Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP January 14, 1987 - -<~ (5;: CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (612) 755-5100 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL ~rnETING - JANUARY 14, 1987 AGENDA 7:30 P.M. I. Call to order 2. Bond Sale/Boisclair/TIF 3. Public Hearing/IP 87-3 4. 5. Adjournment -- CITY of ANDOVER PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 14, 1987 MINUTES Pursuant to notice published thereof, a Public Hearing for Project 87-3, sanitary sewer trunk and watermain facilities was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on January 14, 1987, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilman absent: Elling Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins: TKDA Engineers, John Davidson and John Rodeberg; City Administrator/Engineer, James Schrantz; and others Mayor Windschitl explained the proposal is to extend the sanitary sewer trunk line to service the southeastern and central portions of the City, and to stage the developments and assessments for the use of that sewer facility. Because on1y a certain amount of sewer capacity is allocated to Andover by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, that capacity must be assigned to specific properties for specific time frames. The purpose of the hearing is to expIain the project and to receive comments from affected residents as to when they fee] their property would be developed. Mr. Davidson reviewed the improvement to provide gravity sanitary sewer to the ultimate urban service area, the size and location of the trunk sanitary sewer and watermain, the reasons the route north of Coon Creek was chosen for the sewer trunk line, and the areas from which petitions for sewer and water have already been received. Mayor Windschitl aJso reported on the events to date on the school district's efforts to site an elementary school within Andover. They are now looking at 20 acres of City property south of City Hal I as their preferabie site, and the City needs to determine whether or not it can provide sewer and water to that school. It was his feeling if those utilities cannot be provided that the school district would look elsewhere for a site. This hearing is part of the process to find out what the property owners are planning regarding future development so the City can present a plan to the Metropolitan Council and MWCC to receive the al location to serve that site. Mr. Davidson stated the City can only extend sewer at the maximum rate established by the MWCC, and the site being looked at by the scho01 district could be serviced with a lateral Jine up Hanson Boulevard if the capacity is granted. --' Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 2 Mr. Davidson also explained because the Intent Is for an orderly, progressive rate of development, those areas developing in the 1987 time frame wi II be assessed first. This establIshes the sequence of deve10pment and assessment. The proposal is to levy an area assessment for those areas shown for 1987 development. At the same time, those areas scheduled for 1990-2000 will be restricted from development untIl that time and wi II not be assessed until those services are provIded to that area. Mr. Davidson went on to explain the assessment p011cy, notIng the importance of establishIng a capItal improvements pIan, that Is the schedule of Ievying the assessments to meet the bond payments for the project. The assessment rates were established to be uniform for all areas of the City and are increased annually based on the EngIneering News Record Index. He reviewed the area and connection cha.ges for both sanitary sewer and water, as well as other costs that ultimately would be assessed to hook up to those utIlities. The area assessment charge for sanitary sewer Is $821/acre for buildable property plus a connection charge of $201.10 per residentia1 unit. The area assessment for water is $875/acre for bui ldable acreage pJus a connection charge of $950 per residential unit. The front-foot assessment for lateral benefit is levied at the tIme the property hooks up to the system for pre-existing lots along the trunk lIne. The front-foot assessment withIn developments Is assessed at the time a neighborhood petItions for the utilities and a project is done for that subdIvision. A proposed assessment for each parcel was calculated and was availabJe for property owners to view. Mr. Davidson also explained when sanitary sewer extends past property as is done when a subdivisIon petitions for utilitIes, the MWCC regulations requIre connectIon to the facility within a two-year period. Mayor Windschltl explaIned if a majority petItIon for water is receIved from a neighborhood, then the water must be hooked up within one year. It has generalJy been the CounciJ's policy to order a project withIn a subdivision when there is a petition of at least 50 percent in favor of It, reviewing the 429 procedure for such p.ojects. Finall y, Mr. Davidson reported the project Is feasIble, noted the permits that wil I need to be acquIred, and stated the total estimated project costs are $2,015,850. The hearing was then opened for public testimony, first to those whose propertIes are proposed In the 1990-2000 development area. Richard Fuller. 