Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH May 16, 1985 ~ 01 ANDOVER PUBLIC HEARING - MAY 16, 1985 MINUTES Pursuant to notice published thereof, a Public Hearing for Project 85-8, Trunk Watermain Extension, was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on May 16, 1985, 7:35 p.m., at the Andvoer City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski,. Orttel Councilmen absent: None A I so present: TKDA Engineer, John Davidson; City Engineer, James Schrantz; and interested residents Mayor Windschitl informed the residents of the petition received for utilities to the east of this project area by Hanson and Bunker Lake Boulevards, and of the possible request for utilities to service an area near the railroad tracks on Bunker Lake Boulevard. He stated these tend to complicate the situation, feeling the Council may not want to make a decision on this project until more engineering data is available on providing utilities to that eastern area. The Mayor also explained that the Council will need to decide whether to install a 250,000-gallon storage tank to service Water District No.1, or whether to increase that size to 500,000 gallons to allow capacity for Service District 2 as well. John Davidson then reviewed the feasibility report for the proposed improvement, Project 85-8, Trunk Watermain Extension along Bunker Lake Boulevard in District 1 and continuing to District 2 to approximately Raven Street and north on Crosstown Boulevard to 139th Avenue. He briefly reviewed the water system analysis done for the entire Urban Service District, the restrictions imposed by the Well Advisory area, the existing facilities, the facilities to be constructed within the Woodland Terrace plat this year, the assessment policy of assessing the per-acre and unit connection charge, and the question of sizing the tank in the Northglen Park in District 1. He stated any potable well would be constructed outside the Well Advisory area, noting the total water system ultimately calls for 8 wells and 3 storage tanks. Mr. Davidson explained the change in policy to now assess connection charges up front determined on the basis of 2.5 houses per acre, which would be $900 per unit. Should the land develop to a higher density, the additional connection charge would be paid at the time of development. The area assessment is calculated at $845 per acre. Some of the Adolfson property in District 1 will be assessed only the connection charge at this time because the area charge was assessed under the original project. The estimated trunk watermain cost for the project is $435,270. A 0.25 MG tank is estimated to cost $329,760, a 0.50 MG tank to cost $515,000, and a 0.75MG tank to cost $746,950. Mr. Davidson also reviewed the proposed assessments for benefitted parcels within both water service districts, noting a completion date for the project of December 1, 1985, unless there are delays in awarding the project or other areas are brought into the project. The Hearing was then opened for public testimony. Paster McKinley, Grace Lutheran Church - stated it sounds like a good plan and they are happy to see development in the area. He explained in 1980 the Church began a building program which was more than they could handle. Then there were sanitary sewer assessments imposed at that time of about $7800 a year, and they are running behind in their payments. They are already in their second refinancing, and this assessment would put them in a very serious financial situation. They are marginally holding their own, and he doesn't know where the funds will come from. I Public Hearing May 16, 1985 - Minutes Page 2 Adrian Smith, President of Grace Lutheran Church - also explained they are in their second flnanclng phase, and there lS no thlrd phase to go through. He stated it is an impossible situation to meet, suggesting they may not be able to pay the assessments. John Peterson, Good Value Homes - asked how many petitions have been received in SerVlce District 2. Mayor Windschitl stated there has been one from Gilbert Menkveld, Good Value's petition which he acknowledged has since been withdrawn, a petition from outside this project area in the northeast corner of Hanson and Bunker Lake Boulevard, and the possibility of another one coming in along the railroad tracks off Bunker Lake Boulevard. Mr. Peterson - stated with only three petitions and noting their request not to be served at this time, he felt it is a very large area to serve and that the extension to the east is premature at this time. He explained it is their feeling that given the economy and the large number of lots being developed within the surrounding area that any future development on their part at this time would be premature. In their opinion, their development is one to two years away. Their intent for the request initially was to give the City a chance to look at it. They have now looked at it and have come to the opinion there are more lots in the area than can be absorbed now, again stating it is their position that they not have water extension to their property at this time. Robert Lunds, Attorney re resentin Geor e Adol 'son - asked several questions specl lca y a out t e assessment on e 0 son property for this project. Mr. Davidson explained 64 acres of the Adolfson property was assessed an area benefit in the original project. The remaining property to the east was not assessed in the original project. Since the first project, the assessment policy has been changed to also assess the connection charge as well. He then