Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC May 3, 2005 C I T Y 0 F NDOVE ~diJ lJ)Uttm 10/;:)[,05 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Regular City Council Meeting - Tuesday, May 3, 2005 Call to Order - 7:00 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance Resident Forum Agenda Approval Consent Items 1. Approve Payment of Claims - Finance 2. Consider Excluded Bingo PermitJFun Fest - Clerk 3. Accept Feasibility Report/Waive Public Hearing/Order Plans & Specs/05-18/Wintergreen Street NW & CSAH 20 Improvements - Engineering 4. Accept Petition/Order Feasibility Report/05-22/Lots 2 & 3, Block l/Hanson Meadows/SS & WM - Engineering 5. Accept Petition/Order Feasibility Report/05-31/13511 Round Lake Blvd. NW /WM - Engineering 6. Approve Transfer from the Tax Increment Projects CPF to the 1999 Tax Increment Debt Service Fund - Finance Discussion Items 7. Consider Variance/Accessory Structure/Horse Shelter/3028 181 51 Avenue NW-Planning 8. Consider Variance/Lighting LeveUPrairie Knoll Park/595 146th Lane NW --Planning 9. Approve Plans & Specs/Order Advertisement for Bids/03-lAlPrairie Knoll Park Lighting - Engineering 10. Accept Feasibility Report/Waive Public Hearing/05-29/14355 Crosstown Blvd. NW/SS & WM- Engineering 11. Consider Sketch Plan Cardinal Ridge/15785, 15805, 15875 Nightingale S1. NW-Planning 12. Consider Sketch Plan/Coon Creek Acres/14437 Crosstown Blvd.-Planning Staff Items 13. Schedule City Council Workshop -Administration 14. Administrator Report - Administration Mayor/Council Input Adjournment / REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - M4Y 3,2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE .....................................................................................................1 RESIDENT FORUM.. ................ .... ....... ........ ....................... .............. ......... ........... ................ ....1 AGENDA APPROVAL .............................................................................................................1 CONTINUATION OF Board of Appeals and Taxation Meeting...............................................2 CONSENT ITEMS Approve Payment of Claims.................................................................................................2 Consider Excluded Bingo PermitJFun Fest .........................................................................2 Resolution R078-05 accepting Feasibility Report/Waive Public Hearing/Order Plans & Specs/05-l8IWintergreen Street NW & CSAH 20 Improvements..................................2 Resolution R079-05 accepting Petition/Order Feasibility ReportJ05-22/Lots 2 & 3, Block l/Hanson Meadows/SS & WM .......................................................................................2 Resolution R080-05 accepting Petition/Order Feasibility Report/05-31/l35Il Round Lake Boulevard NW /WM ..... .......... ..... ......... ................. ......... ....... ...... ...... .....................2 Approve Transfer from the Tax Increment Project CPF to the 1999 Tax Increment Debt Service Fund ....... ........ ......... .......... ............ ......... .................. ..................................2 Approve Change Order #6/Community Center ....................................................................2 CONSIDER VARIANCE/ACCESSORY STRUCTURE/HORSE SHEL TER/3028 l8lsT AVENUENW Motion to Approve Res. R081-05 .........................................................................................3 CONSIDER V ARIANCE/LIGHTING LEVEL/PRAIRIE KNOLL P ARK/595 l46TH LANE NW Motion to approve Res. R082-05...........................................................................................3 APPROVE PLANS & SPECS/ORDER ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS/03-IAl PRAIRIE KNOLL PARK LIGHTING. Motion to approve Res. R083-05...........................................................................................5 ACCEPT FEASIBILITY REPORTIW AIVE PUBLIC HEARING/05-29/14355 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW/SS & WM Motion to approve Res. R084-05...........................................................................................6 CONSIDER SKETCH PLAN CARDINAL RIDGE/l 5785, 15805, 15875 NIGHTINGALE STREET NW ........... ...... ........ .... ....... ........................ .............. ........................ ....... ................6 CONSIDER SKETCH PLAN/COON CREEK ACRES/14437 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD .... ........ ................. .......... ................ ...... ............ .......... .............................. ......8 CONSIDER NO P ARKING/148 TH AVENUE NW BETWEEN CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW & LINNET STREET NW Motion to approve Res. R085-05...........................................................................................11 CONSIDER REQUESTIHANSON BOULEVARD AND BLUEBIRD STREET INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Motion to authorize..... ................ ........... ............ ....... .............. ............................................. ..12 J Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Table of Contents Page ii SCHEDULE EDA MEETING ...................................................................................................15 CONDEMNATION OF POVLITZKl PROPERTY ...................................................................16 CONSIDER SUPPORT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT 154m AVENUE NW & HANSON BOULEVARD NW (LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM(ST ATE BONDING BILL .................................................................................16 MAILBOXES IN CUL-DE-SACS .............................................................................................21 ADMINIS TRA TO R' S REPORT . ........................................... ..... ................... ...........................22 MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT MET Council.........................................................................................................................22 ADJOURNMENT ......................................................................................................................22 I CITY OF NDOVE REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MA Y 3, 2005 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Mike Gamache, May 3,2005, 7:02 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MinnesoUL Councilmembers present: Councilmember absent: Also present: Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Ken Orttel, Julie Trude None City Attorney, William Hawkins City Engineer, Dave Berkowitz City Administrator, Jim Dickinson Community Development Director, Will Neumeister Others / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RESIDENT FORUM Ms. Ann Curnow. 15336 Cottonwood Street NW - Indicated she was at the meeting concerning a proposal to adopt an ordinance for restriction of motorized bikes/dirt bikes and ramps that are recreational. She explained she did a fair amount of research over the Nation and what other cities are doing to restrict the use of these kinds of items. This does not eliminate them and allows them to enjoy their recreation and it also allows her to enjoy her home. Mayor Gamache asked if this was an item currently being worked on by the Planning Commission. Mr. Dickinson stated they could send this through to the Planning Commission for their review. Councilmember Trude stated they could send it through zoning for review. Mr. Neumeister stated he could add this item to the May 24th Planning Commission meeting for resident input but he did not think he could get it on their next agenda. Commissioner Trude thought the complaint regarding this has generally been about the noise and this addresses some of those issues. Motion by Trude, Seconded by Jacobson, to direct staff to move this to the Planning Commission for their review. Motion passed unanimously. / AGENDA APPROVAL Add Item 13a, (Consider No Parking/l 48th Avenue NW between Crosstown Blvd NW & Linnet Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 2 Street NW), Item l3b (Consider RequestJHanson Boulevard and Bluebird Street Intersection Improvements), Item l5a (Consider Support For Traffic Signal Improvements at 1 54th Avenue NW & Hanson Boulevard NW (Local Road Improvement Program) State Bonding Bill), Item l5b (Mailboxes in Cul-De-Sacs), Continuation of Board of Equalization l5c (Condemnation of Povlitzki property). Motion by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, to approve the Agenda as amended above. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Gamache reopened the Board of Equalization meeting at 7:18 p.m. Councilmember Jacobson stated they received a letter from Mr. Winslow Holasek with a number of PIN Numbers that he wishes to potentially appeal and wants to preserve his right to go to the County Board on June 13, 2005. Mr. Mark and Mary Maclintosh, 1468 141S( Lane, Andover, Parcel Number 263224330065, came to appeal their value. Jason Dagostino, County Assessor, stated he went out and viewed the home and did a quick sales comparison approach on the home before he went out to it. They have it assessed at $320,800 and his sales comparison came in at $320,000. He loaded the information from re-measuring and reappraising the home and came up with a value of $308,900, which is about 96 percent of market value. He recommended they lower the value from $328,800 to $308,900. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to go with the recommendation of the County Assessor for the home valuation of $308,900 on property number 263224330065. Motion passed unanimously. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to close the Board of Equalization meeting at 7:27 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. CONSENT ITEMS Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 / Item 5 Item 6 Approval of Claims Consider Excluded Bingo PermitlFun Fest Accept Feasibility Report/Waive Public Hearing/Order Plans & Specs/05- l8/Wintergreen Street NW & CSAH 20 Improvements (See Resolution R078-05) Accept Petition/Order Feasibility Report/05-22/Lots 2 & 3, Block l/Hanson Meadows/SS & WM (See Resolution R079-05) Accept Petition/Order Feasibility Report/05-31/135 1 1 Round Lake Blvd. NW/WM (See Resolution R080-05) , Approve Transfer from the Tax Increment Projects CPF to the 1999 Tax Increment Debt Service Fund Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 3 Item 7 Approve Change Order #6/Community Center Motion by Trude, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of the Consent Agenda as read. Motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER V ARIANCElACCESSORYSTRUCTURE/HORSESHELTER/3028181ST A VENUE NW Mr. Neumeister stated Ken and Theresa Meyer have applied for a variance from the requirement that the exterior fInish on their proposed horse barn be compatible with their house at 3028 181 st Avenue NW. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to approve the request for a variance. Councilmember Jacobson asked what the setback for this is on l8lst. Mr. Neumeister stated it is sixty feet. He wondered where it is measured from. Mr. Neumeister indicated it is from the edge of the right-of-way. Mr. Dickinson stated when the building permit is reviewed they will have to meet the setback. Councilmember Jacobson stated they are approving the variance for the siding on the barn and not for the setback and he wondered if this was indeed the proper setback. Mr. Dickinson stated this is not related to the setback; it is related to the building and the materials on the building. Mr. Neumeister stated it indicates in two places in the report a setback of sixty feet from the front lot property line, not from the edge of the road surface. Motion carried unanimously. (Res. R081-05) CONSIDER V ARIANCE/LIGHTING LEVEL/PRAIRlE KNOLL PARKI595146TH LANE NW Community Development Director Neumeister explained this item concerns lighting the athletic fields in Prairie Knoll Park. Mr. Neumeister showed an aerial of the park and discussed where the lighting would be. Councilmember Trude stated they actually adopted a standard because of their concerns in the commercialJindustrial areas where the lights are on almost twenty-four hours a day. She asked if this Code is typically applied to a park situation where it might only be fifty hours a year. She thought it was an unusual situation to apply the commercialJindustrial code to a park. She did not think this was going to be a common situation where the lights will bother neighbors. Mr. Berkowitz stated they have maintained the four-foot candles at the property line at Sunshine Park to meet that requirement. He was not sure what other cities have done. I Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 4 Motion by Trude, Seconded by Knight, to approve the proposed variance. Councilmember Jacobson stated he read the letter from the lighting engineer and on page six it says they can reduce the spillover by moving the pole in the northeast corner into the Northern Natural Gas pipeline easement about thirty feet. He wondered if anyone had talked to Northern Natural Gas about getting their ok to do this. Mr. Berkowitz stated they have talked to them. The concern they have is they take responsibility for the light and if Northern Natural Gas goes in to replace the gas line, they then are responsible to move the light outside of the easement. Councilmember Jacobson asked if they just put the pipeline in new a few years ago. Mr. Berkowitz stated they did on the north side of the park but he did not think they did on the south side. Councilmember Jacobson stated one of the things they have to agree on when giving a variance is it is not for economic reasons. Councilmember Trude thought it was the unique design of the park to maximize the play space. They had to work around the gas pipeline which is a major constraint to the football field location. It runs diagonally across the entire park and there is an existing wetland in the center and the sliding hill which costs too much money to move so the natural configurations of the park lent itselfto very limited abilities for a football field. Councilmember Jacobson stated that was correct but they did not envision lighting it at the time. Councilmember Jacobson stated he would go along with the motion if they could add to it that the pole in the northeast corner be moved thirty feet down to help eliminate the spill light and will give a positive by increasing the uniformity of the light on the field too. Councilmember Trude asked if this would have to go back for re-bid then. Mr. Berkowitz stated it would not, they would prefer to keep the pole outside of the easement. They do have the project currently out for bid and they can change order that or send out an addendum stating that the light moves. Councilmember Orttel asked what the downside of this is. Mr. Berkowitz stated they would have to take responsibility for that cost. Councilmember Knight asked what the odds would be that this would happen within the next twenty years. Mr. Berkowitz stated it would be hard to state when the pipeline would need to be replaced. Councilmember Jacobson thought by moving the pole, it would reduce the spill over and would give the field some better lighting. It does not cost them more to put the pole in but if it needed to moved, they would have to pay for that. Councilmember Trude and Councilmember Knight accepted the amendment to the motion to include moving the pole into the easement. Councilmember Trude thought they had to put the reason for their variance in the resolution and it is not in there. She thought the reason for the variance is that there is no other feasible way to design Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 5 the park because of restrictions. There is no other feasible way to design the park. The park is very limited by the topography which includes the sliding hill, the wetland -and the huge easement