13948 Prairie Road - stated It was mentioned by putting in sewe. and water, deveJopment can be accommodated to the density of two units per acre. He questioned whether the City really wants a density of two units per acre. He felt by slowing the extension of sewer and water, development can be sJowed. There are 12 -- Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 3 units in his area, and he felt he could safely say 11 of them do not want sewer and water in the foreseeable future. He felt it is strange that the area to the northeast, which is generally developed, has been left out, but their area is left in. He aiso felt, given the topography, that it would easier to develop along the creek than to serve their area of 12 families. They moved to Andover because they were attracted to the large undeveloped parcels and they were not purchasing city lots. (applause from audience) He stated if he had wanted the smal 1 city lot, he would have purchased property in GoJden Valley 15 minutes from work, but instead chose this area because of the open space and large lots that provided privacy. He stated he Is Horried they might lose them. (applause) Jack McKelvev. 15327 Niqhtlnqale - stated across from him on 154th, 13 houses are being put in and understands Nightengale Estates has asked for sewer and water. Counc i I and Engineers noted that subdivision has not petitioned and has been excluded from the area because it Is platted into 2 1/2-acre lots. Mr. McKelvev - thought a 40-acre parcel just north of him will be developed shortly. Should these come about and if those people were provided with utilities but he wasn't assessed for them, he is under the impression those assessments Hould have to be paid If he moved, even If I t is before the 1990 time frame. Counc i ] and Engineers stated that wou]d not be true if he was not levied an assessment but exc1uded from the project and the benefit. Mr. McKelvev - stated he moved out to Andover because he wanted to live in the country, not in the city. If the City is talking about assessing him in 1990, he said he's going to have to sell and move further out. He also felt the school will draw development of both homes and businesses, anticipating a school across from City Hall wi II force the sewer Jlne to his area sooner than 1990. He doesn't want to see that, wanting to know if he has to put his place up for sale to move some place else. He has 20 acres, and utilities past his property would cost about $70,000. He didn't want to talk about sewer unt i I past the year 2000. Mr. Schrantz stated the City is saying sewer would be avai]ab]e at that time, not that i t wou] d be pu t in. Counci]man Lachinski also pointed out this process is to prevent property from developing before Its time. So if his property is p]aced beyond the year 2000, he would not be able to develop It before then unless someone offered to gIve up their sewer capacity allotment. The Ci ty is allotted only so much capacity for each time period. Mr. McKelvev - felt that Is true, except he felt a large developer would be able to force the issue and he, asasmalJ landowner, wouldn't have any say In the matter. Mayor Wlndschitl tried to explain the proposal, comparing it to a rationing system, with the Counc i I choosing who gets the sewer capacity based upon the desires of the property owners. ~, Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 4 Mr. McKelvev - worries about thIs because he's heard the CIty Hall is wantIng sewer and water; and once It gets to the school, what's to stop I t from then extending to the City Hal I, past his property, etc. and escalate. Counc I I discussion with Mr. McKelvey was on the plannIng done to accommodate the feelings of property owners In thIs area in an effort to avoid forcing assessments on property before it is ready to develop. The Engineers thought it would be possible to exc1ude this dIstrIct to beyond the year 2000 sInce it is on the edge of the boundary. Ernie Trettel. 1412 Andover Bou1evard - owns 20 acres North of Andover and 10 acres south of Andover Boulevard. As long as he lives on those properties, he has no desire for water and sewer. When he moved to Andover sIx years ago, one of the thIngs that attracted hIm was the orderly planninng for development. The property east of hIm was to be 2 1/2-acre lots. But then this Council changed that to a density five times that. He didn't see why those areas couldn't be left at 2 1/2 acres because there Is a market for that too. (applause) Engineers noted that property stil I is zoned 2 1/2 acres, but sewer would now be available to enable it to be rezoned to smaller lots If the owner wants to deve]op. Tom Chouinard. 