provided copies of the feasibility report to those in the audience. The connection charge will be assessed for 64 acres which has already been assessed the area benefit, and the remaining property will be assessed both the area and connection charge benefits. Mr. Lunds - stated Mr. Adolfson does not have any plans at this point to develop hlS property. He has sold off portions of the farm but has retained a small amount of the farmstead to be left for farming purposes. He believed it is in Green Acres right now and plans to keep it in Green Acres. Mr. Adolfson has asked him to express his opposition to the project. Tom McCabe, 2732 Bunker Lake Boulevard - stated he just put in a new approved well for $4,500 and now he wlll be assessed for something he will not be using. He owns two lots. Council discussion was that the lot with the single family residence is presently developed; and the policy is until connection to the system, there will be no assessment. There would be an assessment against the undeveloped property. They also noted that a number of people are getting into the situation of having to install new, approved wells, which could mean an additional cost should the water system come into the developed areas. Adrian Smith - asked why they are being assessed if only undeveloped properties are belng assessed. Council explained they adopted the policy of assessing undeveloped property equally. A policy decision has also been made to assess the churches, schools, and commercial establishments as well, separating them from residential properties. Those establishments provide a multiple use where a number of people are involved, and that is why the distinction was made between residential and non- residential properties. Another consideration is that the fire protection will be increased as well. Public Hearing May 16, 1985 - Minutes Page 3 Lyle McLaughlin, 3155 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW - asked if the Meadowcreek development across from hlm wll I be assessed for thlS system. Mayor Windschitl explained the overall policy of not assessing existing residential lots for water service using the theory they have already paid for a functioning well. If the property is sub- dividable, then an assessment is placed on the portion other than the residence. Mr. McLaughlin - felt it would be good city planning to have the fire protection extend lnto the neighborhoods also. He argued the system will be used for fire- fighting within the Meadowcreek Addition as well as for his property; therefone, there should be some benefit assessed to them as well. He stated he's never seen a city develop where an improvement didn't service an entire population of a given area. The Council explained that over time it may be that existing neighborhoods would petition for water service. At that time they would pay into the system at the same rate indexed for inflation as those are now. Mr. MCLauählin - stated that should hold true for his property as well. Council noted lt oes, that his assessment should be only on the remaining land outside the lot his house is on. The overall assessment is based on everyone ultimately being hooked up to the system. Mr. McLaughlin - stated he was not objecting to the project, thinking it is essential. He just had a problem with not assessing everyone along the way when he saw a benefit to everyone at this time. Mr. Lund - felt it was a question of fairness. All of the population are ultimately gOlng to benefit but only a few are paying the burden at this time. Council and Engineers again explained the per-acre and connection charges are based on the ultimate system of 3 tanks and 8 wells and that everyone will be paying at the same indexed rate. Mr. McLaughlin - asked if there is any pipe in the streets for water in Meadowcreek. Councllman Lachinski stated there is not. If water was wanted in that area, the people would have to petition for it. But all of the homes there have 300-foot deep we 11 s. Mr. Peterson - asked if any of the neighborhoods in the Well Advisory area are petltlonlng for water now. Council discussion noted no formal petition has been received; however, there is a concern on the part of the people because of the landfill situation and the lower real estate values. It was felt a lot of people would like to see water come in to be able to sell their houses, but everyone is just waiting to see what happens with the landfill site. More should be known on that situation within six months or so. Mr. Peterson - felt it might be wise to wait and see what happens before extending the water service. Mayor Windschitl stated the difficulty is then deciding what size tank to construct in Service District 1. Without extending the service in this project, there would not be enough funds to pay for a 500,OOO-gallon tank. On the other hand, the question is whether it is good planning to construct only a 250,000-gallon tank in District 1, knowing another 250,000-gallon tank would be needed in District 2 in the near future. There is also the cost savings of con- structing only one tank versus two tanks. Councilman Orttel stated at this time the Council would hear petitions from any of the neighborhoods in the Well Advisory if they would come in; but if there is an eminent health hazard, the Council would bring in the water system by mandate, not by petition. And he felt it is the City's obligation to be prepared for that event. He also noted that the well drilling standards set by the Health Department in the Well Advisory are to protect