for Northern Natural Gas. Those restricted the ability to design the park another way. Mr. Neumeister stated that could be added to the second Whereas. Mayor Gamache asked what would happen if another person purchased the property next to the park. Mr. Neumeister stated in a situation like this it is one of those where the buyer has to check out the adjacent property. It does not show up on a title search but if they looked at a record of the park or came in and asked, staff would have to show them what is on the adjacentparcel. He did not think there was any burden that they indicate to the adjacent owner for future buyers through any kind of recorded document that there were variances to this affect. Councilmember Trude thought the Whereas part she added should not be on the Whereas with the Planning Commission, it should be on the fourth Whereas with the City Council. Motion carried unanimously. (Res. R082-05) Mr. Berkowitz stated they will have to come up with an agreement with the gas company and will bring that back for approval. APPROVE PlANS & SPECS/ORDER ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS/03-IA/PRAIRlEKNOLL PARK LIGHTING City Engineer Berkowitz stated the City Council is requested to approve fmal plans and specifications and order the advertisement of bids for Project 03-IA, Prairie Knoll Park Lighting. Motion by Trude, Seconded by Knight, to approve the resolution approving the fmal plans and specifications and order the advertisement of bids for Project 03-IA, Prairie Knoll Park Lighting. Councilmember Jacobson stated in the third bullet point, it indicates installing a light on top of the sliding hill with a timer. Do they need lights on the sliding hill in the wintertime? Mr. Berkowitz stated they have put together a few alternatives in the plan to show that and a light on the sliding hill is one of them. He stated this is for sliding activity after dark which is for safety reasons too. Councilmember Jacobson asked if the light would be on a fifty-foot pole. Mr. Berkowitz stated it would be a standard acorn light. Motion carried unanimously. (Res. R083-05) ACCEPT FEASIBILITY REPORT/WAlVE PUBLIC HEARING/05-29/14355 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARDNW/SS& WM I Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 6 City Engineer Berkowitz explained this item is in regard to approving the resolution accepting the feasibility report, waiving public hearing and ordering plans and specifications for Project 05-29, 14355 Crosstown Boulevard NW for sanitary sewer and water main. Councilmember Orttel stepped down because of a conflict of interest. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to approve the resolution accepting the feasibility report, waive the public hearing and order plans and specifications for Project 05-29, 14355 Crosstown Boulevard NW for sanitary sewer and water main. Motion carried unanimously. (Res. R084-05) Councilmember Orttel returned to the meeting. CONSIDER SKETCH PLAN CARDINAL RlDGE/15785, 15805, 15875 NIGHTINGALE STREET NW Community Development Director Neumeister stated the Council is asked to review a residential sketch plan for a single-family development. I Mayor Gamache stated in the Administrator's report the piece of property to the east was coming forward. Mr. Dickinson stated the Apel Sketch Plan is just to the east and there will be some integration in the connection. Mayor Gamache asked if it would make more sense to discuss these two together or are they two separate developers. Mr. Neumeister stated there will be discussion at the next Planning Commission meeting so if the Council wanted to delay this to allow those to come together at the meeting on the 17th, they could do that. Mr. Berkowitz indicated there is a private property owner between the two properties. He stated they are not directly connected at this point, but there is a link between them that they have looked at through the review. Mr. Neumeister showed an aerial of what is in the vicinity. Councilmember Orttel asked how the two properties will link if there is another property between them. Mr. Neumeister stated the report indicates there is a need to acquire some of the easement for Linnet to make the connection through. The Council discussed the right-of-way connection between the two parcels. Councilmember Jacobson asked if the existing house was going to be removed. Mr. Ben Minks , stated the houses will be removed. I Mr. Minks stated one of the homes is not in the first phase but he does have the parcel to purchase in 2007. I Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 7 Councilmember Knight thought they should look at both properties at the same time. Councilmember Jacobson stated there is a gravel road on 1 57th but it is south of the plat. Technically if the road would have to be blacktopped, they would have to assess half of it to Cardinal Ridge but the other half would have to be assessed to the people on the south side and the same is true of Linnet Street. He would like to hear what the residents think. Mr. Berkowitz stated the south portion is the proposed Shaws Glen Development. Councilmember Trude stated when they did the lot split, they knew this was coming and that was why they took the road easement. Councilmember Orttel asked about double frontage lots and why this is a problem because they have other properties that are double frontage. Mr. Neumeister was not sure but thought there were variances involved with those. Councilmember Trude thought it was just to limit which side the driveways went on. The ordinance allows them to restrict access to one of the sides. Mayor Gamache asked if all of the pieces are being developed at the same time and all will pick up a piece of the cost of the development intersection improvements at Nightingale, will they all be similar to the improvements they are putting in Fox Hollow. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are asking for right and left turn lanes on Nightingale and l57th. The City would pick up a portion of that with the current development. Councilmember Trude thought if the developer wants to develop he should pick up one hundred percent of the costs to improve the road. Mr. Berkowitz stated that has been done in the past but the difference is in the number of lots. Mr. Mink stated at the Planning Commission meeting, it seemed like they either wanted the connection to Linnet or a connection out to Nightingale. He thought it was a choice of either and not both. The City Council continued to discuss access points into the development. Motion by Knight to table this item until the plat next to it comes forward for development. Councilmember Jacobson indicated this is a review of the sketch plan and does not need a motion. Mr. Minks stated the loop was his preference for the development. If there needs to be a connection Linnet would be the next one. Mayor Gamache stated the real concern is the middle piece. The development of the homes on the side, based on the where the cul-de-sac is now positioned, would actually cut the lots in half. They really need to come together on that piece of property to get developed. Mr. Neumeister stated that is correct. He stated they need two ways into the developments for emergency purposes. J Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 8 Mr. Scott Allen, 15873 Linnet Street, stated he is against connecting Cardinal Ridge to the existing Linnet Street because the cul-de-sac alleviates traffic going into their development. He liked the fIrst sketch plan with the loop but understood the reasoning of staff and the Fire Chief wanting more than one access. He was looking to keep Linnet not connected to this development. He bought this property as an investment but did not expect development around him to happen this soon. Councilmember Trude indicated if Linnet Street is connected, there would be a street easement across the northwest corner of his property. Mr. Allen stated the end of his driveway would probably need to be redone because