14123 Prairie Road - is totally against sewer and water. He purchased the place several years ago p1anning to retire there; but if he were assessed, there's no way he could stay there. He is not interested In developing hIs property. Georoe Holst - owns 10 acres north of the City Hal I park complex and 30 acres between NIghtengale and Hanson north of the Steffenson property. He thought only a part of the 3D-acre parcel is Included in the district. Part of the reason he bought the property was to be ab]e to have horses, notIng amenities cited by others for 1 iving in the rural area. He'd just as soon live here and not be included in the sewered area. But if he Is going to be assessed, he'd just as soon know about it now to be able to sel I or develop it and move further out. Winslow H01asek. 1159 Andover Boulevard - would be adjacent to the proposed school site. When Mr. Schneider's property came in for 2 1/2 acres, he supported it; though he now thinks the Council was right in not al 10wing such large lots because it would be difficult to move the sewer north i f It was needed. The last thing he wants to do is work a hardship on anyone e1se. If the school comes to the area, the trunk wI II come up to it. He felt that would be a viable tIme to develop his property across from it. That would help pay for that trunk and not force development further north. He would prefer sewer for his property off Hanson to coincide with the construction of the school if it would not force a hardship on anyone or on the rest of his property to the east. He wI I 1 be provIding a letter of intent at the February Counc i I meeting. They would be working on the same time schedule as the schoo], thInking they could meet the time schedule this fa]l. -' Pub11c Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 5 Counc i I dIscussion wIth Mr. Holasek was on the parcels he wants sewered, those being the two 40's next to Hanson, about 10 acres on the next 40, plus approximately 23 acres north of Crosstown Boulevard whIch is not in his ownershIp. He would not want to change the tIme frame for the 40's next to the railroad tracks nor hIs resIdence. Robert NehrinQ. 14122 Prairie Road - would lIke the area to stay In 2 1/2-acre or low densIty beyond the year 2000. Al Chapman. north of Nehrino's on Prairie Road - stated his preference is a later date that 1990-2000. He asked if the plans are to service the entire area eventually, even if it's beyond 1990 or 2000. Mayor Windschltl expJalned the capacity Is being designed to handle It. That doesn't necessarIly mean the property wil1 follow and develop. Mr. Chapman - asked if the decision for that capacity has already been made. Mayor Wlndschitl stated the overall capacity was establIshed in the early 1970's when the original Interceptor line came in from Coon Rapids. This is a contInuation of that plan. Mr. Chapman - asked if those In the 1990 area would not be assessed unt II approxImately that time or would the area assessment take place on all property. CouncIlman Orttel explained the earliest he could be assessed would be 1990, but It wou1d be when he received the servIce or benefit. Jlm Perrv. 14191 PrairIe Road - would prefer to be excluded from the lIne. RIchard ErIckson. 14610 Crosstown Boulevard - lIked the present density, asking that the buildable part of hIs be In an area beyond the year 2000. Counc II noted the trunk lIne north of the creek wI] I need to run through hIs property, but it is not an attempt to force development on hIs property. Mr. Erickson - asked how far the trunk lIne would come from his resIdence. The Engineers stated the specifIcs have not been determined, but they want to go around the peat land and stay on the slope so it doesn't destroy any of hIs high ground. They wIll work with Mr. Erickson for determining a mutually agreeable locatIon. Al Hamme I . Gauohn Company - has two pIeces of property wIthin the service area. One is north of City Hall which may not be serviced for 13 years unt! I the year 2000, asking what are the posslbilltes for the development of that property in the meantime. Can it be developed as an estate homes area? Council stated no, that the moratorIum on development wIthin this proposed urban service area and this staging of the sewer extension is to prevent development on these properties unti I the sewer is avai lable. v Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 6 Mr. Hammel - stated their preference would be to have utilities on that property in the 1988 or 1989 time frame, or as quickly as possible. The other parcel west of the railroad tracks is In the 1988-1990 timetable, which they are happy with. Gene VanHeel. 