the water tables from becoming polluted as a result of Public Hearing May 16, 1985 - Minutes Page 4 the drilled well; it does not necessarily mean the water will not become contaminated from other sources if that particular aquifer becomes contaminated. Councilman Elling stated the problem is if the City doesn't do something in that area and the residents have to pay the extra money to meet the Well Advisory requirements, they then may have to pay for municipal water as well. He felt the City has a responsibility to the people to see that they don't have to take that kind of financial beating. Mayor Windschitl also thought the pressure will be coming from the Hanson Boulevard/Bunker Lake Boulevard area because there is little left to develop in Coon Rapids. Mr. Lund - asked if the entire service area has been taken into consideration when assesslng for the 12-inch watermains. He didn't feel it was right that they should be paying for the oversizing when a much larger area will benefit. Mr. Davidson stated the calculations and oversizing are ;;based on the overall comprehensive plan for the water in the Urban Service District. Mr. Lund - stated if the people in Meadowcreek area decide they need water, how is that assessment determined considering the surrounding areas have already been assessed and theoretically the system should be paid for. Mr. Davidson stated it is true the overall service district didn't take into account the existing neighborhoods; but given the magnitude of the system, those small areas are insignifi- cant to the total. If that area came into the system, they would be charged the same as everyone else; no one will get a free ride. M.I'. McLaughlin - stated itiis preposterous to leave an area unassessed when a 12-inch maln and well are in place and ready to go. He felt the City is asking a disportionate number of people to back up the total costs of the system. He has never seen a project where the people down one side of the road pays and the other side does not. He felt those people should pay the same portion because of the benefit to them. Mr. Lund - stated whether or not something is done now, it will eventually make it cheaper for those people to get water. Mayor Windschitl stated the City may have to add storage and wells to include those people. Discussion was again on how the area and connection charges were determined on the overall system, including oversizing, trunk, source and storage, so that everyone will be paying at the same indexed rate. Mr. Peterson - asked if it would be possible not to extend the watermain at this tlme but construct the 500,000-gallon tank and assess that cost for that larger capacity to those properties in Service District 2. He again stated in his opinion Service District 2 wasn't ready for the trunk lines yet. Gilbert Menkveld - stated realtors tell him they could use lots in this area and thought thlS would be a good time to develop. He didn't think there was ever a time when everyone would be ready to develop at the same time, but in his opinion this is a good time to do it. Council and Engineers discussed what effect the requests in the vacinity of Hanson and Bunker Lake Boulevards will have on this proposed project. The Engineers thought the per-acre and connection charges would remain the same because of the overall water plan; however, it may be more feasible to construct a separate system on the east end at this time and tie into the existing system at a later date. The Engineer also noted the additional well being constructed in the Woodland Terrace area will supply approximately 150 more homes, but the need for a storage tank is very close to be able to provide pressure for fire protection and for peak flow residential lawn sprinkling. If plans were begun on the tank now, it would be erected by the end of the year and be ready for next year. Mr. Davidson stated specifications for a tank could be ready for the next Council meeting if so ordered. He also stated the plans for a 250,000-gallon tank and for a 500,000-gallon tank are Public Hearing May 16, 1985 - Minutes Page 5 structually different, indicating a need to determine the size of the tank prior to doing specifications. Mr. Davidson advised that a 500,000-gallon storage tank would service the areas in Service District 2 that are proposing to be assessed. Should the residential developments in District 2 want to or have to hook up to the system, the capacity reserved for Good Value Homes, for example, who won't be developed for awhile, will be traded. Not every area would come in at once. At some point in time the saturation of development in the area will require an additional storage tank for the system. Councilman Lachinski felt because a tank would not be needed for about a year, that the decision for capacity of the tank could be postponed for up to six months to see what will happen with the landfill site and potential development to the east. Councilman Orttel felt constructing the 500,000-gallon tank would handle any possibility that comes up within the next 12 to 24 months. He felt it is the City's obligation to make water available to the residents should a health hazard occur, and bringing this line to the area with this project would make it that much closer to the residential developments in the Well Advisory area. He stated it is known water will need to be brought to that area sooner or later. Councilman Lachinski agreed a half-million-gallon tank is needed, but the question is how to pay for it. Mr. Peterson - stated if the decision could