the cul-de-sac would be torn out and the street would be extended to the northwest. He was pretty sure there is a sixty-foot easement on the northeast corner of his property. Mr. Neumeister stated this was considered a paper right-of-way. Mr. Allen stated his biggest reason for not connecting Linnet Street is if they look at the ghost plat for both of the developments and how they connect, the majority of the people will go south onto 1 57th. The Council discussed alternate routes for people to access the developments. Consensus was to wait until the Apel Development was ready to review this development. CONSIDER SKETCH PLAN/COON CREEK ACRES/14437 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD Community Development Director Neumeister stated the City Council is asked to review a sketch plan containing five urban residential lots on 7.95 acres. The property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Crosstown Boulevard and Andover Boulevard. Councilmember Trude wondered ifthey have houses that actually sit behind a wetland in the City. Mr. Berkowitz stated he believes the intent is that those delineated wetlands would be mitigated for outside of that area. Councilmember Trude stated the replacement would be two to one and they would stilI have to have a sixteen foot buffer behind the home and they cannot have a wetland on the front or sideyard so then they would dig up everything that is sixteen feet behind the building pads and it still would not be enough area-wise. Mr. Ron Touchette, developer, stated their goal is to actually go around all of the wetlands. With the mitigation that has to be done, they are only impacting .02 ofan acre of the wetlands. Their goal is to do a dirninimous wetland impact that would allow for a low-density development that works with nature instead of against it. Their biggest goal is to work with what is there. Councilmember Trude asked if they would stilI need to bring in a lot offIll. Mr. Touchette stated there is fill for the pad and driveways but the difference in elevation is not that great. There is a ditch that they go over but it is not that deep. Councilmember Knight asked if they could mitigate in floodplain. Mr. Touchette stated they are not Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 9 in the floodplain at all. Councilmember Orttel asked what the size of the building pads is. Mr. Touchette explained the pads are oversized. The goal is to put higher dollar homes in. He thought the pads were ten thousand square feet. Mr. Neumeister noted the bottom paragraph on the first page of the report which explains what is happening on the property. He stated they will have to get a variance for all ofthe lots because of the scattered wetlands. Councilmember Jacobson stated this is currently zoned for two and a half acre lots. He wondered if because of the particular situation, all the problems with the wetlands and busy roads and traffic, if they want to rezone this. As is, they could get two lots out of it and not have the problems they are looking at. Mayor Gamache stated he is worried about the access roads being that close to the intersection. Councilmember Knight did not understand the mitigation because the way it looks they would be mitigating into the wetland. Mr. Touchette stated they are not mitigating any wetlands in the plan; they are currently under the requirement for mitigation. They do not impact the wetlands enough to be required to mitigate. In the plan there is a retention pond for storm water. \ ;' The Council discussed wetland mitigation. Councilmember Orttel thought the issue was all of the driveways going onto Andover Boulevard. He wondered if a frontage road could be constructed. Mr. Neumeister did not think so because of the restriction; they would need to move everything back another sixty feet and he did not think there would be enough room to do that. Mayor Gamache asked how far into the property a frontage road would need to go. Councilmember Orttel thought the frontage road would need to go right up to the wetlands and he did not think they could do that. Mr. Berkowitz stated they could set that requirement. Councilmember Trude thought this all comes back to this development does not meet their minimum build-able lot depth requirements of the Code and she agreed with Councilmember Jacobson about zonmg. Councilmember Knight asked if there is standing water in the wetlands. Mr. Touchette indicated there is not. Staff discussed the lot widths with the Council and developer. Mayor Gamache stated he has a concern with the driveways. He suggested the developer take lot one and have the road enter into lot one and go behind the homes and have the homes face south instead of facing north. He did not know if this would be feasible or work but he thought that would be the only way possible to build this development. Mr. Touchette stated the only problem with this Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 10 is it would not be a single family development anymore because each home would need to have an easement on everyone else's property and an association would need to be made in order to maintain the road. Mayor Gamache thought the homes could be shifted to get four homes in there. The developer explained to the Council why the development would need to be higher density if a road was installed behind the homes. Councilmember Orttel suggested detached townhomes for the development. Councilmember Knight is troubled with the idea of building on all available land, especially with all of the wetland there. Mr. Touchette stated the land is an eight-acre parcel that has a lot of quality to it with wetlands and bordering Coon Creek so it uses the natural amenities of the land without erasing them. He looked at this as a positive both economically and for natural resources because they would be using the land in a manner that doesn't impact or change it from what it was originally. Councilmember Jacobson stated if they go through with this they will have five islands sitting in what would appear to be a lower setting of wetlands. He did not think the Highway Department would like to have all the driveways going out onto Andover Boulevard. The developer should go back and look at this because the way it is presented there are a lot of problems. Mr. Touchette stated they have been getting help and feedback throughout from the City staff. Mr. Touchette asked if the Council would like him to come back with a new plan including detached townhomes. He asked for some direction. Mayor Gamache thought that would be a good start. Councilmember Knight stated he is not in favor oftownhomes on this land. Councilmember Orttel stated the issue of the driveways going onto Andover Boulevard needs to be resolved. CONSIDER NO PARKING/148TH A VENUE NW BETWEEN CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW & LINNET STREET NW Mr. Berkowitz noted this item is in regard to considering approval of a resolution designating no parking on both sides of 1 48th Avenue NW between Crosstown Boulevard NW and Linnet Street NW. Councilmember Orttel asked if they checked with the school to see if they have the ability to park the cars on the school grounds. Mr. Bednarz stated they talked with Mr. Durand at the School District and they have difficulty with controlling where they park and filling up the lot. Councilmember Orttel stated his point is if they did not have anywhere to park at the school, they have to park somewhere and the streets are available for parking. Mayor Gamache stated he drove by one morning and saw cars parked on both sides of the street so he wanted to see how many spots were available in the school lot. Councilmember Trude explained how the school deals with parking. She thought the school could accommodate more Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 11 parking. Mr. Dickinson stated the part of this is the permitting issue, they only have so many permits and there are a lot of variables the school indicated they would have to deal with. He noted at this time of year there are more drivers because a significant amount of people get their licenses and if those permits are not available, they are out ofluck. They look for the closest place to park. Mr. Dickinson stated they did attempt to put flyers on the cars indicating Sunshine Park was available to park in. They were successful in getting two cars to move but for the most part, they continue to park in the street. Councilmember Orttel asked if they could park along Andover Boulevard by the school. Mr. Berkowitz stated this is a State Aid road and as part of the agreement, they cannot allow parking on that road. Mr. Terry Tobiason, 1970 l48th Avenue NW, stated there are up to fifteen cars at one time parked on his road and some do have parking permits hanging in their windows. Councilmember Jacobson thought in order to solve this problem until summer; they should post no parking signs along l48th and a portion of Raven, south of l49th. Councilmember Orttel asked if the school announced there was parking at Sunshine Park. Mr. Dickinson stated in regard to Raven Street, he visited that street and one of the residents was against no parking on the street. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to approve the attached resolution designating no parking on both sides of 148th Avenue NW between Crosstown Boulevard NW and Linnet Street NW between the hours of7:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday from September 151 through June 10th. Councilmember Trude asked if they could change the date to June 10th because school is usually out by then. Councilmember Jacobson indicated that was fine. Motion passed unanimously. (Res. 085-05) CONSIDER REQUEST/HANSON BOULEVARD AND BLUEBIRD STREET INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS / City Administrator Dickinson stated a group of property owners (McDonalds, Health Partners, J. Charles Land and Andover Clocktower Commons) is requesting the City of Andover to consider undertaking a public improvement project with respect to improvements (3/4 intersection) to the intersection of Hanson Boulevard (CSAH 78) and Bluebird Street. An attorney has been retained Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 12 to work with the property owners to prepare a private agreement among the parties to waive the public notices and hearing requirements for a special assessment. Mayor Gamache asked if the security of 105 percent is standard. Mr. Dickinson stated it is. Councilmember Orttel asked the City Attorney if they could assess this as a City project even though these are County roads. City Attorney Hawkins stated they can do this legally. It would be considered a local improvement. The City has the ability to put the improvements in if the County gives them the right. The question is whether or not the City should as a matter or policy put in County improvements and assess the costs back when the County is the one that will be maintaining them. He did not believe they have ever done that before but legally it can be done as a matter of policy. It is a matter of whether or not the City wants to get involved in a local improvement where the improvement, once it is completed, is taken over and maintained by the County. Councilmember Orttel asked ifthere is any potential liability on the city's part either fmancially or personally. City Attorney Hawkins stated the letter of credit would be there and they would assess the $100,000 cost and they would have a $105,000 letter of credit to make sure the assessment came in. Mr. Dickinson stated they would want a development contract with a commitment that they would cover one hundred percent of those costs and then post security that when the project is over those payments would be made. Councilmember Trude asked if this is similar to what they are doing by the Fire Station. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are doing the turn lane improvements for the development. He explained the requirements to the Council. Mr. Darren Lazan stated the attorney that prepared the letter acted on behalf of the group to get this on the agenda for tonight and does not represent all property owners at this time. They are asking for the Council to approve the concept and direct staff to work with them. He indicated they do not have any idea what the cost will be for the road improvements because the plans were just prepared on Sunday afternoon. They are going to need time to get the information together. Councilmember Jacobson asked if there is going to be time to do this. Mr. Dickinson stated the County wants their staff to continue working with the applicant on this project for the three quarter intersection to move forward and to leave the option open that they could potentially pull that out of their project sometime in the future when they award that contract. Their plans and specs are put together so they have the ability to pull certain portions out of their project as they see fit. They did recommend to the County Board that they give time to try and work with this concept. I Mr. Dickinson indicated the County Engineer did review this and looked at it in concept and recommended to them as details came forward, he would be in agreement to that type of improvement but there would need to be some timing put forward. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 13 Councilmember Orttel stated they are being asked to approve a concept but in reality there are going to be some differing opinions as to who pays what and who puts up the guarantee and he did not know if they heard anything about that. Apparently this has just been done after the twelfth hour and now they are going to have to decide how much each one pays and how much guarantee each will put up. He wondered if this has been decided. Mr. Dickinson was not sure but the way he recommended presenting this was the owners would come forward as a guided front and indicate how they are going to allocate those costs and that is not something for the City and would be put into the development contract. Councilmember Orttel asked what guarantee the City has that this is going to happen in a reasonable fashion. Mr. Dickinson stated the timing guideline would need to be brought forward to the County fairly quickly. Councilmem ber Orttel asked if the County did this as a part of their proj ect, they would just do it and pay for it, they do not have a means to assess it to the property owners. He asked if this was true. Mr. Dickinson stated they do have the means but they do not assess. City Attorney Hawkins stated he has never seen a County that has assessed a project. Mr. Dickinson stated generally what they do in those situations is put together ajoint powers agreement with the community and indicate it to be the city's responsibility. In this situation they are not doing that so there would not be any assessments back through the County. The Council discussed with staff what has occurred with other developments regarding County road improvements. Councilmember Knight asked if they are providing the bonding for other developments such as Sophie's. Mr. Dickinson stated sometimes they do and sometimes they do not. It depends on whether or not they need to bond. He did not think they would need to bond for this project. They could utilize some cash flow within the permanent improvement revolving fund to facilitate this. Councilmember Knight asked the City Attorney what kind of entity could enter into this. City Attorney Hawkins stated every individual property owner that is going to be assessed would need to sign the development agreement and agree to the procedure and that they would waive any appeal to challenge the assessment. \ , / Councilmember Jacobson asked if they had time to direct staff to put together the feasibility to determine the costs and put together the development agreements within two weeks so it would be ready to come back to the Council at the next meeting. Mr. Berkowitz stated two weeks would be a tight timeframe for staff to do this. They could have this back by the following meeting. Councilmember Orttel stated what is going to happen is the County is going to look at this as another delay. Mr. Dickinson stated at the next meeting they could accept the petition, order the feasibility report and the petitioner could work on the detailed plans with the County. Mr. Dickinson explained the County's plans on improving the road. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 14 Councilmember Orttel asked in 2003 when this came up to be done by the development and it never got done, the County came in and made some threats and then Health Partners got involved but he felt they were an innocent party and were not a part of this. He stated now they are going to be paying a portion of this. That was not the agreement with the County. Councilmember Trude thought the County did not tell them they were going to lose access so they are as concerned about access as the rest of them. Ms. Barbara Reinhard-Verad, Health Partner's real estate person, stated Health Partners has expressed their concern in the past. The access for emergency vehicles is the primary concern because they are not worried about suffering economic loss, they are worried for their patients and emergency vehicles. They are willing to listen to how they can work with other people to make this into a three-way. She stated the three-way would be ok with them but the two way is the big concern. They are disappointed that the three-way went away recently and are willing to work with people to see how it can be reinstituted. Mayor Gamache stated the County did approve the concept of a three-way but they were never going to pay for it. It has to come from the development. Mr. Lazan stated there is not a single standing condition today in their development agreement, the resolutions and staff approvals, in the site development plans, that they do that work. He contended that as they did in September 2003 when the County required these improvements that they had no standing to do so. They were not working in the right-of-way, they did not have any permit requirements and he came before the City Council indicating that if this project was going to be expected to bear a $300,000 price tag for these roadway improvements on the County road, they would not go forward. That was clear and they had no standing to require it which why they asked the City to require it and in the end that requirement was removed. At this point, he is a property owner and they are working as a group to try to come up with a resolution. He absolutely contested the characterization that this is a standing requirement that has been ignored for a year and a half or two years. The record will clearly show that there is not any requirement. He stated the County would have liked them to do that work but they do not have any standing. Councilmember Jacobson stated that if the city does receive the petition and everything is satisfactory for the attorney and it comes back in two weeks then we make the decision to proceed or not. Councilmember Trude indicated that it is her understanding that staff allows public or private improvements and this person is asking that they are going to come in as a group instead of one person. She asked if Council would entertain that. She thought that we had heard this is legal and has been done before. I Mr. Dickinson stated that there is no resolution for the Council to adopt. A motion to direct staff to continue to work this way needs to be adopted. Mr. Berkowitz noted that what he is hearing is that they want a public improvement. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 15 Councilmember Trude asked if our policies would allow either public or private. All of the negotiations would happen between our staff and the county staff. Mr. Berkowitz explained that the plan documents will be prepared by the city. We would share as much information as possible so we're not duplicating any work that has been done. Councilmember Trude noted that the county would accept it either way based on our past practice. Councilmember Orttel asked if they have ever done this in the City before and ifit has not been done before he thought this should be included in the assessment policy if they are going to start doing it. Councilmember Trude understood that was how Constance Corners could pay assessments for the project that will include their left and right turn lanes off Crosstown. Mr. Berkowitz noted that project was not petitioned for; that was initiated by the city with the understanding that we had securities in place. Councilmember Trude stated that they are asking us if we'll initiate it and we're saying first we J want to know if they have their agreement worked out and then we would initiate it. Mr. Berkowitz noted that they are willing to petition to do the improvements. Mr. Dickinson explained this would be similar to a residential development. We would work out a development contact and they would post their securities. Mr. Dickinson and the City Attorney explained the process that would be followed regarding special assessments for the project. Councilmember Trude noted that the projects of turn lanes on Crosstown, the fIre station and Constance Corners were initiated by the city so we could also do that if they get their development agreement organized so they know the costs. We could also initiate it without a petition. She asked if that is normally done. Mr. Dickinson explained that the city could then be exposed to costs. Councilmember Trude stated that then this procedure is to protect the city from covering somebody's costs who chooses not to participate. Motion by Trude, seconded by Jacobson to authorize staff to begin working with property owners who expect to bring a petition for public improvements for the HansonIBluebird limited access intersection. \ I J Mayor Gamache stated he is going to vote against this because he does not like the way it has been handled. Motion passed three ayes, 2 nays (Gamache, Orttel). " Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 16 SCHEDULE EDA MEETING Motion by Trude, Seconded by Knight, to schedule an EDA meeting for Tuesday, May 17,2005 at 6:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The City Council recessed at 9:45 p.m. The City Council reconvened at 9:55 p.m. CONDEMNATION OF POVLITZKI PROPERTY Mr. Neumeister indicated they have been working with Mr. Povlitzki and his attorney since January 2005 on right of entry exchange. He stated Mr. Povlitzki believed they are going to sign but he did not know for sure because they have been dealing with this for four months. He discussed it with the City Attorney that if they do not sign by Friday, that they need to begin the process of condemning for right-of-way and trail easement. It is a 522 square foot area. They do have all of the right-of-way for Jay Street from Bunker to his property so they can begin construction of the road but it does take around ninety days to do a quick take. Mayor Gamache wondered why this was only for the one little piece ofland. Mr. Neumeister explained the reason why it was only for a piece ofland. Councilmember Orttel stated if they did not have the exchange agreement now, they could still do the project and could do without if they had to. Mr. Berkowitz stated it could be constructed but affects the side slope drainage and severely affects the trail location. Councilmember Orttel wondered what the issue is with the property owner. Mr. Neumeister did not think there was an issue but a matter of communication between the owner and his attorney. Councilmember Orttel asked if the City met all of the conditions made by the owner. Mr. Neumeister stated they have. Councilmember Orttel stated he did not like the idea of eminent domain and wondered if there was another way to do this. If the deal has essentially been made but there is a communication problem, this might get their attention. Mr. Neumeister stated Mr. Povlitzki has indicated verbally that he is going to try to get this done by the end of the week but he wants to be able to move forward in case it does not happen instead of waiting another two weeks for the next Council meeting. Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, to authorize staff to deal with the City Attorney to acquire the right-of-way on the proposed Jay Street. City Attorney Hawkins stated what they will do is if they do not have a written agreement with Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 17 him on these matters by Monday, they will bring a resolution back to the Council authorizing them to commence a proceeding at the next regular Council meeting. Motion passed unanimously. CONSIDER SUPPORT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT 154TH A VENUE NW & HANSON BOULEVARD NW (LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM) STATE BONDING BILL City Engineer Berkowitz explained a State Bonding Bill (Rural Road Safety Account/Local Roads of Regional Significance) for 5 million dollars is available for local road improvement projects. The City Council is requested to consider support towards a funding application for a traffic signal project at 1 54th Avenue NW and Hanson Boulevard NW. The project would be a joint effort between Anoka County, City of Andover, School District and others. Councilmember Jacobson asked what type of support this would be. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are talking about a financial contribution towards the project. Mr. Dickinson stated the County Highway Department would like a letter of support for this application and they would like a fmancial commitment too at some point in time. Councilmember Orttel asked if this was approved at the last meeting. Mr. Dickinson stated there was discussion but no motion was made. Councilmember Jacobson wondered what the status is of the School Board and Fairbanks Property. Mr. Dickinson stated he talked to the County Engineer and they are talking with the School District and they have asked him to talk to the City Council and to talk to the developer. Councilmember Trude wondered if the developer would have to put out the same amount as the people at Clocktower Commons. Mr. Dickinson stated they have not discussed a dollar amount and the conversation he had with the County Engineer was earlier tonight so he did not have a chance to talk to the developer but he indicated to the County Engineer, Doug Fischer that he would get back to him by Thursday and try to coordinate a meeting with the Fairbanks properties to see what level of commitment they would put into the project. He stated the more cooperation and more sources of revenue that go into the project certainly helps on the scoring on the application and will have a better chance of getting a grant. The reason this was selected as the project is because it is a high profile project, a route of regional significance. Councilmember Knight asked what made this project high profile. Mr. Dickinson stated it is on Hanson, a road that is eligible for various different types of funding, there is a school, County and City partnering together and it is an opportunity to bring in others, such as the developers on 1 54th . Councilmember Jacobson asked what the deadline for this is. Mr. Berkowitz stated the / Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 18 application is due on Friday. Councilmember Orttel stated at the last discussion he brought up they allocated a quarter million dollars to build an overpass or an underpass for the school at Oakview for child safety and it did not work out because going over the road was too expensive and going under the road was too wet so they wound up not doing it. Now the County has given them an opportunity to have a stoplight installed for the children to cross the road instead of walking so far and there is a question about it and he did not know why. Councilmember Trude thought staffwas only giving them a heads up that there was going to be a road committee meeting on Monday and staff went to the meeting. There was a list of projects and this was one on the list and the school indicated this was one on the list that they planned on doing when the road was reconstructed and she thought they were doing this application for 2010 to widen Hanson. At that point they were going to look at improving the safety. She stated this is hard to see why this one jumps out. She indicated she visited the school and talked with over one hundred kids that day and not one kid in the entire day has to cross the road because all the kids are coming from the south or riding the bus to Rum River Elementary School. It is hard to see why this is such a high priority. When Round Lake Boulevard was rebuilt the County said South Coon Creek and Round Lake Boulevard was going to need the next signal light that came in. She wondered if this met the warrants and what the traffic counts are east and west. Councilmember Trude noted she talked to people at the School District about how this helps them with busing because the busing lot will not even be served by this. Mr. Berkowitz assumed ifthe County is willing to move forward with the application that this did meet warrants. Councilmember Trude stated when they discussed this a year or two ago they said when they go through the application process for the widening of Hanson, once they get it built from Coon Rapids up to Bunker, then they were going to start on the applications for phase II to go from 139th further north and at that point, they would look at this area. She that was what was in their overall plan. Councilmember Orttel stated her plan was to put the light at Mr. Lazan's intersection, that was her plan all along and the County said it will not go there. Now the County is going to put it up by the school and they offered to do that. He did not understand how they had a five/zero vote and all of a sudden they have a flip/flop over the period they were not in session and he was not sure what was going on. . I Councilmember Trude stated her goal was to have a light for the Community Center because the kids will go there 365 days out of the year; the kids are in school about 150 days a year. She was looking at kids crossing the street day and night. Councilmember Orttel stated the County already told them they will not put lights in there because it does not meet warrants. Now they have a high profile light that they are willing to fund primarily for Andover for the safety of the kids and the City is arguing over putting it in. Councilmember Trude indicated to let the County fund it then. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 19 Councilmember Jacobson asked what amount was being asked for. Mr. Dickinson stated he would like to be able to have a motion of support. They had a consensus at the workshop; they did not go through a formal vote. They are looking for a formal action to show support, authorize a letter of support and offer a level of commitment. What they have indicated off the top oftheir head was a $50,000 commitment. The County identified that as being substantial and acceptable. Mr. Berkowitz stated there are also other commitments and support which the City could offer such as looking at the design. Councilmember Knight stated all of the beneficiaries should be kicking in and he was curious what the development will be giving. Mr. Dickinson stated that is the meeting he has to get scheduled in the next day and that was the commitment he discussed with Mr. Fischer. Councilmember Trude stated if they apply for this grant, they do not know if they will get it. Mr. Dickinson stated that is correct. The application deadline is May 6, 2005. They should know probably within a month's time whether or not this will proceed. Councilmember Trude indicated the County wants to know how much money the City will provide. She wondered if the City knows what kind of intersection the County will construct. Mr. Berkowitz stated they have only had preliminary discussions on that. He indicated they have talked about a temporary signal and expanding the signal so it can be used in the permanent situation. Those are all things that would have to be looked at through the design. Councilmember Jacobson asked if this was more than the signals, with turn lanes. He asked what is involved, besides the signal light. Mr. Berkowitz stated those are other details that would have to be worked out in the process. He did not think it would be the full permanent improvement but they would want to do what they can to salvage that improvement for when Hanson is reconstructed in the future. Councilmember Knight stated he did not have any trouble supporting it if all the entities are supporting it equally in their share. Mr. Berkowitz stated ifthis project were to be constructed through their normal joint powers agreement with the County, they would pay one hundred percent of each leg that the City owns, and fifty percent of the County leg so they would have a substantial cost to do that if it is not funded through some type of bonding bill. Councilmember Orttel asked if the School District would pay for their own leg and the City would pay for the leg on l54th. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are just looking for a dollar amount. Councilmember Orttel stated in a normal circumstance, the City would pay for one full leg and not pay for the school. Mr. Berkowitz stated that is correct. Councilmember Orttel stated if the light was not constructed under a program like this, the City would end up paying for over half the light. Mr. Dickinson stated in that situation, they would Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 20 have an opportunity to assess that back. Councilmember Jacobson asked what happens if the School District says it is a great idea but they do not have the money and the same with the Fairbanks property. Mr. Dickinson explained how he understood the grant application process would happen. Councilmember Trude stated they were supposed to get a lot more information after the Public Works Committee met. She asked how much they put into this project. Mr. Dickinson stated they did not identify that. He thought it would be more than if not equal to what the City will contribute. Councilmember Trude indicated they do not even know what the County is going for in the grant. Mr. Berkowitz stated his understanding is the County has just begun the process in writing the application. Mr. Dickinson stated the County Board has authorized their staff to submit these applications by the end of the week from the Public Works Committee. Councilmember Knight thought every beneficiary should pay their share. J Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Gamache, to authorize support and draft a letter of support for a signal light at the school on l54th, commitment to not to exceed $50,000 cash or services and gain commitments from all other parties involved. Councilmember Jacobson asked if it would be reasonable to say the City is interested and would commit to the project but their commitment would be at the same level as the other parties involved. Mr. Dickinson stated it could be in the motion as an amount not to exceed $50,000. Councilmember Orttel thought the school would have more of a commitment then they would. Councilmember Knight asked by gaining commitments, did it mean the failure or success ofthis depends on this. Mayor Gamache thought if they did not gain commitments, it does not move forward. Councilmember Orttel asked if they should just assess them then. Councilmember Jacobson wondered if the school says it is a great idea along with the Fairbanks property but only contribute a small amount, is that fair and proportional. Councilmember Trude did not think it would go anywhere with a small commitment like that. Mr. Dickinson stated the more that are committed, the more points they will get and the better chance it is to achieve the grant. Mayor Gamache stated that is the best way to get an intersection there, which is in their transportation plan. Councilmember Jacobson asked under the motion on the floor, does that mean that if it were selected and did get the grant that it would limit their involvement to just that dollar amount and they would not being doing plans and specs. Councilmember Orttel stated he hoped they would do those in lieu of the money. He thought that was what the suggestion was. Mr. Dickinson Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 21 stated part ofthis would depend on who would initiate the project. If it is a requirement that the County initiate and run the project because they would be the recipient of the grants, they may not be able to do the design work. Councilmember Trude wondered if this would be coordinated with all the medians being built so they will not have to close Hanson down more than once. Mr. Dickinson indicated it would have to be. Councilmember Knight did not want to see a perfunctory offer come in and they are stuck with it; he wanted a legitimate offer from both parties. Councilmember Orttel asked why, because if they were going to put in $50,000 and get a traffic signal for the kids at the school, what difference did it make if everyone else contributed or not. Councilmember Knight stated there were some significant beneficiaries there that should be paying their share. Councilmember Orttel understood but he stated they were going to spend a quarter million dollars for an overpass to protect the kids and now it looks like they have a great possibility of getting that for fifty thousand dollars and he was worried about some developer who is already existing there and he wanted him to pay some share so that he pays similar to what the other developer is paying. He stated he did not care who pays what ifthey can get safety for the kids at that school. Motion passed unanimously. MAILBOXES IN CUL-DE-SACS Councilmember Trude stated she received a letter from the Post office regarding placing all mailboxes at the entrance to the cul-de-sacs whether it isa new development or not. She indicated some of the surrounding communities recently approved a new resolution regarding this and she wanted to ask staff to start to work on a similar resolution and this is talking about retrofitting, not just moving forward with new developments because of health and safety issues with the mail carriers and snowplows. Mr. Dickinson stated they will bring a resolution back at the next meeting. Councilmember Knight asked who decides on where the mailboxes are placed. Mr. Berkowitz stated right now their ordinance states that any cul-de-sac that is now developed, the mailboxes are placed at the leg of the cul-de-sac. That is what they would look at. They would need to look at each individual cul-de-sac and figure out the best location and work that out with the residents that live on that cul-de-sac. Councilmember Jacobson stated the problem with the resolution they have before them from Ham Lake is that it requires existing ones to be moved and he questioned that. Mr. Berkowitz stated the request of the post office is to move all the mailboxes. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2005 Page 22 The Council decided to bring this item to the next workshop to discuss because of a number of Issues. ADMINISTRATOR REPORT City Administrator Dickinson updated the Council on the Community Center, Anoka County Highway Department issues and Legislative items. MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT (Met Council) - Councilmember Orttel stated a couple of weeks ago he saw the Met Council did an inventory of what they feel are the lakes of particular interest in the Metropolitan Area and they have two in the City that they are going to work on and try to purify and they are Crooked Lake and Round Lake and they will be doing some improvements over the next few years. \ Motion by Knight, Seconded by Trude, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. ) Respectfully submitted, Susan Osbeck, Recording Secretary