1220 Crosstown Boulevard - can't afford the sewer and water assessments on his five acres, so he'd have to sell It. He'd prefer to be beyond the year 2000. Curtis Steffenson. 15411 Niohtenoale - would .ather not see any sewer to his property at al I . Richard Schneider. 1343 Andover Boulevard - is opposed to any sewer or water coming Into the area. He asked why there Is such a Jarge gap in time periods, as between 1990 and 2000 Is a large variation in time. Mayor Wlndschitl expJained once the document with different time frames is established, the Metropolitan Council wi II review it. The times are to say the earliest sewer would be provided would be the first year shown, In his case, 1990, unless someone from an ear1ier time frame would be willing to trade their development rights. Mr. Schneider - heard it said the City does not 1 ike to 1eapfrog, but In looking at the map, there is a big jump from Bunker to the area north. He asked why not develop in an orderly form from Bunker Lake Boulevard north. Counc i I said that is what Is being done with this proposal, and the al ignment of the trunk not only Is the most cost effective but can also serve a larger a.ea of central Andover as well. The areas proposed in the 1990 - 2000 time frame wi 11 not be assessed until they are provided with sewer even if the trunk goes through It. Those areas are also stIll zoned R-l, but the moratorium on development will al low the City time to settle the issue of development of areas before the sewer is available. The concern is loll th the large-lot developments where i t is known sewer wi I I eventually be extended to. Testimony was then opened to those areas in the time frames of 1988 - 1990 north of Andover Boulevard. Randv Welter. 14590 B1uebird Street - stated for the last 9 years his well and septic system have served him we]J. He doesn't want anything to do with city sewer or water. JoAnn Nelson 14531 Drake - is opposed to city sewer and water. If It does go through, when wi1l It be assessed to them? Mayor Windschltl stated when going Into a residential area, the project is assessed the year the work Is done normally over a 15-year period at an interest rate of approximate]y 8 percent, depending on the bond market. -' Public Hearlng/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 7 Debbie Wittel. 1522 145th Lane - is opposed to city sewer and water, though they would like to see the scho01. She stated If It is in the street and they sel I the house, they do have to hook up to it. Counc i I agreed. Leo Koz I owsk I . representlno Sophie Kozlowski. 1021 Crosstown - stated they are not going to commit for or against the section owned by her, requesting reserve right for future study into this. He found it Interesting that the acreage assessment Is In excess of what property in the area has been sel ling for, and also that they are being put In of position of making decisions very quickly because of outside development. Michel Ie Erickson. 1428 146th Lane - asked if the vacant lots wi II be buildable when the city sewer and water goes through. Counc II stated yes. Ms. Erickson - would like to see the schoo I , but Is opposed to city sewer and water because they would have new neighbors on top of them, which they don't care to have. Ron Herrmann. 14560 Drake - opposes any sewer or water until past the year 2000. Eva Alarcon. 14567 Drake - is opposed to sewer and water. Barb Duerr. 2143 Bunker Lake Boulevard - stated it looks like her property is on the borderline of two years. She wondered if they are sti 11 proposing the construction past her place this summer. Mr. Davidson stated the sanitary sewer and water would be extended past her property to Jay Street this summer. Percv Toml inson. reDresentinq Santa's Tree Farm - stated for a number of years they have been trying to understand what the City's plan was for their area. Last spring they sought Information, and based on that information planted a number of seedling trees for Christmas trees that wll I not be harvestable for at least seven, but more rea11stical ly eight to nine, years. So they have been making constant investments on the best Information that was available. If this goes through, they have wasted sizeable amounts of money for the last five to seven years. He stated they need better information on which to plan. He asked why Lund's Evergreen Estates and another area are removed from the subject area. Mayor Wlndschitl stated the City knows It doesn't have enough capacity to serve even the proposed area, so It is not practical to go Into an existing large-lot development because the assessments would be extremely high. The Idea was to Jet people know what Is available