wait for six months, the risk could be ellmlnated; and at that point it might be more feasible to go with the smaller tank. Councilman Orttel disagreed on that point because of the residential areas in District 2. He felt the City has to be prepared for whatever happens in that area. Councilman Knight asked Mr. Peterson if he thought the market is going to change in six months to give a difinitive answer. Mr. Peterson - was not sure; but he felt it would be best to do whatever possible to delay the decision. Their decision at this time to withdraw the request was based on the economy, not on the cost of the project, or change in assessment policy. Councilman Elling wondered if it wouldn't be better to wait on a decision until after the June 3 meeting with the generators of the landfill where hopefully more informa- tion will be learned. He also was not comfortable making a decision on this project without knowing the feelings of the others that are being assessed but that have not indicated an opinion on the project. Mr. Menkveld - stated he would develop his property into a lot of single family and some duplexes during the 1986 construction season if possible. Council then deliberated whether to construct the project as proposed or whether to just put in a storage tank at this time and what size. General consensus of the Council was that a 500,000-gallon tank should be constructed as proposed in the Northglen park. The question was how to finance it if this proposed project is not ordered. There was also a brief discussion on the operating costs of the water system, some feeling with the increased users, the operating budget should be better than it has been in the past. There was some discussion as to the benefit of bringing the 12-inch watermain just as far as Crooked Lake School to complete District 1; but it was learned that that would only generate enough monies at this time to install the 250,OOO-gallon storage tank. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we close the public portion of the PubllC Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council order Plans and Specifications for the proposed improvement, Project 85-8, trunk watermain extension. as presented by TKDA on 5-16-85 with a ~-million-gallon water tank. Public Hearing May 16, 1985 - Minutes Page 6 DISCUSSION: There was a very lengthy discussion on whether the project should be ordered at this time. Councilman Knight understood the need for the tank, but was concerned that there is now only one petition from Mr. Menkveld for this project, which isn't even remotely close to the majority. He was also concerned with the financing of the project since some of the land being:"assessed is in green acres and wouldn't be collected for awhile. Councilman Orttel saw this as a Council-initiated project. Everyone was notified of the hearing; and except for those here tonight, they chose not to make their feelings known. He felt the City has an obligation to bring the line to this area, especially in light of the potential for polluted water around the landfill. He also felt with the change in the assessment policy to assess the connection charge with the project, the funds are generated up front, which eliminates the problem created in the past of having to wait for development to collect that_portion of the project costs. Councilman Lachinski felt it may be possible to wait as long as six months before making a decision on the size of the storage tank. He felt a 500,000-gallon tank is the minimum that should be built, but didn't know how it could be funded without going into District 2 with this project. Councilman Elling was also concerned about the funding of it; and he wanted to know what some of the other developers in District 2 felt about the project before ordering it. Council also reviewed the cost figures for the project, noting there is approximately $100,000 overassessed in this project to be used for additional production and storage in the future based on the acreage and connection charges calculated for the entire system. Mr. Menkveld - then stated he is withdrawing his request for watermain right now and lS Wl Illng to wait to develop his property, hoping that would make the Council's decision easier. He then left the meeting. Council noted the withdrawal of the request does not solve the problem of sizing the tank in District 1. Councilmen Elling and Knight wished to delay the decision on the project for a few weeks given Mr. Menkveld's withdrawal and the other concerns they have at this time. Councilmen Lachinski and Orttel WITHDREW the Second and the Motion Council continued discussing the project and the dilemma of sizing the storage tank. Mr. Schrantz suggested constructing the 500,000-gallon tank at this time, realizing the watermain will be extended to District 2 within the next few years. He thought there would be enough funds to pay the yearly bond payments until the watermain extension project would be constructed. Mr. Peterson - stated Mr. Menkveld had come over to him stating his heart was pounding and he could not stand the hassle; and that is why he withdrew his request. Council agreed to discuss this matter again at the l:eglllTar:rneeting Tuesday evening, May 21. MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Orttel, to continue this until Tuesday night's meeting and put it on as an additional item for discussion. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting continued to Tuesday, May 21, 1985. 10:17 p.m. eSP::;:h~~~ Marc la A. Peach L Record Secretary