the issue. Mr. Neumeister stated it would be great since there needs to be more buildable area. Mr. Dickinson stated this would eliminate ramblers. Councilmember Trude stated there also is the issue of filling in drainage areas. DISCUSS ADVERTISEMENT IN PARKS Mr. Dickinson stated before staff does further research, there needs to be true consensus on where the Council wants staff to go with this issue. Should this be limited to ball field fences and not park benches? Council could consider doing it just at Sunshine Park to see if it works. It could always be stopped if it is not successful. Councilmember Trude stated she was opposed to this at Sunshine Park because of aesthetics and it being such an open park. Staff could research the issue and see what types of agreements are being used. If the program is unsuccessful it could be discontinued. \ / Staff could do a survey of interest in advertisements in Sunshine Park during the business appreciation event. Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting / Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 12 OTHER BUSINESS ITEMS A. Church Group Use of Sunshine Park Mr. Dickinson stated a church group desires to use the gazebo area at Sunshine Park for a Christian Rock Band from I :00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on May 7, 2005. The group also requested use of electricity. Consensus of the council was to allow this on an experimental trial basis with conditions. B. Options for Xeon Street Mr. Berkowitz stated he had been working with Mr. Winslow Holasek on different options for Xeon Street for the entrance to Well Number 9. The first scenario would be to build a full access street. There were concerns about trees with this option. Mr. Berkowitz stated the second scenario was acceptable to Mr. Holasek. The road would have less than the sixty foot standard and the stormwater would need to be directed back to the gravel. This option would save the trees. Mr. Berkowitz stated there are drainage issues to address. The third alternative would be to do nothing. Councilmember Trude stated the City would save a lot of money if it did nothing. Mayor Gamache stated the road should go the full length if anything is going to be dO!le. He questioned putting in asphalt and tearing it out later. Mr. Berkowitz stated the City set a precedent in the parks and commercial development to put in curb, gutter, and blacktop. Councilmember Knight stated he was in favor of doing nothing. Winslow Holasek. 1159 Andover Blvd. NW Mr. Holasek stated when the City put in the storm sewer it only put in a catch basin. The road was all sloped one way. This road was crowned so the water could not get over to the catch basin. He noted the second option would alleviate this problem. Councilmember Trude asked if the drainage is a big problem for Mr. Holasek. Mr. Berkowitz stated it is not a problem for the City but could become a problem if the property develops. Mayor Gamache stated there were three plans: a driveway only, a twenty-four foot street, and a regular full size street. \ / Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 13 Motion by Councilmember Orttel, Seconded by Councilmember Jacobson, to approve option three, leaving Xeon Street gravel. Motion carried on a 4-yes, I-no (Trude) vote. C. Consideration of Traffic Signal for 154th and Hanson Boulevard Mr. Berkowitz stated there was a bonding bill passed and ten million dollars are available. The County is considering putting an application in to install a traffic signal for 154th and Hanson Boulevard. The County feels it meets all the criteria and has requested the City and the School District consider participating in the project. The applications are due by May 9,2005. On May 2,2005 the Public Works Department would need to make a decision whether it wanted to do this proj ect. Councilmember Trude asked why the County did not consider South Coon Creek Drive and Round Lake Boulevard since it is a more serious need. Mr. Berkowitz stated the County did not feel it met all the warrants. The County had asked for a $50,000 contribution. . \ Councilmember Knight asked if the developer is going to be asked to pay a portion. Mr. Berkowitz stated he spoke with the Fairbanks representative who said they would be willing to contribute. .I The County Highway Department feels this project has the best chance to get approval. Mr. Dickinson stated the school district seems to be in support of this and seems willing to contribute towards the project. Councilmember Trude asked if$50,000 is enough. Mr. Dickinson thought that was plenty. If the County, the City, the School District and the Developer all put in $50,000 the project is probably ready to go. Motion by Mayor Gamache, Seconded by Councilmember Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Czajkowski, Recording Secretary