and let them make a choice wi th that information. -' Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 8 Mr. TomlInson - stated they have made sizeable investments and would like to harvest those trees, and an assessment against the property would be astronomical. They would like to operate it as a tree farm for at least the next eight yea~s, but they wouid like to see the time frame even beyond that. He stated they cannot give a time period at this time. Mayor WindschitJ explained the City must submit a plan to the Metropolitan Council and MWCC fo~ the i ~ approva I . Once the time frames are established, it wi II be very difficult to change, stressing the importance of making an informed decision at this time. Mr. Tomlinson - hoped the CounciJ would not approve the map and the time frame now, that the map would be revised and they be given another opportunity to speak based on the information given tonight. He though t they would be able to provide the City with a more definitive answer about their prope~ty within a couple days. Earl Norwood. Santa's Tree Farm - stated for years the policy established was for 2 1/2 acres. Here the position is one-half acre or less is better. Counc i I noted the 2 1/2-acre lots are sti J ] the po] icy fo~ that area outside the area to be sewered. Where it is known the sewer wi II be extended, the large lots wi II not be allowed, not wanting to impose such assessments on large lots. Mr. Norwood - questioned whether we are a people city or an area city and is there something that says the city must convert to small lots. Council noted they are trying to protect property owner's rights, and many of those owners are asking to develop their land into urban Jots. Mr. Norwood - asked If a purchase agreement has been signed with the school district. Counc i ] discussion with Mr. Norwood was that no purchase agreement has been signed yet, explaining the Council's preference for the southern schoo] site. The policy for hooking up to sewer past their property was explained. If their property Is excluded until 1995, there would be no assessment before then; but they wouldn't be al lowed to connect to the sewer either unless someone is willing to trade their time frame. Discussion was also on the question of orderly development, the intent being to provide utilities at the lowest cost but not force assessments before property Is ready to deveJop. Mr. McKelvev - felt that the proposed plans could change very quickly if, for instance, a large developer in a 1990-2000 a~ea requested services in the next year or two, citing how the plans have changed from just last year. He felt the Metropolitan Council would provide that capacity, the point being the time frames could be changed. Mayor Windschitl noted that is beyond the control of the City, again explaining the importance of making an informed decision before sending the planning document to the Metropolitan Council. Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 9 Bob Enqlekino. Santa's Tree Farm - stated the decision they are being asked to make tonight is not of smal] significance. They have asked for the City's long range plans in making their investment plans. Now the City is talking about ending their business either prematurely or completely, and they are being asked to make that decision tonight with little information. If they were excluded from the area but sewer was run up Hanson to a schoo] site, what would their assessment be. Counc i I and Engineers explained there wou1d be no assessment until the sewer became available to them. Chuck Cook. Continental Development - would like to be in the most ImmedIately avaIlable time frame, 1987 or 1988-1990. Testimony was then opened to any of the remaining areas. Richard Okerlund. 14317 Crosstown Boulevard - Is se1ling his house; and if there is a pending assessment, it wi II ruin him. He is opposed to sewer and water, liking the country 1 iving. Counc i I noted there is no pending assessment now, but thought it had been difficult to sell the parcels by the I andfi I I without sewer and water. Dan Llzakowski. 2355 South Coon Creek Drive - was concerned with where the line would come through his property, asking if it is coming through whether he wants it or not. Me. Davidson explained it would be in the street, not on his property. Mr. Lizakowski - stated he doesn't want sewer or water. He's been there 20 years and has never had a problem with sewer or water. Monroe Lindqren. 1719 Andover Boulevard - would prefer not to have city sewer and water, asking to be included with the tree farm. He is also speaking for his neighbor who couldn't be here tonight. Counc i I asked that the neighbor submit her preference in writing. Berthie Grell. 14430 Quinn Drive - would just as soon have sewer, but not the water or streets, aSking how it would get to the area. Mayor Windschitl stated the engineering has not yet been done, though a number of proposa]s are being considered. Clarence Wirkus. 13435 Jav Street - wondered why the lot was inc1uded, why there is a jog in the map across Jay Street for the uti lit i es, and why those south of him are not included. He also asked when the sewer and water would be going in. Counc i ] explained the one parcel was just rezoned to residential and those lots to the south wi II be serviced through the Coon Rapids line. The Engineers were asked to determined more specificallY where that boundary would be. The sewer and water 1 ines wi] I be constructed along Bunker Lake Boulevard this summer, but would not be extended to his area until it was petitioned for. He would be assessed the area charge because the benefit would be avai1able. Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 10 Merlyn Prochniak. 1836 Andover Boulevard - stated he would have no problem with the trunk line, and he would like to see water come In too because the area is next to the I andf I II. Ron Leines. 1845 Andover Boulevard - asked if assessments are pending In the shaded area. When are assessments pending and when are they 1evied? He is selling his house and needs to know this. Counc I I and Attorney noted there are no assessments pending in his area, as no projects have been ordered. They also explained the procedure for doing construction projects and assessing the costs. An assessment is not pending until a project is ordered and is not levied until the project Is completed. If this project is approved for construction in 1987, there would only be an area assessment pending for the sewer trunk line. They would have to peti ti on for lateral service along the no~th side of Andover Boulevard and for water to be extended. Sherry Jellison. 1775 Bunker Lake Boulevard - asked if the trunk line wi II definitely go to Jay Street in 1987 and are there any plans to continue beyond on Bunker Lake Boulevard to Hanson. Mr. Davidson reviewed the plans to extend the line to Jay Street this summer, but there are no plans to extend to the north until It is petitioned for. Ms. Jellison - stated the proposed assessment fo~ their p~operty are very high. Mr. Davidson explained the amount shown Is the entire assessment for sewer and water based on subdividing the p~operty. Only the area assessment would be levied for the 1987 area at this time. Jim Ferris. 1907 Andover Boulevard - is opposed to any sewer or water. Ken NYstrom. 2245 South Coon Creek Drive - stated there was a petition before but there wasn't enough signatures to approve the the sewer project. Why is It being done now? He is in favor of the road, sewer and water but wants to be Informed. Counc i I explained the fl~st petition was several years ago and was turned down because a majority were opposed, thinking many also wanted water, whIch couldn't be provided at that time. Another petition came In last fall from the Shady Knoll area, but a separate hearing will be held for that project; and everyone will be notified of that hearing. This hearing is not for the internal lines for any development. M~. Weisner. 14366 Quinn Street - wasn't In favor of sewe~ or water before and still is not. He asked how do they determine when or If this gets put in. Mayor Windschitl explained the internal development would not be considered unless the residents petitioned for It. To date, the City has not received a petition from their area. If a pet! tion is received, those affected would be notified and another hearing held for the internal lines for that development. Mr. Weisner - stated he Is opposed to sewer, water, and the trunk. ~ Public Hearing/87-3 Minutes - January 14, 1987 Page 11 David Tostenson. 14139 Crosstown Boulevard - is opposed to sewer and water. He asked about the costs listed for their properties. Mr. Davdison explained it relates to the official parcels of record based on size Including area assessments, connection charges, and front-foot lot benefit for sewer and water based on a density of two lots per acre, and based on today's costs. However, for this hearing, only area assessments are being considered. Counc I ] agreed the Engineers wi I I revise the map with time frames for specific areas based on this evening's testimony, and the hearing will be continued to February 12. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, for continuance of this hearing to the Second Thursday In February. DISCUSSION: Don Erickson. 2387 South Coon Creek Drive. PIN 27 32 24 23 0002 - asked to have his five acres excluded until beyond the year 2000. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting continued to February 12, 1987. 10:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, \"\~¿'2'0L Mar lla A. Peach Recording Secretary